In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

William wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in message

...

I'm merely amused by the lack of consistency with which Steve
approaches the anonymii.

Call it PCTA double standard if you will - all perfectly acceptable on
RRAP.

You are taking in the data, and coming to the wrong conclusion.

No. Brian isn't reaching the conclusion YOU want.

I don't care *what* conclusion Brian reaches. I will call it wrong tho'.

Ach zo! Good old PCTA extra Double Standard invoked! :-)

If it isn't to your liking it is "wrong?"

Of course. You don't like it so therefore it is "wrong." :-)

It isn't the base content but the underlying tone which gets the
response. I simply look at Steve as a feedback generator. Feedback is
derived from input, as it were.

Classic case of a servo loop with too much gain...results in
oscillation and instability.

Nursie's loop filter is way off what it should be. More oscillation.

You shouldn't be too mean to him - you *need* his feedback.

Not at all.

I can reply to anyone.

Nursie could disappear in the next millisecond and would not affect
me at all.

Heck your
fishing expeditions wouldn't be half as much fun without him here.

"Fishing expeditions?" I don't fish.

PCTA bait their hooks and offer me their lines. No problem at all
to reel them in. Easy thing.

The objections to Quitefine and Blackguard are their anonymity, not
their content. Okay. Your answer to all their questions is "you're
anonymous"

Tsk.

it a Task it, eh? 8^)

No, a "tsk," the odd human sound made by unbelievers when they
don't bother to make a verbal comment...or the sound made when
it's obvious (to everyone else) you didn't make any sense.

You are too young to have heard "Little Yellow Basket" when it was
popular. :-)

The anonymousies are NOT INVOLVED! No ID, nothing. [see the
commands uff das uber-oberst...]

So what. non-involvement isn't an issue with me. Note that I post to
you?

It is rather obvious you posted to me. You don't need to announce it.

Last time I checked, Dave didn't control me.

Dave doesn't control anybody...despite what he may think.

Dave isn't a radio regulator...despite kissing up to Mikey Powell like
a good Republican. :-)

yelling across the room Hey Dave, do you control what I post?

He can't hear you. Still has his head deep into the Orion manual,
trying to figure out the instructions.

You've not made any "answer" in your posting. Nothing at all.

Umm, it was his answer, and a comment by me.

You've still not said anything.

But you knew that, eh?

Yes...I'm just emphasizing it for the benefit of those slow readers who
have to run their fingers under words on the screen when reading. :-)

What you've demonstrated is just another item in the becoming-
clear PCTA extra Double Standard: Anyone attacking NCTAs
is "OK." Anyone against PCTA extras should be forbidden
everything. :-)

Who's attacking anyone? Paraaanoiia!

Nope. Rather obvious...unless one is a PCTA extra with the Double
Standard. They can ATTACK all they want. And do! :-)

Poor babies just can't take the return fire. Tsk. :-)

Anonymousies will creep in to "defend" their "honor" and to do more
"attacks" on NCTA. They will help your cheer. Or the uber-oberst or
the gunnery nursie will check in with their mirrors. No problem.

Now, did you have anything of substance to say or are you just killing
time on the computer when you could be playing with your radios?

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Oh, and the anonymousies are anonymous because they can't
handle it under their own identity. Think of that. :-)

Dunno. I don't see anything either of them have posted that is
particularly "non-handlable".

Both are NOT INVOLVED!

No ID, nothing.

Follow der uber-oberst's commands given in here. He is PCTA extra.

Since when does "der uber-oberst's" commands affect me? Or you for that

matter?

All the PCTA extras in here stick together.

Like crazy glue. :-)

For an ostensibly smart fella, you fall into categorization pretty
easily.

"Ostensibly?" :-)

Categorization is the name of the game with the PCTA extras here.

All those who aren't "ostensibly" as good as they are categorized
as "uninvolved" or something else horribly wrong. :-)

I'll post what I want, and if you don't post because of some
"command" given by someone else here, you are the victim.

I am a "victim" now? Of what? :-)

But since you
do post whatever you want, it shows the fallacy of your statement, so
why do you keep posting that?

Tsk. I am NOT a PCTA extra.

