"Radio Amateur KC2HMZ" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 May 2004 13:03:51 -0400, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:

I already referenced the web site of the ARRL. All you have to do is
enter
the words "band plan" in the box to search the site. Then scroll down
until
you see the listing for band plans. I will NOT do this for you.

OK...then I will:

AMATEUR FREQUENCY OPERATION RECOMMENDATIONS (ARRL Band Plans)

[snip]

It's never a good idea to do a student's homework for them. It leads to
laziness and dependency on other people for info that is easily found by
checking basic references.. I'd already referenced the site and
documentation he needed to check previously. Then I gave specific
instructions on how to find the info. That is all that should have been
required.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Dee" == Dee D Flint writes:

Dee I already referenced the web site of the ARRL. All you have to
Dee do is enter the words "band plan" in the box to search the site.
Dee Then scroll down until you see the listing for band plans. I
Dee will NOT do this for you.

KC2HMZ OK...then I will:
KC2HMZ
KC2HMZ AMATEUR FREQUENCY OPERATION RECOMMENDATIONS (ARRL Band Plans)
KC2HMZ
KC2HMZ [snip]

Dee It's never a good idea to do a student's homework for them.

Attempting to answer a question in a condescending manner (and failing
to answer the question correctly) does not imply a teacher-student
relationship. Frankly, it's not clear to me that you have the
capability to build or maintain such a relationship, based on what
I've seen here. That's neither here nor there, however.

Dee It leads to laziness and dependency on other people for info that
Dee is easily found by checking basic references.. I'd already
Dee referenced the site and documentation he needed to check
Dee previously. Then I gave specific instructions on how to find the
Dee info. That is all that should have been required.

You spent a thousand characters where twenty would have been
acceptable. In fact, both you and KC2HMZ gave me information on "the
band plans", not "the gentleman's agreements", which was the specific
bit I asked about, repeatedly. It's not just "where can I find RTTY
traffic?", it's "why is RTTY found there" that interests me the most.

You were so lost in your sophistry that you lost sight of the actual
question being asked. Reread the original question I posed, your
response, my response which included a restating of the original
question, and your second response, and honestly tell me what you were
trying to accomplish.

Now, if you have any information about the gentleman's agreements that
led to the band plans, please, share with me and the others. I am
interested in the actual content you may be able to provide, but I
have no patience for attitude or condescension. The last thing I need
is someone trying to teach me to fish when my question concerns how
night-crawlers on barbed hooks became the approach of choice.

Dee Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Jack.
- --
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFAt3BrGPFSfAB/ezgRAtqpAJ4rLC4EORt2obdbtbkXi+XWE07ocACgjKfW
LhWllQXbLD0WlygMr8hsGbU=
=Lj+y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote:




OK...then I will:

AMATEUR FREQUENCY OPERATION RECOMMENDATIONS (ARRL Band Plans)
Reprinted from "The Considerate Operator's Frequency Guide",


Another method is to just scan a band until you find another ham calling
CQ in
a mode you want to operate in, and respond to him. Be careful in that,
on HF,
some foreign hams can operate SSB on a frequency the FCC rules say CW/data
only. Conversely, there's no point in calling CQ using CW in the middle
of a SSB
subband. It's legal, but you are not likely to find another ham to QSO
with there.
As ham radio is about 2 way radio, people need agreements, formal or
informal,
as to where to do what mode. Otherwise it starts sounding like CB...
And no,
despite no code licenses and "extra lite" licensees, ham radio doesn't
sound anything
like CB except for a few spots (14313) and even that is by informal
agreement.

Subject: CW Testing Question
From: "Dee D. Flint"
Date: 5/28/2004 9:56 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"Radio Amateur KC2HMZ" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 27 May 2004 13:03:51 -0400, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:

I already referenced the web site of the ARRL. All you have to do is
enter
the words "band plan" in the box to search the site. Then scroll down
until
you see the listing for band plans. I will NOT do this for you.

OK...then I will:

AMATEUR FREQUENCY OPERATION RECOMMENDATIONS (ARRL Band Plans)

[snip]

It's never a good idea to do a student's homework for them. It leads to
laziness and dependency on other people for info that is easily found by
checking basic references.. I'd already referenced the site and
documentation he needed to check previously. Then I gave specific
instructions on how to find the info. That is all that should have been
required.

