| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
September 6th 03, 12:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
"Bob Brock" wrote in message ... On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 13:48:10 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote: Bob Brock wrote: On 4 Sep 2003 05:16:59 -0700, (Brian Kelly) wrote: Bob Brock wrote in message . .. If CW is indeed effective and current, then it will propagate due to its usefulness without regulatory requirement. Judging by how shrill the proponents are, it appears that even they are afraid that it won't show itself to be advantageous enough for people to learn on their own. On a related question, is it pro coders intention to boycott QSO's with countries that have already dropped the code requirement for HF work? Do you guys refuse to talk to Australians now? That's shrill enough, congratulations. I guess no answer at all was to be expected since it shows how invalid the postion is. How's this for an answer? NO! Provide references where anyone has even proposed such an activity. I can't understand why you would want to talk to someone from another country who had possibly not passed your lid filter, but to each their own incongruiteis I guess. Show me where I said that anyone proposed it and I'll consider documenting it. I'm not in the habit of trying to document things that I never said and I won't start with you. Real hams will talk to anyone who is duly licensed under the rules and regulations of their own governing body. Now if someone proves himself a lid in the course of QSO, naturally we will bow out but only if the person has demonstrated that he actually is a lid. Besides it's seldom been foreign operators who have been a problem. The problem is right here in this country. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Threaded Mode
