Leo wrote:
Hmmm....

You , Clint and Len have one thing in common - if you can't attach the
individual personally, your argument runs out of steam pretty quickly.

Slash away, gentlemen - your personal attacks are futile here. Ad
Hominem is useless when you remove the 'hominem' from the equation,
isn't it?

I add hominem to many meals, Leo. Great fried with onions and butter!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Certainly not - just trying to see his point of view. He seemed
very passionate about this!

73, Leo

On 25 Sep 2003 13:00:31 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Now, now, Leo, or whoever.

Didn't you just just try to attach an effeminate point of view to
Len's post by dragging in some woman's book?

Or perhaps you think that a woman's point of view has no merit?

Talk about running out of steam and attaching people.

Are we clear?

Leo wrote in message . ..
Hmmm....

You , Clint and Len have one thing in common - if you can't attach the
individual personally, your argument runs out of steam pretty quickly.

Slash away, gentlemen - your personal attacks are futile here. Ad
Hominem is useless when you remove the 'hominem' from the equation,
isn't it? Now, you are forced to rely on intellect alone to make
rational points, which is uncomfortable for some....and difficult for
others. You can't shoot the messenger if you don't like the message.
Waaaa.

Now, gentlemen, if you would care to present lucid and cogent points
in a civilized manner, I'd be happy to listen to you. I have done so
- are you up to the challenge?

73. Leo


On 25 Sep 2003 04:01:09 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Leo wrote in message . ..

Instead of buying one, can I borrow your copy when you are done with
it?

Where should it be sent? To whom should it be addressed?

BTW, are you Len's new guardian angel? Did Clint get laid off?

And did you want to respond to the issues I raised in my post to you,
or shall we redirect Len's mail to you for follow up?

Inquiring minds want to know...cogent and lucid, remember....

73, Leo

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:04:56 GMT, Leo wrote:

Certainly not - just trying to see his point of view. He seemed
very passionate about this!

73, Leo

On 25 Sep 2003 13:00:31 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Now, now, Leo, or whoever.

Didn't you just just try to attach an effeminate point of view to
Len's post by dragging in some woman's book?

Or perhaps you think that a woman's point of view has no merit?

Talk about running out of steam and attaching people.

Are we clear?

Leo wrote in message . ..
Hmmm....

You , Clint and Len have one thing in common - if you can't attach the
individual personally, your argument runs out of steam pretty quickly.

Slash away, gentlemen - your personal attacks are futile here. Ad
Hominem is useless when you remove the 'hominem' from the equation,
isn't it? Now, you are forced to rely on intellect alone to make
rational points, which is uncomfortable for some....and difficult for
others. You can't shoot the messenger if you don't like the message.
Waaaa.

Now, gentlemen, if you would care to present lucid and cogent points
in a civilized manner, I'd be happy to listen to you. I have done so
- are you up to the challenge?

73. Leo


On 25 Sep 2003 04:01:09 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Leo wrote in message . ..

Instead of buying one, can I borrow your copy when you are done with
it?

Where should it be sent? To whom should it be addressed?

Leo wrote in message . ..

How so? I have never stated my position one way or the other with
respect to mandatory Morse testing. I have stated that I did get my 5
WPM to get on to HF because I had to by law, and that using it for
QSOs is beginning to grow on me. That doesn't mean that I think
everyone should have to do it!

Unfortunately, that makes no difference in THIS forum, Leo.

I've expressed not only "tolerence" of NCT's, but have praised
the accomplishments of most of the one's I know, but Lennie, Brain and
a few others always ignore those. It ruins thier rants.

Any opportunity for them to cite "HYPOCRITE" and thereby APPEAR
to be "defending" themselves from some percieved onslaught is never
missed.

As a BIG example, Larry Roll, who is adamantly "pro-code", has
posted countless items on his DIGITAL activities, yet Lennie and his
minions want yo0u (and other countelss faceless readers) to believe
that he's still banging out Code with a Model T spark coil
transmitter.

