Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in
ink.net: A good CW operator could out operate a phone operator with less power, less equipment, and worse propagation. Dan/W4NTI A good operator (CW or any other kind) wouldn't say "(insert mode here) operators are lids". Again Alun you are not qualified to judge. Since you are only half a ham. You have no experience to enable you able to judge anything about CW. You need to just admit that before you have the whole USENET laughing at your ignorance on the subject. Dan/W4NTI Dan, you are not only a lid, you lack even the rudiments of logical reasoning. I was _not_ judging anything about CW. I don't even care to do so. What I was saying, since you evidently fail to understand, is that anyone who says that users of a particular mode are lids just because they use or prefer that mode is not a considerate person, i.e. you aren't. There is a valid place for each mode that we use in the amateur service, and if anyone wants to do all of their operating using one mode, whether it be CW, or slow-scan, or PSK, or SSB, they should be left in peace and not maligned by the likes of you. IMO none of them should be labelled as 'half a ham'. What should we count you as? One quarter of a ham? One eighth? |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FCC Assigns RM Numbers To Three New Restructuring Petitions | Policy | |||
Rev.Jim the troller (was Bootlegging in 1948?) | Policy | |||
With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? | Policy | |||
Ham Radio In The Post-Code Testing Era | Policy | |||
With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? | General |