Jim = Quitefine?
 

Okay folks,

We have a few posters here that are anonymous.

I decided to look into the N2EY-Quitefine connection

What is your evidence for Jim being Quitefine?


Most of Jim's posts - interestingly enough with his callsign - are
posted from google, whereas Quitefine's are all posted from AOL. A small
number of Jim's are posted from AOL, although from the headers,
Quitefine could also be Steve too.

But I doubt it is either of them.

More importantly, it is of interest that some of the people that are so
concerned about these anonymii are more concerned about that anonymity.
not either one is engaging in name calling, although Blackguard seems a
bit coarser.

Can't you guys handle it?


I am -
at least
I think I am -

- Mike KB3EIA -

I think! ;^)

Subject: Jim = Quitefine?
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 9/10/2004 10:40 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Okay folks,

We have a few posters here that are anonymous.

I decided to look into the N2EY-Quitefine connection

What is your evidence for Jim being Quitefine?


Most of Jim's posts - interestingly enough with his callsign - are
posted from google, whereas Quitefine's are all posted from AOL. A small
number of Jim's are posted from AOL, although from the headers,
Quitefine could also be Steve too.

Not I, kindly Sir!

But I do know who!

And I'm not telling!

73

Steve, K4YZ

"Mike Coslo" wrote

Quitefine could also be Steve too.

Only if you decide to suspend credulousness. Quitefine engages in
debates with manners, and does not try to win them by pure weight of
pejoratives and name calling. That easily distinguishes him(her?) from
Steve. If Quitefine is the space-shuttle of civility, then Steve is a
paper airplane.

With all kind wishes,

de Hans, K0HB

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Okay folks,

We have a few posters here that are anonymous.

I decided to look into the N2EY-Quitefine connection

What is your evidence for Jim being Quitefine?


Most of Jim's posts - interestingly enough with his callsign - are
posted from google, whereas Quitefine's are all posted from AOL. A small
number of Jim's are posted from AOL, although from the headers,
Quitefine could also be Steve too.

But I doubt it is either of them.

More importantly, it is of interest that some of the people that are so
concerned about these anonymii are more concerned about that anonymity.
not either one is engaging in name calling, although Blackguard seems a
bit coarser.

Can't you guys handle it?


I am -
at least
I think I am -

- Mike KB3EIA -

I think! ;^)

You put Descarte before de horse... :-)

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

Subject: Jim = Quitefine?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 9/10/2004 12:06 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: .net


"Mike Coslo" wrote

Quitefine could also be Steve too.

Only if you decide to suspend credulousness. Quitefine engages in
debates with manners, and does not try to win them by pure weight of
pejoratives and name calling. That easily distinguishes him(her?) from
Steve. If Quitefine is the space-shuttle of civility, then Steve is a
paper airplane.

And of course THIS was NOT a "perjorative" on your part, Hans, and you are
eminently innocent of namecalling and flaming.

Do you have to spend twice as much money shaving BOTH of those faces,
Hans?


Steve, K4YZ

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote:


And of course THIS was NOT a "perjorative" on your part, Hans...


The word is pejorative, Steve, not "perjorative", so of course it was
not "perjorative" on my part.

Sunuvagun!

72.5,

de Hans, K0HB

PS: Unlike the rather civilized "Quitefine", I give as good as I get.
Sorry if you can't handle that, but try to get used to it.

Subject: Jim = Quitefine?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 9/10/2004 6:07 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: et


"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote:


And of course THIS was NOT a "perjorative" on your part, Hans...


The word is pejorative, Steve, not "perjorative", so of course it was
not "perjorative" on my part.

Excuse my typo.

Sunuvagun!

72.5,

Always just a bit shy.

de Hans, K0HB

PS: Unlike the rather civilized "Quitefine", I give as good as I get.
Sorry if you can't handle that, but try to get used to it.

I can handle you quite fine, Hans. (pun intended)

I've dealt with folks like you in AND out of the service, Hans. It's
challenging, but not really difficult at all.

It's just a matter of trying to determine which face you're presenting
with any given topic.

