|
If you review all of my comments so
far, you'll find that I have never once mentioned Morse testing, pro or con. You have no idea what my position is on that subject - nice reading comprehension, my friend. and if you'll read one of my other posts I made to this very stand you are trying to take, you'll find that nobody buys that as you have shown a one-sided support in this issue, including your very hypocritical scrutinizing of what the NCTA'ers have been saying (grammer and content wise) while NOT holding the PCTA crowd's feet to the fire. This means if you aren't a supporter of them, your at least an apologist. OR there IS a third possiblity; you are a personal friend to one of them and have been communicating on the side, and he or she has asked you to jump in here and appear as a "non-commited" so as to give the air of being ambivalent or indifferent to the matter at hand. No, it's not a matter of my comprehension being poor; it's RIGHT on the mark. In fact, i'd say that I hit the nail square on the head, Leo. There can be NO other reason why you have chastized certain things I have said but given those of the PCTA that have called names and used personal attacks. You're just not that clever. Clint |
Why do you remain ANONYMOUS? No courage of your convictions? No, he may be a ham, may not be... it's more like he's simply doing what one of this PCTA friends is ASKING him to do off the newsgroup, either via the phone OR email, or another NG... *BUSTED* |
It's a pity.
Poor, sad old man. Blasting off random bursts at his 'enemies' on the newsgroup. Perhaps a bout of 1950s-comms-induced PTSD awakened him from his restless, fitful nap late this afternoon. It is indeed heartbreaking to see the ravages of time on someone who was probably so vital and important in their youth. A real tragedy. Firing off 28 postings in a row, in a valiant effort to smite his those who refuse to cowtow. Fighting in the blind. The last vanguard against the sullied and ignorant opinions of the unwashed masses of rec.radio.amateur.policy, and other important theatres of combat. The pathfinder for the hopelessly dinky-dow. Dudley Do-Right, trying to save his Nell. Still swinging at ghosts. PTSD - induced firefights in the newsgroup. Endless torment - always in danger of having his newsgroup position overrun. "Incoming !!! Incoming !!! Stand by - returning Usenet message fire !!! Budda-Budda-Budda-Budda !!!!!. Can't get 'em all, though - too many incoming messages - Can't read 'em all...they're too long !!!!!. Ambush !!!! - We've got Hams in the wire !!. Pick your targets, Men, Just hit the ones you can easily kill ! FOLLOW ME ! AIIIIIIEEEEEEE !!!!" Frustrated. Still unable to score a hit. One shot, no kill. A hundred shots, still no kill. Oh, what would he give for a victory? - the sweet taste of conquest! What would he give to make them listen - to understand? "WHY won't they LISTEN?????????" And lastly, the big one. Tarnishing one's honor in meaningless online arguments, in the hope that someone somewhere out there will agree. Or submit. Or convert to his way of thinking. To see things from his perspective. To comprehend his point, however small, as it is important to him! "To just DO WHAT I SAY!!!!!!!!!!!" Still searching for the right words to make himself understood. But, the right words fail him. And, tragically, losing his perception of reality, and believing that, if it doesn't have a name, it cannot be real. If you can't see it, it isn't there. Imperceptible. Not tangible. Not defeatable. Kicking a** and taking names - that's what young soldiers do, isn't it? - . But the old, the infirm, the surplus, the forgotten, and those looking at the last few miles (nay, perhaps yards) of life's long road - what is reality for them? Is it only what can be touched? Or seen? Or dominated? Or attacked? Or convinced? Oh, sweet reality - what are you, really? "WHAT IS YOUR NAME ???????? WHO ARE YOU ?????????" And, inevitably, the question of honor - possibly the most enduring trait that defines a man, and the last one to be bartered for the short-lived rush of Usenet group acceptance. The last one to be cast off in the pursuit of newsgroup gratification. The final frontier. Down to the last dollar. Craps, you lose. For the best contemporary definition of honor, we need only look to a famous military organization that best personifies that word: "Honor guides Marines to exemplify the ultimate in ethical and moral behavior; to never lie cheat or steal; to abide by an uncompromising code of integrity; respect human dignity; and respect others. The quality of maturity, dedication, trust and dependability commit Marines to act responsibly; to be accountable for their actions; to fulfill their obligations; and to hold others accountable for their actions. " But this is far too harsh a standard in our modern-day civilian world. We as a society give latitude, however, to the older members of our