LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11   Report Post  
Old August 24th 03, 03:49 PM
Larry Roll K3LT
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Dwight Stewart
writes:

And conservatives want to end big government. More specifically,
conservatives want to end unnecessary government rules which exist only to
benefit the interests of a certain special interest group. While you and
your ilk (a special interest group) have an interest in maintaining code
testing to reinforce your self-perceived status, code testing itself is
unnecessary today for anything outside that. Therefore, those seeking to end
code testing are more compatible with conservative views, while those
seeking to maintain code testing to reinforce status are more compatible
with liberal views.


Dwight:

You've conveniently failed to take into account the full context of my previous
response on the same topic.

I'm not an anarchist, Dwight. I believe that
government has a role in our society, and
maintaining standards in the ARS, an activity
in which citizens are given the privilege of
making use of the valuable and finite resource
known as the RF spectrum, makes sense to me.



Well, that's big of you. The question now is which standards (necessary or
unnecessary), which you answer in the next few sentences.


The "government protection" whine is just
another NCTA strawman. I prefer to think of
it as the government "protecting" the whole ARS,
not just the Morse code and it's testing
requirement. (snip)


Then you support unnecessary government requirements.


No, I don't. However, I don't consider the code testing requirement to be
"unnecessary." I consider this requirement to be current, valid, and
essential to maintaining the use of this valuable communications skill
within the ARS.

Code testing serves no real purpose today,


Prove it…

either as a means of insuring communications support
to those outside Ham Radio


…starting with this…

or as a means to keep riff-raft out of Ham Radio
(you were able to get in).


Where have I ever said that it has this effect? I have repeatedly
disclaimed this particular theory, usually citing the 20-WPM Extra-
class HF Phone reprobates who collect virtually 100% of the NAL's
issued to amateur radio operators.

As such, it exists solely to maintain your own
delusions of status and I don't think the government should be maintaining
rules just so you can help yourself feel important.


No, Dwight, that's just your own twisted and, quite frankly, slanderous
opinion.

(snip) "Rednecks," of any region, are usually tough,
self-reliant, moral and decent people. (snip)


You fail that test in many ways. A redneck doesn't need government rules
to be "self-reliant" and your attitudes towards others are certainly not
"decent" or "moral."


If that's how you perceive me, then you're obviously no judge of character.

And, based on your old web page pictures, you clearly
don't look that tough.


And just what is that supposed to mean? It looks like you're making the
classic mistake of judging a book by it's cover.

So, failing that test, we have to look elsewhere for
someone similar to you. And, looking solely at attitudes towards others,
only the deep woods redneck springs to mind.


Well, I guess you're entitled to your opinion, groundless though it may be.

These people (deep woods rednecks) don't like anybody outside kin or clan,
and just barely, though not always, tolerate neighbors.


I haven't had any complaints.

Does this sound
familiar, Larry? I don't know what you do with your kin, so I won't go
there. However, speaking solely of Ham Radio, you don't like anyone outside
your pro-code testing clan, and just barely, though not always, tolerate
those outside the code testing debate.


Dwight, you're digging yourself into a deep hole of scurrilous, groundless
ad hominem attacks -- something that I've been accused of in the past.

Of course, this is only a perception.


And, I might add, not a very well-considered one at that.

Since you obviously have a different
perception of yourself, we're never going to agree. As such, I'll drop the
comparative speculation at this point.


That's the most intelligent thing you've said so far in this entire post.
You've obviously had a bad day, so I'll let it go at that.

73 de Larry, K3LT



 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1366 ­ October 17 2003 Radionews General 0 October 17th 03 06:52 PM
Some comments on the NCVEC petition D. Stussy Policy 13 August 5th 03 04:23 AM
NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement. Keith Policy 1 July 31st 03 03:46 AM
Now That It's "Over"... Steve Robeson, K4CAP Policy 426 July 29th 03 06:49 AM
ATTN: Tech Licensee USA Morse Code Freedom Day is August 1st Merl Turkin Policy 0 July 25th 03 02:28 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017