Steve, K4YZ

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Okay folks,

We have a few posters here that are anonymous.

I decided to look into the N2EY-Quitefine connection

What is your evidence for Jim being Quitefine?


Most of Jim's posts - interestingly enough with his callsign - are
posted from google, whereas Quitefine's are all posted from AOL. A small
number of Jim's are posted from AOL, although from the headers,
Quitefine could also be Steve too.

But I doubt it is either of them.

More importantly, it is of interest that some of the people that are so
concerned about these anonymii are more concerned about that anonymity.
not either one is engaging in name calling, although Blackguard seems a
bit coarser.

Can't you guys handle it?


I am -
at least
I think I am -

- Mike KB3EIA -

I think! ;^)

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.

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote


It's just a matter of trying to determine which face you're presenting
with any given topic.


What you see is what you get, Steve. Just to clear up any confusion on
your part, here are my thoughts on the predominate topics regularly
discussed here on rrap.

1 -- I think that Morse (CW) is a fun operating mode, sort of like
restoring old-time automobiles.
2 -- I do not think that Morse testing ought to be required to obtain an
amateur radio license of any class.
3 -- I think that you, Len, and Brian are a modern-day reincarnation of
the Three Stooges. You guys ought to petition NBC or CBS to revive that
show on TV.

With all kind wishes,

de Hans, K0HB

Subject: Jim = Quitefine?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 9/10/2004 7:00 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net


"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote


It's just a matter of trying to determine which face you're presenting
with any given topic.


What you see is what you get, Steve. Just to clear up any confusion on
your part, here are my thoughts on the predominate topics regularly
discussed here on rrap.

1 -- I think that Morse (CW) is a fun operating mode, sort of like
restoring old-time automobiles.
2 -- I do not think that Morse testing ought to be required to obtain an
amateur radio license of any class.
3 -- I think that you, Len, and Brian are a modern-day reincarnation of
the Three Stooges. You guys ought to petition NBC or CBS to revive that

When I was refering to your multiple faces, I was refering to the one
where in one breath you chastise others for name calling, flaming, personal
attacks and other such conduct, then turn right around and do it yourself.

And we can include you as the fourth Stooge.

There was no confusion, except perhaps in YOUR mind, as to what was being
said, about what and/or whom.

Steve, K4YZ

Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:

Subject: Jim = Quitefine?
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 9/10/2004 10:40 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Okay folks,

We have a few posters here that are anonymous.

I decided to look into the N2EY-Quitefine connection

What is your evidence for Jim being Quitefine?


Most of Jim's posts - interestingly enough with his callsign - are
posted from google, whereas Quitefine's are all posted from AOL. A small
number of Jim's are posted from AOL, although from the headers,
Quitefine could also be Steve too.


Not I, kindly Sir!

I know that too. But from just a cursory glance at header info, one
could get the impression.


But I do know who!

And I'm not telling!

I hope not!

- Mike KB3EIA -

KØHB wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote


Quitefine could also be Steve too.


Only if you decide to suspend credulousness. Quitefine engages in
debates with manners, and does not try to win them by pure weight of
pejoratives and name calling. That easily distinguishes him(her?) from
Steve. If Quitefine is the space-shuttle of civility, then Steve is a
paper airplane.

I was talking about header info, and definitely not posting styles. I
doubt that Steve's innate posting style would adapt to Quitefine's.
Certainly he wouldn't have any fun with it, since his style is more the
head-on, call ya out sort of thing.

I don't condone everything that Steve posts, but I respect him
nonetheless. And after his description of himself being the guy
"whacking at the Pinata,"

Remember that there are equal and opposite antagonists for him, which is
to say that I don't see him treating any of us in the same manner as he
does them. He doesn't even treat you as he does them. But I suspect that
if you started calling him "gunnery nurse, Nursie, or any of the other
dumb names he's called by some, he would reply in kind.

And I suspect that his lack of condemnation of Quitefine or Blackguard
is that they are not doing what a lot of anonymii do, which is to post
libelous and extremely insulting material.