group. Sometimes, they lie. Not intentionally - I'm certain that they honestly believe they are reciting fact from memory, a memory that is now growing fragile and occasionally fuzzy and distorted. And sometimes, they become impatient and forget to respect human dignity (after all, society owes them a debt of gratitude for the contributions of a lifetime!, doesn't it? Of course we do!). Or to accord others the respect and dignity that they deserve. And, ironically, the older folks tend to hold others accountable for their actions, to a level that mainstream society is often uncomfortable with. Even when doing do is in violation of the rules of polite society. But, this is not an affliction. Or a disease. Or the slightest bit unnatural. It is simply the logical, natural progression of life as God intended it to be - perhaps cruel, but it is a road that we all must travel someday. No way out! So, Stand Down, Old Soldier - we understand! We appreciate everything that you have done for us, and we will make it our goal to make your twilight years comfortable. And happy. And fulfilling. No matter what. If you cannot always see your way clear to respecting others, or keep the old facts straight from time to time, that's OK. We understand! We're here to help you to be all that you can possibly be, OM - if you will just let us! Two things in life of of paramount importance right now. People to depend on. And Depends. You will never run out of either, not as long as we are here!!!!! 73 and 88, OM Leo PS - I'm sure other folks on the newsgroup will check in with you from time to time, and make sure that you're OK. There's nothing like reassurance to get the elderly through frightening and frustrating times. Constant reassurance - its the only way! On 24 Sep 2003 21:42:22 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote: In article , Leo writes: And the tree, both the one that made the sound and the metaphoric 'tree' referred to in the posting is very much still there! Irrelevant. You don't exist in reality. Therefore you would not make any sound. You DO make a lot of noise, though, but it is random, just QRM. WHO are you, anonymous one? Did your courage of convictions also fall? |
LOL !
73, Leo On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 18:24:45 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote: If you review all of my comments so far, you'll find that I have never once mentioned Morse testing, pro or con. You have no idea what my position is on that subject - nice reading comprehension, my friend. and if you'll read one of my other posts I made to this very stand you are trying to take, you'll find that nobody buys that as you have shown a one-sided support in this issue, including your very hypocritical scrutinizing of what the NCTA'ers have been saying (grammer and content wise) while NOT holding the PCTA crowd's feet to the fire. This means if you aren't a supporter of them, your at least an apologist. OR there IS a third possiblity; you are a personal friend to one of them and have been communicating on the side, and he or she has asked you to jump in here and appear as a "non-commited" so as to give the air of being ambivalent or indifferent to the matter at hand. No, it's not a matter of my comprehension being poor; it's RIGHT on the mark. In fact, i'd say that I hit the nail square on the head, Leo. There can be NO other reason why you have chastized certain things I have said but given those of the PCTA that have called names and used personal attacks. You're just not that clever. Clint |
Len,
Does it really matter? Would you like to send me a Christmas card, or drop by for a beer someday? ;) And what convictions - are you suggesting that maybe we done time together? LOL 73, Leo On 24 Sep 2003 21:42:24 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote: Why do you remain ANONYMOUS? No courage of your convictions? |
Clint, me amigo, me compadre....
I'm sure that the Founding Fathers would not have written Free Speech into the Constitution, had they any idea what you would one day interpret it to be! You have the right to remain silent, too - why not invoke that one for a change? Leo On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 15:42:50 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote: Hey, wanna talk SHUDDER? this is what makes ME shudder... the thought that you are invoking the priviledges of free speech and rights of society just like I am, but also advocating that an idea, concept or practice be forced upon a person against thier will. And you're doing that with a straight face. Clint KB5ZHT |
But you are, old fella, you are! There you go = proof positive that
you can do anything, if you set your mind to it. Now that's inspirational! 73, Leo On 24 Sep 2003 21:42:19 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote: No one can do battle with a spectre, a ghost, a will-o-the-wisp. |
"Clint" wrote in part ...
