| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Stirrings in the veldt
It seems that the South African authorities have dropped their recent
licencing proposal and replaced it with a new one. Their existing licencing scheme in South Africa has a Full (ZS call) licence and a Restricted (ZR call) licence, the latter having privileges above 30 MHz only, both taking the same theory test, but the ZS calls having to pass a 12wpm code test. IOW, exactly as the UK A and B licences were back when I first got a UK licence. The authorities in South Africa reacted to the demise of the ITU code test requirement in a truly bizarre way, by suggesting a third class of licence with a ZT call, with a 5wpm code test and limited HF privileges. This has been shelved, due to what they say were a large number of comments. No such licence will now be implemented, so don't expect to hear any ZT calls anytime soon. Instead, they are proposing a dual route to a full licence, offering a choice between either an advanced theory test or a code test for each candidate. This was proposed by many people in many countries whilst there still was an ITU requirement for a code test, but this is the first time I have seen it resurface since it ended. If South Africa does implement it, they will be the first and probably only country to do so. They are also proposing to give the same limited HF privileges that they would have given to the new licence, to the existing restricted licence instead, without any addtional testing. 73 de Alun, N3KIP |
In article , Alun
writes: The authorities in South Africa reacted to the demise of the ITU code test requirement in a truly bizarre way, by suggesting a third class of licence with a ZT call, with a 5wpm code test and limited HF privileges. Why was this a "truly bizarre way"? This has been shelved, due to what they say were a large number of comments. Democracy in action. No such licence will now be implemented, so don't expect to hear any ZT calls anytime soon. Instead, they are proposing a dual route to a full licence, offering a choice between either an advanced theory test or a code test for each candidate. This was proposed by many people in many countries whilst there still was an ITU requirement for a code test, but this is the first time I have seen it resurface since it ended. Sounds like a very reasonable compromise. If South Africa does implement it, they will be the first and probably only country to do so. Why? Perhaps it could be a way out of the constant arguments. It wasn't possible before, due to the treaty. They are also proposing to give the same limited HF privileges that they would have given to the new licence, to the existing restricted licence instead, without any addtional testing. How many has in South Africa, anyway? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
In article , Alun
writes: it is bizarre to greet the end of the code requirement by suggesting a new licence with a code test. Why? The revised treaty says that each country shall determine for itself what the code test requirements for an amateur license will be. It appears that South Africa is in the process of determining what it shall be for South Africa. Perhaps there will be no test, or no change, or something in between. And Jim, I didn't say it was a bad idea to have a dual track system with code and theory alternatives. It's actually quite a good one. No doubt now someone will put that in petition number 18, or whatever number we are up to now. I first suggested such a thing several years ago in my "Chinese Menu" license concept. The idea was that there would be a "core" test requirement for the lowest level of license, and upgrading could be accomplished by accumulating credits in a variety of ways, such as specialized written tests, and code tests. I won't though, because it isn't going to happen. Why not? Nobody has suggested it yet in the USA because in the past it would have violated the treaty to have an HF license with no code test. Now it could be done. We don't know exactly what the FCC will do, but we do know two things that they are on record as saying:- 1) They don't beleive that the code test serves a useful purpose; Not true! They said it "serves no *regulatory* purpose" 2) They won't rearrange subbands until a consensus emerges amongst us. I sure hope they don't! So, we do know really (although some are in denial) that the NPRM will dump Element 1 completely. It ain't over until it's over, and even then it ain't over. We can be rather less sure what it will do to reform the unnecessary proliferation of licence classes, What "proliferation"? We have 6 right now, with one scheduled to disappear in a little over six years even if no rules changes at all are made. Two others are disappearing by attrition. and the equally unneccessary slicing and dicing of the ham bands that goes with it. Would you have only one class of license and no subbands by mode? I hope it might do something in this regard, but it is perhaps more likely that it will do nothing, or at least as little as possible, as they probably will decide that we still don't agree with oneanother. And we don't. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
(William) wrote in
om: PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Alun writes: it is bizarre to greet the end of the code requirement by suggesting a new licence with a code test. Why? Because, TAFKARJ, the country already has coded licenses. And they've had since 1912 to perfect them. Now its time for them to try something new and different, but instead they get more of the same. Can't think outside the box. I agree that Jim is being a little obdurate, but don't lose sight of the fact that South Africa have dropped that plan. They at least are somewhat open to persuasion. |
