|
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in
hlink.net: "Alun" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in link.net: "Alun" wrote in message ... Back when I was giving CW tests for the license exams I used a key and a oscillator. So there is your arguement shot down. Dan/W4NTI You'll have to do better than that I understand it is difficult for you to understand how it is to be a real ham. You know one that knows and uses other modes than phone. Again you will simply have to learn to deal with that Alun. I am sure you will find someone out there that will agree, and simpathize with you and your problem. However, I am not that person. Have a good day. Dan/W4NTI You are the one with the problem Because you say so? I think not. Dan/W4NTI Well, I am a bit puzzled why I would need to find someone to sympathise with "my problem", because I don't have one. |
Len Over 21 wrote: In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: "Real ham" = One who abides by 1930s standards and practices That is incorrect, Leonard. Not in the context of the particular give-and-take with "Real Ham" Dan. :-) A "real ham" is one who holds an amateur radio license. Actually, a "real ham" is the butchered meat of swine. :-) Then why are you trying to tell us that " "Real ham' = One who abides by 1930s standards and practices"? The FCC regulations don't define "ham" at all. The FDA does. You have no stake whatever in amateur radio. Tsk, tsk, tsk. All you want to do in here (which is newsgrouping, not amateur radio) is drive a stake through any heart that doesn't beat to the rhythm of classical radiotelegraphy in amateur radio. You've told us on numerous occasions all you want to do here. You never seem to get around to doing what you've stated. Now you'd like to tell me all I want to do. I've not stated all I want to do here so your comments are conjecture on your part. Take your pick, Leonard: classical telegraphy, classical SSB, classical AM phone. You aren't doing any of them in amateur radio. You aren't a participant. This is the year 2004, over 6 decades later. ...and despite your self-declared several decades interest in amateur radio, you have yet to show enough interest to become a participant. Oh? Did you miss something in the past six years of messaging in here? I've been a professional involved with radio and radio communications. Interesting work. Paid well, too. I've communicated on frequencies you aren't allowed to as a "licensed amateur" or even as a State Department government employee. :-) 1. I wrote "amateur radio". You're drifting off into a description of your past professional radio experience once again. 2. I don't really care where on which frequencies you communicated as a professional. 3. You have no idea which frequencies are used or may be used by the U.S. Department of State. Didn't need a bit of manual telegraphy skills or licensing (as an amateur) to do any of that. You wouldn't need any to obtain the most basic amateur radio license in the U.S. either. Where is it "written" that I have to demonstrate some "interest in radio" to the Great Heil? I didn't write anything about "some interest in radio". You DEMAND amateur radio license acquisition in order to state anything on amateur radio regulations in here. I've DEMANDed nothing. I continue to point out that you have nothing to do with amateur radio as a participant or a regulator. You should make public your "authorization" to make such demands. You should look up the definition of the word "demand". Without that "authorization" you are just another bitchy whining complainer who can't hack any real discussion beyond the "official" words on amateur-radio-as-it-used-to-was when you first engaged in that hobby. Wrong-o, Pops. I'm a licensed radio amateur. I have a vested interest in any changes in regulations involving amateur radio license testing or amateur radio operation. You, on the other hand... Without that "authorization" you are just another SS-wannabe who wants nothing more than to fight anyone who doesn't agree with your "orders" posted on this bulletin board. In other words, just another disagreeable gunnery nurse (but without bedpan). "Fight"? "Orders"? If we were fighting, you'd best pack a lunch and rest up beforehand, old timer. I haven't issued any orders. Until you show your "authorization," you'll have to discuss it with the only Real Authority on this newsgroup, Paul Schleck. Hint: he is a licensed radio amateur of Amateur Extra rank. I'll have to discuss what with Paul Schleck? What you seem to want this newsgroup to become is just another Chat Room where like-minded dittyboppers can commiserate in a mental commisary all about "real hams" (who know and love morse code) and follow the League's orders explicitly, complete with all the jargon and standards and practices of 1930's amateur radio. You aren't wrapped very tight. Meanwhile, this newsgroup is still unmoderated and open to anyone with Internet access. No doubt you will redouble your efforts to put down anyone who doesn't think like you do and DEMAND certain things in order to satisfy your "authorized" orders. Pththththth. No DEMANDs have been made of you, Len. You continue to post. I'll continue to point out your lack of anything to do with amateur radio. You've certainly kept mum about your childlike antics exemplified by some of your comments to the FCC. Wanna discuss those? Dave K8MN |
In article k.net,
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com writes: What happened 'putz'? Did you sneak out of your booby bin again? Crawl back under your rock. Better yet go somewhere and die. Nice strength of character and civility you do NOT show, Danny Boy. :-) LHA / WMD |
In article , Dave Heil
writes: In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: "Real ham" = One who abides by 1930s standards and practices That is incorrect, Leonard. Not in the context of the particular give-and-take with "Real Ham" Dan. :-) A "real ham" is one who holds an amateur radio license. Actually, a "real ham" is the butchered meat of swine. :-) Then why are you trying to tell us that " "Real ham' = One who abides by 1930s standards and practices"? I'm not telling you that. All those who trumpet the 1930s standards and practices do. :-) You still want to maintain the ancient rules...because you got your title, rank, status under that archaic standard. Losing that title, rank, status, even if only to yourself, would be a mighty blow to your self-esteem. [that's rather obvious] The FCC regulations don't define "ham" at all. The FDA does. Ham is the butchered meat of swine. :-) You've told us on numerous occasions all you want to do here. I'm doing that. :-) You never seem to get around to doing what you've stated. Less here where it doesn't count for much in the real world. LOTS more at the FCC where it DOES count. Now you'd like to tell me all I want to do. Nobody can tell Big Dave what to do...he da man! :-) I've not stated all I want to do here so your comments are conjecture on your part. All you seem to do in here is bitch, moan, get nasty at folks who don't agree with you. Not a likeable guy you are. :-) Take your pick, Leonard: classical telegraphy, classical SSB, classical AM phone. You aren't doing any of them in amateur radio. You aren't a participant. None of THIS newsgrouping IS amateur radio, Big Dave. The FCC is NOT a "participant" in U.S. amateur radio. The FCC MAKES the rules and regulations for U.S. amateur radio. You seem to have a terrible incognizance problem with those two sentences! [mental Pampers would help you] 1. I wrote "amateur radio". You're drifting off into a description of your past professional radio experience once again. Boils you down to very pale meat, doesn't it? :-) 2. I don't really care where on which frequencies you communicated as a professional. You just don't "care" about anything but attempting to triumph over others in a newsgroup! :-) 3. You have no idea which frequencies are used or may be used by the U.S. Department of State. Does State have its own MARS-like organization? :-) Since when did State enter into this discussion...other than you want to impress your neighbors about your mighty governmental career? Didn't need a bit of manual telegraphy skills or licensing (as an amateur) to do any of that. You wouldn't need any to obtain the most basic amateur radio license in the U.S. either. I have no need for any amateur radio license. I'm "not a participant," remember? :-) Where is it "written" that I have to demonstrate some "interest in radio" to the Great Heil? I didn't write anything about "some interest in radio". Now, now, don't get petulant. This isn't a quibble over semantics or syntax or spelling. You've written MUCH about the equate of "having an interest in radio" with amateur radio. You can't deny that. It's in Google all nice and archived for those so bruised and battered over losing verbal battles that they have to quote endlessly from it. :-) You DEMAND amateur radio license acquisition in order to state anything on amateur radio regulations in here. I've DEMANDed nothing. I continue to point out that you have nothing to do with amateur radio as a participant or a regulator. You DEMAND that ALL who "have an interest in radio" become radio amateurs, all nicely licensed and mentally very important. You can't deny that. [but you will vainly, and self-importantly try] You should make public your "authorization" to make such demands. You should look up the definition of the word "demand". You should take off that Luftwaffe Oberst costume and return it to Western Casting. Otto Preminger imitations from "Stalag 17" are outre' and trite, rather old. Wrong-o, Pops. I'm a licensed radio amateur. I have a vested interest in any changes in regulations involving amateur radio license testing or amateur radio operation. Your "vest" is in bad need of tailoring. The importance of your