Mike,

It looks like no one else is interested in continuing this
thread....in fact, other than the Teletubbies-esque new rule set that
Hans proposed, nothing else has been posted other than our starter
discussion points. Time to take it off of life support?

(sigh)...Oh well - back to the endless Morse code testing discussion!

73, Leo

"The best way to predict the future is to create it."
-Thomas Edison


On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 05:45:52 GMT, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Hey Leo, Good to see you on my screen again! Tell you what. I'll start
with what I think would happen, and if you like, you can join in. Maybe
we can P**s off someone that they might comment..........;^)

Leo wrote:
Mike,

It looks like no one else is interested in continuing this
thread....in fact, other than the Teletubbies-esque new rule set that
Hans proposed, nothing else has been posted other than our starter
discussion points. Time to take it off of life support?

(sigh)...Oh well - back to the endless Morse code testing discussion!


Well, no one can say we didn't give them the chance. Too bad too, since
it allows us to form some new ideas. Not every idea is practical, but
one comes along every once in a while that gives you a Eureka moment.

If we don't want to talk about the Morse code test, maybe Kim's
callsign? 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike,

Heh - I have carefully avoided that discussion so far, as it seems to
be taking on a life of its own.....aw, OK, if you insist......

For the record - and staying well away from the current "who edited
whose post, was that ethical and did they intend t make it look like
the original author did it?" debacle - my personal view of the "Kim's
Call Sign" issue is as follows (and directed at no particular person
or whacko in particular) :

- W5TIT is a valid and legal call sign issued by the US Government,
via the FCC - if they believed that it was inappropriate, they could
have removed it from the list of available suffixes just like the
Motor Vehicle Licensing folks do with certain (ahem) words and
acronyms

- she earned the right to it by becoming licensed, just like every
other Amateur

- she has the right to pick any vanity call sign that she chooses, so
long as the FCC has not prohibited it for whatever reason. Why that
particular call? That's nobody's business except hers!

- she deserves to be addressed by her call sign if she so chooses - I
assume that in Texas, she may have it on her vehicle licence plate
too!

- no one other than the FCC has the right to prevent or censor her
use of it in any way (say, this might be the first legitimate use of
the 'Free Speech' thing here on the group!) Would those who refuse to
spell out her dreaded call here in the group refuse to say it on the
air as well? Jeez, seek help, your inhibitions just might be taking
over your life!

- in Ontario, VA3TIT is available - VE3TIT is in use (by a gentleman
named Neil - would someone like to censor him too? ).
Apparently, just like the US, the Canadian government sees nothing
wrong with this suffix either. (and neither does Neil, I suppose...)

- the thing that really needs to be censored here is the sophomoric
behaviour, boorishness and tittering (sorry - couldn't resist) of a
few sadly immature folks here in the group.

- if Kim interprets the intentional omittance of her callsign from
newsgroup posts as disrespectful towards her personally, then she and
I have something in common - so would I!

and, lastly

- Kim is definitely braver than me - I choose not to use my call sign
on the Usenet groups, to limit the number of crazies that have access
to my snail mail info, where she is willing to deal head on with
whomever, whenever in defense of her rights as detailed above.

In summary - you go, girl!

73, Leo


On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:54:30 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

snip

If we don't want to talk about the Morse code test, maybe Kim's
callsign? 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

Leo wrote:

Mike,

Heh - I have carefully avoided that discussion so far, as it seems to
be taking on a life of its own.....aw, OK, if you insist......

For the record - and staying well away from the current "who edited
whose post, was that ethical and did they intend t make it look like
the original author did it?" debacle - my personal view of the "Kim's
Call Sign" issue is as follows (and directed at no particular person
or whacko in particular) :

- W5TIT is a valid and legal call sign issued by the US Government,
via the FCC - if they believed that it was inappropriate, they could
have removed it from the list of available suffixes just like the
Motor Vehicle Licensing folks do with certain (ahem) words and
acronyms

- she earned the right to it by becoming licensed, just like every
other Amateur

- she has the right to pick any vanity call sign that she chooses, so
long as the FCC has not prohibited it for whatever reason. Why that
particular call? That's nobody's business except hers!

- she deserves to be addressed by her call sign if she so chooses - I
assume that in Texas, she may have it on her vehicle licence plate
too!

- no one other than the FCC has the right to prevent or censor her
use of it in any way (say, this might be the first legitimate use of
the 'Free Speech' thing here on the group!) Would those who refuse to
spell out her dreaded call here in the group refuse to say it on the
air as well? Jeez, seek help, your inhibitions just might be taking
over your life!