(William) wrote in message . com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Alun writes: The authorities in South Africa reacted to the demise of the ITU code test requirement in a truly bizarre way, by suggesting a third class of licence with a ZT call, with a 5wpm code test and limited HF privileges. Why was this a "truly bizarre way"? TAFKA Rev Jim, I'll explain it to you. SA has two existing coded HF licenses. ITU says you can drop code, so they come out with a third coded license. Bizarre. Question, Brain... I have never seen Jim Miccolis refer to you as anything but "Brian"... So WHY do YOU inisist on following the insulting and demeaning example of a known pathological liar and antagonist in engaging in any interaction with him...?!?! Are you, after all, as shallow and immature as I thought you really are? Please give some specific example of how Jim has belittled or demeaned YOU in a like manner... This has been shelved, due to what they say were a large number of comments. Democracy in action. You almost got it right. Should be "Democracy inaction." As the otehr post suggested...You can either get to the higher class license by progressing up a Code ladder or a theory ladder. Why is that "inaction"...?!?! Sounds like a very reasonable compromise. Then why did they initially suggest a third coded license? Why did that generate a "large number of comments?" To introduce a pathway to the higher license. Shall I draw you a map? If South Africa does implement it, they will be the first and probably only country to do so. Why? Perhaps it could be a way out of the constant arguments. It wasn't possible before, due to the treaty. TAFKA Rev Jim, the constant arguments can be gotten out of by letting go. Ahhhhh...so, if we all just agree with you, then we don't need to "discuss" anything any more, eh? How Lenniesque. They are also proposing to give the same limited HF privileges that they would have given to the new licence, to the existing restricted licence instead, without any addtional testing. How many has in South Africa, anyway? huh? Even a gradeschooler can see he just dropped the "m" out of "hams", BRAIN... I can see how you'll wind up a loser if you ever got on "Wheel of Fortune"... OOOOOOPS! YOU'RE ALREADY A LOSER! EXXXXXXXXXCCCCCUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEE MEEEEEEEEEEEEE ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Steve, K4YZ |
|
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in
m: (William) wrote in message . com... PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Alun writes: The authorities in South Africa reacted to the demise of the ITU code test requirement in a truly bizarre way, by suggesting a third class of licence with a ZT call, with a 5wpm code test and limited HF privileges. Why was this a "truly bizarre way"? TAFKA Rev Jim, I'll explain it to you. SA has two existing coded HF licenses. ITU says you can drop code, so they come out with a third coded license. Bizarre. Question, Brain... I have never seen Jim Miccolis refer to you as anything but "Brian"... So WHY do YOU inisist on following the insulting and demeaning example of a known pathological liar and antagonist in engaging in any interaction with him...?!?! Are you, after all, as shallow and immature as I thought you really are? Please give some specific example of how Jim has belittled or demeaned YOU in a like manner... This has been shelved, due to what they say were a large number of comments. Democracy in action. You almost got it right. Should be "Democracy inaction." As the otehr post suggested...You can either get to the higher class license by progressing up a Code ladder or a theory ladder. Why is that "inaction"...?!?! Sounds like a very reasonable compromise. Then why did they initially suggest a third coded license? Why did that generate a "large number of comments?" To introduce a pathway to the higher license. Shall I draw you a map? If South Africa does implement it, they will be the first and probably only country to do so. Why? Perhaps it could be a way out of the constant arguments. It wasn't possible before, due to the treaty. TAFKA Rev Jim, the constant arguments can be gotten out of by letting go. Ahhhhh...so, if we all just agree with you, then we don't need to "discuss" anything any more, eh? How Lenniesque. They are also proposing to give the same limited HF privileges that they would have given to the new licence, to the existing restricted licence instead, without any addtional testing. How many has in South Africa, anyway? huh? Even a gradeschooler can see he just dropped the "m" out of "hams", BRAIN... I can see how you'll wind up a loser if you ever got on "Wheel of Fortune"... OOOOOOPS! YOU'RE ALREADY A LOSER! EXXXXXXXXXCCCCCUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEE MEEEEEEEEEEEEE ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Steve, K4YZ I think when he spoke of inaction he meant the earlier ZS proposal, not the one they are now considering |
Alun wrote in message . ..
I think when he spoke of inaction he meant the earlier ZS proposal, not the one they are now considering Perhaps, Alun, but 99% of that post was asking Brain why it was important to him to demean and belittle another person who does not demean or belittle him. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(William) wrote in message . com... Because, TAFKARJ, the country already has coded licenses. And they've had since 1912 to perfect them. Now its time for them to try something new and different, but instead they get more of the same. Can't think outside the box. Again with teh belittlements where no belittlement in kind existed. And you mean can't think outside YOUR box... Steve, K4YZ What belittlements, Stebe? |
|
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message om...
