In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(William) writes:

There's somewhat the same keyboard lock-out at maximum rate
in the Model 28s and later that are 100 WPM maximums. Few
touch typists can go that fast except in bursts.

That's incorrect, Leonard. Anyone who has spent more than a year
steadily poking tape on a 28 can reasonably be expected to type at or
near the machine's maximum capability.

It's a fact, visible to anyone around a real communications center,
that p-tape is what is used for continuous throughput.

Yep, paper or mylar (for tapes used frequently). Trouble is, someone
has to input that information to the tape without errors. Someone has
to manually assign Message Reference Numbers and (for those who use
them) Message Continuity Numbers. Someone has to look up the routers
for stations infrequently addressed. There's a lot more to this
"continuous throughput" than you've indicated.

Yes...the transmitting distributors do their thing all by themselves.
One racked-up tape will start pushing through as soon as the
other reader finishes...

Sunnuvagun! :-)

Tsk. All the morsemen "know" that they do near-perfect copy
every single time at high rates. :-)

All you mighty macho morsemen can do 100 WPM throughput
for hours and hours continuously... :-)


As with CW circuits, RTTY circuits are subject to receiving errors and
to transmitting errors. Multipath distortion or "echo" can leave an
RTTY circuit useless when the same distortion has little effect on a
morse circuit.

Wow, World's Greatest DXer spouting propagation effects!

Guess that's why all the other radio services abandoned RTTY
and took up morse on-off carrier keying, wasn't it? :-)

Oh, no, wait...it was the other way around!

Sunnuvagun!

Uh...Len? You're not doing much communicating via amateur radio, are
you?

Can't do that legally, World's Greatest DXer. Not on the ham bands.

I'm just as legal as anything on HF in other radio services. :-)

Does the fact that morse remains a popular mode, in wide use by radio
amateurs bother you?

No. Amateurs are the LAST vestige of morsemanship in radio.

If amateurs want to keep on recreating the past over and over again,
then I say "have fun, kiddies." Enjoy.

When you PCTA extra blowhards start spouting all the BS about
morsemanship is "necessary" to operate...other than the legal
requirement...on HF, then it's time to send a good old raspberry
to those stuffed-shirt, self-important, olde-tymers who don't have
much but morsemanship to be proud of...

All those amateur morseaholics aren't taking any test when they
are busy keying. What is at stake is whether or not a morse test
has any validity for any amateur radio license test. The FCC doesn't
think so, didn't think so several years ago.

But, big World's Greatest DXer, you aren't pleased with that answer,
are you? You will go right ahead with your "not licensed" schtick
and do personal attacks against any NCTA...because that is the
way you are...another representative of the PCTA olde-fahrts who
demand that all have to endure the test YOU had to do long ago.

Sunnuvagun!

Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 10/14/2004 8:14 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Sunnuvagun!

Sunnuvagun!

Sunnuvagun!



Plagarizing Putz!

Sunnuvagun!

Steve, K4YZ

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(William) writes:

There's somewhat the same keyboard lock-out at maximum rate
in the Model 28s and later that are 100 WPM maximums. Few
touch typists can go that fast except in bursts.

That's incorrect, Leonard. Anyone who has spent more than a year
steadily poking tape on a 28 can reasonably be expected to type at or
near the machine's maximum capability.

It's a fact, visible to anyone around a real communications center,
that p-tape is what is used for continuous throughput.

Yep, paper or mylar (for tapes used frequently). Trouble is, someone
has to input that information to the tape without errors. Someone has
to manually assign Message Reference Numbers and (for those who use
them) Message Continuity Numbers. Someone has to look up the routers
for stations infrequently addressed. There's a lot more to this
"continuous throughput" than you've indicated.

Yes...the transmitting distributors do their thing all by themselves.
One racked-up tape will start pushing through as soon as the
other reader finishes...

Sunnuvagun! :-)

Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't
address my comments at all.

Tsk. All the morsemen "know" that they do near-perfect copy
every single time at high rates. :-)

Tsk. I've not seen that written except by you. RTTY is only as perfect
as a the typist who inputs the material and then only if there are no
noise bursts to create additional errors.

All you mighty macho morsemen can do 100 WPM throughput
for hours and hours continuously... :-)

Really?

As with CW circuits, RTTY circuits are subject to receiving errors and
to transmitting errors. Multipath distortion or "echo" can leave an
RTTY circuit useless when the same distortion has little effect on a
morse circuit.

Wow, World's Greatest DXer spouting propagation effects!

Is he here too? Why, I was spouting propagation effects myself! I
happen to know quite a bit about it. Maybe the World's Greatest DXer
and myself can get together and give you a few pointers on the subject.

Guess that's why all the other radio services abandoned RTTY
and took up morse on-off carrier keying, wasn't it? :-)

Oh, no, wait...it was the other way around!

Sunnuvagun!

I'm not too concerned with what other radio services do. I'll continue
to enjoy the use of morse. I do hope that's all right with you.

Uh...Len? You're not doing much communicating via amateur radio, are
you?

Can't do that legally, World's Greatest DXer. Not on the ham bands.

Is he here? Funny, that's my view of you too.

I'm just as legal as anything on HF in other radio services. :-)

"Other" radio services, huh? I'm sure you're having a ball on lots of
them.

Does the fact that morse remains a popular mode, in wide use by radio
amateurs bother you?

No. Amateurs are the LAST vestige of morsemanship in radio.

You say "No" but continue with the "LAST vestige" stuff. It sounds as
if you're bothered by the use of morse by radio amateurs.

If amateurs want to keep on recreating the past over and over again,
then I say "have fun, kiddies." Enjoy.

We're not "kiddies", Len and you aren't one of us. I'm not recreating
anything. I'm using something which is there. Are you recreating when
you use SSB, AM or FM?

When you PCTA extra blowhards start spouting all the BS about
morsemanship is "necessary" to operate...other than the legal
requirement...on HF, then it's time to send a good old raspberry
to those stuffed-shirt, self-important, olde-tymers who don't have
much but morsemanship to be proud of...

Don't let it worry you, Leonard. You aren't involved in the slightest.
You are to amateur radio what a chainsaw is to a symphony.

All those amateur morseaholics aren't taking any test when they
are busy keying. What is at stake is whether or not a morse test
has any validity for any amateur radio license test. The FCC doesn't
think so, didn't think so several years ago.

Why should any of that concern you? You aren't in. You aren't getting
in. The FCC doesn't seem to have taken any action except to reduce the
HF morse testing speed to 5 wpm. Why do you think that is?

But, big World's Greatest DXer, you aren't pleased with that answer,
are you?

Is he here too? I'll bet he could give you some valueable insight as to
how to better use your venerable R-70.

You will go right ahead with your "not licensed" schtick...

Yes, I will. It happens to be true. You aren't in. You have no plans
to get in. You have no experience in amateur radio. You have no stake
in amateur radio.

and do personal attacks against any NCTA...because that is the
way you are

That's not quite correct. I'll be happy to take shots at you though.
It doesn't seem to matter if people take pokes at you or razz you or if
they are civil to you. You continue to insult and demean. You deserve
everything you get here, poor old piranha.

...another representative of the PCTA olde-fahrts who
demand that all have to endure the test YOU had to do long ago.

You can't possibly endure the test I had to take. The test I had to
take isn't being given any longer. You can't even take the same written
test.
You're an old fart, Len and you're on the periphery of amateur radio. I
suppose you'll stay there.

Dave K8MN

Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: Dave Heil
Date: 10/15/2004 12:14 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Guess that's why all the other radio services abandoned RTTY
and took up morse on-off carrier keying, wasn't it? :-)

Oh, no, wait...it was the other way around!