- in Ontario, VA3TIT is available - VE3TIT is in use (by a gentleman
named Neil - would someone like to censor him too? ).
Apparently, just like the US, the Canadian government sees nothing
wrong with this suffix either. (and neither does Neil, I suppose...)

- the thing that really needs to be censored here is the sophomoric
behaviour, boorishness and tittering (sorry - couldn't resist) of a
few sadly immature folks here in the group.

- if Kim interprets the intentional omittance of her callsign from
newsgroup posts as disrespectful towards her personally, then she and
I have something in common - so would I!

What you say is true, anyone has the right to exercise bad taste.

Leo wrote:

- she deserves to be addressed by her call sign if she so chooses - I
assume that in Texas, she may have it on her vehicle licence plate
too!

She can use it any time she likes. I'm not required to use it.

- no one other than the FCC has the right to prevent or censor her
use of it in any way (say, this might be the first legitimate use of
the 'Free Speech' thing here on the group!) Would those who refuse to
spell out her dreaded call here in the group refuse to say it on the
air as well? Jeez, seek help, your inhibitions just might be taking
over your life!

Sure, I'd be happy not to use Kim's call on the air. If I hear Kim on
the air, I'll be happy to tune right by. If she calls me, I'm not
required to respond.


- if Kim interprets the intentional omittance of her callsign from
newsgroup posts as disrespectful towards her personally, then she and
I have something in common - so would I!

Please point out the requirement for anyone posting here to use Kim's
callsign.

- Kim is definitely braver than me - I choose not to use my call sign
on the Usenet groups, to limit the number of crazies that have access
to my snail mail info, where she is willing to deal head on with
whomever, whenever in defense of her rights as detailed above.

Well, "Leo", maybe you have an offensive call; maybe you don't. It is
your perogative to keep us in the dark.

Dave K8MN

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:24:42 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

Leo wrote:

- she deserves to be addressed by her call sign if she so chooses - I
assume that in Texas, she may have it on her vehicle licence plate
too!

She can use it any time she likes. I'm not required to use it.

Absolutely not. But she still deserves to be addressed by it if she
so chooses (it would be kinda hard to QSO with Kim without using it!)
You are of course free to refrain from using it if you choose - but it
would be rude to do so in a manner that is intentionally designed to
discriminate against or annoy the holder of the call. Wouldn't it?
You bet.

Common courtesy cannot be mandated, Dave. Just expected.


- no one other than the FCC has the right to prevent or censor her
use of it in any way (say, this might be the first legitimate use of
the 'Free Speech' thing here on the group!) Would those who refuse to
spell out her dreaded call here in the group refuse to say it on the
air as well? Jeez, seek help, your inhibitions just might be taking
over your life!

Sure, I'd be happy not to use Kim's call on the air. If I hear Kim on
the air, I'll be happy to tune right by. If she calls me, I'm not
required to respond.

Now that's a friendly and considerate thing to do! The True Spirit Of
Amateur Radio right there.......

And all because of a call sign? Really. That's one scary call sign,
huh? Wow.


- if Kim interprets the intentional omittance of her callsign from
newsgroup posts as disrespectful towards her personally, then she and
I have something in common - so would I!

Please point out the requirement for anyone posting here to use Kim's
callsign.

The point was the omission of just W5TIT's call sign in the list of
all the other calls, Dave. That would not be the courteous thing to
do. Revising the list so that only first nams were listed, removing
the problem of the 'inappropriate' call, would be.

Not the required thing, Dave - the courteous thing. Considerate, even
- like the Amateur's Code says:

"CONSIDERATE...never knowingly operates in such a way as to lessen the
pleasure of others."

You can read the whole thing if you like at the following address:

http://www.arrl.org/acode.html

Friendly is in there too. Worth a read sometime.


- Kim is definitely braver than me - I choose not to use my call sign
on the Usenet groups, to limit the number of crazies that have access
to my snail mail info, where she is willing to deal head on with
whomever, whenever in defense of her rights as detailed above.

Well, "Leo", maybe you have an offensive call; maybe you don't. It is
your perogative to keep us in the dark.

Thanks!

Personally, I don't suffer from some Freudian thing that causes me to
find call signs offensive. People can be offfensive, but not call
signs - it's just a license number, Dave......


Dave K8MN

73, Leo

"Leo" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:24:42 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

Leo wrote:

- she deserves to be addressed by her call sign if she so chooses - I
assume that in Texas, she may have it on her vehicle licence plate
too!

She can use it any time she likes. I'm not required to use it.