(William) wrote in message . com... PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , Alun writes: The authorities in South Africa reacted to the demise of the ITU code test requirement in a truly bizarre way, by suggesting a third class of licence with a ZT call, with a 5wpm code test and limited HF privileges. Why was this a "truly bizarre way"? TAFKA Rev Jim, I'll explain it to you. SA has two existing coded HF licenses. ITU says you can drop code, so they come out with a third coded license. Bizarre. Question, Brain... Brain? I have never seen Jim Miccolis refer to you as anything but "Brian"... How is it that you misspell my name in one fragment sentence, and spell it correctly in another? So WHY do YOU inisist on following the insulting and demeaning example of a known pathological liar and antagonist in engaging in any interaction with him...?!?! Stebe, you misunderstand (what's new?). I am the ONE who has tagged N2EY with the title "TAFKA Rev. Jim" after his dishonesty in altering Kim's posts. He previously put forth the image of being as pure as the driven snow. But after that little stunt, he can no longer be referred to as Reverend Jim. So, "formerly known as" sounded good to me. You got a problem with it? Are you, after all, as shallow and immature as I thought you really are? No. Perhaps even more so. Perhaps almost as much as you are. Please give some specific example of how Jim has belittled or demeaned YOU in a like manner... Why? Shallow and immature people don't have to follow your orders. This has been shelved, due to what they say were a large number of comments. Democracy in action. You almost got it right. Should be "Democracy inaction." As the otehr post suggested...You can either get to the higher class license by progressing up a Code ladder or a theory ladder. Why is that "inaction"...?!?! Sounds like a very reasonable compromise. Then why did they initially suggest a third coded license? Why did that generate a "large number of comments?" To introduce a pathway to the higher license. Shall I draw you a map? If South Africa does implement it, they will be the first and probably only country to do so. Why? Perhaps it could be a way out of the constant arguments. It wasn't possible before, due to the treaty. TAFKA Rev Jim, the constant arguments can be gotten out of by letting go. Ahhhhh...so, if we all just agree with you, then we don't need to "discuss" anything any more, eh? How Lenniesque. They are also proposing to give the same limited HF privileges that they would have given to the new licence, to the existing restricted licence instead, without any addtional testing. How many has in South Africa, anyway? huh? Even a gradeschooler can see he just dropped the "m" out of "hams", BRAIN... I can see how you'll wind up a loser if you ever got on "Wheel of Fortune"... OOOOOOPS! YOU'RE ALREADY A LOSER! EXXXXXXXXXCCCCCUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEE MEEEEEEEEEEEEE ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Steve, K4YZ Stebe, take a chill pill or whatever meds you forgot to take. |
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(William) wrote in message What belittlements, Stebe? You really need to ask? The you ARE the idiot I have surmised all along. Steve, K4YZ Such as your incessant use of "Brain" instead of using my name? And now you want to call me on the carpet for using TAFKA Rev. Jim??? You just renewed your membership in the KMA Club. |
(William) wrote in message . com...
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... (William) wrote in message What belittlements, Stebe? You really need to ask? The you ARE the idiot I have surmised all along. Steve, K4YZ Such as your incessant use of "Brain" instead of using my name? And now you want to call me on the carpet for using TAFKA Rev. Jim??? You just renewed your membership in the KMA Club. I am not the one who sets the rules, Brain. You make a fool out of yourself in a public forum...I sarcastically call you "Brain" since you keep on doing it over and over. As for the "KMA" club, thanks...Sure is embarrassing having a membership that much junior to YOURS, though.... Steve, K4YZ |
(William) wrote in message om...
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message om... (William) wrote in message . com... TAFKA Rev Jim, I'll explain it to you. SA has two existing coded HF licenses. ITU says you can drop code, so they come out with a third coded license. Bizarre. Question, Brain... Brain? I have never seen Jim Miccolis refer to you as anything but "Brian"... How is it that you misspell my name in one fragment sentence, and spell it correctly in another? Because, BRAIN, it's not about how I address YOU...It's about why do YOU address Jim Miccolis with belittling endearments when HE has never addressed YOU as anything except your proper name? That scumbag you run with likes to do that. Jim has never refered to him as anything but "Len", yet "Len" finds countless ways to belittle him. Lennie does that because he cannot "argue" or "debate" Jim otherwise. He has to make Jim appear less-than-adequate in order to promote himself. The weak minded and the foolish HAVE to do that...It's a defense mechanism. Are YOU that weak minded and foolish? He did the same thing with me when he launched into allegations of being a "jack booted thug", "Nazi", "elitist", "Dill Sergeant", etc etc etc, when I had not so addressed him. He is treated and addressed in the same tone and with the same viciousness as he unleashed. Is that how you feel? Do YOU need to belittle Jim in order to effectively express yourself when discussing things with/about him? Please do not humiliate yourself by trying to misdirect this question by asking ME about how I address Lennie...I've already answered that. Stay focused...you were asked a direct, specific question. You CAN answer direct, specific questions, can't you? So WHY do YOU inisist on following the insulting and demeaning example of a known pathological liar and antagonist in engaging in any interaction with him...?!?! Stebe, you misunderstand (what's new?). I am the ONE who has tagged N2EY with the title "TAFKA Rev. Jim" after his dishonesty in altering Kim's posts. He previously