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