self has resulted in an expansion of your mental waist beyond limits. You are LICENSED! Oh, my. Terribly important you are! Without that "authorization" you are just another SS-wannabe who wants nothing more than to fight anyone who doesn't agree with your "orders" posted on this bulletin board. In other words, just another disagreeable gunnery nurse (but without bedpan). "Fight"? "Orders"? If we were fighting, you'd best pack a lunch and rest up beforehand, old timer. I haven't issued any orders. Sweetums, if this had been a real physical fight, you wouldn't have been able to write anydamnthing in here. :-) I'll have to discuss what with Paul Schleck? For starters, your "participation" in this newsgroup. Do you have a "participation license" granted to you to bitch and whine and moan in here about those who aren't licensed in amateurism? What you seem to want this newsgroup to become is just another Chat Room where like-minded dittyboppers can commiserate in a mental commisary all about "real hams" (who know and love morse code) and follow the League's orders explicitly, complete with all the jargon and standards and practices of 1930's amateur radio. You aren't wrapped very tight. No problem. You are unable to open packages, gift or otherwise. No DEMANDs have been made of you, Len. Irrelevant since you can't order anyone around, despite your mighty psycho-war effort to bluff and bluster others off your "licensed" turf. :-) You continue to post. It's your time you are wasting. No problem for me. :-) I'll continue to point out your lack of anything to do with amateur radio. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Still into the "turf" thing, aren't you? :-) You've certainly kept mum about your childlike antics exemplified by some of your comments to the FCC. What "childlike" antics, little toddler? :-) Poor baby. Can't take grown-up debate against opposite-to-yours opinions, can you? You have to call them "childlike" as if you were a "grown-up" trying to spank children? [you must have been talking to Dee?] You seem to have dysfunctional attributes in your "parenting." :-) Wanna discuss those? Not with SS-wannabes like yourself. The FCC makes and enforces the civil radio regulations in the United States. If you have an old bone that you think needs gnawing on, then go make your Comments to the FCC about regulations. It probably busts your chops no end that actual civilians, citizens of this country, can actually hold a discussion-debate with government. You just can't stand it when others have opinions contrary to yours. You have to call such folks names, denigrate them, pejorate them, do all you can to stifle independent thought. Hiram forbid that anyone should think opposite to your god-like viewpoints! After all, you are federally LICENSED as an amateur! You are a PARTICIPANT! Only YOU RULE! ...nobody else allowed to say anydamnthing. :-) The colonel just loves it when a dictatorial plan comes together... LHA / WMD |
"Alun" wrote in message ... Well, I am a bit puzzled why I would need to find someone to sympathise with "my problem", because I don't have one. See? There it is....that's your problem. You don't even recognize you have it. Dan/W4NTI |
Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote: In article , Dave Heil writes: You've told us on numerous occasions all you want to do here. You never seem to get around to doing what you've stated. Now you'd like to tell me all I want to do. I've not stated all I want to do here so your comments are conjecture on your part. Take your pick, Leonard: classical telegraphy, classical SSB, classical AM phone. You aren't doing any of them in amateur radio. You aren't a participant. It seems to me that Lennie's UNaccomplishments in "radio" far exceed anything he MAY have accomplished. And his "word" as to what he says he's going to do is useless. Oh? Did you miss something in the past six years of messaging in here? I've been a professional involved with radio and radio communications. Interesting work. Paid well, too. I've communicated on frequencies you aren't allowed to as a "licensed amateur" or even as a State Department government employee. :-) 1. I wrote "amateur radio". You're drifting off into a description of your past professional radio experience once again. 2. I don't really care where on which frequencies you communicated as a professional. Lennie may be allowed to "communicate" on any number of of DISCREET channels at any one time, and then only as the parameters of the contract he may be presently working on allow. He has never been allowed, and at present will not be allowed, to select the frequency, the mode, or the parameters under which he "operates". You DEMAND amateur radio license acquisition in order to state anything on amateur radio regulations in here. I've DEMANDed nothing. I continue to point out that you have nothing to do with amateur radio as a participant or a regulator. You should make public your "authorization" to make such demands. You should look up the definition of the word "demand". Common sense would dictate that anyone "commenting" on how others "do" something actually have some EXPERIENCE in what they are commenting about. It goes without saying that Lennie has absolutely NO experience in Amateur Radio practice. He can cut-and-paste from various websites all day long about the THEORY of Amateur practice (noting that I am NOT addressing "technical" theory") Without that "authorization" you are just another bitchy whining complainer who can't hack any real discussion beyond the "official" words on amateur-radio-as-it-used-to-was when you first engaged in that hobby. Wrong-o, Pops. I'm a licensed radio amateur. I have a vested interest in any changes in regulations involving amateur radio license testing or amateur radio operation. You, on the other hand... Without that "authorization" you are just another SS-wannabe who wants nothing more than to fight anyone who doesn't agree with your "orders" posted on this bulletin board. In other words, just another disagreeable gunnery nurse (but without bedpan). "Fight"? "Orders"? If we were fighting, you'd best pack a lunch and rest up beforehand, old timer. I haven't issued any orders. Ahhhhh yes...As soon as he's backed into yet another corner, Lennie switches back to making analogies to the Nazis. How predictable. Until you show your "authorization," you'll have to discuss it with the only Real Authority on this newsgroup, Paul Schleck. Hint: he is a licensed radio amateur of Amateur Extra rank. I'll have to discuss what with Paul Schleck? What you seem to want this newsgroup to become is just another Chat Room where like-minded dittyboppers can commiserate in a mental commisary all about "real hams" (who know and love morse code) and follow the League's orders explicitly, complete with all the jargon and standards and practices of 1930's amateur radio. You aren't wrapped very tight. I am wondering what "orders" he refers to, Dave...?!?! I've never received any "directives" or other "orders" from Newington or any League representitive. Meanwhile, this newsgroup is still unmoderated and open to anyone with Internet access. No doubt you will redouble your efforts to put down anyone who doesn't think like you do and DEMAND certain things in order to satisfy your "authorized" orders. Pththththth. No DEMANDs have been made of you, Len. You continue to post. I'll continue to point out your lack of anything to do with amateur radio. You've certainly kept mum about your childlike antics exemplified by some of your comments to the FCC. Wanna discuss those? And he'll continue to post, regardless of how silly or obviously uninformed or ill-prepared his rantings may be. Works for me...Only serves to prove what we've been saying about him all along. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in
hlink.net: "Alun" wrote in message ... Well, I am a bit puzzled why I would need to find someone to sympathise with "my problem", because I don't have one. See? There it is....that's your problem. You don't even recognize you have it. Dan/W4NTI So, let's see if I have this right, according to you I have a problem because I only operate one mode? Well, you're right about one thing, I do fail to see what part of that is a problem. |
"Alun" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in hlink.net: "Alun" wrote in message ... Well, I am a bit puzzled why I would need to find someone to sympathise with "my problem", because I don't have one. See? There it is....that's your problem. You don't even recognize you have it. Dan/W4NTI So, let's see if I have this right, according to you I have a problem because I only operate one mode? Well, you're right about one thing, I do fail to see what part of that is a problem. You need to stop now Alun. All you are doing is proving my point over and over. You are a lid because you operate only phone. Have a Good day mate. Dan/W4NTI |