So, does that make me pro or con, for mandatory testing? Where's the
obvious? Hmmm - there's that old reading comprehension problem
again....

Yes..."reading comprehension" is a problem in this forum.

I think that you just like to stir things up, Sir - your diatribes
appear to serve no other useful purpose. Of course you are aware that
the future of Morse testing will be decided at the government level,
by committees of civilized people - and not within this group. As
such, your energies and passionate rants are for nought, as they will
not sway the decision makers one bit. Like complaining with the guys
on the loading dock about the boss - won't change anything, but I bet
that would make someone one feel more important and in control, huh?
(know the feeling?)

Myself and two or three others have, in times past, tried to
"organize" collective voices on certain REAL policy issues, but they
are always thwarted by Lennie, Brain, and a handful of others who
invariably manage to make almost every post here about the Code issue.

It's really sad in many ways, becasue we have a truly remarkable
opportunity of our own at our disposal, yet a very narrowminded few
would rather just spit and snarl about perceived "wrongs" rather than
truly move forward.

C'est le vie.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Leo


On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:21:09 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron
dot net wrote:



WHOA, PUTZBREATH!


Leo, an obvious PCTA, said this in a previous thread.. and I quote..

"Not intellectual enough to make his
point by rational arguement, he resorts to name calling and other
juvenile tactics to 'get his way'. "

oops.

A PCTA just did that, not a NCTA type.

Add "hypocrisy" to the list of the PCTA flaws in tactics and
debate skills.

Clint, there's nothing here to debate. Nothing.

"Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote in message ...

Clint, you have to consider the ANONYMITY of this mighty, opinionated
nobody.

He (or she) hasn't the courage of their conviction to releal their
identity.


And i'm telling you, guy, you can BET on this.... he's just a friend of some
sort
to one of the PCTA's who has asked him to jump in here on thier behalf and
appear as hypothetical observer. I've seen this tactic before. You have to
consider how hypocritical HE is (attacking our syntax and grammer, while
not saying a THING about the PCTA group's choice of words or
grammer).

But that's just fine. I don't mind debating with him either, it's even
EASIER
to beat for this reason because his heart and mind aren't really into it...
and if he ISN'T a ham, then it'll show through eventually but i'd hazard the
guess that long before it gets to that point you'll mysteriously see him
*vanish*.

Ahhhhhhh....I see. "...even EASIER to beat..."

I think that sums up most of the posts here, even those of
persons who feign "superiority-by-virtue-of-enlightenment" such as
Clint.

Practical experience dictates otherwise, but hey...When it COMES
to facts and practical expereience, that's where the Lennie Crowd
suffer the most.

Steve, K4YZ

I think that sums up most of the posts here, even those of
persons who feign "superiority-by-virtue-of-enlightenment" such as
Clint.

ah, I don't claim such, as i'll leave "enlightenment" up to left wing
liberals in government that have absolutely no clue about the world
outside of lecture halls, government buildings and lawyer's offices.

I only take the facts as they are and deduce a conclusion, rather
than take a passion-filled idea intermixed with rage against
opposition and launch a scathing attack devoid of everything
necessary to warrant a good debate and argument to back up
one's claims.


Practical experience dictates otherwise, but hey...When it COMES
to facts and practical expereience, that's where the Lennie Crowd
suffer the most.

Steve, K4YZ

learn to spell "E X P E R E I E N C E" (your spelling) first and then your
credibility to pass judgement on other people will hold more water.

Clint
KB5ZHT

"Leo" wrote in part ...

BTW, are you Len's new guardian angel? Did Clint get laid off?
__________________________________________________ _____

I was actually beginning to think that Len and Clint might be one in the
same. But a cursory view of the disparity in writing style, grammar, and
spelling dispels that myth fairly quickly.

Arnie -
KT4ST

Talk about running out of steam and attaching people.

Are we clear?