Sunnuvagun!

I'm not too concerned with what other radio services do. I'll continue
to enjoy the use of morse. I do hope that's all right with you.

In actuallity, the other radio services are abandoning RTTY in droves.

Too many mistakes. Too unreliable.

Of course the World's Greatest Professional Radio Engineer hasn't
addressed that.

I can only assume that is because the LAST time he had any significant
exposure to any message handling on HF was in 1950-something at A-something-A,
a rear area radio relay station at which he was not even an operator...just a
mechanic...so says HIS oft-repeated MOS.

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(William) writes:

There's somewhat the same keyboard lock-out at maximum rate
in the Model 28s and later that are 100 WPM maximums. Few
touch typists can go that fast except in bursts.

That's incorrect, Leonard. Anyone who has spent more than a year
steadily poking tape on a 28 can reasonably be expected to type at or
near the machine's maximum capability.

It's a fact, visible to anyone around a real communications center,
that p-tape is what is used for continuous throughput.

Yep, paper or mylar (for tapes used frequently). Trouble is, someone
has to input that information to the tape without errors. Someone has
to manually assign Message Reference Numbers and (for those who use
them) Message Continuity Numbers. Someone has to look up the routers
for stations infrequently addressed. There's a lot more to this
"continuous throughput" than you've indicated.

Yes...the transmitting distributors do their thing all by themselves.
One racked-up tape will start pushing through as soon as the
other reader finishes...

Sunnuvagun! :-)

Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't
address my comments at all.

Tsk. One is REQUIRED to "address your comments," your
royalness? :-)

Tsk. All the morsemen "know" that they do near-perfect copy
every single time at high rates. :-)

Tsk. I've not seen that written except by you. RTTY is only as perfect
as a the typist who inputs the material and then only if there are no
noise bursts to create additional errors.

Tsk, you don't "see" much... :-)

More tsk...you forget that a p-tape TTY message can be read,
scanned, checked, changed if needed by a new tape, checked
all over again...usually at a message center or central before
sent as RTTY. Or done "off line" at a ham station just like a PC
e-mail message. The obvious advantage is that the outgoing
message as well as the incoming reply can be stored easily
without resorting to a paper form.

Those "noise bursts" affect manual morse reception as well,
unless the sending rate is so slow that it occurs between dots.
Technical tsk: The noise bursts are primarily of amplitude. They
do have some wideband frequency content, but the common noise
experienced at home hobby ham stations is primarily impulse noise
with more amplitude (think AM) content that have less effect on
Frequency Shift Keying. (think FM)

RTTY can be resent easily and quickly without resorting to any
paper. At 100 WPM continuous rates that still goes faster than
common manual morse. Special character coding can include
FEC (Forward Error Correction) or ECC (Error Correction), the latter
able to automatically correct singular bit errors and to indicate
double bit errors.

The claim by many morsemen is that "CW gets through when
nothing else will..." which is a hoary old myth dating from about
the 1930s and morsemen bragging that they were better than the
voice communicators. The only conclusion on "noise burst" circuit
problems is that most of those morsemen were "filling in the blanks"
and not doing real copy. :-)

Despite all your negative criticism against non-morse communications
methods, all the other radio services engaged in communications
have dropped morse on-off keying modes. On-off keying of a carrier
just doesn't cut it in the communications world of now.


I'm not too concerned with what other radio services do. I'll continue
to enjoy the use of morse. I do hope that's all right with you.

Enjoy it all you want. I was never against any morse USE...only
against the TEST for same for radio operator licenses.

If you want to claim extraordinary or even ordinary prowess of
superhuman (or even ordinary superior human) ability, feel free to
brag up a storm complete with your usual windy rhetoric.

None of that arrogant thundering is any sort of case to retain the
old morse manual test for licensing for any newcomers.


"Other" radio services, huh? I'm sure you're having a ball on lots of
them.

I have. :-)


No. Amateurs are the LAST vestige of morsemanship in radio.

You say "No" but continue with the "LAST vestige" stuff. It sounds as
if you're bothered by the use of morse by radio amateurs.

Tsk. No. Only by the excessive self-righteous self-proclaimed
superiority (as a 1930s expert radio morseman) and expecting
all others to emulate your mighty and superior accomplishments.

What YOU had to do long ago to get your license just does not
apply to the radio world of now. The higher morse rate testing was
an artificiality of old, a left-over from the past when the only method
of radio communications was by on-off keying.


We're not "kiddies", Len and you aren't one of us. I'm not recreating
anything. I'm using something which is there.

Tsk. You are acting the usual arrogant bully when expecting all
to agree with your idea of what constitutes "fun" in ham radio.

All those old, tired, worn-out, dead cliches about "absolutely
needing to prove manual morse capability to work HF" is just a
heap of artificial BS left over from earlier times...repeated and
repeated and repeated by the ARRL for so long that the league
lost sight (and hearing) of what it originally meant.

If you and the other mighty morsemen want to preserve and protect
morsemanship through required manual morse testing, then you
had best petition the FCC for changing the ARS to the Archaic
Radiotelegraphy Society. That's what the HF part of U.S. ham
radio became decades ago. That's what the testing requlations
required. A name change would make the ARS more meaningful
to what it was.


Don't let it worry you, Leonard. You aren't involved in the slightest.
You are to amateur radio what a chainsaw is to a symphony.

Tsk, tsk. Mike Coslo had an innovative use for a chainsaw as
a shallow trench maker for radial wires. You didn't like that. :-)

I'm sure you look down your nose at all who don't agree what you
consider is vital to ham radio enjoyment...that's been demonstrated
in your on-going comments to all who have different interests in here.


Why should any of that concern you? You aren't in.

Don't have to be "in." :-)

The FCC regulates U.S. civil radio. The laws of the USA don't
require the FCC commissioners or staff to hold amateur radio
licenses in order to regulate U.S. amateur radio.

Despite your mighty brass-section trumpeting about "needing to
be 'in' in order to 'direct things' in ham radio," YOU are NOT a
radio regulator. YOU are nothing but a mighty wind section
demanding all go along with your ideas, conceptions, and general
wild hairs of what 'should be done' and 'who is allowed to regulate
it.' :-)

Not an orchestra by any means, just a bad brass band, out of
step with the times yet demanding that all keep the old things.

You aren't getting in.

Are you going to STOP me?!? Oh, my. Tsk.

The FCC doesn't seem to have taken any action except to reduce the
HF morse testing speed to 5 wpm. Why do you think that is?

They seem to be overwhelmed by the olde-fahrt olde-tymer
morsemen who are blindly believing in the morse religion and
have filled the ECFS' 18 petition commentary with same. :-)


Is he here too? I'll bet he could give you some valueable insight as to
how to better use your venerable R-70.

That general purpose receiver is still working as good as it did
when I bought it and when I tested it to its factory specifications
shortly thereafter. Icom has a good product there.

Tsk. Two NCTAs in here having the same Icom receiver (both still
working) seems to be a sore point with you. Poor baby. Go play
with your Orion, why don't you? That ready-made will bring you up
to the "state of the art!" :-)

You will go right ahead with your "not licensed" schtick...

Yes, I will. It happens to be true.

No, it is NOT "true." You don't regulate U.S. amateur radio. All
you are is an olde-tymer snarling about all having to do as you did
before they are allowed to talk about it, discuss it, or anything
else.

Tsk. Elementary civics teaches us that U.S. federal laws are
open for dicsussion by all citizens according to the First Amendment
of the U.S. Constitution. You seek to BAR any citizen from talking
about regulations of radio hobby licensing. You aren't any member of
any bar association, so don't try to throw your weight around where
you are weightless.