put forth the image of being as pure as the driven snow. But after that little stunt, he can no longer be referred to as Reverend Jim. So, "formerly known as" sounded good to me. You got a problem with it? I have a problem with you lying. I have a problem with you following in the footsteps of a person who is a known pathological liar and antagonist. It's embarrassing to see a contemporary Veteran and Amateur licensee resorting to Lennie's tactics. As for what "sounded good to (you)"...My question STILL remains...Did Jim refer to you by any name, title or endearment OTHER than "Brian"...?!?! If not, why do YOU find it necessary to do so...?!?! Are you, after all, as shallow and immature as I thought you really are? No. Perhaps even more so. Perhaps almost as much as you are. Brain, you will NEVER be as much as I am...good OR bad. Please give some specific example of how Jim has belittled or demeaned YOU in a like manner... Why? Shallow and immature people don't have to follow your orders. What "order", Brain...?!?! I SAID "please"...And to have fulfilled my request would have only served to explain why YOU find it necessary to be demeaning and rude...OR have proven why you were right and I was wrong. Instead, you choose to be even MORE argumentitive and demeaning, even further cementing your reputation. Stebe, take a chill pill or whatever meds you forgot to take. Uh huh....Just after you take your distemper shot, Brain, and answer the question put to you. WHY do you find it necessary to be rude and demeaning when no such epithets were addressed to you...?!?! Steve, K4YZ PS: I will assume any answer to the question that attempts to redirect or obfuscate the response to be "I am unwilling to directly answer the question as I know the truth to be other than what I stated". Simple enough? |
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(William) wrote in message om... (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message om... (William) wrote in message . com... TAFKA Rev Jim, I'll explain it to you. SA has two existing coded HF licenses. ITU says you can drop code, so they come out with a third coded license. Bizarre. Question, Brain... Brain? I have never seen Jim Miccolis refer to you as anything but "Brian"... How is it that you misspell my name in one fragment sentence, and spell it correctly in another? Because, BRAIN, it's not about how I address YOU... I say it is. Until you behave yourself, its TAFKARJ!!! It's about why do YOU address Jim Miccolis with belittling endearments when HE has never addressed YOU as anything except your proper name? Tuff. I'm holding TAFKARJ metaphorically hostage until you straighten your insane a$$ out. My regrets to Jim. I'll send out for Schlottskey's deli. That scumbag you run with likes to do that. Jim has never refered to him as anything but "Len", yet "Len" finds countless ways to belittle him. That would be between the scumbag that I run with and TAFKARJ. Do you often get involved with other people's issues? Lennie does that because he cannot "argue" or "debate" Jim otherwise. He can. He has. And to a reasonable person, effectively. But TAFKARJ remains in another world. A Ham in a Bubble. He has to make Jim appear less-than-adequate in order to promote himself. The weak minded and the foolish HAVE to do that...It's a defense mechanism. Perhaps. But TAFKARJ has made himself less-than-adequate by altering posts. It is a cross that he must bear (Mel, forgive me). Are YOU that weak minded and foolish? Don't know. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most weak-minded and foolish, how high would you rate me? He did the same thing with me when he launched into allegations of being a "jack booted thug", "Nazi", "elitist", "Dill Sergeant", etc etc etc, when I had not so addressed him. He is treated and addressed in the same tone and with the same viciousness as he unleashed. Ahem. I hate to be the one to break it to you, Steve, but you are just a wee little bit over the top. Ask ANYone! Is that how you feel? Do YOU need to belittle Jim in order to effectively express yourself when discussing things with/about him? Do you need to belittle me in order to express yourself? Rhetorical question. I already know the answer. And, no, I don't need to belittle TAFKARJ. Have I done so? Please do not humiliate yourself by trying to misdirect this question by asking ME about how I address Lennie...I've already answered that. See above. Why do you need to try to belittle ME? Stay focused...you were asked a direct, specific question. Which was? You CAN answer direct, specific questions, can't you? If I can recall them. So WHY do YOU inisist on following the insulting and demeaning example of a known pathological liar and antagonist in engaging in any interaction with him...?!?! Stebe, you misunderstand (what's new?). I am the ONE who has tagged N2EY with the title "TAFKA Rev. Jim" after his dishonesty in altering Kim's posts. He previously put forth the image of being as pure as the driven snow. But after that little stunt, he can no longer be referred to as Reverend Jim. So, "formerly known as" sounded good to me. You got a problem with it? I have a problem with you lying. I have a problem with your lies, and your insane behavior. I have a problem with you following in the footsteps of a person who is a known pathological liar and antagonist. It's embarrassing to see a contemporary Veteran and Amateur licensee resorting to Lennie's tactics. Len is also a Veteran and a Radioman. As for what "sounded good to (you)"...My question STILL remains...Did Jim refer to you by any name, title or endearment OTHER than "Brian"...?!?! No. He no longer refers to me at all. He keeps tripping over his own tie, and won't acknowledge or explain his most recent irrational policy positions WRT amateur radio. If not, why do YOU find it necessary to do so...?!?! Jim has tainted himself by altering posts. I can no longer revere him, thusly, he is no longer Reverend. Are you, after all, as shallow and immature as I thought you really are? No. Perhaps even more so. Perhaps almost as much as you are. Brain, you will NEVER be as much as I am...good OR bad. True. You're manic. Go see the definition. Please give some