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil writes: In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: "Real ham" = One who abides by 1930s standards and practices That is incorrect, Leonard. Not in the context of the particular give-and-take with "Real Ham" Dan. :-) A "real ham" is one who holds an amateur radio license. Actually, a "real ham" is the butchered meat of swine. :-) Then why are you trying to tell us that " "Real ham' = One who abides by 1930s standards and practices"? I'm not telling you that. Excuse me. Yes, you personally told us that. All those who trumpet the 1930s standards and practices do. :-) No, nobody here except you has written that. Now you've backtracked and have told us that it is something different. The several of you inhabiting the body of Leonard Anderson need to come to an agreement. You still want to maintain the ancient rules...because you got your title, rank, status under that archaic standard. Y'know Len? I got my four different classes of license under several different standards. When you've obtained a license under any standard, perhaps you'll be able to engage in a rational discussion of amateur radio licensing. Losing that title, rank, status, even if only to yourself, would be a mighty blow to your self-esteem. [that's rather obvious] It might appear that way to an outsider like you. From my perspective, you're a guy who doesn't want to participate in an endeavor where anyone has more status than you. Tough it out, old timer. The FCC regulations don't define "ham" at all. The FDA does. Ham is the butchered meat of swine. :-) That conflicts with what you wrote in the very recent past. You've told us on numerous occasions all you want to do here. I'm doing that. :-) Actually, you aren't. You never seem to get around to doing what you've stated. Less here where it doesn't count for much in the real world. LOTS more at the FCC where it DOES count. Okay, Mr. Mitty. I'm sure folks at the FCC find your sheer volume of material fascinating. Now you'd like to tell me all I want to do. Nobody can tell Big Dave what to do...he da man! :-) I respect authority, Len. You aren't authority. I've not stated all I want to do here so your comments are conjecture on your part. All you seem to do in here is bitch, moan, get nasty at folks who don't agree with you. Are the several of you inhabiting the body of Leonard Anderson having a group discussion among yourselves? Not a likeable guy you are. :-) ....not by you or "William". I can certainly live with that. Take your pick, Leonard: classical telegraphy, classical SSB, classical AM phone. You aren't doing any of them in amateur radio. You aren't a participant. None of THIS newsgrouping IS amateur radio, Big Dave. That's right. If this was amateur radio, you wouldn't be a participant. The FCC is NOT a "participant" in U.S. amateur radio. Yes, the Commission participates. You don't participate. The FCC MAKES the rules and regulations for U.S. amateur radio. You seem to have a terrible incognizance problem with those two sentences! [mental Pampers would help you] Your perception is incorrect. I understand that the Commission participates in that it regulates amateur radio. 1. I wrote "amateur radio". You're drifting off into a description of your past professional radio experience once again. Boils you down to very pale meat, doesn't it? :-) Actually, no. 2. I don't really care where on which frequencies you communicated as a professional. You just don't "care" about anything but attempting to triumph over others in a newsgroup! :-) I wrote what I meant to convey, that I don't care on which frequencies you communicated as a professional. 3. You have no idea which frequencies are used or may be used by the U.S. Department of State. Does State have its own MARS-like organization? :-) Do a web search. Since when did State enter into this discussion... Since you brought it up. other than you want to impress your neighbors about your mighty governmental career? My neighbors don't read this newsgroup. Didn't need a bit of manual telegraphy skills or licensing (as an amateur) to do any of that. You wouldn't need any to obtain the most basic amateur radio license in the U.S. either. I have no need for any amateur radio license. I'm "not a participant," remember? :-) Having a need or desire and actually doing something about obtaining a license are two very different things. Where is it "written" that I have to demonstrate some "interest in radio" to the Great Heil? I didn't write anything about "some interest in radio". Now, now, don't get petulant. This isn't a quibble over semantics or syntax or spelling. That's right. It isn't a quibble over semantics. I wrote "amateur radio" no matter how badly you want it to be "radio". You've written MUCH about the equate of "having an interest in radio" with amateur radio. You can't deny that. I certainly can deny it. I've written nothing about "interest in radio". I've written of "interest in amateur radio". It's in Google all nice and archived for those so bruised and battered over losing verbal battles that they have to quote endlessly from it. :-) Good. You can research it and prove your claim then. You DEMAND amateur radio license acquisition in order to state anything on amateur radio regulations in here. I've DEMANDed nothing. I continue to point out that you have nothing to do with amateur radio as a participant or a regulator. You DEMAND that ALL who "have an interest in radio" become radio amateurs, all nicely licensed and mentally very important. I've DEMANDed nothing. You can't deny that. [but you will vainly, and self-importantly try] Denying it is quite easy. I've made no demands of you. You rise or fall on your own efforts. I've pointed out that you have not obtained even the most basic amateur radio license. You are LICENSED! Oh, my. Terribly important you are! Without that "authorization" you are just another SS-wannabe who wants nothing more than to fight anyone who doesn't agree with your "orders" posted on this bulletin board. In other words, just another disagreeable gunnery nurse (but without bedpan). "Fight"? "Orders"? If we were fighting, you'd best pack a lunch and rest up beforehand, old timer. I haven't issued any orders. Sweetums, if this had been a real physical fight, you wouldn't have been able to write anydamnthing in here. :-) You mean for all the laughing I'd be doing, old timer? You're probably right. I'll have to discuss what with Paul Schleck? For starters, your "participation" in this newsgroup. If I have need of Paul Schleck. I'll get in touch with him. As of right now, I don't need him. Do you have a "participation license" granted to you to bitch and whine and moan in here about those who aren't licensed in amateurism? As you pointed out earlier, this isn't amateur radio. I need no more license to target you than you need for taking potshots at radio amateurs and their traditions, Mr. Professional. No DEMANDs have been made of you, Len. Irrelevant since you can't order anyone around, despite your mighty psycho-war effort to bluff and bluster others off your "licensed" turf. :-) It can't be irrelevant. You brought it up. You accused me of making DEMANDS but you haven't come up with a single example. What demand has been made of you? You continue to post. It's your time you are wasting. No problem for me. :-) Let's see....This is an amateur radio newsgroup dealing with amateur radio policy. I am a radio amateur. It seems to make sense for me to be here. You aren't a radio amateur. You, on the other hand, aren't involved in amateur radio. Which one of us is wasting time? I'll continue to point out your lack of anything to do with amateur radio. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Still into the "turf" thing, aren't you? :-) The turf is amateur radio. You aren't in on the action. You're a bystander. You've certainly kept mum about your childlike antics exemplified by some of your comments to the FCC. What "childlike" antics, little toddler? :-) Those on the Commission's web site; the ones deriding the comments of others. Poor baby. Can't take grown-up debate against opposite-to-yours opinions, can you? You haven't exhibited any "grown-up debate" here, ever. I'll find out if I can take it when and if you ever do so. You have to call them "childlike" as if you were a "grown-up" trying to spank children? [you must have been talking to Dee?] I call them childlike because I read them. You seem to have dysfunctional attributes in your "parenting." :-) I'm not your parent. Wanna discuss those? Not with SS-wannabes like yourself. Is the sentence above your idea of grownup behavior? The FCC makes and enforces the civil radio regulations in the United States. If you have an old bone that you think needs gnawing on, then go make your Comments to the FCC about regulations. Quit making DEMANDS, Len. It probably busts your chops no end that actual civilians, citizens of this country, can actually hold a discussion-debate with government. You just can't stand it when others have opinions contrary to yours. You have to call such folks names, denigrate them, pejorate them, do all you can to stifle independent thought. Most radio amateurs are civilians. We can and do comment to and petition our government. I've never had the opportunity to debate with government. You might tell us how you accomplished such debate. Your thought is certainly independent. Independent doesn't mean that it is rational thought. Hiram forbid that anyone should think opposite to your god-like viewpoints! After all, you are federally LICENSED as an amateur! Right. I'm involved in amateur radio. You are on the sidelines and have been for what is it?--several decades. You are a PARTICIPANT! Yes, I am. Only YOU RULE! ...nobody else allowed to say anydamnthing. :-) The FCC rules. I participate. You say much but you aren't involved. The colonel just loves it when a dictatorial plan comes together... The colonel is dead. KFC is owned by a big corporation. Dave K8MN |
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in
hlink.net: "Alun" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in hlink.net: "Alun" wrote in message ... Well, I am a bit puzzled why I would need to find someone to sympathise with "my problem", because I don't have one. See? There it is....that's your problem. You don't even recognize you have it. Dan/W4NTI So, let's see if I have this right, according to you I have a problem because I only operate one mode? Well, you're right about one thing, I do fail to see what part of that is a problem. You need to stop now Alun. All you are doing is proving my point over and over. You are a lid because you operate only phone. How does that prove anything? Do you think if you repeat something often enough it becomes true? Have a Good day mate. Are you Australian? Dan/W4NTI |
Alun wrote in message . ..