You aren't in. You have no plans to get in.

Tsk. I don't tell all in here. :-)

Neither am I required to tell YOU on YOUR demand about anything.

Heh heh heh. Ever the demanding arrogance of someone who likes
to push folks around.

First Amendment. Refresh your memory with what it means.

Feel free to review Title 47 C.F.R. Part 97 and show us all where
ONLY already-licensed radio amateurs can talk or discuss the
amateur radio regulations. Show your work.

You have no experience in amateur radio.

I have MUCH experience in RADIO. It's true that I have no amateur
radio license. It's also true that I have a commercial radio operator
license and had several other radio licenses.

See Part 97 again and tell us all the sub-part that allows ONLY
already-licensed radio amateurs to talk about amateur radio.

You have no stake in amateur radio.

Tsk. There you go again DEMANDING a "stake!"

Be advised that von Helsing may give YOU a stake.

Wooden. [I would suggest wormwood as fitting...]


It doesn't seem to matter if people take pokes at you or razz you or if
they are civil to you.

Heh heh heh heh. I'm a long-time veteran of computer-modem
communications with a survivor's thick virtual skin. :-)

But, very very FEW PCTAs in here have been civil to me. Begin
with Jim Kehler, continue through assorted types who couldn't
take it in here and left, on through a couple of now-deceased
PCTAs who weren't able to continue for obvious reasons.

ALL of them insisted and insisted and insisted that the morse
code test "must" stay...as "tradition," as a number of invalid
reasons, but (unvoiced) was the real reason, that of making all
newcomers jump through the same hoops they had to jump
through.

You continue to insult and demean.

Tsk. I return fire with fire. :-)

You don't like it because you imperiously demand that all the
"firing" be yours against others. Tsk.

You deserve everything you get here, poor old piranha.

Tsk. Someone wrote that all were "civil TO me?" :-)

Hello? Can you understand 'hypocrisy?' :-)


You can't possibly endure the test I had to take.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!

The test I had to take isn't being given any longer.

Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehheeehhheeee e.

You can't even take the same written test.

No need, is there? Tsk, tsk.

You're an old fart, Len and you're on the periphery of amateur radio.

I did have some bean soup a couple days ago. Black bean.
Very good with a salad and a sandwich. No flatulence, though.

I come in here and sense a great deal of flatulence from you
olde-tymers boasting that NOBODY "could endure the kind of
test they endured."

Funny as hell, this newsgroup. :-)

I suppose you'll stay there.

Maybe I will. Maybe I won't.

Either way, YOU have NO CONTROL over it!

Sunnuvagun! :-)

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(William) writes:

There's somewhat the same keyboard lock-out at maximum rate
in the Model 28s and later that are 100 WPM maximums. Few
touch typists can go that fast except in bursts.

That's incorrect, Leonard. Anyone who has spent more than a year
steadily poking tape on a 28 can reasonably be expected to type at or
near the machine's maximum capability.

It's a fact, visible to anyone around a real communications center,
that p-tape is what is used for continuous throughput.

Yep, paper or mylar (for tapes used frequently). Trouble is, someone
has to input that information to the tape without errors. Someone has
to manually assign Message Reference Numbers and (for those who use
them) Message Continuity Numbers. Someone has to look up the routers
for stations infrequently addressed. There's a lot more to this
"continuous throughput" than you've indicated.

Yes...the transmitting distributors do their thing all by themselves.
One racked-up tape will start pushing through as soon as the
other reader finishes...

Sunnuvagun! :-)

Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't
address my comments at all.

Tsk. One is REQUIRED to "address your comments," your
royalness? :-)

Not at all, your Foghorn Lenhorn-ness. You can type a paragraph about
regional variations in Swahili dialect in response to someone's input on
the possibilities for the introduction of errors in RTTY messages. It's
just that doing so will make you look rather simple-minded.

Tsk. All the morsemen "know" that they do near-perfect copy
every single time at high rates. :-)

Tsk. I've not seen that written except by you. RTTY is only as perfect
as a the typist who inputs the material and then only if there are no
noise bursts to create additional errors.

Tsk, you don't "see" much... :-)

Well, I certainly don't see things which aren't there. :-) :-)

More tsk...you forget that a p-tape TTY message can be read,
scanned, checked, changed if needed by a new tape, checked
all over again...usually at a message center or central before
sent as RTTY.

No, I haven't forgotten any of those things. My experience in such
things is much more recent than your own and it is therefore fresher in
my memory. All of those things introduce a time lag.

Or done "off line" at a ham station just like a PC
e-mail message. The obvious advantage is that the outgoing
message as well as the incoming reply can be stored easily
without resorting to a paper form.

Nifty. Those things can be done with help from a PC while using morse.

Those "noise bursts" affect manual morse reception as well,
unless the sending rate is so slow that it occurs between dots.

They surely do "affect" morse reception, but you were touting the
superiority of RTTY.

Technical tsk: The noise bursts are primarily of amplitude. They
do have some wideband frequency content, but the common noise
experienced at home hobby ham stations is primarily impulse noise
with more amplitude (think AM) content that have less effect on
Frequency Shift Keying. (think FM)

Those "home hobby ham stations" use RTTY too, Leonard. I'm quite
familiar with the use of FSK. It is still effected by noise and
multipath distortion.

RTTY can be resent easily and quickly without resorting to any
paper.

So, if I've got this right, we save on paper but spend on equipment.
There's a dilemma. If my morse stuff is in memory on a keyer or PC, I
can resend it quickly and easily without resorting to any paper.

At 100 WPM continuous rates that still goes faster than
common manual morse. Special character coding can include
FEC (Forward Error Correction) or ECC (Error Correction), the latter
able to automatically correct singular bit errors and to indicate
double bit errors.

The fact is that while FEC can be of some help, it is still subject to
errors. It isn't a robust system like packet or Sitor/Amtor.

The claim by many morsemen is that "CW gets through when
nothing else will..." which is a hoary old myth dating from about
the 1930s and morsemen bragging that they were better than the
voice communicators. The only conclusion on "noise burst" circuit
problems is that most of those morsemen were "filling in the blanks"
and not doing real copy. :-)

....or so you've been told. :-)

Despite all your negative criticism against non-morse communications
methods, all the other radio services engaged in communications
have dropped morse on-off keying modes. On-off keying of a carrier
just doesn't cut it in the communications world of now.

I don't have much in the way of negative criticism for non-morse
communication methods, Leonard. Fact is, I use most of 'em. Fact is,
on/off keying cuts it quite well in the communications world of now.
That hasn't changed just because you aren't proficient in its use.


I'm not too concerned with what other radio services do. I'll continue
to enjoy the use of morse. I do hope that's all right with you.

Enjoy it all you want. I was never against any morse USE...only
against the TEST for same for radio operator licenses.

Despite the statement above, your diatribe doesn't read like someone who
supports use of morse code.

If you want to claim extraordinary or even ordinary prowess of
superhuman (or even ordinary superior human) ability, feel free to
brag up a storm complete with your usual windy rhetoric.

Did you confuse me with you there for a moment?

None of that arrogant thundering is any sort of case to retain the
old morse manual test for licensing for any newcomers.

"Arrogant thundering" = any disagreement with your views.

"Other" radio services, huh? I'm sure you're having a ball on lots of
them.

I have. :-)

Past tense?


No. Amateurs are the LAST vestige of morsemanship in radio.

You say "No" but continue with the "LAST vestige" stuff. It sounds as
if you're bothered by the use of morse by radio amateurs.