Although not a regular in this forum (any more, any way) John is well
known in various CB radio and scanner NG's, usually for his overwhelming desire
to be king of the hill and lack of regard for how he gets there.

His "debating" techniques have cost him a couple of ISP's, I understand,
and got him in trouble with local law enforcement. He was also listowner of a
fairly well populated Yahoo group that went ka-put due to his escapades.

As you can see, Dee, he's got a bit of the same "See, I Know More Than
You" streak in him that Lennie has...

Welcome back, John. Worn out your welcome elsewhere again...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: CW Testing Question
From: "Dee D. Flint"
Date: 5/28/2004 9:56 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"Radio Amateur KC2HMZ" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 27 May 2004 13:03:51 -0400, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:

I already referenced the web site of the ARRL. All you have to do is
enter
the words "band plan" in the box to search the site. Then scroll down
until
you see the listing for band plans. I will NOT do this for you.

OK...then I will:

AMATEUR FREQUENCY OPERATION RECOMMENDATIONS (ARRL Band Plans)

[snip]

It's never a good idea to do a student's homework for them. It leads to
laziness and dependency on other people for info that is easily found by
checking basic references.. I'd already referenced the site and
documentation he needed to check previously. Then I gave specific
instructions on how to find the info. That is all that should have been
required.

Although not a regular in this forum (any more, any way) John is well
known in various CB radio and scanner NG's, usually for his overwhelming
desire to be king of the hill and lack of regard for how he gets there.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...looking in the mirror again? :-)

His "debating" techniques have cost him a couple of ISP's, I understand,
and got him in trouble with local law enforcement. He was also listowner of a
fairly well populated Yahoo group that went ka-put due to his escapades.

Remember who manufactured a very libelous "home page" on AOL?

Lasted for all of three days before AOL removed it. Nearly removed
nursie from its subscribers, too. :-)

As you can see, Dee, he's got a bit of the same "See, I Know More Than
You" streak in him that Lennie has...

Poor baby. Nursie has to understand that MANY know more than he
does. :-)

There's the "MARS is amateur radio" claim...which remains just a
claim since the DoD defines MARS, not the FCC or ARRL.

No one goes to as great lengths as the gunnery nurse in trying to
damn others. Nursie DOES have top honors in that. :-)

LHA / WMD

Subject: CW Testing Question
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 5/28/2004 3:04 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Although not a regular in this forum (any more, any way) John is well
known in various CB radio and scanner NG's, usually for his overwhelming
desire to be king of the hill and lack of regard for how he gets there.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...looking in the mirror again?

Nope.

Remember who manufactured a very libelous "home page" on AOL?

No one I know, Lennie.

If somethings true, it's not libelous.

You are a lair. You DID misrepresent your intentions with an e-mail that
contained OTHER than what you attested to it being.

Lasted for all of three days before AOL removed it. Nearly removed
nursie from its subscribers, too.

That's OK. It wouldn't have lasted too long. That's what lawyers are
for.

As you can see, Dee, he's got a bit of the same "See, I Know More Than
You" streak in him that Lennie has...

Poor baby. Nursie has to understand that MANY know more than he
does.

No doubt. But when it comes to Amateur Radio, I DO know more than
YOU, Lennie!

And that's ALL that counts!

There's the "MARS is amateur radio" claim...which remains just a
claim since the DoD defines MARS, not the FCC or ARRL.

No Amateur Radio = No MARS.

No one goes to as great lengths as the gunnery nurse in trying to
damn others. Nursie DOES have top honors in that.

Just you, Lennie. The others "damn" themselves.

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: CW Testing Question
From: (Steve Robeson K4CAP)
Date: 5/28/2004 4:13 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Subject: CW Testing Question
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 5/28/2004 3:04 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Although not a regular in this forum (any more, any way) John is well
known in various CB radio and scanner NG's, usually for his overwhelming
desire to be king of the hill and lack of regard for how he gets there.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...looking in the mirror again?

Nope.

Remember who manufactured a very libelous "home page" on AOL?

No one I know, Lennie.

If somethings true, it's not libelous.