Heh... under MOST circumstances, brevity is the soul of wit. I would hazard the guess, however, in THIS instance it's because perhaps I was right. __________________________________________________ _________ Wrong. He was just laughing at you. Arnie - KT4ST |
Bingo!
73, Leo On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 21:49:16 -0400, "Arnie Macy" wrote: "Clint" wrote in part ... Heh... under MOST circumstances, brevity is the soul of wit. I would hazard the guess, however, in THIS instance it's because perhaps I was right. _________________________________________________ __________ Wrong. He was just laughing at you. Arnie - KT4ST |
"Clint" wrote ...
Imagine a televised debate on a matter, say a political one, where you have candidates behind either a table they're sitting at or a podium they are standing behind.. The first candidate begans to spew out all his ideas and what he wants to see happen and what he'd do if his side of the issue one, and then when the other candidate stepped up for his or her retort, the first candidate just stuck his fingers in his ears, rocked his head back and forth and looked up and the ceiling and started humming loudly to himself so he couldn't see or hear anything from the other side. Now, he doesn't know what the other side said, and probably doesn't care... but the important matter is THIS.. what do all the voters in the audience think of that fellow???? makes you want to rub your chin and go "hmmmmmmmm...." __________________________________________________ _______________ Imagine the same debate where the first candidate makes no points on topic whatever, lies about the qualifications and personal history of the other candidate, and injects a string of personal insults as part of his off-topic diatribe. The audience just sits there looking at each other because they know that extremely rude person has just blatantly lied to them. I wonder how many votes that first candidate would get? Arnie - KT4ST |
Leo wrote in message . ..
Brian, You know that for a fact, do you? I see no evidence of one. |
"Arnie Macy" wrote in message ...
"Clint" wrote ... Imagine a televised debate on a matter, say a political one, where you have candidates behind either a table they're sitting at or a podium they are standing behind.. The first candidate begans to spew out all his ideas and what he wants to see happen and what he'd do if his side of the issue one, and then when the other candidate stepped up for his or her retort, the first candidate just stuck his fingers in his ears, rocked his head back and forth and looked up and the ceiling and started humming loudly to himself so he couldn't see or hear anything from the other side. Now, he doesn't know what the other side said, and probably doesn't care... but the important matter is THIS.. what do all the voters in the audience think of that fellow???? makes you want to rub your chin and go "hmmmmmmmm...." __________________________________________________ _______________ Imagine the same debate where the first candidate makes no points on topic whatever, lies about the qualifications and personal history of the other candidate, and injects a string of personal insults as part of his off-topic diatribe. The audience just sits there looking at each other because they know that extremely rude person has just blatantly lied to them. I wonder how many votes that first candidate would get? Arnie - KT4ST That candidate stole the election in 1992. |
My QTH in Ontario, Canada, and my callsign is a VE3 one. It took you THIS long to get with your PCTA contact to get fed a line to use to try to pump up your legitamacy? Anybody who has been on the internet more than a few months nows the secrets of sender blocking (your reality-dodging PCTA buddies already are using it), and how to avoid spam by using spam blocking emails... PLUS you could have just been smart by not sending out your email addy anyway. *busted* Clint KB5ZHT |
I see no evidence of one. Because there isn't any. Clint KB5ZHT |
Sir, you posted your message at 9:25 PM EDT - my reply is timestamped