Tsk. No. Only by the excessive self-righteous self-proclaimed
superiority (as a 1930s expert radio morseman) and expecting
all others to emulate your mighty and superior accomplishments.

That's a load of manure, Leonard. That isn't the "only" at all. It is
any radio amateur who uses morse and supports continuation of morse
testing. I, for one, couldn't care less if you decide to "emulate" me
or not.

What YOU had to do long ago to get your license just does not
apply to the radio world of now.

What YOU write here isn't the case simply because YOU write it. Radio
amateurs worldwide are using morse code daily for real communications.
That you don't approve doesn't change that.

The higher morse rate testing was
an artificiality of old, a left-over from the past when the only method
of radio communications was by on-off keying.

There isn't any "higher morse rate" testing.

We're not "kiddies", Len and you aren't one of us. I'm not recreating
anything. I'm using something which is there.

Tsk. You are acting the usual arrogant bully when expecting all
to agree with your idea of what constitutes "fun" in ham radio.

You aren't even involved. It would really take an arrogant bully to
expect radio amateurs to swallow your view of how amateur radio should
be regulated. What do you know of the "fun" of amateur radio?

All those old, tired, worn-out, dead cliches about "absolutely
needing to prove manual morse capability to work HF" is just a
heap of artificial BS left over from earlier times...repeated and
repeated and repeated by the ARRL for so long that the league
lost sight (and hearing) of what it originally meant.

Well, there you have it--the opinion of one never involved in amateur
radio; one whom it would seem finds that five word per minute exam an
insurmountable obstacle to his entry into amateur radio.

If you and the other mighty morsemen want to preserve and protect
morsemanship through required manual morse testing, then you
had best petition the FCC for changing the ARS to the Archaic
Radiotelegraphy Society.

Is that a DEMAND, Leonard? It's your idea. You petition for the name
change for the service in which you have no part.

That's what the HF part of U.S. ham
radio became decades ago.

So you believe that all that goes on in HF amateur radio is the use of
morse? You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on.

That's what the testing requlations
required. A name change would make the ARS more meaningful
to what it was.

Petition your government for redress of your numerous grievances.

Don't let it worry you, Leonard. You aren't involved in the slightest.
You are to amateur radio what a chainsaw is to a symphony.

Tsk, tsk. Mike Coslo had an innovative use for a chainsaw as
a shallow trench maker for radial wires. You didn't like that. :-)

I didn't like it? I recall suggesting something easier. I could have
saved him some money if he was bent on sawing slits in his yard. A
circular saw requires only a blade change to a carbide blade. It won't
even care if it hits a rock what that blade.

I'm sure you look down your nose at all who don't agree what you
consider is vital to ham radio enjoyment...that's been demonstrated
in your on-going comments to all who have different interests in here.

Different interests? What are your "interests" in amateur radio, Len?
What do YOU consider "vital" to ham radio enjoyment?

Why should any of that concern you? You aren't in.

Don't have to be "in." :-)

You have to be in if you:

1. want to partake in those things "vital to ham radio enjoyment".

2. want to be seen as credible.

The FCC regulates U.S. civil radio.

You aren't the FCC.

The laws of the USA don't
require the FCC commissioners or staff to hold amateur radio
licenses in order to regulate U.S. amateur radio.

I'd have thought you'd have picked up on this one by now. Those people
are paid to regulate amateur radio. They are PROFESSIONALS.

Despite your mighty brass-section trumpeting about "needing to
be 'in' in order to 'direct things' in ham radio," YOU are NOT a
radio regulator.

....and have never claimed to be a regulator.

YOU are nothing but a mighty wind section
demanding all go along with your ideas, conceptions, and general
wild hairs of what 'should be done' and 'who is allowed to regulate
it.' :-)

That's be another incorrect response. I'm a participant. Participants
are more important than regulators. With no participants, there'd be
nothing to regulate.

Not an orchestra by any means, just a bad brass band, out of
step with the times yet demanding that all keep the old things.

You're an old thing and I'm not demanding to keep you.

You aren't getting in.

Are you going to STOP me?!? Oh, my. Tsk.

Why, no. You do that. Consider yourself stopped by inertia.

The FCC doesn't seem to have taken any action except to reduce the
HF morse testing speed to 5 wpm. Why do you think that is?

They seem to be overwhelmed by the olde-fahrt olde-tymer
morsemen who are blindly believing in the morse religion and
have filled the ECFS' 18 petition commentary with same. :-)

Sure, Len. When will the scales fall from their eyes? :-)

Is he here too? I'll bet he could give you some valueable insight as to
how to better use your venerable R-70.

That general purpose receiver is still working as good as it did
when I bought it and when I tested it to its factory specifications
shortly thereafter. Icom has a good product there.

I'm sure it works as well as designed. Did you read up on phase noise
yet?

Tsk. Two NCTAs in here having the same Icom receiver (both still
working) seems to be a sore point with you. Poor baby.

If you own an R-70 and are happy with it, bully for you. It is fine for
your sort of casual listening.

Go play
with your Orion, why don't you? That ready-made will bring you up
to the "state of the art!" :-)

It surely does, Leonard. Its receiver beats the specs on the $11,000
Icom IC-7800. I'm sure that my tired old Orion couldn't begin to
compete with the likes of an R-70. Now THAT'S state of the art!

You will go right ahead with your "not licensed" schtick...

Yes, I will. It happens to be true.

No, it is NOT "true."

Yes, it is an undeniable truth that you have no amateur radio license.

You don't regulate U.S. amateur radio.

That doesn't give you an amateur radio license.

All
you are is an olde-tymer snarling about all having to do as you did
before they are allowed to talk about it, discuss it, or anything
else.

"All" can't do that. You have no license but you've talked, discussed,
demeaned, insulted and belittled.

Tsk. Elementary civics teaches us that U.S. federal laws are
open for dicsussion by all citizens according to the First Amendment
of the U.S. Constitution. You seek to BAR any citizen from talking
about regulations of radio hobby licensing. You aren't any member of
any bar association, so don't try to throw your weight around where
you are weightless.

It has been pointed out on numerous occasions that no one has prevented
you from spilling your guts. But you just can't force anyone to take
your stuff seriously.

You aren't in. You have no plans to get in.

Tsk. I don't tell all in here. :-)

We can only go by what you've told us. If you do have plans to get in,
then you've lied. It doesn't matter. As the President responded to
John Kerry: "A litany of complaints is not a plan".

Neither am I required to tell YOU on YOUR demand about anything.

Excuse me? Which demand was that?

Heh heh heh. Ever the demanding arrogance of someone who likes
to push folks around.

You attempt to push others around quite frequently. It's tough being
arrogant about amateur radio when you aren't actually a licensed ham
though.

First Amendment. Refresh your memory with what it means.

It says that my right to free speech is equal to your own. It makes no
requirement for me to accept your views or to refrain from giving you
the raspberries.

Feel free to review Title 47 C.F.R. Part 97 and show us all where
ONLY already-licensed radio amateurs can talk or discuss the
amateur radio regulations. Show your work.

Is that a DEMAND?

You have no experience in amateur radio.

I have MUCH experience in RADIO.

You misread. I wrote that you have no experience in *amateur* radio.

It's true that I have no amateur
radio license.

It certainly is.

It's also true that I have a commercial radio operator
license and had several other radio licenses.

Irrelevant.

See Part 97 again and tell us all the sub-part that allows ONLY
already-licensed radio amateurs to talk about amateur radio.

You've "talked". I find you incredibly incredible.

You have no stake in amateur radio.

Tsk. There you go again DEMANDING a "stake!"

I didn't see a demand, Leonard. Do you see a demand in my six word
statement?

