In article , "Kim W5TIT"
writes:

Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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


pssssst, I think Len is superior at pulling Dave's strings...

Shhhh...don't tell anybody... :-) :-) :-)

LHA

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

It should be clear that there will never be any "consensus" on
code testing as long as such beligerance remains rooted among
the self-styled elite morsemen of U.S. amateur radio.

LHA

Darn-it, Len, I wanted Dee to say those things.

She never will... :-)


I think those endless droplets of water falling and hitting her
between the eyes, while listening to Farnsworth-spaced propoganda from
W1AW will be hard to undo.

Nah. It's a more subtle form of propaganda...lying by omission.

Any organization that has a large media base can do that bit
by simply omitting content that is unfavorable to the media Hq.

They control the media content.

If the high wire-pullers at the League want to emphasize code by
deemphasizing all other modes, they have perfect control to do so.

No one else will be the wiser if all the news-events-doings comes
their way via League-controlled information. Everyone is captive
if they don't have other sources of information. Very subtle.

LHA

Dave Heil wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

Len Over 21 wrote:

snippage

You are not in either camp.

I'm in our home office right now. Haven't been to "camp" for a while.

Why do you ask?


I asked you nothing. Pay attention.



Is there a morse camp one has to go to in amateur radio?

:-)


Maybe there is a morse camp available. Perhaps it could help with your
morse learning disability. :-) :-)

Well, there is this:

http://www.trefoilnet.net/disp/morse.htm


I think you've come up with some valueable aids for overcoming Len's
inertia.

Always willing to help!

- Mike KB3EIA -

"N2EY" wrote


The inescapable conclusion is that many of those listed in the database
are
either totally inactive or only slightly active.


I don't think it's "inescapable" --- in fact, I think it's incredibly
far-fetched to expect that...

1) ...1% of all of us would be on the air transmitting at any given moment,
and....

2) ... even if we were, that more than a fraction of that 1% would be heard
at any given QTH, presuming they're somewhat evenly distributed across the
available 3,750 kHz of spectrum.

I consider myself a reasonably active licensee, perhaps more active than the
average. Other than contest weekends, my transmitter is actually ON THE AIR
transmitting a signal perhaps no more than 60 minutes a week. That's less
than 1% of the time that you could hear on the air, propagation permitting.
If everyone were as active as me, it would take 168 hams transmitting (and
presumably another 168 listening --- total of 336 hams) to keep a single
frequency occupied 24/7. Now if we suppose that on average, each ongoing
QSO occupies 1kHz of spectrum (phone takes up more, morse and data take up
less) we'd need 1,260,000 (336 x 3750) active hams to keep all frequencies
QRL 24/7. Of course this presumes that every QSO would be heard everywhere,
but thanks to the magic of RF propagation, we are able share most
frequencies geographically, and in fact more than two stations can
simultaneously use a single frequency.

So much for your 'inescapable' conclusion!!!

73, de Hans, K0HB

In article . net, "KØHB"
writes:

I don't think it's "inescapable" --- in fact, I think it's incredibly
far-fetched to expect that...

1) ...1% of all of us would be on the air transmitting at any given moment,
and....

That works out to 1 hour and 22 minutes of transmitting per week per ham.

2) ... even if we were, that more than a fraction of that 1% would be heard
at any given QTH,

Very true!

presuming they're somewhat evenly distributed across the
available 3,750 kHz of spectrum.

That's the really far-fetched part. Distribution won't ever be even or even
nearly so, by frequency or time. At 2AM local during sunspot minimum, the 1700
kHz of 10 meters isn't lilkely to be full of signals.

I consider myself a reasonably active licensee, perhaps more active than the
average. Other than contest weekends, my transmitter is actually ON THE AIR
transmitting a signal perhaps no more than 60 minutes a week. That's less
than 1% of the time that you could hear on the air, propagation permitting.

Well, there you have it. Some would say an hour a week is reasonably active,
others would say it's quite inactive, etc. YMMV

If everyone were as active as me, it would take 168 hams transmitting (and
presumably another 168 listening --- total of 336 hams) to keep a single
frequency occupied 24/7.

And that's the point - everyone isn't even as active as you (on noncontest
weekends)

Now if we suppose that on average, each ongoing
QSO occupies 1kHz of spectrum (phone takes up more, morse and data take up
less) we'd need 1,260,000 (336 x 3750) active hams to keep all frequencies
QRL 24/7.

Exactly! And the bands aren't anywhere near that busy - even on contest
weekends.

Of course this presumes that every QSO would be heard everywhere,
but thanks to the magic of RF propagation, we are able share most
frequencies geographically, and in fact more than two stations can
simultaneously use a single frequency.

And then there's things like roundtables and nets.

So much for your 'inescapable' conclusion!!!

bwaahaahaa



73 de Jim, N2EY

In article et, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

Len is working hard to pull your strings

It isn't a string that Len is pulling. And it's not on Dave.

;-) ;-0 ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-0 ;-) ;-0 ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-0 ;-) ;-0 ;-) ;-)
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-0 ;-) ;-0 ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-0 ;-) ;-0 ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-0
;-) ;-0 ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-0

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , "Kim W5TIT"
writes:

Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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


pssssst, I think Len is superior at pulling Dave's strings...

Shhhh...don't tell anybody... :-) :-) :-)

Is this the part where you make me one of your playthings or have me
fall into one of your carefully laid snares, Len?