Absolutely not. But she still deserves to be addressed by it if she
so chooses (it would be kinda hard to QSO with Kim without using it!)
You are of course free to refrain from using it if you choose - but it
would be rude to do so in a manner that is intentionally designed to
discriminate against or annoy the holder of the call. Wouldn't it?
You bet.


Actually it is quite easy to QSO someone without using their call sign.
Except when 3rd party traffic is involved, the FCC rules only require that
we give our own call on the air. We do not have to give the other
station's. For example in working a pileup, we throw in our call. The DX
station manages to pick it out of the mess, responds, and gives a report.
We repeat our call sign and give our report. Many times we do not say the
DX station's call just to keep things moving.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 01:27:42 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:

Good point, Dee - I'm not a contester, and was unaware of this mode of
operation. I'm more familiar with the one-on-one ragchew session, or
the 'net' scenario, where you identify the particular station that you
want to speak to, and go from there.

Now, if we can convince these two that Texas is DX from West Virginia,
maybe we can get them talking!

73, Leo


"Leo" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:24:42 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

Leo wrote:

- she deserves to be addressed by her call sign if she so chooses - I
assume that in Texas, she may have it on her vehicle licence plate
too!

She can use it any time she likes. I'm not required to use it.

Absolutely not. But she still deserves to be addressed by it if she
so chooses (it would be kinda hard to QSO with Kim without using it!)
You are of course free to refrain from using it if you choose - but it
would be rude to do so in a manner that is intentionally designed to
discriminate against or annoy the holder of the call. Wouldn't it?
You bet.


Actually it is quite easy to QSO someone without using their call sign.
Except when 3rd party traffic is involved, the FCC rules only require that
we give our own call on the air. We do not have to give the other
station's. For example in working a pileup, we throw in our call. The DX
station manages to pick it out of the mess, responds, and gives a report.
We repeat our call sign and give our report. Many times we do not say the
DX station's call just to keep things moving.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Leo wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:24:42 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

Leo wrote:

- she deserves to be addressed by her call sign if she so chooses - I
assume that in Texas, she may have it on her vehicle licence plate
too!

She can use it any time she likes. I'm not required to use it.

Absolutely not. But she still deserves to be addressed by it if she
so chooses (it would be kinda hard to QSO with Kim without using it!)
You are of course free to refrain from using it if you choose - but it
would be rude to do so in a manner that is intentionally designed to
discriminate against or annoy the holder of the call.

She deserves? On what basis? If Kim believes that I am discriminating
against her because I disapprove of her callsign, she's right. If it
annoys her--well, I find Kim's callsign to be inappropriate. She should
stop annoying me.

Wouldn't it?
You bet.

I see you already have an answer for your question so I needn't weigh
in.

Common courtesy cannot be mandated, Dave. Just expected.

I think Kim owes amateur radio a little common courtesy. Don't you?


Sure, I'd be happy not to use Kim's call on the air. If I hear Kim on
the air, I'll be happy to tune right by. If she calls me, I'm not
required to respond.

Now that's a friendly and considerate thing to do! The True Spirit Of
Amateur Radio right there.......

I don't find Kim's call to be in the true spirit of amateur radio.
Where's my obligation to reward bad taste?

And all because of a call sign? Really. That's one scary call sign,
huh? Wow.

I'm not afraid of Kim's callsign. I disapprove of it.

- if Kim interprets the intentional omittance of her callsign from
newsgroup posts as disrespectful towards her personally, then she and
I have something in common - so would I!

Please point out the requirement for anyone posting here to use Kim's
callsign.

The point was the omission of just W5TIT's call sign in the list of
all the other calls, Dave. That would not be the courteous thing to
do. Revising the list so that only first nams were listed, removing
the problem of the 'inappropriate' call, would be.

You know, "Leo", Kim's choice of calls wasn't a very courteous thing to
do, was it? Kim doesn't seem bothered by her lack of decorum. I'm not
going to let the fact that she's honked over her call not being written
by someone cause me a lack of sleep.

Not the required thing, Dave - the courteous thing. Considerate, even
- like the Amateur's Code says:

Kim wasn't being considerate of the views of others in choosing that
particular call, was she?

"CONSIDERATE...never knowingly operates in such a way as to lessen the
pleasure of others."

I have news for you, "Leo". I'm living up to that line from the
Amateur's Code. I'm not operating in such a way as to lessen the
pleasure of others. Right now, I'm not operating at all. I'm posting
in Usenet.


Personally, I don't suffer from some Freudian thing that causes me to
find call signs offensive. People can be offfensive, but not call
signs - it's just a license number, Dave......