Be advised that von Helsing may give YOU a stake.

Wooden. [I would suggest wormwood as fitting...]

I'll take it. If he has a few more, I can use 'em during Field Day.

It doesn't seem to matter if people take pokes at you or razz you or if
they are civil to you.

Heh heh heh heh. I'm a long-time veteran of computer-modem
communications with a survivor's thick virtual skin. :-)

Virtual skin? Is that like those "message knuckles" you wrote about
some time back?

But, very very FEW PCTAs in here have been civil to me.

Gee...I wonder why that would be.

Begin
with Jim Kehler, continue through assorted types who couldn't
take it in here and left, on through a couple of now-deceased
PCTAs who weren't able to continue for obvious reasons.

Well, you seem to have it on points over those who tired of your
nonsense and left, and over those whose respiration stopped. I'm
betting that I can outlast you.

ALL of them insisted and insisted and insisted that the morse
code test "must" stay...as "tradition," as a number of invalid
reasons, but (unvoiced) was the real reason, that of making all
newcomers jump through the same hoops they had to jump
through.

You probably lose some folks as soon as you start your "jump through the
same hoops" schpiel. You aren't yet a newcomer and you'll not be able
to jump through my hoops. They no longer exist.

You continue to insult and demean.

Tsk. I return fire with fire. :-)

Naw, fess up. You more often fire and wait for the return. Say, didn't
you claim that you didn't know much about this battle stuff?

You don't like it because you imperiously demand that all the
"firing" be yours against others. Tsk.

I'm sure that it seems that way to a guy with an obvious inferiority
complex; a guy who sees demands in ordinary statements; a guy who views
the comments of those who don't agree with him as "arrogant",
"bullying", "imperious".

You deserve everything you get here, poor old piranha.

Tsk. Someone wrote that all were "civil TO me?" :-)

Who was that?

Hello? Can you understand 'hypocrisy?' :-)

Yes, I've been reading your stuff for years.

You can't possibly endure the test I had to take.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!

Did you find that funny or did the Metamucil kick in?

The test I had to take isn't being given any longer.

Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehheeehhheeee e.

You can't even take the same written test.

No need, is there? Tsk, tsk.

Need matters not. You brayed about insistence that all must do as I
have done. Fact is, it can't be done. Tsk, tsk. Poor baby.

You're an old fart, Len and you're on the periphery of amateur radio.

I did have some bean soup a couple days ago. Black bean.
Very good with a salad and a sandwich. No flatulence, though.

You underestimate yourself.

I come in here and sense a great deal of flatulence from you
olde-tymers boasting that NOBODY "could endure the kind of
test they endured."

That wasn't a boast, Leonard. Nobody wrote "endure". You made a false
statement. Now you can eat your own words with your bean soup.

Funny as hell, this newsgroup. :-)

It just seems that way if you don't know what's going on.

I suppose you'll stay there.

Maybe I will. Maybe I won't.

Did you hear that noise? That was me giving a rat's patoot.

Either way, YOU have NO CONTROL over it!

Sure I do, Len. Watch this:

Leonard Anderson, you'll stay out of amateur radio.

Now, watch it come to pass.

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't
address my comments at all.

Tsk. One is REQUIRED to "address your comments," your
royalness? :-)

Not at all, your Foghorn Lenhorn-ness. You can type a paragraph about
regional variations in Swahili dialect in response to someone's input on
the possibilities for the introduction of errors in RTTY messages. It's
just that doing so will make you look rather simple-minded.

Tsk. Try to stay focussed. I wasn't "introducing Swahili dialect"
into anything. :-)

Can a morse radiotelegraph circuit introduce error or is it supposedly
free from error of any kind?

Answer that yes and you yourself are very simple-minded. Tsk.


Well, I certainly don't see things which aren't there. :-) :-)

Tsk. You are seeing things not there continually.

I made no remark about "introducing Swahili dialects." You did.


No, I haven't forgotten any of those things. My experience in such
things is much more recent than your own and it is therefore fresher in
my memory. All of those things introduce a time lag.

Tsk. Are you saying that TTY "introduces a time lag" now?

Are you also saying manual morse is instantaneous?

More tsk. You should be out educating all the rest of the
radio services on the supposed efficacy of morse code and
manual on-off carrier keying.

All the rest of those radio services that once used morse have
dropped it for communications purposes.

Then there are a number of radio services which never bothered
with any morse code when they began.

But, you will then "argue" that "this is amateur radio" as if it was
a haven, shrine, or religious temple for morse code and that all
amateurs MUST test for it...won't you? :-)


They surely do "affect" morse reception, but you were touting the
superiority of RTTY.

Incorrect. I was simply pointing out that morse code telegraphy
is the SLOWEST of all modes available to U.S. radio amateurs.

But, you cannot keep on the subject and must always attack
the persons of those who disagree with you. Tsk.


Those "home hobby ham stations" use RTTY too, Leonard.

You don't, do you? :-)

I'm quite
familiar with the use of FSK. It is still effected by noise and
multipath distortion.

...and on-off keyed carriers are NOT so affected? :-)

Of course they are. You are too simple-minded to admit to that.


So, if I've got this right, we save on paper but spend on equipment.
There's a dilemma. If my morse stuff is in memory on a keyer or PC, I
can resend it quickly and easily without resorting to any paper.

Tsk. "Spend on equipment?" What are you communicating with
on this newsgroup? Morse code into your telephone line? :-)

Tsk. So simple-minded you walked into that very visible trap
like a blind man trying to bluff.


The fact is that while FEC can be of some help, it is still subject to
errors. It isn't a robust system like packet or Sitor/Amtor.

...and, to you, of course, manual morse code is without error. :-)

Lacking a few received characters in morse? Why, just fill in the
blanks. Who will know? :-)


I don't have much in the way of negative criticism for non-morse
communication methods, Leonard. Fact is, I use most of 'em.

Of course you do...oh, yes, everything from facsimile to slow-
scan TV. :-)

Fact is,
on/off keying cuts it quite well in the communications world of now.

By whom? Third- and fourth-world nations who don't have any
capital monies to invest? :-)

Face the facts. The rest of the radio world does NOT use morse
code for communications.

That hasn't changed just because you aren't proficient in its use.

TRY to stay focussed on the subject instead of (once more)
launching into personalities.

TRY to understand that the rest of the radio communications
world does NOT use morse code for communications.

All you can do is to be very trying...


Despite the statement above, your diatribe doesn't read like someone who
supports use of morse code.

Tsk. You ARE seeing things that aren't there...


Did you confuse me with you there for a moment?

Never happen. I know me. I know you. You do NOT know me.

"Arrogant thundering" = any disagreement with your views.

You can't stay focussed on the subject. All you can do is act
the thunder mug on anything I post. :-)


Past tense?

I'm using the Internet to send these messages. Whether that uses
radio or other means is not an issue. Except by your misdirection
and seeing things that aren't there.


That's a load of manure, Leonard. That isn't the "only" at all. It is
any radio amateur who uses morse and supports continuation of morse
testing. I, for one, couldn't care less if you decide to "emulate" me
or not.

Irrelevant.

NO one cares to "emulate" you. :-)


What YOU write here isn't the case simply because YOU write it. Radio
amateurs worldwide are using morse code daily for real communications.
That you don't approve doesn't change that.

Again, irrelevant.

At issue is the morse code TEST, not whether or not "Dave" or his ilk
"use morse."

Note that USE has no real relation to the MORSE TEST.

Or do you spend all your amateur radio time "taking tests?" :-)


There isn't any "higher morse rate" testing.

Isn't that awful...hi hi.