specific example of how Jim has belittled or demeaned YOU in a like manner... Why? Shallow and immature people don't have to follow your orders. What "order", Brain...?!?! I SAID "please"...And to have fulfilled my request would have only served to explain why YOU find it necessary to be demeaning and rude...OR have proven why you were right and I was wrong. Instead, you choose to be even MORE argumentitive and demeaning, even further cementing your reputation. Jim has been found guilty of altering posts. Stebe, take a chill pill or whatever meds you forgot to take. Uh huh....Just after you take your distemper shot, Brain, and answer the question put to you. WHY do you find it necessary to be rude and demeaning when no such epithets were addressed to you...?!?! Steve, K4YZ PS: I will assume any answer to the question that attempts to redirect or obfuscate the response to be "I am unwilling to directly answer the question as I know the truth to be other than what I stated". Simple enough? See above. Questions answered. Now what? |
|
|
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(William) wrote in message . com... (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... (William) wrote in message What belittlements, Stebe? You really need to ask? The you ARE the idiot I have surmised all along. Steve, K4YZ Such as your incessant use of "Brain" instead of using my name? And now you want to call me on the carpet for using TAFKA Rev. Jim??? You just renewed your membership in the KMA Club. I am not the one who sets the rules, Brain. You set your own rules. |
William wrote: (N2EY) wrote in message . com... "[their] hobby is wasting time. Your time." Free speech doesn't mean you have to listen to what everyone says. 73 de Jim, N2EY If you want to witness a true waste of time, read a Heil post. Just because it takes you an inordinate amount of time, does not mean that others are having the same difficulty, William/Brian. Dave K8MN |
|
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , (N2EY) writes: (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message .com... I have also used the term "Mr. Anderson". ...but not for very long. Even once makes it 100% more than the "courtesy" you ahve extended him, Putz. Don't forget "nursie" and being addressed by the wrong gender. How do we know "his" gender? There is no physical exam for an amateur radio license rank. You mean other than the fact that my picture is on the net in several places...?!!? He is treated and addressed in the same tone and with the same viciousness as he unleashed. And you have provided the exact response desired. Right...so, when are YOU going to insult my wife, my occupation, my experience, and everything else like you consider "acceptible amateur behavior?" This forum, as YOU ahve pointed out, Your Scumminess, is NOT Amateur Radio, is NOT moderated, nor is it under the auspices of FCC control. Rhetorical question. The answer is obvious: Whenever I agree with any of your opinions I will be in a most-favored category and all who oppose me are "unacceptibles." No one expects everyone to agree all the time. I certainly ahve my disagreements with many here, and they with I, but the only ones who I feel compelled to "reply in kind" to are you and your puppet-in-training, Brain. By responding in kind, you have lowered yourself to the level of the very people you oppose, and (in their minds) given them the OK to continue to behave that way. :-) I have a problem with you lying. Do you think that such lies will ever be admitted? For example, I have been accused of altering Kim's posts - which is not what happened at all. Prima facie evidence in Google proves you ALTERED things. I read the posts. He altered nothing. I have a problem with you following in the footsteps of a person who is a known pathological liar and antagonist. It's embarrassing to see a contemporary Veteran and Amateur licensee resorting to Lennie's tactics. And by responding in kind...... Poor baby. All those "hurt" feelings allowing insulting behavior towards others is somehow "justified?" Jim's not the problem...He has not "justified" anything, and if you read any of his posts for anything OTHER than something you thought you could lash onto and make a rant out of, you'd notice he's expressed his disdain for the frequent spankings I've given you for YOUR conduct. Good old Amateur Extra Double Standard! Good old Lennie not paying attention. Instead, you choose to be even MORE argumentitive and demeaning, even further cementing your reputation. Then why bother, Steve? Haven't you seen enough examples to know what the responses will be? Don't you already know that your questions will not be answered? What "questions?" We'd expect nothing less...Not that you could DO less, Lennie. The gunnery nurse wastes my time. You waste your own time...Lying...antagonizing, trying to "argue" about topics you clearlya re ignorant in...But hey...It's your "retirement"... There's a reason for killfiles and filters. I find my rrap experience to be much better for the use of them. DENIAL. Ostrich syndrome. Mama Dee does the same. Lennie's expression of gratitude for being publically humiliated on numerous occassions... Living in an imaginary world where everyone thinks as nobly and purely as yourself? The "yourself" who always has the "correct" answer? More evidence of Lennie not paying attention...again... You've got kids, Steve. Haven't you had the situation where a kid argues with you about bedtime - at bedtime? By arguing with the kid, bedtime effectively becomes later because the kid isn't in bed when s/he's arguing. But if you refuse to argue, you get less of a hassle. Poor baby. Seven-year-old-Extras seem to be all about, aren't they? Go to bed, Jimmie. You waste everyone's time with your puerile behavior. Upgrade. Become an eight-year-old extra. Thanks, Lennie, for proving my point. Thanks also for proving me right...Again...I'd say I "owe you one", but so far most of what you've said about ANYTHING is so far off base as to be laughable, or just plain false. I'll try to find SOMETHING in one of your posts I can "corroborate" for you...But don't hold your breath. Steve, K4YZ |
(William) wrote in message om...
