Not really - read the message I replied to - the reply was just
following the thread. (you know, replying to the content and in this
case the criticism of *my* spelling in the message one up from this
one.....). It was a bit of a cheap shot, I admit - the result of
fighting fire with fire, I suppose.

As far as I'm concerned, the differences that Clint and I have had
have been amicably resolved - we now know exactly where each other is
coming from, and why - and peace reigns once again. We may not agree
on all points - but we do share common ground, as do the majority of
us in the group: see the thread "The Way To Stop BPL" for further
details.

Beating each other up isn't going to resolve anything...there are
issues we all need to stand together on. Some (like the famous Code /
No Code question) simply have no right answer - and others (like BPL)
threaten the hobby. Perhaps if we channel all of our energy where it
will do the most good for the hobby, we can effect change.

73, Leo

On 30 Sep 2003 05:39:37 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

And so it goes.

It would appear that you've run out of steam again.

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

Or Amateur Radio beyond getting as much as possible for as little
as possible invested...

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.

No "scathing attacks" or "passion-filled" ideas here, Clint.

My tit-for-tat with Lennie and Brain is based solely upon what
THEY supply. I don't need to make any of it up.

You're getting there.

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.

Ahhhhh...I seeeeeeee...."passion filled" only applies to those
who find themselves in Clint's crosshairs.

Taking Lennie's "If Ya Can't Beat Them, Correct Their Spelling
Errors" tangent, I see.

If I spell it "ekspyryance" the facts are still such that
Lennie's a liar, Brain says the liar is his mentor, and now you want
to join them...

What does that say about you, Clint?

Just curious.

Steve, K4YZ

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , "Clint" rattlehead at
computron dot net writes:

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, 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.


Yet another typo made in anger, Lennie? That's what you acuse ME
of...

Your pool-pal Clint says spelling errors undermine one's ability
to be taken seriously.

Is that true?

Are you mad, or just not credible?

I say it's both.

Steve, K4YZ

On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being "morron," and 10 being genius,
where would you say Bruce falls?

Remember now, you've put forth the theory that Bruce is a master of
trickery, so only you are able to see his brilliance.

Using your scale, I would rate Bruce somewhere between a 15 and 20.

Leo wrote in message . ..
Not really - read the message I replied to - the reply was just
following the thread. (you know, replying to the content and in this
case the criticism of *my* spelling in the message one up from this
one.....). It was a bit of a cheap shot, I admit - the result of
fighting fire with fire, I suppose.

I thought you called that "running out of steam." Now you're trying
to rationalize your lack of steam.

As far as I'm concerned, the differences that Clint and I have had
have been amicably resolved - we now know exactly where each other is
coming from, and why - and peace reigns once again. We may not agree
on all points - but we do share common ground, as do the majority of
us in the group: see the thread "The Way To Stop BPL" for further
details.

Fair enough.

Beating each other up isn't going to resolve anything...there are
issues we all need to stand together on. Some (like the famous Code /
No Code question) simply have no right answer

I disagree.

- and others (like BPL)
threaten the hobby. Perhaps if we channel all of our energy where it
will do the most good for the hobby, we can effect change.

73, Leo

Perhaps the ARRL's Official Observer program will now look outward for
interference problems rather than confine itself to internal problems.

On 1 Oct 2003 07:53:24 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Leo wrote in message . ..
Not really - read the message I replied to - the reply was just
following the thread. (you know, replying to the content and in this
case the criticism of *my* spelling in the message one up from this
one.....). It was a bit of a cheap shot, I admit - the result of
fighting fire with fire, I suppose.

I thought you called that "running out of steam." Now you're trying
to rationalize your lack of steam.

Not at all - just explaining the reasoning behind the comments. Read
the entire thread - the comments followed suit.

I sincerely hope your 'lack of steam' comment wasn't an attempt to
rekindle the flame, now, was it?


