"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
ink.net...

Thanks for posting this again, Larry. I didn't say anything when I first
read it, but I remember having some doubts - doubts which still linger to
this day. The most obvious is why Riley singled out Kim for this
admonishment, without mentioning W4TIT (VA), W6TIT (TX), K5TIT (FL), K6TIT
(CA), N0TIT (FL), N4TIT (FL), W1ASS (MA), W2ASS (MA), W4ASS (NC), W5ASS
(TX), and similar callsigns. In other words, Kim's callsign, and similar
callsigns, are not exactly unique.


Another interesting little snippit... If I recall, it was only after I
"took on" some of the things Larry (and his ilk) was posting that he decided
to take a dislike to my callsign.

Makes one wonder if it is the callsign that is the reason for the attitude;
or that they just plain dislike me and can't think of any other way to
express it. Kind of like when I say something that would--under normal
conditions--stand on its own without the chance of drawing fi just
because it was me that said it, there is disagreement that will be found for
it.

I think it's all that "other stuff" that comes into play. Riley was
probably closer to having a real opinion about my callsign than Larry or
anyone else here is. He was honest and forthright about it, and dignified
in his response. Larry seems to think it's "disrespectful" to disagree with
Riley's opinion--why I don't know. Riley is a person just like anyone else
and is entitled to his opinion. And, since the ARS is no closer to
exctinction today than it was prior to my ever getting a license, I totally
disagree with Riley.


Clearly, letters only become vulgar when one attaches a specific meaning
to them. Without a context to make "TIT," or other such letters, vulgar, I
can't really envision a "parent or uncle or grandparent" keeping a child
out
of Amateur Radio simply because those letters appear in a callsign.


Oh, I can. If they're prone to "protecting" their little tyke from the
evils of the world--in every way but actually dealing with the little tyke,
i.e., making it everyone else's fault but their own that their little tyke
is actually a little monster.


Finally, I noticed most of the callsigns above belong to males (all
except
one, a club call). The absence of any comment about those callsigns (from
Riley, you, or others here) makes me wonder if a callsign with the letters
"TIT" only becomes vulgar when used by a woman. Would Riley say those
callsigns bring Ham radio "one step closer to extinction?" Would Jim omit
those callsigns from his list (the topic this thread spun off from)? Would
you as aggressively challenge one of those guys, like you've done with
Kim,
if any one of them were active in this newsgroup?


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


Fact ot the matter is my callsign is not vulgar, it is not disrespectful, it
is not inappropriate. It's nothing more than a vanity callsign that brings
out other peoples' vanity (here in this newsgroup anyway) way more than it
even expresses my own And, it works great working DX and pileups--when I
used to do that!

Kim W5TIT