You are a lair

Ooops! TYPO !

But it doesn't change anything...You ARE a L I A R...!

Steve, K4YZ

On 28 May 2004 19:35:45 GMT, (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote:

Although not a regular in this forum (any more, any way) John is well
known in various CB radio and scanner NG's, usually for his overwhelming desire
to be king of the hill and lack of regard for how he gets there.

Various? There is only one CB newsgroup, rec.radio.cb - and if I'm
well-known there it's because of telling certain regulars there what I
thought of their blatant disregard for Part 95.

Any of the folks in the scanner newsgroups who know me, know me from
material published in Popular Communications, or from when I was a
member of NYSING, or both.

His "debating" techniques have cost him a couple of ISP's, I understand,
and got him in trouble with local law enforcement.

That what KF2TI told you? That's bull. I've never had an account
yanked by an ISP, nor had any trouble with local law enforcement. On
the other hand, I've been known to work *with* local law enforcement
on occasion.

He was also listowner of a
fairly well populated Yahoo group that went ka-put due to his escapades.

At the time I owned it, it was not a Yahoo group, it was a onelist.com
group, and it did not go kaput - it became a Yahoo group when
onelist.com and Yahoo merged, and it still exists - the current list
owner is Al Stern of Satellite Beach, Florida who is an old buddy of
mine from the #monitor channel on IRCNet.

he only reason you're ****ed about all of this is that I refused to
let you and KF2TI join that list, which I did because after observing
your antics in rec.radio.amateur.policy - particularly your penchant
for trading personal attacks with Len Anderson and others in this NG,
which has been going on for years now - I decided I did not want
people of your ilk polluting the Radiomonitors list.

As you can see, Dee, he's got a bit of the same "See, I Know More Than
You" streak in him that Lennie has...

If you wish to draw that conclusion based on the fact that I responded
to a request for information by posting information, it's no skin off
my fanny, Steve. Besides, somebody in this NG has to post something
besides personal attacks on other users, or the whole NG will consist
of nothing but half a dozen trolls such as yourself, and the hobby
deserves better than that.

Welcome back, John. Worn out your welcome elsewhere again...?!?!

Actually, I just switched to a different ISP, which has an NNTP
server, among other things that my old ISP did not (the old one was a
dialup and an e-mail account, period).

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: CW Testing Question
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 5/28/2004 3:04 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Although not a regular in this forum (any more, any way) John is well
known in various CB radio and scanner NG's, usually for his overwhelming
desire to be king of the hill and lack of regard for how he gets there.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...looking in the mirror again?

Nope.

Remember who manufactured a very libelous "home page" on AOL?

No one I know, Lennie.

If somethings true, it's not libelous.

AOL thought it was VERY libelous and cancelled that alternate
screen name you used then.

You went ballistic on that "home page" and were clearly deep
into libelous personal attack. AOL concurred.

You are a lair.

A "lair?!?" :-)

Do you imagine yourself in some sort of jungle surrounded by
carnivorous animals? :-)

You DID misrepresent your intentions with an e-mail that
contained OTHER than what you attested to it being.

Poor baby. A simple mistake and you go BALLISTIC! :-)


As you can see, Dee, he's got a bit of the same "See, I Know More Than
You" streak in him that Lennie has...

Poor baby. Nursie has to understand that MANY know more than he
does.

No doubt. But when it comes to Amateur Radio, I DO know more than
YOU, Lennie!

Actually no. You still can't read Part 97 clearly and you were unable
to post references for MARS documents. :-)

And that's ALL that counts!

Only on your mythical amateur Fantasy Island. :-)

There's the "MARS is amateur radio" claim...which remains just a
claim since the DoD defines MARS, not the FCC or ARRL.

No Amateur Radio = No MARS.

Still incorrect. MARS is MILITARY, not civilian.

Haven't you understood that yet?

Just read DoD Directive 4650.2 and then USN-USMC Communication
Instruction NTP 8(C).

MARS can and does function solely with military personnel.

It's nice that amateurs have volunteered to help in MARS, but MARS
is a MILITARY radio service. By definition.