You aren't even involved.

Tsk...with role models like the archtypical PCTA extra, who would
want to be "involved" in amateur radio? :-)

It would really take an arrogant bully to
expect radio amateurs to swallow your view of how amateur radio should
be regulated.

Tsk. I feel that the USA should have the FCC regulate amateur radio,
all according to the Communications Act of 1934 plus the Congressional
law of 1996.

Who do you feel should "regulate" U.S. amateur radio?

A bunch of arrogant bullies trying to make newcomers swallow their
bilge about doing as they had to do?

What do you know of the "fun" of amateur radio?

Tsk. What do you know of "fun" in ANYTHING? :-)

Well, there you have it--the opinion of one never involved in amateur
radio; one whom it would seem finds that five word per minute exam an
insurmountable obstacle to his entry into amateur radio.

Tsk. Still seeing things that aren't there.

Still tossing out personal pejoratives instead of discussing the subjects.

THAT is the "fun" that appears in this amateur radio newsgroup. :-)


So you believe that all that goes on in HF amateur radio is the use of
morse? You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on.

Tsk. You don't have any idea of how to discuss things civilly.


Petition your government for redress of your numerous grievances.

I have. :-)

You don't like that. TS for you. :-)


Different interests? What are your "interests" in amateur radio, Len?
What do YOU consider "vital" to ham radio enjoyment?

Freedom from the oppression of olde-tyme hammes insistent on
ruling over all others would be a good start... :-)

Oh, tsk. That would eliminate you, wouldn't it? Can't have that.

You have to stay here and effect ethnic cleansing of U.S. amateur
radio. All must think and act in the "officially approved" manner. :-)

Which has a strange similarity to your own interests, narrow as
those might be...


You have to be in if you:

1. want to partake in those things "vital to ham radio enjoyment".

This was NOT a discussion about "partaking" in anything.

Then, again, this isn't a discussion at all...just "Dave" trying to
push others around. Again.

2. want to be seen as credible.

Lets "Dave" out...he is INcredible. :-)

The FCC regulates U.S. civil radio.

You aren't the FCC.

NEITHER ARE YOU. :-)


I'd have thought you'd have picked up on this one by now. Those people
are paid to regulate amateur radio. They are PROFESSIONALS.

YOU are not a professional regulator...just an amateur one.

YOU may be admitted to A bar, but never a bar association.


That's be another incorrect response. I'm a participant.

You are a precipitate. The dried leftovers following evaporation.

Participants are more important than regulators.

Tell that to Congress. Have them change the Communications Act
of 1934. :-)

With no participants, there'd be nothing to regulate.

Keep at it with your warmth and charm in newsgroups and that will
be a foregone conclusion. :-)


You're an old thing and I'm not demanding to keep you.

Tsk. Again with the personal pejoratives. :-)

So...you are "young?" :-)


Are you going to STOP me?!? Oh, my. Tsk.

Why, no. You do that. Consider yourself stopped by inertia.

Tsk. You, repeat YOU, keep trying to stop me.

Your technique (word used instead of other nasty ones) does NOT
work!

Sunnuvagun!


It has been pointed out on numerous occasions that no one has prevented
you from spilling your guts.

Feel free to do your own seppuku. Nobody is stopping you... :-)

But you just can't force anyone to take
your stuff seriously.

You aren't "anyone." You are the arrogant bully of the newsgroup,
even better than the gunnery nurse. :-)

Wouldn't dream of trying to make YOU seriously "take" anything.

That's what you try to do to others. :-)


You attempt to push others around quite frequently.

Tsk. You gods of radio seem to think you are inviolate. Nobody is
supposed to say ANYTHING nasty to you dieties. :-)

It's tough being
arrogant about amateur radio when you aren't actually a licensed ham
though.

It's much much more arrogant when you ARE a licensed ham (either
FCC or FDA) and you keep on trying to push folks around, strip
citizens of their Rights such as the First Amendment. Tsk.

First Amendment. Refresh your memory with what it means.

It says that my right to free speech is equal to your own.

Tsk. It does NOT say your right is in any way stronger than mine.

Yet, throughout in here, that's what you keep on claiming.

It makes no
requirement for me to accept your views or to refrain from giving you
the raspberries.

YOU would NOT come even close to accepting a contrary idea
to what you hold... :-)


You misread. I wrote that you have no experience in *amateur* radio.

According to "Dave," one can't have ANY "interest in radio" without
getting an amateur radio license! :-)

Wasn't any qualifier to the word "radio" when "Dave" wrote it. :-)


Heh heh heh heh. I'm a long-time veteran of computer-modem
communications with a survivor's thick virtual skin. :-)

Virtual skin? Is that like those "message knuckles" you wrote about
some time back?

LIke I've seen lots of computer-modem bullies in the last 20 years.
Most of those are gone. I'm still here... :-)


Well, you seem to have it on points over those who tired of your
nonsense and left, and over those whose respiration stopped. I'm
betting that I can outlast you.

Anything is possible... :-)

You are a god of radio. One of the Four Morsemen of this
Apocalypse.


You probably lose some folks as soon as you start your "jump through the
same hoops" schpiel.

Poor baby. Still can't get used to what others say of the morse
test, can you? :-)

You aren't yet a newcomer and you'll not be able
to jump through my hoops. They no longer exist.

Incorrect.

But, it is impossible to get you to admit to an error.

You are a god of radio and therefore inviolate.


I'm sure that it seems that way to a guy with an obvious inferiority
complex; a guy who sees demands in ordinary statements; a guy who views
the comments of those who don't agree with him as "arrogant",
"bullying", "imperious".

Now, now, don't get upset...the mirror you are looking into when
writing that has YOUR reflection! :-)


Need matters not. You brayed about insistence that all must do as I
have done. Fact is, it can't be done. Tsk, tsk. Poor baby.

Sadness is. When "Dave" was made, the mould was broken...

[or was that "mold?" Sometimes its hard to tell the difference...]


Now, watch it come to pass.

Tsk. "Dave" keeps on with the personal pejoratives and gets all
flustered when they aren't received well.

If you threw passes properly then receivers might catch them.
Remember which way your goalposts are on the field...you keep
forgetting and that's not good. You should practice punting.
Your arm must be so sore from throwing all that stuff you throw....

Try to play with your Orion some more. Seriously, not trivially.
Can't have a god of radio use equipment trivially. :-)

If you go away from your radio toys into the newsgroup, then lots
of replies to you will "just write themselves!" :-)

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't
address my comments at all.

Tsk. One is REQUIRED to "address your comments," your
royalness? :-)

Not at all, your Foghorn Lenhorn-ness. You can type a paragraph about
regional variations in Swahili dialect in response to someone's input on
the possibilities for the introduction of errors in RTTY messages. It's
just that doing so will make you look rather simple-minded.

Tsk. Try to stay focussed. I wasn't "introducing Swahili dialect"
into anything. :-)

That's right, you introduced equally unrelated. Then again, you don't
have to address my comments ;-)

Can a morse radiotelegraph circuit introduce error or is it supposedly
free from error of any kind?

It isn't necessarily free of error, Len. Then again, I've not claimed
that it is.

Well, I certainly don't see things which aren't there. :-) :-)

Tsk. You are seeing things not there continually.

Which things are not there continually?

I made no remark about "introducing Swahili dialects." You did.

Your response was equally irrelevant.

No, I haven't forgotten any of those things. My experience in such
things is much more recent than your own and it is therefore fresher in
my memory. All of those things introduce a time lag.

Tsk. Are you saying that TTY "introduces a time lag" now?

We'll never know. You snip the relevant portions.