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... Because, BRAIN, it's not about how I address YOU... I say it is. Until you behave yourself, its TAFKARJ!!! Then I'd say you've pretty well proven that I am right about your general lack of character. About what I'd expect from someone who expresses public admiration for a known liar and antagonist. It's about why do YOU address Jim Miccolis with belittling endearments when HE has never addressed YOU as anything except your proper name? Tuff. I'm holding TAFKARJ metaphorically hostage until you straighten your insane a$$ out. My regrets to Jim. I'll send out for Schlottskey's deli. Still haven't answered the question, which in itself I'd say puts you in the "coward" category, but the INSISTENCE on being insulting where no insult was offered puts you solidly in the "scumbag" category, too. Do you often get involved with other people's issues? Only when I see creepy scumbags acting like bullies towards people who have treated them with nothing but respect. You'd be that bully, ergo you'd be that scumbag. I am sure you family line is proud of you. He can. He has. And to a reasonable person, effectively. But TAFKARJ remains in another world. A Ham in a Bubble. So far everything he's said, other than that that he clearly states as opinion, is true. You and Lennie the Liar do not have that reputation. Are YOU that weak minded and foolish? Don't know. I do.... On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most weak-minded and foolish, how high would you rate me? Ummmm.... a solid 8.5. You ahve the potential to be redeemed, but I doubt it. You occassionally manage to express a vaild opinion without being insulting or dememaning, but your inability to substantiate your claims leaves you wanting pretty badly. He did the same thing with me when he launched into allegations of being a "jack booted thug", "Nazi", "elitist", "Dill Sergeant", etc etc etc, when I had not so addressed him. He is treated and addressed in the same tone and with the same viciousness as he unleashed. Ahem. I hate to be the one to break it to you, Steve, but you are just a wee little bit over the top. Ask ANYone! Perhaps I am...But I refuse to be talked down to, pushed, or otherwise be bullied by cowards and creeps like you and Lennie. Sorry if that hurts your feelings. Perhaps asking yourself how you came to this juncture would be warranted? Is that how you feel? Do YOU need to belittle Jim in order to effectively express yourself when discussing things with/about him? Do you need to belittle me in order to express yourself? Nope. You belittle yourself just fine. But since you deem it necessary to address people the way you do, I just assume that this is the manner in which you find it most effective to communicate. Rhetorical question. I already know the answer. No you don't. You ASSUME that you know an answer. And, no, I don't need to belittle TAFKARJ. Have I done so? THAT was a rhetorical question, Brain. Please do not humiliate yourself by trying to misdirect this question by asking ME about how I address Lennie...I've already answered that. See above. Why do you need to try to belittle ME? Because it seems to be the form of communication that you understand. Stay focused...you were asked a direct, specific question. Which was? Which was obviously not important enough for you to answer like a man. You CAN answer direct, specific questions, can't you? If I can recall them. Obviously you ARE Gene Pool Deficient... Cut and snip to... PS: I will assume any answer to the question that attempts to redirect or obfuscate the response to be "I am unwilling to directly answer the question as I know the truth to be other than what I stated". Simple enough? See above. Questions answered. Now what? No, they weren't...but I am sure that you think that you danced your way around the point. THE POINT is that Brian Burke is not a person of reputable character. Not that we'd expect anything less from a person who publically expresses admiration for a known pathological liar and antagonist. Thanks, Brain...You DO make this easy...You have now admitted to publically lying...not that "we" didn't already know that. Steve, K4YZ |
Dave Heil wrote in message ...
