Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 10/19/2004 6:24 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

William wrote:


Yet Dick stated that his mission was to make his fist uncopyable to
no-code Technicians with a machine reader.

c'mon now Brian. Dick isn't here to defend himself. SNIOTD.

Considering who he is and what he's proven of his character in the past,
Mike, would you expect any different?

73

Steve, K4YZ

"KØHB" wrote in message k.net...
--
My name is Hans and I improved this message.

"William" wrote

Yet Dick stated that his mission was to make his fist uncopyable to
no-code Technicians with a machine reader.


If Dick said that, it's probably too late to change his mind on the
matter.

73, de K0HB

That's a fact. I wish I had known him under different circumstances.

Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 10/19/2004 6:57 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (N2EY)
Date: 10/18/2004 12:04 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 10/14/2004 5:34 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Jim has stated that the throughput of a rtty system may be limited by
the typing speed of the operator. The example he used is that the
rtty operator might only be able to type 10wpm, thus rendering the
rtty a 10wpm machine.

I responded that the throughput of a CW system might be limited by the
Morse Code operator only knowing the code at 10wpm.

I wanted to know how that was different from his example. So far no
response.

No response because I don't read most of what "William" writes here. I
only saw this because it was quoted by Steve.

Besides, why should I answer "William's" questions when he won't
answer mine? Also, I've already answered the above question in another
post.

Absolutely.

Brain has "chastised" me over "not being able to resist" responding to
posts, yet his posts on this forum outnumber mine. By a considerable
percentage.

So why not resist?

So why not?


Also, he's tried to alledge that I (and others who are "on the other
side,
which is just about everyone) "don't have a life" beyond RRAP...Yet there's
been several occassions wherein family, work, volunteer activites, etc have
"kept me away" from the NG, and when I did return, there was a post from the
Gonadless One making some smart alec comment about not responding to him in
what HE considers a timely manner.

He has taken the lessons of his master to heart: "Do As I Say, Not Do
As I Do".

Why not set a good example?

I am certainly not perfect, Jim, but believe I set a better example that
anything Lennie or Brain can field.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 10/19/2004 8:11 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"KØHB" wrote in message
nk.net...
--
My name is Hans and I improved this message.

"William" wrote

Yet Dick stated that his mission was to make his fist uncopyable to
no-code Technicians with a machine reader.


If Dick said that, it's probably too late to change his mind on the
matter.

73, de K0HB

That's a fact. I wish I had known him under different circumstances.

What a coincidence.

I wish I knew YOU under different circumstances.


Steve, K4YZ

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 10/19/2004 8:11 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"KØHB" wrote in message
nk.net...
--
My name is Hans and I improved this message.

"William" wrote

Yet Dick stated that his mission was to make his fist uncopyable to
no-code Technicians with a machine reader.


If Dick said that, it's probably too late to change his mind on the
matter.

73, de K0HB

That's a fact. I wish I had known him under different circumstances.

What a coincidence.

I wish I knew YOU under different circumstances.


Steve, K4YZ


I'd rather not know you at all. etx

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (N2EY)
Date: 10/18/2004 12:04 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 10/14/2004 5:34 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Jim has stated that the throughput of a rtty system may be limited by
the typing speed of the operator. The example he used is that the
rtty operator might only be able to type 10wpm, thus rendering the
rtty a 10wpm machine.

I responded that the throughput of a CW system might be limited by the
Morse Code operator only knowing the code at 10wpm.

I wanted to know how that was different from his example. So far no
response.

No response because I don't read most of what "William" writes here. I
only saw this because it was quoted by Steve.

Besides, why should I answer "William's" questions when he won't
answer mine? Also, I've already answered the above question in another
post.

Absolutely.

Brain has "chastised" me over "not being able to resist" responding to
posts, yet his posts on this forum outnumber mine. By a considerable
percentage.

So why not resist?

Resistance is futile. Look at the "Subject" in the header.

Also, he's tried to alledge that I (and others who are "on the other
side,
which is just about everyone) "don't have a life" beyond RRAP...Yet there's
been several occassions wherein family, work, volunteer activites, etc have
"kept me away" from the NG, and when I did return, there was a post from the
Gonadless One making some smart alec comment about not responding to him in
what HE considers a timely manner.

He has taken the lessons of his master to heart: "Do As I Say, Not Do
As I Do".

Why not set a good example?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Steve cannot set a good example because he is not a good example.

Steve is more than welcome to set down the guidelines for what is
dis-cuss-able in RRAP, and when I see the rest of you comply I will follow.