Are you also saying manual morse is instantaneous?

I don't think so.

More tsk. You should be out educating all the rest of the
radio services on the supposed efficacy of morse code and
manual on-off carrier keying.

I have no interest in educating the rest of the radio world in anything.
You may, if you like.

All the rest of those radio services that once used morse have
dropped it for communications purposes.

So? What is that supposed to mean for the service which uses it
commonly and regularly?

Then there are a number of radio services which never bothered
with any morse code when they began.

Did you have a point?

But, you will then "argue" that "this is amateur radio" as if it was
a haven, shrine, or religious temple for morse code and that all
amateurs MUST test for it...won't you? :-)

As pointed out quite a few times to you, thousands of radio amateurs use
morse daily despite what the "rest of the radio world" decides to do.

They surely do "affect" morse reception, but you were touting the
superiority of RTTY.

Incorrect. I was simply pointing out that morse code telegraphy
is the SLOWEST of all modes available to U.S. radio amateurs.

Incorrect. That isn't what you were doing. Since you don't use morse
and aren't a radio amateur, why do you worry about morse throughput?

But, you cannot keep on the subject and must always attack
the persons of those who disagree with you. Tsk.

You can't possibly realize how silly the above statement makes you look.

Those "home hobby ham stations" use RTTY too, Leonard.

You don't, do you? :-)

Why, yes, I do.

I'm quite
familiar with the use of FSK. It is still effected by noise and
multipath distortion.

...and on-off keyed carriers are NOT so affected? :-)

By noise? Sure. By multipath distortion? Not much at all.

So, if I've got this right, we save on paper but spend on equipment.
There's a dilemma. If my morse stuff is in memory on a keyer or PC, I
can resend it quickly and easily without resorting to any paper.

Tsk. "Spend on equipment?" What are you communicating with
on this newsgroup? Morse code into your telephone line? :-)

Tsk. So simple-minded you walked into that very visible trap
like a blind man trying to bluff.

Some "very visible trap"! I regularly use morse from my car. I don't
have a PC in my car.

The fact is that while FEC can be of some help, it is still subject to
errors. It isn't a robust system like packet or Sitor/Amtor.

...and, to you, of course, manual morse code is without error. :-)

I've not stated such.

Lacking a few received characters in morse? Why, just fill in the
blanks. Who will know? :-)

One thing for su You won't.

I don't have much in the way of negative criticism for non-morse
communication methods, Leonard. Fact is, I use most of 'em.

Of course you do...oh, yes, everything from facsimile to slow-
scan TV. :-)

That's right.

Fact is,
on/off keying cuts it quite well in the communications world of now.

By whom? Third- and fourth-world nations who don't have any
capital monies to invest? :-)

By radio amateurs across the globe, those with CASH and those without.

Face the facts. The rest of the radio world does NOT use morse
code for communications.

Why this concern about what the "rest of the radio world" is doing?
Hams aren't required to follow other services.

That hasn't changed just because you aren't proficient in its use.

TRY to stay focussed on the subject instead of (once more)
launching into personalities.

Tell you what: You settle on a subject and perhaps we can do that...if
you can't keep from launching into personalities.

TRY to understand that the rest of the radio communications
world does NOT use morse code for communications.

Try coming up with a valid explanation as to why I should concern myself
with that.

Despite the statement above, your diatribe doesn't read like someone who
supports use of morse code.

Tsk. You ARE seeing things that aren't there...

Incorrect. You've snipped them so they aren't there.

Did you confuse me with you there for a moment?

Never happen. I know me. I know you. You do NOT know me.

Interesting that you believe you can know me without my knowing you.
I've read your stuff for nearly a decade.


Past tense?

I'm using the Internet to send these messages. Whether that uses
radio or other means is not an issue.

We'll never know. Your snippage removes any context.

Except by your misdirection
and seeing things that aren't there.

I can't see them. You snipped 'em.

That's a load of manure, Leonard. That isn't the "only" at all. It is
any radio amateur who uses morse and supports continuation of morse
testing. I, for one, couldn't care less if you decide to "emulate" me
or not.

Irrelevant.

Very relevant.

NO one cares to "emulate" you. :-)

You aren't in a position to know that. :-)

What YOU write here isn't the case simply because YOU write it. Radio
amateurs worldwide are using morse code daily for real communications.
That you don't approve doesn't change that.

Again, irrelevant.

Very relevant. Why should radio amateurs follow the methods of
unrelated services?

At issue is the morse code TEST, not whether or not "Dave" or his ilk
"use morse."

The issue, according to you, is that other radio services don't use
morse.
Do try to stay focussed.

Note that USE has no real relation to the MORSE TEST.

I don't agree.

Or do you spend all your amateur radio time "taking tests?" :-)

I'll spend my amateur radio time doing what I choose. You spend your
amateur radio time....Oh, never mind.

There isn't any "higher morse rate" testing.

Isn't that awful...hi hi.

You seemed to think it an issue a couple of posts ago.

You aren't even involved.

Tsk...with role models like the archtypical PCTA extra, who would
want to be "involved" in amateur radio? :-)

Lots of folks want to and do. You haven't and won't.

It would really take an arrogant bully to
expect radio amateurs to swallow your view of how amateur radio should
be regulated.

Tsk. I feel that the USA should have the FCC regulate amateur radio,
all according to the Communications Act of 1934 plus the Congressional
law of 1996.

*Poof!* You've got your wish.


What do you know of the "fun" of amateur radio?

Tsk. What do you know of "fun" in ANYTHING? :-)

I know all about the fun in amateur radio. I know quite a bit about the
fun in usenet. Couldn't you come up with a meaningful answer?

Well, there you have it--the opinion of one never involved in amateur
radio; one whom it would seem finds that five word per minute exam an
insurmountable obstacle to his entry into amateur radio.

Tsk. Still seeing things that aren't there.

Not really. I just took a look at amateur radio. I didn't see you.

Still tossing out personal pejoratives instead of discussing the subjects.

THAT is the "fun" that appears in this amateur radio newsgroup. :-)

Why, Leonard, that is PRECISELY your mode of operation here on a regular
basis. I know. We're to do as you say, not as you do.

So you believe that all that goes on in HF amateur radio is the use of
morse? You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on.

Tsk. You don't have any idea of how to discuss things civilly.

Why, Leonard. That is precisely your mode of operation here.

Petition your government for redress of your numerous grievances.

I have. :-)

Don't get upset with me because the government hasn't seen things your
way.

You don't like that. TS for you. :-)

I wouldn't mind if you petitioned government for something each and
every day of the remainder of your life.

Different interests? What are your "interests" in amateur radio, Len?
What do YOU consider "vital" to ham radio enjoyment?

Freedom from the oppression of olde-tyme hammes insistent on
ruling over all others would be a good start... :-)

Oppression? Oooooooh! Are you a victim now?

Oh, tsk. That would eliminate you, wouldn't it? Can't have that.

No, you can't have that.

You have to stay here and effect ethnic cleansing of U.S. amateur
radio.

You aren't an ethnic group and you aren't in amateur radio.


You have to be in if you:

1. want to partake in those things "vital to ham radio enjoyment".

This was NOT a discussion about "partaking" in anything.

Why'dja snip the relevant portion, Leonard? I directly responded to
something written by you.

2. want to be seen as credible.

Lets "Dave" out...he is INcredible. :-)

Couldn't you come up with anything original?

The FCC regulates U.S. civil radio.

You aren't the FCC.

NEITHER ARE YOU. :-)

What's with the caps?

I'd have thought you'd have picked up on this one by now. Those people
are paid to regulate amateur radio. They are PROFESSIONALS.