LHA / WMD

In article , Radio Amateur KC2HMZ
writes:

On 28 May 2004 19:35:45 GMT, (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote:

Although not a regular in this forum (any more, any way) John is well
known in various CB radio and scanner NG's, usually for his overwhelming
desire
to be king of the hill and lack of regard for how he gets there.

Various? There is only one CB newsgroup, rec.radio.cb - and if I'm
well-known there it's because of telling certain regulars there what I
thought of their blatant disregard for Part 95.

Any of the folks in the scanner newsgroups who know me, know me from
material published in Popular Communications, or from when I was a
member of NYSING, or both.

Belated welcome back, John. :-)

As you can tell (obviously), few have departed from their
usual style of attacking all who do not agree with them. :-)

His "debating" techniques have cost him a couple of ISP's, I understand,

and got him in trouble with local law enforcement.

That what KF2TI told you? That's bull. I've never had an account
yanked by an ISP, nor had any trouble with local law enforcement. On
the other hand, I've been known to work *with* local law enforcement
on occasion.

Nursie is on his usual smearing of snit routine again. :-)

Adell has been - gratefully - not present, leaving only a few
of the PCTAs to attempt attacking others. [he might be
trying to sort out which of the several personalities he's used
in this newsgroup]

He was also listowner of a
fairly well populated Yahoo group that went ka-put due to his escapades.

At the time I owned it, it was not a Yahoo group, it was a onelist.com
group, and it did not go kaput - it became a Yahoo group when
onelist.com and Yahoo merged, and it still exists - the current list
owner is Al Stern of Satellite Beach, Florida who is an old buddy of
mine from the #monitor channel on IRCNet.

True facts interfere with obsessive hatred. Disagree with him
and you will be added to the top of his snit list. [nothing much
changed in the last 5 or so years]

he only reason you're ****ed about all of this is that I refused to
let you and KF2TI join that list, which I did because after observing
your antics in rec.radio.amateur.policy - particularly your penchant
for trading personal attacks with Len Anderson and others in this NG,
which has been going on for years now - I decided I did not want
people of your ilk polluting the Radiomonitors list.

Poor guy lives for the moment of upsetting normalcy of
discussion of others. It's become an obsession with him,
far from a penchant. :-)

As you can see, Dee, he's got a bit of the same "See, I Know More Than
You" streak in him that Lennie has...

If you wish to draw that conclusion based on the fact that I responded
to a request for information by posting information, it's no skin off
my fanny, Steve. Besides, somebody in this NG has to post something
besides personal attacks on other users, or the whole NG will consist
of nothing but half a dozen trolls such as yourself, and the hobby
deserves better than that.

The hobby DOES deserve better than what they are, but,
according to them, they do no wrong, can never do wrong,
for they are privileged (because they say they are).

This particular newsgrope has become nothing but a giant
flamefest.

Pity that, the forum polluted by those wanting only to FIGHT.

It's worse, actually. The politicians at the FCC want to permit
BPL to continue on and truly pollute HF and low-VHF for ALL,
not just amateurs. The fighters such as nursie only want to
fight, fight, fight with others for newsgrope supremacy, thinking
they will "win" something. They only win emotional candy for
the moment, unable to understand that others don't agree
with them. shrug

Add to that the spectre of even more radical revisions with
Part 97 restructuring and the loss of international regulation
on manual telegraphy testing and this newsgroup has become
nothing more than a chat room for a small group nattering
about everything but Policy as They See It.

Welcome back, John. Worn out your welcome elsewhere again...?!?!

Actually, I just switched to a different ISP, which has an NNTP
server, among other things that my old ISP did not (the old one was a
dialup and an e-mail account, period).

Explanations of what you actually did are irrelevant and just
waste your time replying.

I don't think it matters really what anyone says, the "fighters"
will manufacture some kind of "cause" and then say their
imaginary product is "fact." :-)

On the other hand, Brian Burke (screen name of "BillyBeeper"
now) thinks that the PCTA are becoming tired and impotent.
There IS something to that faced with the revision of 25.5 and
their inability to control the newsgroup content.

The tide is turning but the old cliches' of the PCTA are
littering the beach, drying up instead of washing back out to
sea, losing their threats, imprecations, and "superiority" (as
amateur telegraphers).

Have fun here if you can, John. :-)

Len

LHA / WMD