Larry Roll K3LT wrote:
In article , JJ
writes:


Larry Roll K3LT wrote:




Well, on behalf of my colleague Dick (that's MISTER Carroll to you, BOY!)
it's nice to know that we're providing a much needed service to the ARS!

73 de Larry, K3LT

Anyone ever tell you what a pompous ass you really are Larry?
That's MISTER JJ to you little BOY!!

In article , JJ
writes:

Well, on behalf of my colleague Dick (that's MISTER Carroll to you, BOY!)
it's nice to know that we're providing a much needed service to the ARS!

73 de Larry, K3LT

Anyone ever tell you what a pompous ass you really are Larry?

JJ:

Oh, but of course! But this is Usenet, and, more specifically, rrap -- so
I won't take that personally, since I'm in such good company!

That's MISTER JJ to you little BOY!!

Uh, no, not quite. You see, Mr. Carroll is YOUR moral and intellectual
superior, therefore it is appropriate for you to address him in a form which
shows proper respect. You, OTOH, deserve no such consideration, since
you have not earned it through your participation in this forum.

73 de Larry, K3LT

Larry Roll K3LT wrote:



Uh, no, not quite. You see, Mr. Carroll is YOUR moral

Are you suggesting I am an immoral person?

and intellectual
superior,

That that is a real laugh.

therefore it is appropriate for you to address him in a form
which shows proper respect.f

When he dose something to deserve respect, he will get my respect.
Belittling other hams just because they do not feel the same
fanatical zeal toward CW as you and Dick do, does not deserve any
respect. When you and Dick stop seeing other hams as inferior to
you, then you might get some respect. Because of your "I am
superior because I operate CW, that makes me a real ham" attitude
toward other hams means you have not earned any consideration for
respect through your participation in this forum.

It is still MISTER JJ to you and Dick.

"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message
...
In article , "Kim W5TIT"
writes:

So, what're you gonna say to those who will
obviously be a better ham than you because they learned CW out of
wanting
to, not needing to?

Kim W5TIT

Well, Kim, if any show up, I'll be the first to congratulate them!
However,
I hope you'll forgive me for not holding my breath in the meantime!
You
see, I've become somewhat accustomed to the occasional whiff of oxygen!

73 de Larry, K3LT


Something tells me you don't have to worry about people looking for
congrats
from you, Larry.

Kim W5TIT

Kim:

So be it. In any case, the coming generation of New Age, Dumbed-Down,
No-Coder hams aren't likely to seeking any kudos from me on their CW
skills. I would hope that any who learned the code and became proficient
with it's use on-the-air, would do so for their own personal gratification
and
to add that skill to their overall capability as a radio amateur. Of
course,
that is a concept that you will naturally reject, out of the necessity of
your
agenda to justify your own lack of useful communications skills. Don't
worry -- our expectations of you are small.

73 de Larry, K3LT


Larry, I am so far ahead of you in terms of overall capability and
contribution that you're a speck of dust in my rear view mirror.

Kim W5TIT


---
Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
Complaints to

On 13 Jul 2003 05:53:17 GMT, ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)
wrote:


So be it. In any case, the coming generation of New Age, Dumbed-Down,
No-Coder hams

That statement just convinced a few thousand people to try CW on its
own merits...NOT!

aren't likely to seeking any kudos from me on their CW
skills.

They are, however, likely to seek refuge from your insulting rhetoric.

I would hope that any who learned the code and became proficient
with it's use on-the-air, would do so for their own personal gratification and
to add that skill to their overall capability as a radio amateur.

I hope so too, Larry, because with your apparent attitude towards
fellow hams, they sure as heck aren't going to be leqarning it so they
can put your call in the logbook.

Of course,
that is a concept that you will naturally reject, out of the necessity of your
agenda to justify your own lack of useful communications skills.

My, my, Larry, she does get under your skin, doesn't she? Are you sure
there isn't more to this than meets the eye? :-)

Don't
worry -- our expectations of you are small.

Why don't you quit beating around the bush and just ask her whether or
not size really matters?

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

On 13 Jul 2003 05:53:17 GMT, ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)
wrote:


So be it. In any case, the coming generation of New Age, Dumbed-Down,
No-Coder hams

That statement just convinced a few thousand people to try CW on its
own merits...NOT!

aren't likely to seeking any kudos from me on their CW
skills.

They are, however, likely to seek refuge from your insulting rhetoric.

I would hope that any who learned the code and became proficient
with it's use on-the-air, would do so for their own personal gratification and
to add that skill to their overall capability as a radio amateur.

I hope so too, Larry, because with your apparent attitude towards
fellow hams, they sure as heck aren't going to be leqarning it so they
can put your call in the logbook.

Of course,
that is a concept that you will naturally reject, out of the necessity of your
agenda to justify your own lack of useful communications skills.

My, my, Larry, she does get under your skin, doesn't she? Are you sure
there isn't more to this than meets the eye? :-)

Don't
worry -- our expectations of you are small.

Why don't you quit beating around the bush and just ask her whether or
not size really matters?

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

In article , Radio Amateur KC2HMZ
writes:

So be it. In any case, the coming generation of New Age, Dumbed-Down,
No-Coder hams

That statement just convinced a few thousand people to try CW on its
own merits...NOT!