Actually, I have only one number in my call. The rest are letters. I
have had a couple of calls which had two digits. I've never referred to
any past or present calls as license numbers.

Dave K8MN

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:30:15 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

Leo wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 17:24:42 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

Leo wrote:

- she deserves to be addressed by her call sign if she so chooses - I
assume that in Texas, she may have it on her vehicle licence plate
too!

She can use it any time she likes. I'm not required to use it.

Absolutely not. But she still deserves to be addressed by it if she
so chooses (it would be kinda hard to QSO with Kim without using it!)
You are of course free to refrain from using it if you choose - but it
would be rude to do so in a manner that is intentionally designed to
discriminate against or annoy the holder of the call.

She deserves? On what basis? If Kim believes that I am discriminating
against her because I disapprove of her callsign, she's right. If it
annoys her--well, I find Kim's callsign to be inappropriate. She should
stop annoying me.

On the basis that it is her legal callsign, Dave.

Sorry, I don't understand this one at all, Dave - how is Kim annoying
you? By simply existing, or by having a "bad taste" callsign. or ?

Wouldn't it?
You bet.

I see you already have an answer for your question so I needn't weigh
in.

I'm glad that we agree on this point, Dave - it would indeed be rude
to do so.

Common courtesy cannot be mandated, Dave. Just expected.

I think Kim owes amateur radio a little common courtesy. Don't you?

My point (again...) was that the callsign itself cannot possibly be
"objectionable" - it's a callsign. If dirty thoughts enter your own
mind whever you see it, that ain't Kim's problem.

If Kim chooses to use her call in an objectionable manner, that would
be a different issue. Please feel free to start your own thread if
you wish to debate this point.


Sure, I'd be happy not to use Kim's call on the air. If I hear Kim on
the air, I'll be happy to tune right by. If she calls me, I'm not
required to respond.

Now that's a friendly and considerate thing to do! The True Spirit Of
Amateur Radio right there.......

I don't find Kim's call to be in the true spirit of amateur radio.
Where's my obligation to reward bad taste?

So long as the callsign is used only as a callsign, where is the bad
taste? It's a callsign, Dave. Letters and numbers. W5TIT.

And all because of a call sign? Really. That's one scary call sign,
huh? Wow.

I'm not afraid of Kim's callsign. I disapprove of it.

And no one is denying your right to do so, Dave. That isn't the point
of this discussion.

- if Kim interprets the intentional omittance of her callsign from
newsgroup posts as disrespectful towards her personally, then she and
I have something in common - so would I!

Please point out the requirement for anyone posting here to use Kim's
callsign.

The point was the omission of just W5TIT's call sign in the list of
all the other calls, Dave. That would not be the courteous thing to
do. Revising the list so that only first nams were listed, removing
the problem of the 'inappropriate' call, would be.

You know, "Leo", Kim's choice of calls wasn't a very courteous thing to
do, was it? Kim doesn't seem bothered by her lack of decorum. I'm not
going to let the fact that she's honked over her call not being written
by someone cause me a lack of sleep.

Missed the point, "Dave". Again. That ain't what she's "honked" over
- said so herself a while back. Get some sleep

Not the required thing, Dave - the courteous thing. Considerate, even
- like the Amateur's Code says:

Kim wasn't being considerate of the views of others in choosing that
particular call, was she?

I don't know, Dave. She picked a callsign, and the FCC granted it to
her. Was that inconsiderate somehow?

If she uses it in an incosiderate way, it would be. But that's not
what began this discussion. In this case, it was stated that the
callsign is "inappropriate". Which, by itself, it is not. It's
just a callsign, Dave.

"CONSIDERATE...never knowingly operates in such a way as to lessen the
pleasure of others."

I have news for you, "Leo". I'm living up to that line from the
Amateur's Code. I'm not operating in such a way as to lessen the
pleasure of others. Right now, I'm not operating at all. I'm posting
in Usenet.

You mean you consider it appropriate for an amateur to behave
inconsiderately or in an unfriendly manner when so long as he/she is
not on the air? Interesting concept.....

That must be one of those 'flexible' standards, huh?


Personally, I don't suffer from some Freudian thing that causes me to
find call signs offensive. People can be offfensive, but not call
signs - it's just a license number, Dave......


Actually, I have only one number in my call. The rest are letters. I
have had a couple of calls which had two digits. I've never referred to
any past or present calls as license numbers.

I'm sorry, Dave - my error. It's a license alphanumeric.


Dave K8MN

73, Leo