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in hlink.net: "Alun" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in hlink.net: "Alun" wrote in message ... Well, I am a bit puzzled why I would need to find someone to sympathise with "my problem", because I don't have one. See? There it is....that's your problem. You don't even recognize you have it. Dan/W4NTI So, let's see if I have this right, according to you I have a problem because I only operate one mode? Well, you're right about one thing, I do fail to see what part of that is a problem. You need to stop now Alun. All you are doing is proving my point over and over. You are a lid because you operate only phone. How does that prove anything? Do you think if you repeat something often enough it becomes true? Thats the PCTA way. |
"Alun" wrote in message ... Are you Australian? No. But I have known several. Dan/W4NTI |
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"Alun" wrote in message ... Are you Australian? No. But I have known several. I thought sure you were going to say "No, but I play one on TV!", Dan ;^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
In article , Dave Heil Herr Robust uf das
newsgroup polizei writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , Dave Heil writes: In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: "Real ham" = One who abides by 1930s standards and practices That is incorrect, Leonard. Not in the context of the particular give-and-take with "Real Ham" Dan. :-) A "real ham" is one who holds an amateur radio license. Actually, a "real ham" is the butchered meat of swine. :-) Then why are you trying to tell us that " "Real ham' = One who abides by 1930s standards and practices"? I'm not telling you that. Excuse me. Yes, you personally told us that. Anyone who espouses the 1930s standards and practices, such as requiring manual telegraphy skills in order to be licensed in amateur radio, says that. It doesn't have to be overtly stated (this is not a court of law and you are NO judge...). All those who trumpet the 1930s standards and practices do. :-) No, nobody here except you has written that. Like I said, this is NOT a court of law and you are NO judge. Now you've backtracked and have told us that it is something different. No. Nothing different. I've said that all along. You haven't been paying attention. :-) The several of you inhabiting the body of Leonard Anderson need to come to an agreement. NO "agreement" needed with a single body, single personality. I suggest that YOUR multiple personalities can't reach any agreement on what this one person wrote. Call a meeting and discuss that among YOUR personalities. You still want to maintain the ancient rules...because you got your title, rank, status under that archaic standard. Y'know Len? I got my four different classes of license under several different standards. Wonderful. Keep on doing that until you get it right. :-) When you've obtained a license under any standard, perhaps you'll be able to engage in a rational discussion of amateur radio licensing. I already have several licenses. Your "rationality" is on short ration. YOU define "rational" as strict and utter obediance to a SINGLE set of standards AND take the arrogant, UNofficial role of being a judge (plus jury and executioner) of who can say what and to whom. That is NOT "rational," herr robust. That is DICTATORIAL. Losing that title, rank, status, even if only to yourself, would be a mighty blow to your self-esteem. [that's rather obvious] It might appear that way to an outsider like you. :-) An "outsider" is it? [of course, no official license, absolute inability to say anydamnthing according to Herr Heil] From my perspective, you're a guy who doesn't want to participate in an endeavor where anyone has more status than you. Ol' Dozer Davie is busy, busy, busy moving soil to make a mountain out of metaphoric molehill. [your OSHA backup beeper is not working old timer, get it fixed...at an appropriate service place that knows how to work on simple circuitry] Dozer Davie is also busy, busy, busy trying to cover up the subject of WHEN the manual telegraphy test will be eliminated in U.S. amateur radio licensing. He wanna keep shifting to denigrating others that don't think as arrogantly and self-importantly as Him. :-) Tough it out, old timer. I do that constantly. That's how I've survived that long. :-) By the way, did you return that SS costume to Western Casting? The rental prices are going up soon. The FCC regulations don't define "ham" at all. The FDA does. Ham is the butchered meat of swine. :-) That conflicts with what you wrote in the very recent past. No conflict. I've written before (roughly over a year ago) that a W6 already defined "ham" as "the butchered meat of swine" a number of years ago. That fits with one dictionary definition. As far as I know, without bothering to check with the Food and Drug Administration, the FDA still has rules on ham and can approve it or disapprove it. Also beef, fish, and poultry. Are you too chicken to defy the FDA? :-) You've told us on numerous occasions all you want to do here. I'm doing that. :-) Actually, you aren't. Not in this message, true. I'm replying to nothing more than some idiot's heckling and cat-calling about "cannot say anydamnthing about amateur radio without a amateur radio license." Except for its personal amusement value, your constant mention of needing an amateur radio license in order to discuss matters of amateur radio policy, is just a time-wasting exercise. :-) You don't have a single bit of authority to judge who can say what and to whom in here. All you have is a big keyboard and wayyyyy too much time on your hands to satisfy that warped thought-control police mind one of your personalities has. You never seem to get around to doing what you've stated. Less here where it doesn't count for much in the real world. LOTS more at the FCC where it DOES count. Okay, Mr. Mitty. I'm sure folks at the FCC find your sheer volume of material fascinating. How would you know? [did you add Thurber to your schiz ids?] Oh, yes...you are one of those claiming "insider information" on U.S. government...because you once got a regular salary for working for working in one part of it. You claim to KNOW things. Uh huh. Now you'd like to tell me all I want to do. Nobody can tell Big Dave what to do...he da man! :-) I respect authority, Len. You aren't authority. Tsk, tsk, tsk. You only respect Davie Heil. YOU ARE NOT AUTHORITY. [can you understand it better if written all-caps?] Davie, all you've got is a Big Ego and all you have is a Big keyboard in front of a control-freak personality problem. I've not stated all I want to do here so your comments are conjecture on your part. All you seem to do in here is bitch, moan, get nasty at folks who don't agree with you. Are the several of you inhabiting the body of Leonard Anderson having a group discussion among yourselves? I'm not the schizoid, herr robust. Your own multiple personalities badly need to seek consensus there. :-) Not a likeable guy you are. :-) ...not by you or "William". I can certainly live with that. So, you are unable to live with dissent. Must be hell to be so royal. Or "heil." :-) Take your pick, Leonard: classical telegraphy, classical SSB, classical AM phone. You aren't doing any of them in amateur radio. You aren't a participant. None of THIS newsgrouping IS amateur radio, Big Dave. That's right. If this was amateur radio, you wouldn't be a participant. If this were a "rational discussion," you would have LOST long ago. The FCC is NOT a "participant" in U.S. amateur radio. Yes, the Commission participates. You don't participate. The FCC makes regulations and - sometimes - enforces those regulations. The FCC does NOT promote amateur radio, nor does it put amateur radio over and above all other radio services it is required to regulate. NO staff or commissioner is required to have any "participatory" amateur radio license in order to exercise regulatory power over amateur radio. Ain't that a bitch, though? :-) Imagine that...THE regulatory power over amateur radio and not a single FCC person is required to have any amateur radio license! You precipitate in here, little snowflake, not participate. You are a crystalized form of ego condensed out of a fog of old- time ideas, standards, and practices, trying to clump in drifts to disable independent thought of others. The weather is too hot for your rigid, arrogant assertion of mandatory old-time ideas, standards, and practices. Your precipitation only leaves a wet smudge on the surface of rational discussion. A paper towel can quickly wipe up your mess. The FCC MAKES the rules and regulations for U.S. amateur radio. You seem to have a terrible incognizance problem with those two sentences! [mental Pampers would help you] Your perception is incorrect. I understand that the Commission participates in that it regulates amateur radio. Tsk, tsk, tsk. There you go with the "participation" thing again. Hello? Did your ancient dictionary dry up and blow away? The FCC is somehow a "participator" like the ARRL? :-) NOT ONE SINGLE FCC STAFFER NEED HAVE ANY AMATEUR RADIO LICENSE TO *REGULATE* U.S. AMATEUR RADIO. You are a precipitate. Dried sludge at the bottom of a Petrie dish. 1. I wrote "amateur radio". You're drifting off into a description of your past professional radio experience once again. Boils you down to very pale meat, doesn't it? :-) Actually, no. Actually, YES. :-) 2. I don't really care where on which frequencies you communicated as a professional. You just don't "care" about anything but attempting to triumph over others in a newsgroup! :-) I wrote what I meant to convey, that I don't care on which frequencies you communicated as a professional. Poor precipitate. You "care" only to denigrate all those who disagree with you and stand up to you, tossing back the same sort of thing (and in greater quantity) as you try to heap on others. Doesn't feel good to your noble, royal ego, does it? 3. You have no idea which frequencies are used or may be used by the U.S. Department of State. Does State have its own MARS-like organization? :-) Do a web search. All I find is Heilian spiders squeaking "you can't talk about amateur radio without an amateur radio license!" :-) Since when did State enter into this discussion... Since you brought it up. You never mentioned the U.S. Department of State before?!?!? other than you want to impress your neighbors about your mighty governmental career? My neighbors don't read this newsgroup. Then they can't be "rational," can they? They aren't "participatory?" :-) Didn't need a bit of manual telegraphy skills or licensing (as an amateur) to do any of that. You wouldn't need any to obtain the most basic amateur radio license in the U.S. either. I have no need for any amateur radio license. I'm "not a participant," remember? :-) Having a need or desire and actually doing something about obtaining a license are two very different things. Oh? Now it is a finer Heilian definition of "NEED OR DESIRE?" Of course, according to the arrogant Heilian definition, one MUST have an amateur radio license in order to discuss amateur radio! Where is it "written" that I have to demonstrate some "interest in radio" to the Great Heil? I didn't write anything about "some interest in radio". Now, now, don't get petulant. This isn't a quibble over semantics or syntax or spelling. That's right. It isn't a quibble over semantics. I wrote "amateur radio" no matter how badly you want it to be "radio". You've written MUCH about the equate of "having an