9:35 EDT. That's 10 minutes, there, feller, not 24 hours. Are you a'fixin to learn how 't use that thar confuser proper-like, thar, Son? Ah'm a'waitin! Leo On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 05:57:48 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote: It took you 24 hours and THAT was the best you could come up with, a (non)response. Clint KB5ZHT |
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message thlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote in message ... In article .net, "Bill Sohl" writes: IF morse (i.e. radiotelegraphy) had any basis as a foundation for higher learning of radio concepts, principles or theory then it would be a requirement of engineering students...which it has never been to my knowledge anywhere. Faulty logic, Bill. "Radio" is but a small, specialized part of electrical engineering. That's one reason Morse isn't and wasn't part of the curriculum. Heck, soldering is a much bigger part of electrical engineering than radio, and soldering is not taught in EE school either. But if someone wants to learn radio on their own, and wants to learn-by-doing, amateur radio can be a really fun way to learn. Skill in Morse code is an excellent tool in that learning process. 73 de Jim, N2EY Then yoiu should have no problem gaining morse users from those that want to learn by doing after the code test is gone. And by that same reasoning, there's no reason to test for most of what's in the written test, because there should be no problem gaining technically-inclined people who want to learn by doing after the theory parts of the written test are gone. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Leo wrote:
Sir, after reading the endless reams of drivel that you have produced in this newsgroup of late, I believe that you are correct - brevity is the soul of wit.....;) You might also add for him that the only thing worse than being witty is not being witty! ;^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes: Actually, the reply was specifically directed at Len. He is infamous for doing everything I described. No. My "model of behavior" in here was originally KH2D, an ardent PCTA and far more caustic than I was at the time. The other "models of behavior" were still more PCTAs, most of whom have left. Those PCTAs either went SK or they went to schoolyards or old age homes to beat up on people they could handle. All of that is back at Google archives. A simple Google search will easily verify that. Everyone is welcome to search ALL of Google as far as I'm concerned. Look at ALL of it. Those that do will see the blatant HYPOCRISY of your claim. |
"Leo" wrote in message ... Clint, me amigo, me compadre.... You have the right to remain silent, too - why not invoke that one for a change? Leo I knew your real inner character and feelings would come out if you kept talking enough, and you JUST did. No, I will not shut up simply because I have factually destroyed your position and then continued further to expose YOU for WHO you are and WHAT you do. Leo the unbiased objective reader, who attacks NCTA members for using character attacks, said THIS on september 25, referring to *certain members* of this NG... "For the most part, it's an intelligent and good natured animal - but you do have to watch out for the pricks.... ;)" I will NOT ask you to shut up... or, how did you put it? invoke my right to remain silent? (funny, I didn't know I had violated the law and needed to invoke my rights)... on the contrary, I ask you to KEEP talking and continue revealing yourself for what and who you are. You just haven't learned. Clint KB5ZHT |
Actually, the reply was specifically directed at Len. And I was replying to it anyway. Oh, you're FREIND "leo" made this comment- "For the most part, it's an intelligent and good natured animal - but you do have to watch out for the pricks.... ;)" on the same day he accused NCTA members of insults and personal attacks. If he's ever going to be a good debater, you may as well also coach him on the side about how to do it in a good and civilized manner, and not incriminate himself by making an accusation and then turning around and commiting that very same offense himself. Clint KB5ZHT |
?