I call 'em as I see 'em...and one cannot possibly miss seeing those
PCTA extra commands and epistles. :-)

Of course you know! ;^)

I know more than you care to admit. :-)

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

If my memory serves me right, the four Morsemen we

Larry Roll
Dave Hiel
Dick Carroll
Jim Micollis

Lenover21 would know exactly - he coined it.

I would have told Dee...but she never reads my posts (what she said
in here). :-)

Scratch tRoll...he probably drove his bus somewhere bad...

Scratch Carroll...he probably crossed over to the other side of life.

Include Kellie the Katapult King.

Jim Kehler, KH2D, is the leader of the pack but is ailing in the
USA somewhere. Call him "morseman imperator" with his
leadership emeritus.

Toss in the gunnery nursie, graduated from a little yipping dog
on the heels of the former morsemen to getting saddle sore.

There's a bunch of anonymousies but they are NOT INVOLVED,
have NO ID and therefore don't count.

ARS = Archaic Radiotelegraphy Service.

Anything more? :-)

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


Len Over 21 wrote:


In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


William wrote:


Mike Coslo wrote in message

...

I'm merely amused by the lack of consistency with which Steve
approaches the anonymii.

Call it PCTA double standard if you will - all perfectly acceptable on
RRAP.

You are taking in the data, and coming to the wrong conclusion.

No. Brian isn't reaching the conclusion YOU want.

I don't care *what* conclusion Brian reaches. I will call it wrong tho'.


Ach zo! Good old PCTA extra Double Standard invoked! :-)

If it isn't to your liking it is "wrong?"

Of course. You don't like it so therefore it is "wrong." :-)

Works for you.


It isn't the base content but the underlying tone which gets the
response. I simply look at Steve as a feedback generator. Feedback is
derived from input, as it were.

Classic case of a servo loop with too much gain...results in
oscillation and instability.

Nursie's loop filter is way off what it should be. More oscillation.

You shouldn't be too mean to him - you *need* his feedback.


Not at all.

I can reply to anyone.

Nursie could disappear in the next millisecond and would not affect
me at all.

Uh huh.


Heck your
fishing expeditions wouldn't be half as much fun without him here.


"Fishing expeditions?" I don't fish.

PCTA bait their hooks and offer me their lines. No problem at all
to reel them in. Easy thing.

Aren't you mixing the sides of your methphor?

The objections to Quitefine and Blackguard are their anonymity, not
their content. Okay. Your answer to all their questions is "you're
anonymous"

Tsk.

it a Task it, eh? 8^)


No, a "tsk," the odd human sound made by unbelievers when they
don't bother to make a verbal comment...or the sound made when
it's obvious (to everyone else) you didn't make any sense.

You are too young to have heard "Little Yellow Basket" when it was
popular. :-)


The anonymousies are NOT INVOLVED! No ID, nothing. [see the
commands uff das uber-oberst...]

So what. non-involvement isn't an issue with me. Note that I post to
you?


It is rather obvious you posted to me. You don't need to announce it.


Last time I checked, Dave didn't control me.


Dave doesn't control anybody...despite what he may think.

Dave isn't a radio regulator...despite kissing up to Mikey Powell like
a good Republican. :-)


yelling across the room Hey Dave, do you control what I post?


He can't hear you. Still has his head deep into the Orion manual,
trying to figure out the instructions.


You've not made any "answer" in your posting. Nothing at all.

Umm, it was his answer, and a comment by me.


You've still not said anything.


But you knew that, eh?


Yes...I'm just emphasizing it for the benefit of those slow readers who
have to run their fingers under words on the screen when reading. :-)


What you've demonstrated is just another item in the becoming-
clear PCTA extra Double Standard: Anyone attacking NCTAs
is "OK." Anyone against PCTA extras should be forbidden
everything. :-)

Who's attacking anyone? Paraaanoiia!


Nope. Rather obvious...unless one is a PCTA extra with the Double
Standard. They can ATTACK all they want. And do! :-)

Poor babies just can't take the return fire. Tsk. :-)

Anonymousies will creep in to "defend" their "honor" and to do more
"attacks" on NCTA. They will help your cheer. Or the uber-oberst or
the gunnery nursie will check in with their mirrors. No problem.

Now, did you have anything of substance to say or are you just killing
time on the computer when you could be playing with your radios?