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

- Mike KB3EIA -

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo writes:


Okay folks,

We have a few posters here that are anonymous.

I decided to look into the N2EY-Quitefine connection

What is your evidence for Jim being Quitefine?


Most of Jim's posts - interestingly enough with his callsign - are
posted from google, whereas Quitefine's are all posted from AOL. A small
number of Jim's are posted from AOL, although from the headers,
Quitefine could also be Steve too.

But I doubt it is either of them.

More importantly, it is of interest that some of the people that are so
concerned about these anonymii are more concerned about that anonymity.
not either one is engaging in name calling, although Blackguard seems a
bit coarser.

Can't you guys handle it?


I am -
at least
I think I am -

- Mike KB3EIA -

I think! ;^)


You put Descarte before de horse... :-)

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".

Perhaps answers to their questions fit better into that category.

- Mike KB3EIA -

KØHB wrote:

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote:


And of course THIS was NOT a "perjorative" on your part, Hans...



The word is pejorative, Steve, not "perjorative", so of course it was
not "perjorative" on my part.

Sunuvagun!

72.5,

de Hans, K0HB

PS: Unlike the rather civilized "Quitefine", I give as good as I get.
Sorry if you can't handle that, but try to get used to it.


Funny that I see this right after I post that that is what Steve does!

go figure!

- Mike KB3EIA -

William wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

Okay folks,

We have a few posters here that are anonymous.

I decided to look into the N2EY-Quitefine connection

What is your evidence for Jim being Quitefine?


Most of Jim's posts - interestingly enough with his callsign - are
posted from google, whereas Quitefine's are all posted from AOL. A small
number of Jim's are posted from AOL, although from the headers,
Quitefine could also be Steve too.

But I doubt it is either of them.

More importantly, it is of interest that some of the people that are so
concerned about these anonymii are more concerned about that anonymity.
not either one is engaging in name calling, although Blackguard seems a
bit coarser.

Can't you guys handle it?


I am -
at least
I think I am -

- Mike KB3EIA -

I think! ;^)


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.

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.

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

Clever answer, that! And not an answer at all.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:

Subject: Jim = Quitefine?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 9/10/2004 7:00 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net


"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote


It's just a matter of trying to determine which face you're presenting
with any given topic.


What you see is what you get, Steve. Just to clear up any confusion on
your part, here are my thoughts on the predominate topics regularly
discussed here on rrap.

1 -- I think that Morse (CW) is a fun operating mode, sort of like
restoring old-time automobiles.
2 -- I do not think that Morse testing ought to be required to obtain an
amateur radio license of any class.
3 -- I think that you, Len, and Brian are a modern-day reincarnation of
the Three Stooges. You guys ought to petition NBC or CBS to revive that


When I was refering to your multiple faces, I was refering to the one
where in one breath you chastise others for name calling, flaming, personal
attacks and other such conduct, then turn right around and do it yourself.

And we can include you as the fourth Stooge.

Would that be Joe? ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Jim = Quitefine?
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 9/11/2004 9:56 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:



Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:

Subject: Jim = Quitefine?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 9/10/2004 7:00 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net


"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote


It's just a matter of trying to determine which face you're presenting
with any given topic.


What you see is what you get, Steve. Just to clear up any confusion on
your part, here are my thoughts on the predominate topics regularly
discussed here on rrap.

1 -- I think that Morse (CW) is a fun operating mode, sort of like
restoring old-time automobiles.
2 -- I do not think that Morse testing ought to be required to obtain an
amateur radio license of any class.
3 -- I think that you, Len, and Brian are a modern-day reincarnation of
the Three Stooges. You guys ought to petition NBC or CBS to revive that


When I was refering to your multiple faces, I was refering to the one
where in one breath you chastise others for name calling, flaming, personal
attacks and other such conduct, then turn right around and do it yourself.

And we can include you as the fourth Stooge.

Would that be Joe? ;^)

Ooooops....forgot him...Shemp too.

That would make Hans the sixth.

He keeps moving on down the rungs!

73

Steve, K4YZ

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.

:-)

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.

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.

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

Tsk.