LOL.. I enjoy your mocking of Leo's spelling.
I also find it funny that they don't see thier hypocrisy; they must
be TOTALLY blind to it. Such a reality filter must come in
handy when having conflicts of the soul... or, rather, when
wanting to avoid one.

Now, to annihilate Leo's attempt at having a dialogue AGAIN...

Now, gentlemen, if you would care to present lucid and cogent points
in a civilized manner, I'd be happy to listen to you. I have done so
- are you up to the challenge?

Oh, it's been done time and time again, and met rebuttles of nothing more
than insults and condescending remarks (young man, you just don't know
how easy you have it, blah blah blah) and then the hypocrisy kicked in
and we were accused of doing all these things when in fact it was your
side of the fence that was doing it.... of course, this was before your
buddy got a hold of you outside the newsgroup and asked you to jump
in and pretend to be an unbiased person who was passing objective
criticism.

BUT ENOUGH OF THAT... I know draw attention to the fact that
you are BUSTED AGAIN..... if you don't have a position one way or
the other (or so you've *CLAIMED*), then, um, why would you need to
hear "lucid and cogent points in a civilized manner" for debate and
argument if you're NOT a PCTA apologist/sympathizer/member?

You better stop while you are ahead. The more you talk, the more
you sabotage yourself... not to mention you better look over your
post VERY carefully and make sure you really meant to type
what you did and use the words you chose....

Clint
KB5ZHT

LOL !

What in hell are you trying to say? Sabotage what position? Please
get someone to translate my posts into whatever it is that you speak,
then reply! Duh...

Leo

PS - while we're on the subject of spelling errors, I noticed this one
in your post below:

Rebuttles? Try 'rebuttals' next time

Whoops, them thar's one of yer Pot / Black sceen-arios, I reckon!



On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:02:32 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron
dot net wrote:



Talk about running out of steam and attaching people.

Are we clear?

LOL.. I enjoy your mocking of Leo's spelling.
I also find it funny that they don't see thier hypocrisy; they must
be TOTALLY blind to it. Such a reality filter must come in
handy when having conflicts of the soul... or, rather, when
wanting to avoid one.

Now, to annihilate Leo's attempt at having a dialogue AGAIN...

Now, gentlemen, if you would care to present lucid and cogent points
in a civilized manner, I'd be happy to listen to you. I have done so
- are you up to the challenge?

Oh, it's been done time and time again, and met rebuttles of nothing more
than insults and condescending remarks (young man, you just don't know
how easy you have it, blah blah blah) and then the hypocrisy kicked in
and we were accused of doing all these things when in fact it was your
side of the fence that was doing it.... of course, this was before your
buddy got a hold of you outside the newsgroup and asked you to jump
in and pretend to be an unbiased person who was passing objective
criticism.

BUT ENOUGH OF THAT... I know draw attention to the fact that
you are BUSTED AGAIN..... if you don't have a position one way or
the other (or so you've *CLAIMED*), then, um, why would you need to
hear "lucid and cogent points in a civilized manner" for debate and
argument if you're NOT a PCTA apologist/sympathizer/member?

You better stop while you are ahead. The more you talk, the more
you sabotage yourself... not to mention you better look over your
post VERY carefully and make sure you really meant to type
what you did and use the words you chose....

Clint
KB5ZHT

Arnie,

You're right - just that he was so kind to correct a typo in one of my
posts, I thought I'd return the favour for him

73, Leo

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:50:02 -0400, "Arnie Macy"
wrote:

"Leo" wrote in part ...

PS - while we're on the subject of spelling errors, I noticed this one in
your post below:

Rebuttles? Try 'rebuttals' next time Whoops, them thar's one of yer Pot
/ Black sceen-arios, I reckon!
_________________________________________________ __________________

Don't be so hard on Clint, Leo. He doesn't specialize in English, grammar,
or spelling. His forte is writing non-cogent replies.

Arnie -
KT4ST