Best of Luck.

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

William wrote:

Yet Dick stated that his mission was to make his fist uncopyable to
no-code Technicians with a machine reader.

c'mon now Brian. Dick isn't here to defend himself. SNIOTD.

Face it, Dick wasn't defending himself when he WAS in here.

Just like a lot of SK amateur morsemen of "legend" are no longer
with us.

Is the FCC "required" to keep the morse test JUST BECAUSE some
old morsemen are no longer among the living?

You PCTAs need (desperately?) to build Time Machines to go back
to the halcyon past and glory that was beeping. ["Come with us
now to the days of yesteryear..." - intro to the old "Lone Ranger"
show on radio]

Me, I'm busy trying to invent anti-gravity...but something's holding
me down...

In article , "KØHB"
writes:

"William" wrote

Unless you have an Extra Class operator who vows to do his best to
make machine copy impossible. Ever heard of such stupidity?

I've never heard of that, but I have heard of skilled operators who
make no effort to send machine perfect code, and who in fact take some
pride in sending Morse with some personality.

Ahem...Brian was referring to a once-regular in here named Dick
Carroll, W0EX.

There are a couple of reasons for this seemingly maverick behaviour.

Heah com de excuses...heah com de excuses! :-)

Reason #1: Before the days of "electronic precision" in keying, Morse
was a manual art. An operators fist was a second "signature", and many
operators cultivated a distinctive style. This was especially true
where more than one operator shared a single call sign. You could tell
who was on watch at KFS by the fist of the operator.

Not much NEED of that now, is there?

Even with the advent of electronic keyers, some of this old preference
exists, and I must admit I get pretty bored with the
machine-perfect-sterile-without-personality Morse we hear today. It
sounds like robots talking to robots. If you ever heard the melodic
fist of pioneers like W4KFC, you would not have asked the question.
grin.

GUFFAW!

Morse code radiotelegraphy STILL sounds like robot-to-robot
communications.

Absolutely NO human-sense clues as to the other operator other
than the monotonic "personality" of dot-dash "weighting." Can't
even tell the gender of the other operator...no voice tone, only the
need to Believe in the "honesty" of the operator that what they send
is "truth."

Sort of like "UR 599 OM!" Pbththththt.

Reason #2: Under "less than ideal" conditions, a little overweighting
with emphasis on the DAH seems to make copy a bit easier.

Your rationalization seems a bit overweight on the DUH.

Fantasy Island, amateur style.

Make certain amateur radio is safe from SEX...force all to learn morse
and qualify by test to exclude any trace of gender. Make certain
amateur radio is safe from humor...use "HI HI" for laughter by qualified
morse testing. Remove all honesty from signal strength-tone "reports."

[morse allows anyone to use another callsign without an immediate
recognition of the fraudulent ID...such as using a spouse's ham call]

Keep the "tradition" firm, fast, held in place by armor-protected
concrete & rebar footing, make all hams "qualify" to operate below
30 MHz by morse test. Just like the OLD, OLD days.

In article ,
(William) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
.com...
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 10/14/2004 5:34 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Jim has stated that the throughput of a rtty system may be limited by
the typing speed of the operator. The example he used is that the
rtty operator might only be able to type 10wpm, thus rendering the
rtty a 10wpm machine.

I responded that the throughput of a CW system might be limited by the
Morse Code operator only knowing the code at 10wpm.

I wanted to know how that was different from his example. So far no
response.

No response because I don't read most of what "William" writes here. I
only saw this because it was quoted by Steve.

Of course. Hi!

"Steve" who? :-)

Besides, why should I answer "William's" questions when he won't
answer mine? Also, I've already answered the above question in another
post.

I didn't see it because I don't read most of what "Jim" posts.

"Jim" who? Jimmie Who?

Even if the operator can type 120 WPM, if s/he can't be interrupted in
the
midst of the string and asked for a repeat, as a good QSK CW operator
can,
then
that error will exist until the end of the transmission and the error
resolved.

That's a side benefit.

Assuming both ops have QSK. And there's nothing inherently wrong with
asking for "all again after xxx." SOP if you know what I mean.

All mighty macho morsemen can do perfect copy. All the time.

They are "qualified" to do so. They have their ancient "degrees"
to prove it (suitable for framing, complete with engraved borders.

Here's the plain facts:

The speed and accuracy of *any* mode that requires a human operator is
highly dependent upon that operator's skill. Doesn't matter if it's
done with a key, keyboard or microphone. If you have 10 wpm Morse
operators, you have (at best) a 10 wpm system. If you have 10 wpm
teletypists, you have (at best) a 10 wpm system regardless of what the
maximum speed of the system is rated. Same for voice.

