"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

Unfortunately, I believe I have heard
the story of which Jim speaks...or at
least one exactly like it. (snip)


Okay, I'll try one more time. Please read back over what I've said.
Nothing was said by me about a denial of license based on other grounds.
We
were talking about license testing and everything I said had to do with
license testing. What does Jim's story have to do with license testing?
Instead, not able to respond to the actual question raised (character
testing within the license tests), Jim has deceitfully, but clearly
successfully, introduced another subject (denial of license) to undermine
my
earlier statements about license testing.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


I thought he'd been responding to your analogy that "character" is not
something to be tested for (paraphrasing there). Sorry...

Kim W5TIT

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message link.net...
"Dwight Stewart" wrote:

I understand Kim's point. Lets try
it from this perspective. If you're one
of the millions of immigrants entering
this country, the speech we use on
the radio, and on the radio tests, in
this country is not already in the
"toolbox." And Spanish certainly isn't
in the "toolbox" of many other Hams
in this country. So, even if you ignore
any skills needed for the voice modes
(however minor), there is still some
validity in Kim's argument. Spanish is
use more often the CW in this (snip)


Wow! See what happens when you edit a sentence without checking it
afterwards. That last sentence should read "Spanish is used" and "more often
than CW."


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

No sweat, Dwight. Only the very petty folks will nitpick about minor
spelling errors or grammatical misuses on USENET. (Usually in an
attempt to compensate for the invalidity of their own statements.)

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Bert Craig" wrote:

I hate to say it, Jim, but this is one
of those intangibles that fall under
the catagory of "if you don't get it,
I can't explain it to you."

Kim's got it, but doesn't like it. I
can respect that. Bill's got it too,
but doesn't appear to want to let
on that he's got it. (Broken record
mode: But the FCC..., but the
FCC..., but the FCC...) Dwight?
No comment.


Bert: I just noticed this. I cannot believe you said that. I cannot
believe you are acting like that. I *GET* that you like CW testing and you
should *GET* that I don't. THAT is all there is to *GET*. It's that
simple.

Kim W5TIT


Excuse me, Bert. Before you continue discussing whether I "get"
something
or not, read back over what I've actually said and notice that absolutely
none of it had anything whatsoever to do with the separate issue raised by
Jim. We were talking about license testing. My comments had to do with
license testing. Jim changed the subject to license denial based on other
grounds. I've made no comments on that subject.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
et...
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"JEP" wrote:

Service means just that. Broadcasters
have to do public service to keep
broadcastings. Why do you think they
do PSA's. No money involved, they
do it free. (snip)


Nonsense.

I just love how you so cavalierly proclaim other's opinions and/or
statements as "nonsense." Kim was right on target re. same.

What public service is performed by those in the Citizens Band
Radio Service?

Gee, the Office of Homeland Security disagrees with you, Dwight. Should
your
statement be labeled as "nonsense" or just plain "ignorant?"

The newsgroups "rec.radio.shortwave" and "rec.radio.cb" were again
deleted
from this reply (off-topic in those newsgroups).

Good call.

Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

73 de Bert
WA2SI



BERT. I still can't believe I am seeing this!! YOU are getting way too
upset...LOL

Kim W5TIT

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
om...
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"Dwight Stewart" wrote:

I understand Kim's point. Lets try
it from this perspective. If you're one
of the millions of immigrants entering
this country, the speech we use on
the radio, and on the radio tests, in
this country is not already in the
"toolbox." And Spanish certainly isn't
in the "toolbox" of many other Hams
in this country. So, even if you ignore
any skills needed for the voice modes
(however minor), there is still some
validity in Kim's argument. Spanish is
use more often the CW in this (snip)


Wow! See what happens when you edit a sentence without checking it
afterwards. That last sentence should read "Spanish is used" and "more
often
than CW."


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

No sweat, Dwight. Only the very petty folks will nitpick about minor
spelling errors or grammatical misuses on USENET. (Usually in an
attempt to compensate for the invalidity of their own statements.)

73 de Bert
WA2SI


OK, I see...you're getting up early, too. ; ) ROFLMAO...

Kim W5TIT

"Bert Craig" wrote:

(snip) The discussion I was engaged
in w/Bill, K2UNK, concerned the
"character" aspect of Morse code
testing. (snip)

(snip) Well Dwight, the above is the
issue that Bill, JEP, Kim, Jim, and I
were discussing. Get it yet?


However, I wasn't discussing anything with Bill, Jep, Kim, or you. I
responded to something Jim had said and we had exchanged several messages on
that subject (with the subject clearly stated).


I do notice that this is not the first
(or tenth, for that matter) time you've
joined into a thread, (or a branch
thereof) pulled the subject in a
different direction, and then whined
about a response by claiming that
what you said had nothing to do
with a "separate" issue.


In case you haven't noticed, the subject you're discussing isn't the
subject listed in the subject line of this thread. The subject you're
discussing spun off from that original discussion, as the subject Jim and I
were discussing spun off from yours. That's fairly typical of newsgroup
discussions. Therefore, I think it's fairly important to know what is being
discussed before making comments, especially comments about the participants
(not the subject, but the participants - you said, "Kim's got it, (snip)
Bill's got it too, (snip) Dwight No comment."). Enough said.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Bert Craig" wrote:

"Dwight Stewart" wrote:

(snip)

I just love how you so cavalierly
proclaim other's opinions and/or
statements as "nonsense." Kim
was right on target re. same.


It's a matter of opinion, Bert. From my perspective, it is nonsense. Of
course, it doesn't become so just because I say it. Others, including you,
are obviously free to have a different opinion.


What public service is performed by
those in the Citizens Band Radio
Service?

Gee, the Office of Homeland Security
disagrees with you, Dwight. (snip)


I ask a question and you respond by saying DHS disagrees.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

"Dwight Stewart" wrote:

And the efforts of REACT and its
members are commendable. However,
any public service performed is informal
in nature, not the result of any regulatory
stipulation imposed by the FCC or
federal government. There is nothing in
part 95 that mandates public service like
that found in part 97.

OK, Dwight quote paragraph and section
that states that amateurs MUST do public
service.


Okay, Dee, show me where I said Amateurs "must" do public service. Part 97
offers that as one purpose of the ARS and gives us the mandate (authority)
to do so (ARES and so on), but it certainly isn't required.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Kim W5TIT" wrote


You actually spend time recording it, huh?


Common practice when working weak signals in DXpedition mode. (Didn't you
often wonder why some DSP rigs have that little 'snippet catcher' in them?)

73, de Hans, K0HB