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:09:57 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote: "Leo" wrote in message .. . Clint, me amigo, me compadre.... You have the right to remain silent, too - why not invoke that one for a change? Leo I knew your real inner character and feelings would come out if you kept talking enough, and you JUST did. No, I will not shut up simply because I have factually destroyed your position and then continued further to expose YOU for WHO you are and WHAT you do. Leo the unbiased objective reader, who attacks NCTA members for using character attacks, said THIS on september 25, referring to *certain members* of this NG... "For the most part, it's an intelligent and good natured animal - but you do have to watch out for the pricks.... ;)" I will NOT ask you to shut up... or, how did you put it? invoke my right to remain silent? (funny, I didn't know I had violated the law and needed to invoke my rights)... on the contrary, I ask you to KEEP talking and continue revealing yourself for what and who you are. You just haven't learned. Clint KB5ZHT |
I find Leo's posts to be quite humorous, cogent, and factual. He runs circles around you and Len. That's why you can offer nothing of substance in return. Arnie - KT4ST And how is it he's debating us when he also claims that he's not on one side OR the other of the issue of CW testing?? HMMM??????? Just HOW is it he has managed to find a way to eat his cake and have it too when the rest of humanity in thousands of years have not been able to solve that age old paradox? HMMM????? And, as far as "cogent and factual", is that before or after he made a reference to us being pricks? Clint KB5ZHT |
I never named anyone as the porcupine's - uh - quills. I assumed that
you know who you are, and, well.....apparently, I was correct. Kindly do not include Arnie in that category by referring to 'us' when you speak to him about it, though - ....he sure ain't one! Why must I take a side in the code debate? Or does your ISP carry this group as rec.radio.amateur.morsecode? It's a policy group. For amateur radio. All policies. Not just the one you like! It's a big world out there, 'lil feller..... Pray for a clue, please - it would be a service to the entire Amateur community. Pray to Saint Anderson, the Patron Saint of Lids...before its too late.... That was humour too, Clint. You can go to bed now. 73, Leo On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 21:12:24 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote: I find Leo's posts to be quite humorous, cogent, and factual. He runs circles around you and Len. That's why you can offer nothing of substance in return. Arnie - KT4ST And how is it he's debating us when he also claims that he's not on one side OR the other of the issue of CW testing?? HMMM??????? Just HOW is it he has managed to find a way to eat his cake and have it too when the rest of humanity in thousands of years have not been able to solve that age old paradox? HMMM????? And, as far as "cogent and factual", is that before or after he made a reference to us being pricks? Clint KB5ZHT |
"Clint" wrote ...
And how is it he's debating us when he also claims that he's not on one side OR the other of the issue of CW testing?? HMMM??????? Just HOW is it he has managed to find a way to eat his cake and have it too when the rest of humanity in thousands of years have not been able to solve that age old paradox? HMMM????? And, as far as "cogent and factual", is that before or after he made a reference to us being pricks? __________________________________________________ ________________ No, actually he is successfully debating your posting style (or lack thereof) As to the other comment, I read it as a reference to having a pet porcupine. Are you a porcupine, Clint? Arnie - KT4ST |
"Leo" wrote in message ... I never named anyone as the porcupine's - uh - quills. I assumed that you know who you are, and, well.....apparently, I was correct. and, like your buddy arnie who set you up as a plant in this newsgroup in the FIRST place, I now thank YOU for admitting your hypocrisy the way HE did when he admitted to calling people jerks shortly after accusing the same people of "name calling". You guys make it so easy. No WONDER your losing the morse code test debate; the FCC is a real government entitiy in the real world and you won't get anywhere with them by name calling and insulting them. Clint KB5ZHT |
No, actually he is successfully debating your posting style (or lack thereof) As to the other comment, I read it as a reference to having a pet porcupine. Are you a porcupine, Clint? Arnie - KT4ST bzzzzzt, nice try. There is no debate on my posting style. Debates include at least two opposing sides to an issue who are argueing thier points to try to get an unbiased third party observing to accept thier reasoning. The debating here that sparked him being planted as an unbiased third party that nobody is accepting is over cw testing. And don't think anybody buys the porcupine anology; he already admitted to having done it as an insult, but tried the explain it away as humor. You're too late to save him on that one. You guys may have prearranged this ordeal of his but you haven't done a good-follow through on coaching one another on what you're going to say before you post. Clint |
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
Leo wrote: Sir, after reading the endless reams of drivel that you have produced in this newsgroup of late, I believe that you are correct - brevity is the soul of wit.....;) You might also add for him that the only thing worse than being witty is not being witty! ;^) "Your Majesty is like a jelly donut with creme on the top" "WHAT?!?!" "Your arrival brings us pleasure, and your departure leaves us hungry for more!" "Ah - very witty!" - Monty Python 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Clint wrote:
And, as far as "cogent and factual", is that before or after he made a reference to us being pricks? Was that before or after you made reference to us as N***S? - Mike KB3EIA = |
But, Alter Kocker, the points that I make are lucid and cogent.