John:

No, it just gave them another in an already lengthy list of excuses to
be lazy and not give it a try. They could care less about what I think of
them -- or, should I say, if they were motivated to learn a useful
communications skill, nothing I say could stop them from trying.

aren't likely to seeking any kudos from me on their CW
skills.

They are, however, likely to seek refuge from your insulting rhetoric.

Oh, you mean the truth.

I would hope that any who learned the code and became proficient
with it's use on-the-air, would do so for their own personal gratification
and
to add that skill to their overall capability as a radio amateur.

I hope so too, Larry, because with your apparent attitude towards
fellow hams, they sure as heck aren't going to be leqarning it so they
can put your call in the logbook.

Or for any other reason.

Of course,
that is a concept that you will naturally reject, out of the necessity of
your
agenda to justify your own lack of useful communications skills.

My, my, Larry, she does get under your skin, doesn't she? Are you sure
there isn't more to this than meets the eye? :-)

A whole lot less, actually.

Don't
worry -- our expectations of you are small.

Why don't you quit beating around the bush and just ask her whether or
not size really matters?

Because I couldn't care less about what Kim thinks about "size," or
anything else, for that matter. All she is interested in is defending her
lack of motivation to learn a useful communications skill like the
Morse code.

73 de Larry, K3LT

On 14 Jul 2003 07:33:29 GMT, ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)
wrote:

In article , Radio Amateur KC2HMZ
writes:

So be it. In any case, the coming generation of New Age, Dumbed-Down,
No-Coder hams

That statement just convinced a few thousand people to try CW on its
own merits...NOT!

John:

No, it just gave them another in an already lengthy list of excuses to
be lazy and not give it a try. They could care less about what I think of
them -- or, should I say, if they were motivated to learn a useful
communications skill, nothing I say could stop them from trying.

aren't likely to seeking any kudos from me on their CW
skills.

They are, however, likely to seek refuge from your insulting rhetoric.

Oh, you mean the truth.

That remains to be seen. The next generation of hams hasn't joined our
ranks yet. However, if you're truly concerned about getting said hams
to try CW so as to preserve its status as a viable means of
communication in the ARS, you might consider wording your message in a
less offensive manner. That way you might actually reach someone with
your message. As it is, you virtually guarantee a negative reaction to
your words. You'll never convince anybody that way.

I would hope that any who learned the code and became proficient
with it's use on-the-air, would do so for their own personal gratification
and
to add that skill to their overall capability as a radio amateur.

I hope so too, Larry, because with your apparent attitude towards
fellow hams, they sure as heck aren't going to be leqarning it so they
can put your call in the logbook.

Or for any other reason.

Faced with the possibility of an uphill battle to preserve the
viability of CW in the ARS, you're surrendering and conceding defeat
even before the first shot has been fired?

Don't
worry -- our expectations of you are small.

Why don't you quit beating around the bush and just ask her whether or
not size really matters?

Because I couldn't care less about what Kim thinks about "size," or
anything else, for that matter. All she is interested in is defending her
lack of motivation to learn a useful communications skill like the
Morse code.

Which she shouldn't need to defend in the first place. It's a free
country, and she's in it.

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

In article , Radio Amateur KC2HMZ
writes:

We used it when Floyd hit in 1999. We were having a hard time getting
through on SSB, so switched over to CW and continued ops until the band
conditions improved. CW didn't "save the day", but it sure came in handy
when needed. It is still an integral part of our EMA plan. Remember, in
disaster planning, we try to use *all* of the tools available to us. Maybe
one day, the light will come on for you and you'll understand that concept.

Don't look now, but as I type this, Charlotte is approaching. We may
get an object lesson here shortly after it makes landfall (not that I
or anyone else is hoping for that, except perhaps Larry who is shining
his straight key in anticipation).

John:

You think I'm "hoping" that a devastating hurricane will strike and perhaps
take lives and destroy property? Just so I can use some freshly-polished
straight key to send emergency traffic? I don't think so.

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

Speaking of obsolete, there's your buddy -- good old SSB -- a mode which
has been (borrowing your words) "supplanted, in virtually every service
except ham radio ... by more modern, efficient, reliable, and convenient
means of communications." and *I* (wink) think it should be retired as soon
as possible and we should stop using SSB for EMComm immediately -- I mean
after all, it is just about as ancient as it gets in communication terms,
right? Why use that ancient old SSB when I can hop on the Internet or bring
up VTC or digital and get through faster and farther.

Arnie -
KT4ST

Arnie:

Worry not, help is on the way! When the FCC finally acts on WRC-03 and
drops the code testing requirement, the ARS will suddenly be filled with
eager, computer-literate, technically-inclined young newcomers to ham
radio who will invent, develop, and deploy the amateur radio version of the
broadband infrastructure now available to anyone who owns a cell phone,
wireless PDA, or Wi-Fi equipped laptop. We will be communicating by
voice, data, and image, all with no need to purchase "minutes" of air time
or enter into expensive contracts with service providers. Once relieved of
the requirement to learn that obsolete old Morse code, we will see, as
promised for years, a technical revolution in amateur radio the likes of
which nobody could have imagined in the bad old days of being tested
for competence in "beeping."

I can hardly wait!

73 de Larry, K3LT