That's just common sense.

But you chose to imply that the CW op was somehow better than rtty for
throughput. And you got called on it.

We can "call" him on anything but he gots the "answers" which are
supposed to be "correct" and "without error" because he made them.

Hi hi.

The use of prerecorded storage can speed things up somewhat if, say, a
10 wpm teletypist is punching tape while receiving. But that takes the
systems out of real-time communications. One could prerecord Morse and
transmit it at high speed, as was done over 60 years ago, just as
well.

Unless you have an Extra Class operator who vows to do his best to
make machine copy impossible. Ever heard of such stupidity?

Tsk. We shouldn't make fun of W0s who may be SK.

[I think we did that while he was alive - metaphorically speaking -
in here...]

The basic fact is that Morse code is *not* the slowest mode available
to hams.

It is among the very slowest, all else being equal.

Tsk. From Jimmie Who's vast experience in ALL communications
modes, he might argue that facsimile is "slower" but that isn't really
message/communications transmission but imagery. However, if
"a picture is worth 10,000 words" according to that old saw, then
FAX most definitely has more words per minute than any super
morseman's capability (10,000 "words" taking 10 minutes to FAX
would be 1000 WPM equivalent rate).

The experimental LF amateur trials, not allowed in the USA ham
bands, have been making records for others using "ESSM"
(extremely slow speed morse) which needs a computer and
program to decode. Hardly comparable. :-)

I dunno what he would explain about SSTV but I'm sure that he
could get all pixel-lated about sending imagery via morse. :-)
And "justify" it because interference hit every OTHER mode.
Hi hi!

Assuming the interruption it to tell the transmitting station that
it's
ALL garbled, your 60-100WPM teletype just became zero.

Yup.

Ditto W0EX sent cw.

Tsk. Dick sent garble via computer-modem data in here.

Various forms of error detection and correction, checksums, ACK/NAK
and other methods can do a lot of that stuff automatically. At a cost
in speed, of course.

But that's not really the issue.

Never is. CW is better than everything else. That is the issue.

ABSOLUTE!

A bridge out in the middle of the Autobahn means everyone goes zero
until
the bridge is replaced regardless of what the thoroughfare will otherwise
allow. Same thing.

Exactly!

Ever heard of changing bands, or relaying?

He was too busy thumbing a ride on the Autobahn... :-)

Or driving a cruise ship bow-on to ice bergs in order to "survive."

Or:

The bridge is down to one lane in each direction, and the speed limit
is such that only 1/10 as many cars/hour get through as would normally
be able to use the bridge. The effective capacity of the road is then
reduced to 1/10 of normal (between the exits before and after the
blockage).

73 de Jim, N2EY

The only blockage are the eyes rolled back Morse Code elitists.

To quote a supervisor on a Texas road gang, "Whut we got here is
a failure to communicate!" [from a Paul Newman film "Hud"]

Jimmie must think the Tacoma Narrows bridge is still up and
swaying in Kitsap County, Washington. Aka, "Galloping
Gertie" that collapsed six decades ago. Spectacular failure
shown on "disaster" documentaries on TV. Of course it was
designed by PROFESSIONALS! :-)

Tsk. Oddly enough, the replacement Tacoma Narrows bridge
has been up and running traffic daily for five decades. Of course
that one was also designed and built by PROFESSIONALS! :-)

Jimmie Who is busy trying to build a "bridge over troubled waters."
Little does he know that the water dried up a long time ago, leaving
only a trickle ot morse water to be lapped up by elitist AMATEUR
morsemen.

Tsk. Everyone needs wading boots to walk on that "water."

Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 10/20/2004 8:23 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William)
Date: 10/19/2004 8:11 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"KØHB" wrote in message
nk.net...
--
My name is Hans and I improved this message.

"William" wrote

Yet Dick stated that his mission was to make his fist uncopyable to
no-code Technicians with a machine reader.


If Dick said that, it's probably too late to change his mind on the
matter.

73, de K0HB

That's a fact. I wish I had known him under different circumstances.

What a coincidence.

I wish I knew YOU under different circumstances.

I'd rather not know you at all.

I am sure you wouldn't. Kinda rough, all that trolling and story telling,
only to keep getting your nose rubbed in it.

It's gotta hurt.

Maybe if you were a bit more honest and forthcoming it wouldn't be so
painful...

Steve, K4YZ