interest in radio" with amateur radio. You can't deny that. I certainly can deny it. I've written nothing about "interest in radio". I've written of "interest in amateur radio". Quibble, quibble, just so much dribble. :-) Up near the beginning of your message you said: "When you've obtained a license under any standard, perhaps you'll be able to engage in a rational discussion of amateur radio licensing." Hello? I've got SEVERAL licenses by SEVERAL STANDARDS. Had them (plural) before you got a single one. :-) Want to "quibble" more about what YOU wrote...and all readers have read? You DEMAND that ALL who "have an interest in radio" become radio amateurs, all nicely licensed and mentally very important. I've DEMANDed nothing. Sure you have. Many times. It's getting to be a standard bit of off-key singing done in falsetto. You can't deny that. [but you will vainly, and self-importantly try] Denying it is quite easy. I've made no demands of you. Yes you have. Demands on TIME. Except for its amusement value, replies to you WASTE TIME. You rise or fall on your own efforts. Yes. I've risen to this occasion more than once, Dozer Davie. Must really gripe your big, sorry butt that I keep telling things like they are. :-) I've pointed out that you have not obtained even the most basic amateur radio license. There you go again. :-) Oberst Heil adjusts his monocle and addresses the troops: "You cannot have a rational discussion about amateur radio without FIRST getting an amateur radio license!!!" As you pointed out earlier, this isn't amateur radio. No kidding? Ah, but, the Grate Heil said that an amateur radio license is REQUIRED in order to have a "rational" discussion about getting an amateur radio license! That's a "chicken-egg paradox" thing painted different colors and repackaged. :-) I need no more license to target you than you need for taking potshots at radio amateurs and their traditions, Mr. Professional. Tsk, tsk, tsk. One of your personalities getting paranoid pot-shots? Bandage that personality's wounds and continue on... You need some (unlicensed) ability to take adversity, Mr. Amateur. You've shown repeatedly that YOU CAN'T TAKE IT. You become petulant, irritated, sometimes outraged at the slightest negativism of your arrogant, follow-my-directive authority. Tsk, tsk, tsk. It can't be irrelevant. You brought it up. You accused me of making DEMANDS but you haven't come up with a single example. What demand has been made of you? Something about "one has to have an amateur radio license in order to 'rationally' discuss anything about amateur radio." :-) Let's see....This is an amateur radio newsgroup dealing with amateur radio policy. I am a radio amateur. It seems to make sense for me to be here. In general, it would, but you go FAR beyond that in your arrogant petulance of constantly trying to heckle, jeer, denigrate all those who disagree with you. Social-wise, you are rated a "LID" as a human being on newsgroups. You aren't a radio amateur. You, on the other hand, aren't involved in amateur radio. Which one of us is wasting time? According to Heilian Law, obviously the one without OFFICIAL AMATEUR RADIO LICENSE to do the "rational" ritual. :-) You've certainly kept mum about your childlike antics exemplified by some of your comments to the FCC. What "childlike" antics, little toddler? :-) Those on the Commission's web site; the ones deriding the comments of others. Poor baby. Can't take the heat of the discussions? Precipitates are like that. Snowflake condensates melt quickly and turn into hot vapor when exposed to heat. They steam and try to burn others but quickly cool down and do no more. It's a return to room temperature. :-) Poor baby. Can't take grown-up debate against opposite-to-yours opinions, can you? You haven't exhibited any "grown-up debate" here, ever. I'll find out if I can take it when and if you ever do so. Poor baby. Still angry, still trying to get the last word, still trying to bluff and bluster like you are some kind of "leader." :-) You have to call them "childlike" as if you were a "grown-up" trying to spank children? [you must have been talking to Dee?] I call them childlike because I read them. Slowly, with a finger tracing out each letter? :-) You seem to have dysfunctional attributes in your "parenting." :-) I'm not your parent. Darwinian Law comes to humanity's rescue! :-) The FCC makes and enforces the civil radio regulations in the United States. If you have an old bone that you think needs gnawing on, then go make your Comments to the FCC about regulations. Quit making DEMANDS, Len. A CONDITIONAL phrase begins with "if," senior. That wasn't a demand, just a conditional statement. But, if you CAN'T take any controversy, much less negative opinion, by all means stay away from making any comments in public to the FCC. Stay in here where you have the fictional equivalent of King of the Loud Hill, where you can safely send nastygrams to those who won't agree with you. Most radio amateurs are civilians. We can and do comment to and petition our government. Ah, but amateur radio is DIFFERENT according to Heilian Law. In order to comment to government on amateur radio, Heilian Law states that commenter MUST have an amateur radio license! Well, so much for the First Amendment... Your thought is certainly independent. Independent doesn't mean that it is rational thought. Neither is your arrogant petulant whining over your perceived "hurts" in this newsgroup...done for years... Poor baby. LHA / WMD |
|
|
Subject: The Pool
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 5/24/2004 2:08 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: When you've obtained a license under any standard, perhaps you'll be able to engage in a rational discussion of amateur radio licensing. I already have several licenses. None of them on FCC form 660, and none of them granting operating priviledges in the Amateur Radio Service. tsk, tsk, tsk...you should read what was WRITTEN, little man. Herr Robust said NOTHING about any "FCC form 660." But I did. You are still not a licensed Amateur Radio operator. Too incompetent to pass the test, obviously. Actually, the one with way too much time on his hands is you, Lennie...Perhaps if YOU had an Amateur Radio license and spent some time on the air you'd have less to waste...?!?! I'm retired, gunnery nurse. Comfortable income, money in the bank, good health, nice home, wonderful wife. I've got U.S. patent 3,848,191. You haven't got any. [which may be your problem...] Don't need a "patent", Lennie. I'll accept all of your assertions as true, especialloy the ones about your wife...It would take a woman with a heart of gold (or too broken and depressed) to tolerate a creep like you. I guess SOMEONE had to do it, though. [can you understand it better if written all-caps?] LEONARD H. ANDERSON IS A FOOL. Nope. Yep. YOU continue to prove it. "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue"... From the archived lies of Leonard H. Anderson. The gunnery nurse is here only to attempt personal attacks on humans he can't get along with. Poor baby. First of all, you're not what I consider to be human. Secondly, you provide me the stuff to work with. Lastly, it's not an "attack" if it's true. Hello? I've got SEVERAL licenses by SEVERAL STANDARDS. None of them an Amateur Radio license, and none of them with ANY experience in practical Amateur Radio applications. Poor deluded gunnery nurse...thinks amateur radios work by different laws of physics than any other radio...thinks amateur radios won't work without passing a test for manual telegraphy. Tsk, tsk, tsk. You continue to avoid the fact that "physics" are not the issue. And I have never suggested that the ONLY test to take was the Morse test. I have repeatedly encouraged you to take the Amateur Technician since it doesn't require a Morse Code examination. However you still seem stymied byt the process. Actually, I think it's because you might have to actually demonstrate your REAL knowledge base...Your ego wouldn't allow you to expose yourself to the ridicule of failing the test in a room full of grade school kids who just passed it. Poor baby. Sucks to be Lennie. You have "point blank" demanded that I or others "shut up"..."go away", etc etc etc. I don't shoot blanks, little gunnery nurse. Obviously you do. Tell us about those kids you raised that helped you to formulate an informed opinion on the ability of teenagers (and younger) to be competent Amateur licensees...?!?! Oh yeah...I forgot, that's yet another arena in which you slobbered your ill-prepared vulgarities in. But then stand-up-manship was never your forte. "Stand-up-manship?" :-) You mean like the puerile little penwomanship you exhibit all the time with such cute phrases like "putz," "your scumminess," "sucks to be you," etc., etc., etc. But you ARE a putz, Lennie. It DOES suck to be you, and you are scummy. So what's the problem? So far, all YOU have been able to offer is what you can glean from various websites or second hand opinions. Not "glean" but rather reveal, as in regulations and directives of the latest effective dates. And absolutely NO practical experience...Not one second's worth. Gunnery nurse was UNABLE to name or reference a single MARS directive or regulation in three weeks of give-and-take with Brian Burke. UNABLE. Despite holding an "amateur extra" license (suitable for framing), gunnery nurse tried to bluff and bluster through an argument, NOT ONCE being ABLE to reference a single directive or regulation concerning MARS. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Didn't need to, Lennie. No Amateur Radio = No MARS. Just like the slap in the face, it doesn't need to be documented that it hurts to KNOW it hurts... Poor gunnery nurse is sick and disgusted that anyone not licensed in amateur radio EVER worked in other radio on a professional basis...and for half a century! I think it's great, Lennie. I just think you're a scumbag for trying to push your oblivious weight around in THIS forum over Amateur PRACTICE when you have abasolutely ZERO experience in it. The real pitiful part is knowing that you probably were a lot of the things you claim, only to have it all undone by your now well documented propensity for lying and antagonism. Again...Sucks to be you. I have to commit adultery with some "Mrs. Scummy" to do all that? Nope...Just roll over and tap her on the shoulder tonight. Or is that walk down the hall and tap on the door...?!?! Pot/Kettle/Black...Witness your own frequent "demands" peppered with liberal doses of profanity and lack of facts. "Liberal doses of 'profanity?'" Tsk, tsk, tsk...talk about the deep black pot with continued use of a Yiddish colloquialism for "asshole" (the word "putz") trying to call anyone else nasty... But you ARE a putz, Lennie. The very post I am responding to has only served to revalidate that assertion. Get some mental therapy and work on your ability to get along with others. It will help you and those around you. I am still waiting for you to enlighten us as to what credentials in "mental health" you have that qualify you to make that suggestion. So far, your identity crisis has resulted only in some mild amusement for me and a a lot of irritation to other readers in here. That is NOT good for your image. The amusement IS all yours, Lennie. I quite clearly imagine you laughing at a lot of things, not all of them perceptible to those around you. Laugh on, Lennie. You're the putz the REST of us are laughing at. Steve, K4YZ |
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in
