(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/25/2004 6:02 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...

Well...I guess it just exacerbates an existing problem, when I think
about
it...

Steve, K4YZ

Yep. It exasperates you.

Yes, Brain...You "exasperate" me. Liars do.

And your on-going trolling and misrepresentation of truth still exacerbate
a larger problem.

Poor, Steve. The RRAP Bully now thinks he's being picked on and
suckered into looking foolish and behaving badly. It's just so very
unfair.

Subject: Clarification, was: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 3/27/2004 9:31 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:



Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo writes:


Len Over 21 wrote:


Plonk

Finally! Thank you!


I though you plonked me, kind sir?

You expected him to acutally DO what he said?

The 'old timers' here are still waiting for him to get his "Extra Lite out
of the box".

The box has been open for three years now.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/27/2004 9:39 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/26/2004 9:29 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
"Arnie Macy" wrote ...

What "interpretation" did YOU make, Brain?

I put interpretation in "" because it is a literal reading of the
rules. Everyone else who has taken me to task calls it an
interpretation.

I have no "task" to take you to over Part 97 rules.

They are pretty clear. Not a whole lot of "interpretation" required
there. You either do (or don't do, as may be the case) what they say, or be
held liable for fines.

The FCC itself has issued several "clarifications" on these very
specific
topoics that you've cited here. What interpretation was left to be made?

You must post those at once or you are a liar. You have 12 hours to
do so.

I didn't post them in the first place, Brain.

They were not assertions of mine.

There ARE public resources to validate the FCC previous "positions" on
rulings. I suggest that you use them.

On the otherhand, YOU are the ONLY person who can "validate" assertions
YOU make. And "we" are still waiting for you to answer the question "What
"major role" in "emergency comms" do unlicensed radio services play...???

2. Administering a Farnsworth exam when Part 97 clearly states "Morse
Code."

There is no such thing as a "Farnsworth" exam, Brain.

Then no dash-dot exams have been given by the ARRL VEC since 1988.

Which is it? Has the ARRL given dash-dot exams or haven't they?

Huh? Huh?? Huh???

The VEC's have not administred any "dot-dash" exams, either.

They have, however, administered thousands of Element 1 Morse Code tests.

These tests were administered in accordance with FCC parameters and
approval.

UNLESS, of course, you can provide some reference to some FCC rule or
regulation that mandates a "Farnsworth" test or a "dot-dash" test...?!?!

I don't make the rules, and I don't take it upon myself to interpret
workarounds to what Part 97 states.

What "workarounds"...?!?! The FCC had already "interpreted" the
specific
items you've mentioned in this post, Brain.

Then it is imperative that you post such documents.

Which documents would you like posted, Brain? A simple Google search for
"Part 97" or "Amateur Radio Rules" will deliver tons of links to FCC comments
on the topic, and since they will come from a third party, it will deny you or
Lennie the opportunity to claim I either "editied" the find or drew solely upon
ARRL resources to provide them.

Or are you simply voicing your disagreement with thier position on
those
specifics?

Their position is stated in Part 97. Even though you think it may
take many libraries to hold all of the content of Part 97, you might
try embarking on such a reading journey. It might take you the
remainder of your natural life to get through it all, but it is worth
the effort.

The FCC has issued many "interpretations" on "pecuniary interest" since I
was first licensed in 1972, from "absolutely not", to "It's OK under these
restrictions..."

Do you REALLY need over 30 years of FCC comments to wade through?

You can't even handle ONE question asked of you in the last hour...How are
you going to proceess THAT amount of data...?!?!

Hey, I managed to get through it, and so can you.

I have noting to "get through", Brain...I just don't use Amateur Radio to
make ANY business related communicaitons. Period. What anyone else does is at
the peril of THIER license, not mine.

I leave that sort of work to the experts on RRAP and the FCC.

The "experts" in RRAP are one thing....

Correct. They are one thing, one mind, lock step.

If you think that, you've not been paying attention.

That you and I are at odds is living proof of that.

The FCC staffers, on the otherhand, ARE the "experts". Even your
"mentor" says so. Do you disagree?

SORRY to BUST YOUR RANT!!!

That is why I deferred to their document when Arnie asked me to
provide a workaround to the monetary rule. I cannot do so.

What "rant", Brainless One?

Do you disagree that the FCC staffers are the defacto "experts" on radio
regulations?

Yes or no.

Brain, it's obvious that getting your nose rubbed in your own newsgroup
excrement is beginning to cause you to act in an unstable manner.

I am sorry that you find it offensive that you are being required to take
responsiblity for your own actions, but most of us ARE required to do that...or
at least expected to...

That you were not rasied that way is not my problem. But you are over 18
now and it IS expected of you.

That you are incapable is obvious.

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/27/2004 9:40 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/25/2004 6:07 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/24/2004 5:26 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Fair enough.

It only took you three days.

Steve, K4YZ

Is there now a time limit on replying?

Oh no, Brain...You go right on spinning your spin and dancing your
dance.

I'll keep pointing out how silly you look going around in circles.

Steve, K4YZ

You keep making yourself look silly, and nuts.

And I will keep on making you look like a liar.

Now...WHAT "major role" do teh "unlicensed services" play in "emergency
comms"...??

Do I need to RE-quote the post that you stated that this is so?

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/27/2004 9:43 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: (William)
Date: 3/25/2004 6:02 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Poor, Steve. The RRAP Bully now thinks he's being picked on and
suckered into looking foolish and behaving badly. It's just so very
unfair.

I am neither bullying you nor am being "suckered" into anything.

I am showing you to be the liar that I have claimed you to be.

Sorry that you can't see that. It IS rather obvious.

Steve, K4YZ

"William" wrote in message
m...

Then no dash-dot exams have been given by the ARRL VEC since 1988.

Which is it? Has the ARRL given dash-dot exams or haven't they?

Huh? Huh?? Huh???


What the HECK is a dash-dot exam?? They have NEVER given dash-dot exams.
They've only given Morse code receiving and/or sending exams as far as I am
aware of. Since it is far easier to copy using Farnsworth spacing at 5wpm
than other spacing methods, that is what they use.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

I though you plonked me, kind sir?

You expected him to acutally DO what he said?

Hope springs eternal.

The 'old timers' here are still waiting for him to get his "Extra Lite
out of the box".

The box has been open for three years now.

Four years, two months and eight days as of today, actually.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ,
(William) writes:

Poor, Steve. The RRAP Bully now thinks he's being picked on and
suckered into looking foolish and behaving badly. It's just so very
unfair.

Isn't it awful? Gosh, he ought to contact the other Steve, Colonel
Austin (the one with the bionic VTC), and, with the aid of a ham
in Iowa, they can straighten all this out to assure their amateur
god-hood.

LHA / WMD

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Plonk

Finally! Thank you!

I though you plonked me, kind sir?

Not in the browser settings here...:-)

A "Plink" restores everything. It's what is done with 22s. :-)

Besides, the gunnery nurse keeps hollering "HE LIES, HE LIES!"

Feels like kindly magnanimity to fabricate a situation where it
is true! :-)

Just think, "true lies." Could be a great motion picture title!

Plank

LHA / WMD

Subject: Clarification, was: Wrong Again, Len! (Communicator Power)
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 3/27/2004 12:59 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

I though you plonked me, kind sir?

You expected him to acutally DO what he said?

Hope springs eternal.

The 'old timers' here are still waiting for him to get his "Extra Lite
out of the box".

The box has been open for three years now.

Four years, two months and eight days as of today, actually.


Oooooops...so it is.

I stand corrected. Time flies while having fun.

73

Steve, K4YZ