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

Clever answer, that! And not an answer at all.

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

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. :-)

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

And I suspect that his lack of condemnation of Quitefine or Blackguard
is that they are not doing what a lot of anonymii do, which is to post
libelous and extremely insulting material.

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

You ain't got it yet...

In article . net, "KØHB"
writes:

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote

It's just a matter of trying to determine which face you're presenting
with any given topic.

What you see is what you get, Steve. Just to clear up any confusion on
your part, here are my thoughts on the predominate topics regularly
discussed here on rrap.

1 -- I think that Morse (CW) is a fun operating mode, sort of like
restoring old-time automobiles.
2 -- I do not think that Morse testing ought to be required to obtain an
amateur radio license of any class.
3 -- I think that you, Len, and Brian are a modern-day reincarnation of
the Three Stooges. You guys ought to petition NBC or CBS to revive that
show on TV.

Two out of three ain't bad... :-)

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


And I suspect that his lack of condemnation of Quitefine or Blackguard
is that they are not doing what a lot of anonymii do, which is to post
libelous and extremely insulting material.

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


You ain't got it yet...

And the proof of the point is here.

- Mike KB3EIA -

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?

For an ostensibly smart fella, you fall into categorization pretty
easily. 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. But since you
do post whatever you want, it shows the fallacy of your statement, so
why do you keep posting that?

Of course you know! ;^)

I am,

The fifth wheel
of the four Morsemen
of the Apocalypse *80)

- Mike KB3EIA -

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'.


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


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^)

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

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


Clever answer, that! And not an answer at all.


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

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

But you knew that, eh?

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!

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
[snip]

I am,

The fifth wheel
of the four Morsemen
of the Apocalypse *80)

- Mike KB3EIA -


So who are the "four Morsemen of the Apocalypse?"

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

And we can include you as the fourth Stooge.

Would that be Joe? ;^)

Shemp.

btw, Moe, Curly and Shemp were brothers.

73 de Jim, N2EY

nyuk-nyuk-nyuk

In article . net, "KØHB"
writes:

Just to clear up any confusion on
your part, here are my thoughts on the predominate topics regularly
discussed here on rrap.

1 -- I think that Morse (CW) is a fun operating mode, sort of like
restoring old-time automobiles.

Sailboats and piston-engine aircraft come to mind, too.

2 -- I do not think that Morse testing ought to be required to obtain an
amateur radio license of any class.

And you manage to make that opinion clear and concise without calling anyone
names, insulting their heritage, etc.

3 -- I think that you, Len, and Brian are a modern-day reincarnation of
the Three Stooges. You guys ought to petition NBC or CBS to revive that
show on TV.

I have to ask...

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

73 de Jim, N2EY

N2EY wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


And we can include you as the fourth Stooge.

Would that be Joe? ;^)


Shemp.

btw, Moe, Curly and Shemp were brothers.

73 de Jim, N2EY

nyuk-nyuk-nyuk

And Larry's wife was a babe! nyaaah, nyaah, nyaah...woowoowoowwoowwoo

- Mike KB3EIA -

N2EY wrote:

In article . net, "KØHB"
writes:


Just to clear up any confusion on
your part, here are my thoughts on the predominate topics regularly
discussed here on rrap.

1 -- I think that Morse (CW) is a fun operating mode, sort of like
restoring old-time automobiles.


Sailboats and piston-engine aircraft come to mind, too.


2 -- I do not think that Morse testing ought to be required to obtain an
amateur radio license of any class.


And you manage to make that opinion clear and concise without calling anyone
names, insulting their heritage, etc.


3 -- I think that you, Len, and Brian are a modern-day reincarnation of
the Three Stooges. You guys ought to petition NBC or CBS to revive that
show on TV.


I have to ask...

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

hehe, well we all know who Moe is!
Now figuring out the other two is more of a problem.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Dee D. Flint wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

[snip]

I am,

The fifth wheel
of the four Morsemen
of the Apocalypse *80)

- Mike KB3EIA -



So who are the "four Morsemen of the Apocalypse?"


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.

- Mike KB3EIA -

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)