om: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (gunnery nurse trying to impersonate an offizier uf das newsgroup polizei) writes: All of Lennie's usual "look at how much smarter I am than you" rantings snipped. "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue", from the laundry list of lies and other obfuscations of Leonard H. Anderson. Scumbag, liar, putz. All in one package. Did your wifey do the ribbon, Lennie...??? Steve, K4YZ LOL, Thanks steve. Good one. KB7ADL |
In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: The Pool From: (Len Over 21) Date: 5/24/2004 2:08 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: When you've obtained a license under any standard, perhaps you'll be able to engage in a rational discussion of amateur radio licensing. I already have several licenses. None of them on FCC form 660, and none of them granting operating priviledges in the Amateur Radio Service. tsk, tsk, tsk...you should read what was WRITTEN, little man. Herr Robust said NOTHING about any "FCC form 660." But I did. You are still not a licensed Amateur Radio operator. Too incompetent to pass the test, obviously. :-) Nursie is beyond rational thought...or any reasoning. Actually, the one with way too much time on his hands is you, Lennie...Perhaps if YOU had an Amateur Radio license and spent some time on the air you'd have less to waste...?!?! I'm retired, gunnery nurse. Comfortable income, money in the bank, good health, nice home, wonderful wife. I've got U.S. patent 3,848,191. You haven't got any. [which may be your problem...] Don't need a "patent", Lennie. You should get one. You have made the grade of original, but rather disordered thought, on advancing the state of the known art on insulting others. :-) I'll accept all of your assertions as true, especialloy the ones about your wife...It would take a woman with a heart of gold (or too broken and depressed) to tolerate a creep like you. "Gold especialloy?!?" :-) :-) :-) Sorry, you've called me a "liar" too many times for you to "accept" anything I've written. You've insulted my wife way too many times, in public, without knowing a single thing about her, to "accept" any turnaround in your attitude. I guess SOMEONE had to do it, though. You are really and truly bitter and frustrated, aren't you? You can't stop your obsessive hatred of certain other people. You really need some mental therapy. First of all, you're not what I consider to be human. Hoo boy, you are on a hatred roll there. Don't slip in the bitter. Secondly, you provide me the stuff to work with. No. That's your own fevered, angry mind busy fantasizing. Lastly, it's not an "attack" if it's true. It's not true. It IS a personal attack. You aren't a divinity and cannot define what is "right" or "wrong." You are unable to relate to civil society. Poor deluded gunnery nurse...thinks amateur radios work by different laws of physics than any other radio...thinks amateur radios won't work without passing a test for manual telegraphy. Tsk, tsk, tsk. You continue to avoid the fact that "physics" are not the issue. Then why are you so insistent that I take some kind of amateur test? I've already passed commercial and industry tests long ago. Made a good living at that kind of work. You keep denigrating a career in radio-electronics by others. Why? Are you THAT resentful of others having success at a chosen field of endeavor? [that's not a good mental picture, all that resentment] And I have never suggested that the ONLY test to take was the Morse test. A manual telegraphy test is NECESSARY for a U.S. amateur radio license examination having below-30-MHz-privileges. That's LAW. I have repeatedly encouraged you to take the Amateur Technician since it doesn't require a Morse Code examination. To adopt nursie's own line of response, "you are LYING SOB*." You've NEVER "encouraged" anyone, you crock of salacious snit. You've COMMANDED as if you were some kind of Dill instructor in the murines. :-) * SOB = Son Of a Beeper. However you still seem stymied byt the process. There is NO REQUIREMENT to have any amateur radio license in a newsgroup. Quit trying to COMMAND something that isn't "regulation." :-) Actually, I think it's because you might have to actually demonstrate your REAL knowledge base... Define "REAL knowledge," nursie. Being able to sing hymns in the Church of St. Hiram? Memorizing stacks of advertisements in QST? Memorizing the Amateur's Code as if it were military General Orders? Your mind has flipped out of reality long ago. Hint: One doesn't get regular paychecks for demonstrating false knowledge on the job. [engineering isn't like purchasing parts in a small company for less than a half year] Your mind has flipped out of reality long ago. Hint: One doesn't get magazine articles reviewed and accepted by editors for being false. [just because you can't understand them doesn't make them false] Your mind has flipped out of reality long ago. Hint: Nightime college classes are rated the same way as daytime college classes and tests there are rated and graded the same. Your ego wouldn't allow you to expose yourself to the ridicule of failing the test in a room full of grade school kids who just passed it. I would have NO "ego problems" with being in any room full of grade school kids whether there was a test or not. Is it required in amateur radio to sink down to the knowledge level of grade school kids in order to be a "real ham?" I've been a commercial illustrator and still capable of working in several media from pencil through oils. Do you expect me to "test in fingerpainting" (a la kindergarten classes) to show my skills in art? If "real ham radio" can be accomplished by "grade school kids," is that some kind of inducement for adult activity? You are way to childish for me to take you seriously as an adult. Tell us about those kids you raised that helped you to formulate an informed opinion on the ability of teenagers (and younger) to be competent Amateur licensees...?!?! Tell us about your "normal" teenagers. This isn't a hobby of child welfare. Oh yeah...I forgot, that's yet another arena in which you slobbered your ill-prepared vulgarities in. ? I am supposed to sire children in order to obtain a "real ham license?" You are becoming obscene, not heard... But you ARE a putz, Lennie. It DOES suck to be you, and you are scummy. So what's the problem? I have no problem. YOU have one. Basically, YOUR problem is this terrible obsession of being unable to let go your hatred of anyone who stands up to you and shows you what you are doing wrong. You can't just drop a subject and go on to another. You have to bring up that hatred time and time again. That isn't normal behavior. So far, all YOU have been able to offer is what you can glean from various websites or second hand opinions. Not "glean" but rather reveal, as in regulations and directives of the latest effective dates. And absolutely NO practical experience...Not one second's worth. "No practical experience" in MARS? Sorry, I do. MARS had second priority on one of the transmitter circuits at ADA in Japan long ago. Gunnery nurse was UNABLE to name or reference a single MARS directive or regulation in three weeks of give-and-take with Brian Burke. UNABLE. Despite holding an "amateur extra" license (suitable for framing), gunnery nurse tried to bluff and bluster through an argument, NOT ONCE being ABLE to reference a single directive or regulation concerning MARS. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Didn't need to, Lennie. No Amateur Radio = No MARS. The "M" in MARS = MILITARY The "A" in MARS = AFFILIATE MARS is NOT amateur radio. Just like the slap in the face, it doesn't need to be documented that it hurts to KNOW it hurts... You have to understand that MARS did NOT grow out your fantasy or myths that you cherish when unable to comprehend reality. MARS was "born" in 1925 as the AARS or Army Amateur Radio System. After WW2 and silencing of the AARS, it was reborn in 1948 in both the Army and the new USAF as MARS, or Military Affiliate Radio System. The USN joined in a few years later. The Directive and all Regulations are quite clear, unambiguous, and available to anyone. The "M" in MARS = MILITARY The "A" in MARS = AFFILIATE MARS is NOT amateur radio. I just think you're a scumbag for trying to push your oblivious weight around in THIS forum over Amateur PRACTICE when you have abasolutely ZERO experience in it. Tough on you, isn't it? :-) The real pitiful part is knowing that you probably were a lot of the things you claim, only to have it all undone by your now well documented propensity for lying and antagonism. Ooooo...trying for new distinctive literary imagery, are you? :-) You are resentful and bitter that anyone else can have experience in REAL COMMUNICATIONS as well as holding a REAL JOB in the radio-electronics industry. Tsk, tsk, tsk...you triumph amateur radio as "better" because you've not done any of that REAL communicating. Again...Sucks to be you. Tsk, tsk, tsk...all that hatred and bitterness showing again. YOU don't have experience in REAL communications or in REAL radio-electronics work so you insult those that have done it. Amateur radio is supposed to be an enjoyable avocational radio activity carried on for personal enjoyment. You don't demonstrate that at all. You USE amateur radio as a spring- board to dive into another ranting spate of personal insults. Tsk, tsk, tsk...talk about the deep black pot with continued use of a Yiddish colloquialism for "asshole" (the word "putz") trying to call anyone else nasty... But you ARE a putz, Lennie. Is nursie Jewish? [oy, gevalt!] Get some mental therapy and work on your ability to get along with others. It will help you and those around you. I am still waiting for you to enlighten us as to what credentials in "mental health" you have that qualify you to make that suggestion. "Credentials" to observe a demented person vent bile time and again in public, insulting anyone who has the slightest disagreement with him? Not necessary. It is plain to everyone. The amusement IS all yours, Lennie. I quite clearly imagine you laughing at a lot of things, not all of them perceptible to those around you. Laugh on, Lennie. You're the putz the REST of us are laughing at. Tsk, tsk, tsk...your multiple personalities got together to stage a protest, did they? Sorry you are (said Yoda). Temper fry... LHA / WMD |
In article ,
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (gunnery nurse trying to impersonate an offizier uf das newsgroup polizei) writes: All of Lennie's usual "look at how much smarter I am than you" rantings snipped. Tsk, tsk, tsk...really and truly frustrated by something? Poor nursie. "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue", from the laundry list of lies and other obfuscations of Leonard H. Anderson. Scumbag, liar, putz. Nice environment you are the model of... :-) ARRL turned you down for a PR job, did they? [wonder why...] This thread was originally just a list of names of those picking certain dates for the elimination of the manual telegraphy test for a United States amateur radio license. This thread has mutated (as usual) into yet-another pile of h-s personal attack diatribe, hatred spewing denigrations of those not favored by nursie. Nursie needs mental help. Has needed it for a long time. Obviously the "rehab" wasn't complete. Remember, MARS is NOT amateur radio. Temper fry... LHA / WMD |
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net... "Alun" wrote in message ... Are you Australian? No. But I have blown several. Dan/W4NTI Too much info. |
|
|
Gee everybody...look...another creative editor.