As far as I'm concerned, the differences that Clint and I have had
have been amicably resolved - we now know exactly where each other is
coming from, and why - and peace reigns once again. We may not agree
on all points - but we do share common ground, as do the majority of
us in the group: see the thread "The Way To Stop BPL" for further
details.

Fair enough.

Thank you.


Beating each other up isn't going to resolve anything...there are
issues we all need to stand together on. Some (like the famous Code /
No Code question) simply have no right answer

I disagree.

As you most assuredly have the right to do.

BTW, is it the code/no code part, or the beating people up part, or
the standing together part of my statement that you disagree with?


- and others (like BPL)
threaten the hobby. Perhaps if we channel all of our energy where it
will do the most good for the hobby, we can effect change.

73, Leo

Perhaps the ARRL's Official Observer program will now look outward for
interference problems rather than confine itself to internal problems.

I'm a bit puzzled by this one - that has what to do with BPL, or other
things that threaten the hobby?

Dick Carroll wrote in message ...
Brian wrote:.

On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being "morron," and 10 being genius,
where would you say Bruce falls?


With you occupying the slot at 2, he comes in at least a 3.

That would be an invalid assessment, from someone occupying slot #1.

Leo wrote in message . ..
On 1 Oct 2003 07:53:24 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Leo wrote in message . ..
Not really - read the message I replied to - the reply was just
following the thread. (you know, replying to the content and in this
case the criticism of *my* spelling in the message one up from this
one.....). It was a bit of a cheap shot, I admit - the result of
fighting fire with fire, I suppose.

I thought you called that "running out of steam." Now you're trying
to rationalize your lack of steam.

Not at all - just explaining the reasoning behind the comments. Read
the entire thread - the comments followed suit.

I sincerely hope your 'lack of steam' comment wasn't an attempt to
rekindle the flame, now, was it?


As far as I'm concerned, the differences that Clint and I have had
have been amicably resolved - we now know exactly where each other is
coming from, and why - and peace reigns once again. We may not agree
on all points - but we do share common ground, as do the majority of
us in the group: see the thread "The Way To Stop BPL" for further
details.

Fair enough.

Thank you.


Beating each other up isn't going to resolve anything...there are
issues we all need to stand together on. Some (like the famous Code /
No Code question) simply have no right answer

I disagree.

As you most assuredly have the right to do.

BTW, is it the code/no code part, or the beating people up part, or
the standing together part of my statement that you disagree with?

The famous Code/No Code part.

- and others (like BPL)
threaten the hobby. Perhaps if we channel all of our energy where it
will do the most good for the hobby, we can effect change.

73, Leo

Perhaps the ARRL's Official Observer program will now look outward for
interference problems rather than confine itself to internal problems.

I'm a bit puzzled by this one - that has what to do with BPL, or other
things that threaten the hobby?

OO's are trained in documentation. Documentation of interference will
be required to file a complaint. OO's are confined to documenting
amateur's violations in the ARS, not interference to the ARS by
unlicensed operators.

Thus, I state that perhaps the ARRL will take an outward looking
stance with respect to this interference.

Thus, I state that perhaps the ARRL will take an outward looking
stance with respect to this interference.


Why would they, they dont care.

On 2 Oct 2003 06:48:13 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

snipped

BTW, is it the code/no code part, or the beating people up part, or
the standing together part of my statement that you disagree with?

The famous Code/No Code part.

Understood - and I respect your position.


Perhaps the ARRL's Official Observer program will now look outward for
interference problems rather than confine itself to internal problems.

I'm a bit puzzled by this one - that has what to do with BPL, or other
things that threaten the hobby?

OO's are trained in documentation. Documentation of interference will
be required to file a complaint. OO's are confined to documenting
amateur's violations in the ARS, not interference to the ARS by
unlicensed operators.

Thus, I state that perhaps the ARRL will take an outward looking
stance with respect to this interference.

That makes sense - we have the same program running up here.

Assuming that happens, I'd expect that plenty of us will be required
to augment the work that the OO's do in this regard. I have not seen
a statistic on the number of active OO's in the program - I'd assume
it to be relatively small, though.

73, Leo