Had a few moments to waste before going to bed early before a hamfest.
So I thought I'd post a bit to you.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


Len Over 21 wrote:


In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


Oh, and the anonymousies are anonymous because they can't
handle it under their own identity. Think of that. :-)

Dunno. I don't see anything either of them have posted that is
particularly "non-handlable".

Both are NOT INVOLVED!

No ID, nothing.

Follow der uber-oberst's commands given in here. He is PCTA extra.

Since when does "der uber-oberst's" commands affect me? Or you for that


matter?


All the PCTA extras in here stick together.

Like crazy glue. :-)


For an ostensibly smart fella, you fall into categorization pretty
easily.

"Ostensibly?" :-)

Yeah, like apparently, like to all outward appearances. It is a perfect fit.


Categorization is the name of the game with the PCTA extras here.

All those who aren't "ostensibly" as good as they are categorized
as "uninvolved" or something else horribly wrong. :-)

Noun sands! I'm a nickle extra, 5wpm and the new tests, I've only been a
ham for 5 years, and an Extra for a couple. Ostensibly, I would be one
of their targets PCTA or not.

I'll post what I want, and if you don't post because of some
"command" given by someone else here, you are the victim.

I am a "victim" now? Of what? :-)


But since you
do post whatever you want, it shows the fallacy of your statement, so
why do you keep posting that?


Tsk. I am NOT a PCTA extra.

I call 'em as I see 'em...and one cannot possibly miss seeing those
PCTA extra commands and epistles. :-)


Of course you know! ;^)


I know more than you care to admit. :-)

- mike KB3EIA -

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

William wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in message

Heck your
fishing expeditions wouldn't be half as much fun without him here.

"Fishing expeditions?" I don't fish.

PCTA bait their hooks and offer me their lines. No problem at all
to reel them in. Easy thing.

You seem to have some confusion on the concept of fishing. Let's
see...."they" bait their hooks and offer you a line. Now then, *you*
have a reel? It doesn't sound like an easy thing at all.

The objections to Quitefine and Blackguard are their anonymity, not
their content. Okay. Your answer to all their questions is "you're
anonymous"

Tsk.

it a Task it, eh? 8^)

No, a "tsk," the odd human sound made by unbelievers when they
don't bother to make a verbal comment...or the sound made when
it's obvious (to everyone else) you didn't make any sense.

"They" have hooks and lines and you have a reel? Tsk.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

But since you
do post whatever you want, it shows the fallacy of your statement, so
why do you keep posting that?

Tsk. I am NOT a PCTA extra.

Double tsk. You are NOT a NCTA Exta despite your "right out of the box"
brag. You aren't a radio amateur at all.

I call 'em as I see 'em...and one cannot possibly miss seeing those
PCTA extra commands and epistles. :-)

Only you can read a sentence like, "Leonard Anderson is not a radio
amateur" and find a command in it. St. Leonard's epistles to the
anti-code test believers read like the work of some pulp magazine hack
who is being paid at a nickel a word.

Of course you know! ;^)

I know more than you care to admit. :-)

....and yet less than *you* care to admit. :-)

Dave K8MN

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

There is a difference between civil anonymity and non-civil anonymity.
To not get that is to not get it.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Incorrect.

If there is no disagreement, then anonymity is just peachy.

But it is their anonymity that is -attacked- when there is a
disagreement, i.e., Steve calls them cowardly scum for hiding behind a
mask.

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

But since you
do post whatever you want, it shows the fallacy of your statement, so
why do you keep posting that?

Tsk. I am NOT a PCTA extra.

Double tsk. You are NOT a NCTA Exta despite your "right out of the box"
brag. You aren't a radio amateur at all.

Triple tsk. You said that you "just did it" with respect to getting
"Extra right out of the box." Yet your very own bio on QRZ says your
first call had a "WN" prefix. Can you explain yourself?

"Sorry Hans, Novice IS Extra???" Hi, hi!

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

I have to ask...

Who is Moe, who is Larry, and who is Curly/Shemp?

hehe, well we all know who Moe is!

I don't. C'mon, spell it out.

Now figuring out the other two is more of a problem.

Let's do a poll!

73 de Jim, N2EY

(who actually met Moe Howard back in the 1970s)