How unique. Idiot. Dan/W4NTI "Bada Bing" wrote in message s.com... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net... "Alun" wrote in message ... Are you Australian? No. But I have blown several. Dan/W4NTI Too much info. |
(N2EY) wrote in message . com...
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... I have repeatedly encouraged you to take the Amateur Technician since it doesn't require a Morse Code examination. Why, Steve? Why do you encourage Mr. Anderson to get an amateur radio license, given the way he behaves here towards anyone who disagrees with him? Do you really *want* him to join the ARS? Now wait just a minute. You idly stood by for years while Dick, Larry, Steve, Steve, Bruce, Kelly, et all, grossly misbehaved, then you beg them to join your CW nets. Where were your words of caution then? Why do you intentionally associate with such people? They said they were good as gold because they made it through the filter, and they wouldn't behave so horribly while on the air. Mr. Anderson told us way back in January of 2000 (almost 4-1/2 years ago) that he was "going for Extra right out of the box". Didn't happen, probably won't happen any time soon, if ever. You told us just last week that you have no opinion of "Sorry Hans, MARS IS Amateur Radio." Jim does have an opinion. One day he just might voice it. But not while whacked out Steve is doing his battle for him. Just as Jim had an opinion of Bruce. An opinion that he sat on for years and years, until Bruce's outrages became even too much for Jim to bear. The Tech hasn't had a code test in over 13 years and medical waivers for all code tests except 5 wpm were available in 1990. None of this is news or any sort of secret. If Mr. Anderson were interested in being a radio amateur, he would have gotten a license long ago. So there's only one logical conclusion left. What might that be, Jim? Do you think that calling him "Lennie" or various versions of "scummy" or "liar" will change his behavior, or opinions, or get him to admit any of his many mistakes? Or do you think that maybe, just maybe, getting *you* to behave in a manner similar to *his* might be one of his real goals? So you think Steve is so easily and blatantly manipulated? I do. I snipped out all of the name calling and insults in the post I replied to - and there wasn't much left. Nowadays I don't even read most rrap posts past the first insult. Many I don't read past the author line. I try to look for some good in everything rather than dismissing it outright. However you still seem stymied byt the process. Actually, I think it's because you might have to actually demonstrate your REAL knowledge base...Your ego wouldn't allow you to expose yourself to the ridicule of failing the test in a room full of grade school kids who just passed it. Did it ever occur to you, Steve, that Mr. Anderson could pass the test if he wanted to - but that he doesn't want to? That his hobby is something very different? I think Mr. Anderson is not interested in a VHF license. Just my opinion. You'll have to ask him. Look back over the past several years. Do you really think Mr. Anderson will *ever* engage in civil debate here on *any* subject? I don't seem to have a problem. And I've always been civil with the other Jim, KH2D. Gee! Or that Mr. Burke will answer any questions that he doesn't want to answer (while at the same time asking all sorts of questions of others)? You're free to disclose as much or as little as you like. For instance, you disclosed no opinion when asked if, "Sorry Hans, MARS IS Amateur Radio" were a valid statement. But worse, you lied and said that you had no opinion. Of course you have an opinion. Meanwhile, Amateur Radio continues. OTA, not here. Will we hear you on 7037 next Monday night? Best of Luck. |
In article ,
(William) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message .com... (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... I have repeatedly encouraged you to take the Amateur Technician since it doesn't require a Morse Code examination. Why, Steve? Why do you encourage Mr. Anderson to get an amateur radio license, given the way he behaves here towards anyone who disagrees with him? Do you really *want* him to join the ARS? Now wait just a minute. You idly stood by for years while Dick, Larry, Steve, Steve, Bruce, Kelly, et all, grossly misbehaved, then you beg them to join your CW nets. Dick, Larry, Steve, Steve, Bruce, Kelly et al, are PCTA. That makes them "correct" and "civil." PCTA can do no wrong. All others can do no right. Where were your words of caution then? Why do you intentionally associate with such people? PCTA are PCTA. They need not be civil or correct. They simply are. :-) They said they were good as gold because they made it through the filter, and they wouldn't behave so horribly while on the air. They might not have said it openly in those words, but they sure acted like it. Mr. Anderson told us way back in January of 2000 (almost 4-1/2 years ago) that he was "going for Extra right out of the box". Didn't happen, probably won't happen any time soon, if ever. You told us just last week that you have no opinion of "Sorry Hans, MARS IS Amateur Radio." Rev. Jim may be too busy celebrating the 160th anniversary of the first (commercial) morse code message. :-) Jim does have an opinion. One day he just might voice it. But not while whacked out Steve is doing his battle for him. PCTA are very forgiving of one another. They can do no wrong. They are Morsemen! [hear them roar...] Just as Jim had an opinion of Bruce. An opinion that he sat on for years and years, until Bruce's outrages became even too much for Jim to bear. Broose is tangential to everyone else. :-) The Tech hasn't had a code test in over 13 years and medical waivers for all code tests except 5 wpm were available in 1990. None of this is news or any sort of secret. If Mr. Anderson were interested in being a radio amateur, he would have gotten a license long ago. So there's only one logical conclusion left. What might that be, Jim? PCTA demand that all "interested in radio" take a code test. It was so in the beginning and it will be so to their bitter end. Do you think that calling him "Lennie" or various versions of "scummy" or "liar" will change his behavior, or opinions, or get him to admit any of his many mistakes? Or do you think that maybe, just maybe, getting *you* to behave in a manner similar to *his* might be one of his real goals? So you think Steve is so easily and blatantly manipulated? I do. Nursie manipulates himself. :-) I snipped out all of the name calling and insults in the post I replied to - and there wasn't much left. Nowadays I don't even read most rrap posts past the first insult. Many I don't read past the author line. I try to look for some good in everything rather than dismissing it outright. PCTA are very snobbish and elite. They be better than others. Sort of like the Daughters of the American Revolution. However you still seem stymied byt the process. Actually, I think it's because you might have to actually demonstrate your REAL knowledge base...Your ego wouldn't allow you to expose yourself to the ridicule of failing the test in a room full of grade school kids who just passed it. Did it ever occur to you, Steve, that Mr. Anderson could pass the test if he wanted to - but that he doesn't want to? That his hobby is something very different? I think Mr. Anderson is not interested in a VHF license. Just my opinion. You'll have to ask him. I've HAD a VHF radio license. It wasn't amateur. I was operating VHF and low-UHF back in 1954. PM, not FM. Look back over the past several years. Do you really think Mr. Anderson will *ever* engage in civil debate here on *any* subject? I don't seem to have a problem. And I've always been civil with the other Jim, KH2D. Gee! As I said, PCTA are the ONLY "civil" and "correct" people. All others are "uncivil" and "incorrect." :-) Or that Mr. Burke will answer any questions that he doesn't want to answer (while at the same time asking all sorts of questions of others)? You're free to disclose as much or as little as you like. For instance, you disclosed no opinion when asked if, "Sorry Hans, MARS IS Amateur Radio" were a valid statement. But worse, you lied and said that you had no opinion. Of course you have an opinion. Of course. PCTA are the only ones "civil" and "correct." That's a given in here. All others are "lids," like tops of garbage cans. According to the PCTA. However, Dan has done something with Australians and I'm not sure I want to hear more about that... Meanwhile, Amateur Radio continues. OTA, not here. Will we hear you on 7037 next Monday night? Best of Luck. Interesting. The PCTA need a high-speed Internet forum in order to organize a schedule. :-) Says something right there... LHA / WMD |
In article .net, "Dan/W4NTI"
w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com writes: Gee everybody...look...another creative editor. How unique. Idiot. Dan/W4NTI "Bada Bing" wrote in message ws.com... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net... "Alun" wrote in message ... Are you Australian? No. But I have blown several. Dan/W4NTI Too much info. Hilarious! "Too much info!" Too much...and with so few general words. :-) |
Subject: The Pool
From: (N2EY) Date: 5/26/2004 12:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Meanwhile, Amateur Radio continues. OTA, not here. Will we hear you on 7037 next Monday night? I hope so, Jim. I am trying to put up a new attic loop right now. I am also experimenting with the MFJ version of the manual bandspanner as an "emergency" antenna. I am trying to see if it can be used in an NVIS configuration, or if it is too mechanically short. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: The Pool From: (N2EY) Date: 5/26/2004 12:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Meanwhile, Amateur Radio continues. OTA, not here. Will we hear you on 7037 next Monday night? I hope so, Jim. I am trying to put up a new attic loop right now. I am also experimenting with the MFJ version of the manual bandspanner as an "emergency" antenna. I am trying to see if it can be used in an NVIS configuration, or if it is too mechanically short. 73 Steve, K4YZ NVIS prop is usually several db down ordinary skywave. |