William wrote: (N2EY) wrote in message . com... "[their] hobby is wasting time. Your time." Free speech doesn't mean you have to listen to what everyone says. 73 de Jim, N2EY If you want to witness a true waste of time, read a Heil post. Just because it takes you an inordinate amount of time, does not mean that others are having the same difficulty, William/Brian. Dave K8MN David, the reading of it takes no time at all since there is so little content. It's the contemplation, wonderment, and disappointment afterwards that you are supposed to be some kind of hotshot in the amateur radio world, yet none of it comes through in the way you express yourself here. Simply amazing. |
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(William) wrote in message om... (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... Because, BRAIN, it's not about how I address YOU... I say it is. Until you behave yourself, its TAFKARJ!!! Then I'd say you've pretty well proven that I am right about your general lack of character. About what I'd expect from someone who expresses public admiration for a known liar and antagonist. It's about why do YOU address Jim Miccolis with belittling endearments when HE has never addressed YOU as anything except your proper name? Tuff. I'm holding TAFKARJ metaphorically hostage until you straighten your insane a$$ out. My regrets to Jim. I'll send out for Schlottskey's deli. Still haven't answered the question, which in itself I'd say puts you in the "coward" category, but the INSISTENCE on being insulting where no insult was offered puts you solidly in the "scumbag" category, too. Do you often get involved with other people's issues? Only when I see creepy scumbags acting like bullies towards people who have treated them with nothing but respect. You'd be that bully, ergo you'd be that scumbag. I am sure you family line is proud of you. He can. He has. And to a reasonable person, effectively. But TAFKARJ remains in another world. A Ham in a Bubble. So far everything he's said, other than that that he clearly states as opinion, is true. You and Lennie the Liar do not have that reputation. Are YOU that weak minded and foolish? Don't know. I do.... On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most weak-minded and foolish, how high would you rate me? Ummmm.... a solid 8.5. You ahve the potential to be redeemed, but I doubt it. You occassionally manage to express a vaild opinion without being insulting or dememaning, but your inability to substantiate your claims leaves you wanting pretty badly. He did the same thing with me when he launched into allegations of being a "jack booted thug", "Nazi", "elitist", "Dill Sergeant", etc etc etc, when I had not so addressed him. He is treated and addressed in the same tone and with the same viciousness as he unleashed. Ahem. I hate to be the one to break it to you, Steve, but you are just a wee little bit over the top. Ask ANYone! Perhaps I am...But I refuse to be talked down to, pushed, or otherwise be bullied by cowards and creeps like you and Lennie. Sorry if that hurts your feelings. Perhaps asking yourself how you came to this juncture would be warranted? Is that how you feel? Do YOU need to belittle Jim in order to effectively express yourself when discussing things with/about him? Do you need to belittle me in order to express yourself? Nope. You belittle yourself just fine. But since you deem it necessary to address people the way you do, I just assume that this is the manner in which you find it most effective to communicate. Rhetorical question. I already know the answer. No you don't. You ASSUME that you know an answer. And, no, I don't need to belittle TAFKARJ. Have I done so? THAT was a rhetorical question, Brain. Please do not humiliate yourself by trying to misdirect this question by asking ME about how I address Lennie...I've already answered that. See above. Why do you need to try to belittle ME? Because it seems to be the form of communication that you understand. Stay focused...you were asked a direct, specific question. Which was? Which was obviously not important enough for you to answer like a man. You CAN answer direct, specific questions, can't you? If I can recall them. Obviously you ARE Gene Pool Deficient... Cut and snip to... PS: I will assume any answer to the question that attempts to redirect or obfuscate the response to be "I am unwilling to directly answer the question as I know the truth to be other than what I stated". Simple enough? See above. Questions answered. Now what? No, they weren't...but I am sure that you think that you danced your way around the point. THE POINT is that Brian Burke is not a person of reputable character. Not that we'd expect anything less from a person who publically expresses admiration for a known pathological liar and antagonist. Thanks, Brain...You DO make this easy...You have now admitted to publically lying...not that "we" didn't already know that. Steve, K4YZ Steve, in your own eyes-rolled-back kind of way, I'm sure you really believe what you say. But I don't. I think you're nuts. |
(William) wrote in message . com...
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... (William) wrote in message om... (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... THE POINT is that Brian Burke is not a person of reputable character. Not that we'd expect anything less from a person who publically expresses admiration for a known pathological liar and antagonist. Thanks, Brain...You DO make this easy...You have now admitted to publically lying...not that "we" didn't already know that. Steve, in your own eyes-rolled-back kind of way, I'm sure you really believe what you say. Of course I do, Brain. Why would a rational person say something he DIDN'T believe? But I don't. Of course you don't, Brain. Probably due tot he fact that it's your failure to understand why YOUR behaviour is the one in question here... YOU claim to have operated as "DX" from an area of the world in which you obviously had no permission to operate from. I say "obviously" since you cannot produce a single bit of evidence that you DID have permission. When asked to provide some documentary evidence of this operation, you cannot provide a single QSL card, a single callsign of somone who can verify they "worked" you, etc. You then follow up THAT act by publically expressing admiration and claiming as your "mentor" a person who ahs been clearly and repeatedly documented as intentionally untruthful and openly spiteful of the very radio service of which you are a licensee. Several folks here have expressed disdain of my poking at you and the Putzy one...Not because you don't deserve it, but because they believe if you are "left alone", you'll go away. I did that for a while and you didn't...Neither did your lying friend. I for one believe when you try to placate bullies and liars, you only serve to embolden them. Just as it is your right to lie and misrepresent, it's my right to challenge and expose your lies and misrepresentations. You and Lennie certainly give me plenty of opportunites to address them. I think you're nuts. If thinking that makes you feel warm and fuzzy and let's you sleep at night, Brain, you go right on ahead and think it. Consider it yours. Steve, K4YZ |
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(William) wrote in message . com... (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... (William) wrote in message om... (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... THE POINT is that Brian Burke is not a person of reputable character. Not that we'd expect anything less from a person who publically expresses admiration for a known pathological liar and antagonist. Thanks, Brain...You DO make this easy...You have now admitted to publically lying...not that "we" didn't already know that. Steve, in your own eyes-rolled-back kind of way, I'm sure you really believe what you say. Of course I do, Brain. Why would a rational person say something he DIDN'T believe? He could be: a. lying. b. not rational and doesn't know what he's saying. I think you're not rational (nuts). |
(William) wrote in message . com...