Something that you seem incapable of achieving. Unkike the drivel and vitriol that you contunally post. And, if you cannot attack someone personally, you are impotent. Out of ammo. Powerless. Where is it written that only comments from people that you can find in QRZ or in a phone book are valid? A Vue Shtet Geschreiber, Len? You are not a Ham. Your opinions don't matter here. Game over. And, who is to say that you are who you say you are? And would you be any more real than the disembodied voice of idiocy in the newsgroup that you are right now? Not likely. Who knows? Who cares. As Descartes said, "I think, therefore I am". (You won't find him on QRZ either :0 ) In this newsgroup, I'm as real as you are. Anytime you wish, you can find me here. And, if you wish to attempt an intelligent discussion some day, look no further. And in honour of your fondness of Yiddish, I leave you with this wish: Er Zol Vaksen Vi a Tsibeleh, Mit Dem Kop in Drerd. And soon. 30, Leo On 26 Sep 2003 18:29:57 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote: In article , "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net writes: I find Leo's posts to be quite humorous, cogent, and factual. He runs circles around you and Len. That's why you can offer nothing of substance in return. Arnie - KT4ST And how is it he's debating us when he also claims that he's not on one side OR the other of the issue of CW testing?? HMMM??????? Just HOW is it he has managed to find a way to eat his cake and have it too when the rest of humanity in thousands of years have not been able to solve that age old paradox? HMMM????? And, as far as "cogent and factual", is that before or after he made a reference to us being pricks? Arnie is defending his Ego Turf, Clint. It's a fairly standard way he does it. Just another PCTA who can't get along with NCTAs who do NOT worship his mighty macho morsemanship. This "Leo" doesn't really exist as any sort of Man. He (or she) has no real interest in any subjects. "Leo" is just playing with people in a unique form of sociopathy brought out by the Internet's anonymity. It's a juvenile form of harrassment but gives this person much glee for getting away with it. By choosing the PCTA side, "Leo" gets support and encouragement from the PCTA regulars in here. "Leo" is only involved with bashing personalities. "Leo" doesn't care about any debate, discussion, or argument on any subject. He or she just likes to hide in anonymity of the Internet and work out his or her frustrations of daily whatevers by bashing anyone he or she picks. "Leo" feels secure in the Internet anonymity. He or she must get some feeling of "power" by remaining unidentifiable, to be able to hit on anyone. It isn't reasonable discourse on subjects. It is just a perverse form of aggression, of getting back at anyone without being physically hurt. It is that person's little fantasy world at work in the mind. What is ugly about that sort of psychological perverseness is that it reflects badly on the lofty, noble principles that ARRL keeps saying about amateur radio. It is rule by a mild form of terrorism, of the very "thugs" he (or she) complains "others" are doing. "Leo" tries to project "power" with the inference that anyone disagreeing with his writings will be subject to harrassment, humiliation, or constant barrage of denigration. He (or she) is "powerful" yet without any power except to drive everyone away in disgust or extreme irritation. What I find mildly curious is that the PCTA regulars are all "on his side." The PCTA like that for they are frustrated at the turn of events of recent history that is against their particular cause. What the PCTA regulars don't realize is that the syndrome of this "Leo" can just as easily turn against Them if they do not condone his or her statements. :-) |
|
Did you read leo's (or whatever his real name is) posts where he referred to those opposing his buddy PCTA hams as "pricks", and upon busting him for it, tried to say it was YOU saying it, and upon busting him on THAT with just basic cut and paste, he tried to claim he didn't know what I was talking about? Arnie and/or the rest should have set up a better player for that game, if you catch my drift. Clint |
Clint,
You had best stop following so close behind Len - people are going to think that you are just one of his stooges! (and, if he stops quickly enough, your head might even disappear....;) 30, Leo On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 17:40:56 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote: Did you read leo's (or whatever his real name is) posts where he referred to those opposing his buddy PCTA hams as "pricks", and upon busting him for it, tried to say it was YOU saying it, and upon busting him on THAT with just basic cut and paste, he tried to claim he didn't know what I was talking about? Arnie and/or the rest should have set up a better player for that game, if you catch my drift. Clint |
"Arnie Macy" wrote in message ... "Brian" wrote ... That candidate stole the election in 1992. __________________________________________ Ah, something to which we can both agree :-)) Arnie - KT4ST Do keep in mind that finally some newspaper, under the Freedom of Information Act, finally did do a recount of all ballots in Florida. Some six months later, the results were published and showed the election results would have been unchanged. Naturally this was printed as a filler at the bottom of the last page of the paper. It was available somewhere on line, but it's been so long ago now that I now longer have the URL and it may have been taken on the site by now. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Clint" wrote in part ...