Subject: The Pool
From: (William) Date: 5/27/2004 7:45 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: The Pool From: (N2EY) Date: 5/26/2004 12:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Meanwhile, Amateur Radio continues. OTA, not here. Will we hear you on 7037 next Monday night? I hope so, Jim. I am trying to put up a new attic loop right now. I am also experimenting with the MFJ version of the manual bandspanner as an "emergency" antenna. I am trying to see if it can be used in an NVIS configuration, or if it is too mechanically short. 73 Steve, K4YZ NVIS prop is usually several db down ordinary skywave. Depends on who you want to talk to and where they are. Yes, from my QTH to yours would probably present a several db difference. But remember what NVIS is for. It's for using HF spectrum for local to regional communications. It's NOT for continental or DX purposes. I have a very specific need to have reliable comms on 3.5, 3.9, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6 and 7.9MHz. Especially within Tennessee and the Southeastern United States. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: The Pool From: (N2EY) Date: 5/26/2004 12:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Meanwhile, Amateur Radio continues. OTA, not here. Will we hear you on 7037 next Monday night? I hope so, Jim. I am trying to put up a new attic loop right now. http://www.g3tpw.ukgateway.net/ Not a new idea but I just came upon it. Could be adapted to 40m attic use, I think. I am also experimenting with the MFJ version of the manual bandspanner as an "emergency" antenna. I am trying to see if it can be used in an NVIS configuration, or if it is too mechanically short. I'll look that one up. -- But you haven't answered my other questions, Steve. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
In article ,
(William) writes: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: The Pool From: (N2EY) Date: 5/26/2004 12:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Meanwhile, Amateur Radio continues. OTA, not here. Will we hear you on 7037 next Monday night? I hope so, Jim. I am trying to put up a new attic loop right now. I am also experimenting with the MFJ version of the manual bandspanner as an "emergency" antenna. I am trying to see if it can be used in an NVIS configuration, or if it is too mechanically short. 73 Steve, K4YZ NVIS prop is usually several db down ordinary skywave. Be kind to someone who just found out about "Nevis." That's important stuff for effective (but illegal) homegrown "militia" defense of the Homeland. [remember his need for a "real military" handset for an SG-2020? :-) ] Maybe he is "activating" a special "amateur only MARS" unit? ["Hostile action" in TN?] :-) LHA / WMD |
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: The Pool From: (William) Date: 5/27/2004 7:45 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: The Pool From: (N2EY) Date: 5/26/2004 12:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Meanwhile, Amateur Radio continues. OTA, not here. Will we hear you on 7037 next Monday night? I hope so, Jim. I am trying to put up a new attic loop right now. I am also experimenting with the MFJ version of the manual bandspanner as an "emergency" antenna. I am trying to see if it can be used in an NVIS configuration, or if it is too mechanically short. 73 Steve, K4YZ NVIS prop is usually several db down ordinary skywave. Depends on who you want to talk to and where they are. As always. Yes, from my QTH to yours would probably present a several db difference. But remember what NVIS is for. It's for using HF spectrum for local to regional communications. It's NOT for continental or DX purposes. I have a very specific need to have reliable comms on 3.5, 3.9, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6 and 7.9MHz. Especially within Tennessee and the Southeastern United States. 73 Steve, K4YZ Steve, I know exactly what NVIS is for. I was trained by the inventor of the whip-tilt adapter at Hurlburt Field, FL. Brian |
In article ,
(William) writes: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: The Pool From: (William) Date: 5/27/2004 7:45 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: The Pool From: (N2EY) Date: 5/26/2004 12:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Meanwhile, Amateur Radio continues. OTA, not here. Will we hear you on 7037 next Monday night? I hope so, Jim. I am trying to put up a new attic loop right now. I am also experimenting with the MFJ version of the manual bandspanner as an "emergency" antenna. I am trying to see if it can be used in an NVIS configuration, or if it is too mechanically short. 73 Steve, K4YZ NVIS prop is usually several db down ordinary skywave. Depends on who you want to talk to and where they are. As always. Brian, don't try to discuss anything with nursie. He/she will get it wrong and waste anothe rmonth trying to state he/she is right when he/she is not right. :-) Steve, I know exactly what NVIS is for. I was trained by the inventor of the whip-tilt adapter at Hurlburt Field, FL. NVIS (pronounced "neviss") has been in U.S. military HF-low-VHF doctrine for communications for over two decades. Nursie never worked any military communications so is unaware of that. Nursie just learned about NVIS from reading this newsgroup. :-) Nursie failed to provide a single government document name or other identification in trying to argue that "MARS is amateur radio" and will now try to "prove" he/she is right about NVIS, whatever he/she says. :-) LHA / WMD |
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , (William) writes: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: The Pool From: (William) Date: 5/27/2004 7:45 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: The Pool From: (N2EY) Date: 5/26/2004 12:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Meanwhile, Amateur Radio continues. OTA, not here. Will we hear you on 7037 next Monday night? I hope so, Jim. I am trying to put up a new attic loop right now. I am also experimenting with the MFJ version of the manual bandspanner as an "emergency" antenna. I am trying to see if it can be used in an NVIS configuration, or if it is too mechanically short. 73 Steve, K4YZ NVIS prop is usually several db down ordinary skywave. Depends on who you want to talk to and where they are. As always. Brian, don't try to discuss anything with nursie. He/she will get it wrong and waste anothe rmonth trying to state he/she is right when he/she is not right. :-) Steve, I know exactly what NVIS is for. I was trained by the inventor of the whip-tilt adapter at Hurlburt Field, FL. NVIS (pronounced "neviss") has been in U.S. military HF-low-VHF doctrine for communications for over two decades. Nursie never worked any military communications so is unaware of that. Nursie just learned about NVIS from reading this newsgroup. :-) Nursie failed to provide a single government document name or other identification in trying to argue that "MARS is amateur radio" and will now try to "prove" he/she is right about NVIS, whatever he/she says. :-) LHA / WMD I actually have an "amateur" version of the whip-tilt adapter. It uses 3/8x24 threads rather than military fittings. It runs a hamstick or 102" whip in the normal vertical position, and then has an angle off of vertical (probably 15 or 20deg) for NVIS use. It was given to me by a long-time colleague of the inventor. I suppose now I'll be commanded to provide names and dates, patent numbers, and a portfolio of 8x10 glossies with circles and arrows. But I won't. After all, "Sorry Hans, MARS IS Amateur Radio." Hi, hi! 70 tree, bb |
Gee Dan, you don't mind being jerky to everyone else, but don't like
anyone getting jerky with you. "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message hlink.net... Gee everybody...look...another creative editor. How unique. Idiot. Dan/W4NTI "Bada Bing" wrote in message s.com... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net... "Alun" wrote in message ... Are you Australian? No. But I have blown several. Dan/W4NTI Too much info. |
|
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , (William) writes: I actually have an "amateur" version of the whip-tilt adapter. It uses 3/8x24 threads rather than military fittings. It runs a hamstick or 102" whip in the normal vertical position, and then has an angle off of vertical (probably 15 or 20deg) for NVIS use. It was given to me by a long-time colleague of the inventor. I suppose now I'll be commanded to provide names and dates, patent numbers, and a portfolio of 8x10 glossies with circles and arrows. But I won't. Don't forget the QSL cards to "prove" you used a tilted whip to work somebody...AND the signature of your authorizing officer plus the appropriate directive/regulation! :-) After all, "Sorry Hans, MARS IS Amateur Radio." Hi, hi! Don Rumsfeld and company might take some issue with that, but then someone here "knows" all about MARS. Donnie better start kissing the former Marine's butt before Steve decides to pull all of -his- Amateurs out of MARS. Maybe he/she went there... :-) "QRM Interplanetary" is the title of a short story by George O. Smith, appeared in Astounding Science Fiction of the late 1940s. It was part of the "Venus Equilateral" series, had very little to do with Mars. :-) LHA / WMD "Sorry Hans, MARS IS Amateur Radio!!!" Hi hi |
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:55 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com