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... Of course I do, Brain. Why would a rational person say something he DIDN'T believe? He could be: a. lying. b. not rational and doesn't know what he's saying. I think you're not rational (nuts). Of course you do. You (and your "mentor") are the one's with credibility problems here. So.....How do YOU go about "fixing" it...?!?! You do your best to try and put the onus of inpropriety off on anyone BUT yourself. Since I work the hardest to keep your frequent foolishness in the public eye, I catch the flak. No problem. The worst YOU have to suggest is that I am "nuts" or "irrational" for not allowing you and Lennie to get away with bullying and lying. So far, you've failed. Try again...?!?! Steve, K4YZ |
|
|
|
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(William) wrote in message . com... (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... Of course I do, Brain. Why would a rational person say something he DIDN'T believe? He could be: a. lying. b. not rational and doesn't know what he's saying. I think you're not rational (nuts). Of course you do. You (and your "mentor") are the one's with credibility problems here. So.....How do YOU go about "fixing" it...?!?! You do your best to try and put the onus of inpropriety off on anyone BUT yourself. Since I work the hardest to keep your frequent foolishness in the public eye, I catch the flak. No problem. The worst YOU have to suggest is that I am "nuts" or "irrational" for not allowing you and Lennie to get away with bullying and lying. So far, you've failed. Try again...?!?! Steve, K4YZ Whether I've failed or not is immaterial to your being nuts. You would be nuts with or without my presence on rrap. Best of luck. |
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(William) wrote in message . com... (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... I am not the one who sets the rules, Brain. You set your own rules. Only when it comes to not accepting bullying and lying as acceptable public behaviour. Correct. You don't follow that rule, but you should. You're favorite rule is "Do as I say, not as I do." |
|
In article ,
(William) writes: (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message .com... (William) wrote in message .com... (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message .com... I am not the one who sets the rules, Brain. You set your own rules. Only when it comes to not accepting bullying and lying as acceptable public behaviour. Correct. You don't follow that rule, but you should. You're favorite rule is "Do as I say, not as I do." If he yells at you again "FALL DOWN AND GIVE ME TWENTY!!!" tell him you have no cash but ask if he'll take PayPal instead... :-) LHA / WMD |
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , (William) writes: So far, you've failed. Try again...?!?! Steve, K4YZ Whether I've failed or not is immaterial to your being nuts. You would be nuts with or without my presence on rrap. Best of luck. He has succeeded beyond his wildest dreams in that. I am curious as to what training eithr of you ahve had in psychiatry...?!?! The same "training" that Lennie has had in Amateur Radio, no doubt. And Brain, you have indeed, in public, failed... Steve, K4YZ |
(William) wrote in message . com...
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com... So far, you've failed. Try again...?!?! Whether I've failed or not is immaterial to your being nuts. You would be nuts with or without my presence on rrap. Best of luck. Luck is not needed here, Brain. That which you call "nuts" is simply your attempt to writhe away from being publically humiliated over and over, Brain. Perhaps if YOU reconsidered YOUR own rhetoric and conduct, that which you consider "nuts" would cease...?!?! I consider anyone who publically expresses admiration for a person who has been thoroughly documented as a liar and antagonist as "nuts". I consider anyone who makes public assertions that they either cannot substantiate or validate via some third party source as "nuts". I consider anyone who's been caught doing those things who then PERSISTS in doing them, contrary to evidence against them, as nuts. All of those things, Brain, would be you... If calling me "nuts" makes you sleep better, or you feel you got your sucker punch in, well then, I hope it makes that warm fuzzy feeling for you. I think the evidence of odd behaviour rests on YOUR shoulders, Brain...not anyone elses. That I (or anyone else) apparently manage to effectively rub your nose in your own errors and foolishness doesn't make me (us) nuts...Just glad for the entertainment you provide. For that I (we) thank you. Steve, K4YZ |
In article ,
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes: (William) wrote in message .com... (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message .com... That I (or anyone else) apparently manage to effectively rub your nose in your own errors and foolishness doesn't make me (us) nuts...Just glad for the entertainment you provide. For that I (we) thank you. Your only contribution in here seems to be one of FIGHTING your own little personal battles with imaginary foes and generally coming unglued at the slightest provocation. That's unstable behavior, obvious to lay people. LHA / WMD |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:12 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com