and, like your buddy arnie who set you up as a plant in this newsgroup in the FIRST place, I now thank YOU for admitting your hypocrisy the way HE did when he admitted to calling people jerks shortly after accusing the same people of "name calling". __________________________________________________ _________________ Anyone who has been on this group for a while will tell you that I'm as close to Leo as you are to Bill Clinton. Sheesh, you couldn't be any farther away from the facts if you tried. BTW, when are you going to respond to my post regarding your ability to use the "facts" to make decisions? I'll wait here. Arnie - KT4ST |
BTW, when are you going to
respond to my post regarding your ability to use the "facts" to make decisions? I'll wait here. I have several times until I was blue in the face and got nothing back in return except "do as your told", "I had to do it so you should to", and my all time favorite, "you can't possibly learn anything else about radio until you learn CW first so you MUST be tested on it" (begging the question AND circular thinking combined on that (non)logic)... so, I say to you that I hope things go well for you in your life and hope you can certainly get over it and move on and not get really vendictive or beligerant when they finally remove the outdated and archaic cw testing policy soon. Clint KB5ZHT |
"Clint" wrote ...
I have several times until I was blue in the face and got nothing back in return except "do as your told", "I had to do it so you should to", and my all time favorite, "you can't possibly learn anything else about radio until you learn CW first so you MUST be tested on it" (begging the question AND circular thinking combined on that (non)logic)... so, I say to you that I hope things go well for you in your life and hope you can certainly get over it and move on and not get really vendictive or beligerant when they finally remove the outdated and archaic cw testing policy soon. __________________________________________________ _____________ Wow, I guess you *don't* want to argue when the facts are presented. And I thought that's what you held so dear? Run Forrest, Run. Arnie - KT4ST |
In article k.net, "Bill
Sohl" writes: The fact that morse is in use o ham bands offers no reason to have a code test in order to begin learning and using the mode. Well, we'll have to agree to disagree about that point. If a new ham without code knowledge decided to get together with another ham to mutually learn/use code at veerrrryyy slow seed (say 1-2 wpm)...would you oppose that? Not at all! But I would point out that there are easier and faster ways to learn the code. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message y.com...
"Arnie Macy" wrote in message ... "Brian" wrote ... That candidate stole the election in 1992. __________________________________________ Ah, something to which we can both agree :-)) Arnie - KT4ST Do keep in mind that finally some newspaper, under the Freedom of Information Act, finally did do a recount of all ballots in Florida. Some six months later, the results were published and showed the election results would have been unchanged. Naturally this was printed as a filler at the bottom of the last page of the paper. It was available somewhere on line, but it's been so long ago now that I now longer have the URL and it may have been taken on the site by now. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Did Florida have a recount in the 1992 election? |
"Brian" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message y.com... "Arnie Macy" wrote in message ... "Brian" wrote ... That candidate stole the election in 1992. __________________________________________ Ah, something to which we can both agree :-)) Arnie - KT4ST Do keep in mind that finally some newspaper, under the Freedom of Information Act, finally did do a recount of all ballots in Florida. Some six months later, the results were published and showed the election results would have been unchanged. Naturally this was printed as a filler at the bottom of the last page of the paper. It was available somewhere on line, but it's been so long ago now that I now longer have the URL and it may have been taken on the site by now. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Did Florida have a recount in the 1992 election? My apologies. I was thinking of 2000 and the mind reacted on what it expected to see not on what was there. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com