YOU are not a professional regulator...just an amateur one.

That's incorrect. I don't regulate amateur radio.

That's be another incorrect response. I'm a participant.

Participants are more important than regulators.

Tell that to Congress. Have them change the Communications Act
of 1934. :-)

No changes are needed. No regulators are needed where there are no
participants.



You're an old thing and I'm not demanding to keep you.

Tsk. Again with the personal pejoratives. :-)

So...you are "young?" :-)

Everything is relative, Leonard. I'm just a kid when compared to you.

Are you going to STOP me?!? Oh, my. Tsk.

Why, no. You do that. Consider yourself stopped by inertia.

Tsk. You, repeat YOU, keep trying to stop me.

There, there, Leonard. I'll give back your study guides, repair your
practice oscillator and allow you access to the site where you can
download the appropriate forms.

Only your own failure to act keeps you from an amateur radio license.

Your technique (word used instead of other nasty ones) does NOT
work!

Oh? You mean you'll have that Extra "right out of the box" sometime in
the forseeable future?

Sunnuvagun!

It has been pointed out on numerous occasions that no one has prevented
you from spilling your guts.

Feel free to do your own seppuku. Nobody is stopping you... :-)

But you just can't force anyone to take
your stuff seriously.

You aren't "anyone."

You may not like it but, yes, I am someone.

You are the arrogant bully of the newsgroup,
even better than the gunnery nurse. :-)

Actually, I believe that title is rightfully yours. You've earned it.

You attempt to push others around quite frequently.

You often confuse me with yourself.

Tsk. You gods of radio seem to think you are inviolate. Nobody is
supposed to say ANYTHING nasty to you dieties. :-)

Oh, here we go again. One time I'm a god. The next, I'm no god.
Fact is, I'm a radio amateur. You are not.

It's tough being
arrogant about amateur radio when you aren't actually a licensed ham
though.

It's much much more arrogant when you ARE a licensed ham (either
FCC or FDA) and you keep on trying to push folks around, strip
citizens of their Rights such as the First Amendment. Tsk.

Funny that you mention the First Amendment as if your rights have
somehow been taken away. That view is as incorrect now as it was the
very first time you tried to sell it.

First Amendment. Refresh your memory with what it means.

It says that my right to free speech is equal to your own.

Tsk. It does NOT say your right is in any way stronger than mine.

Yeah? And?

Yet, throughout in here, that's what you keep on claiming.

Is it? You've written and written and written and written. I've not
attempted to prevent you from doing so at any time. I have often
ridiculed you and laughed at you. I intend to continue doing so.


It makes no
requirement for me to accept your views or to refrain from giving you
the raspberries.

YOU would NOT come even close to accepting a contrary idea
to what you hold... :-)

You have no way of knowing that. All that you can be certain of is that
I find your ideas on regulating amateur radio to be laughable. I find
you to be a peculiar oddity--a man obsessed with regulating that in
which he has no part.

You misread. I wrote that you have no experience in *amateur* radio.

According to "Dave," one can't have ANY "interest in radio" without
getting an amateur radio license! :-)

You've been corrected on this one a number of times. You persist in
writing the same thing. It is a lie.

Wasn't any qualifier to the word "radio" when "Dave" wrote it. :-)

Yes, there certainly was.

Heh heh heh heh. I'm a long-time veteran of computer-modem
communications with a survivor's thick virtual skin. :-)

Virtual skin? Is that like those "message knuckles" you wrote about
some time back?

LIke I've seen lots of computer-modem bullies in the last 20 years.
Most of those are gone. I'm still here... :-)

That doesn't fill us in on "virtual skin" or "message knuckles".

Well, you seem to have it on points over those who tired of your
nonsense and left, and over those whose respiration stopped. I'm
betting that I can outlast you.

Anything is possible... :-)

Any many things are likely. :-)

You are a god of radio. One of the Four Morsemen of this
Apocalypse.

You seem to have some trouble making up your mind on the issue. There
is an archived record on the subject.

You probably lose some folks as soon as you start your "jump through the
same hoops" schpiel.

Poor baby. Still can't get used to what others say of the morse
test, can you? :-)

Poor baby. You can't get used to the idea that you'll have to climb
that 5 wpm mountain in order to partake in HF amateur radio.

You aren't yet a newcomer and you'll not be able
to jump through my hoops. They no longer exist.

Incorrect.

Quite correct. I took a 20 wpm morse exam. It isn't possible for you
take it. I took and passed written exams for the Novice, General,
Advanced and Extra. It is no longer possible for you to do so. No
exams are given for two of those classes. Exams very different from
those taken by me are now being used to test for both the General and
Amateur Extra.

But, it is impossible to get you to admit to an error.

I'd first have to make one.

You are a god of radio and therefore inviolate.

No, I'm inwestvirginia.

I'm sure that it seems that way to a guy with an obvious inferiority
complex; a guy who sees demands in ordinary statements; a guy who views
the comments of those who don't agree with him as "arrogant",
"bullying", "imperious".

Now, now, don't get upset...the mirror you are looking into when
writing that has YOUR reflection! :-)

Can't be, Leonard. You're the guy who uses the terms "arrogant",
"bullying" and "imperious". You're the guy who sees simple statements
as DEMANDS. You're mistaken.

Now, watch it come to pass.

Tsk. "Dave" keeps on with the personal pejoratives and gets all
flustered when they aren't received well.

The only thing you could do to fluster me would be to swear that you
actually like them.


Try to play with your Orion some more. Seriously, not trivially.
Can't have a god of radio use equipment trivially. :-)

Irrelevant.


Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't
address my comments at all.

Tsk. One is REQUIRED to "address your comments," your
royalness? :-)

Not at all, your Foghorn Lenhorn-ness. You can type a paragraph about
regional variations in Swahili dialect in response to someone's input on
the possibilities for the introduction of errors in RTTY messages. It's
just that doing so will make you look rather simple-minded.

Tsk. Try to stay focussed. I wasn't "introducing Swahili dialect"
into anything. :-)

That's right, you introduced equally unrelated. Then again, you don't
have to address my comments ;-)

Can a morse radiotelegraph circuit introduce error or is it supposedly
free from error of any kind?

It isn't necessarily free of error, Len. Then again, I've not claimed
that it is.

Tsk. More political spin. :-)

All other modes BUT morse has errors. An absolute. Yet you say
morse "isn't necessarily free of error." :-) A decided qualified non-
statement.

Anyplace else but in PCTA haven, such antics would be called
"sinning by omission."


I made no remark about "introducing Swahili dialects." You did.

Your response was equally irrelevant.

Tsk. You tried to introduce "Swahili" in here. I didn't. :-)


Tsk. Are you saying that TTY "introduces a time lag" now?

We'll never know. You snip the relevant portions.

In Heilian logic, that's "not necessarily relevant." :-)


I have no interest in educating the rest of the radio world in anything.

Riiiight. All should revere and respect you because you Are.


All the rest of those radio services that once used morse have
dropped it for communications purposes.

So? What is that supposed to mean for the service which uses it
commonly and regularly?

Tsk. You can't see the relevence, your reverence? :-)

Morse code just doesn't have all the attributes that lie like urban
myths in the brainwashed minds of hams. It isn't faster than any
other mode, isn't error-free...all it is is a throwback to the pioneer
times of the first radios, far before the existance of anyone in this
newsgroup.


Then there are a number of radio services which never bothered
with any morse code when they began.

Did you have a point?

Yes, I borrowed Amstrong's lance. [nice sharp point at the end]

But, you will then "argue" that "this is amateur radio" as if it was
a haven, shrine, or religious temple for morse code and that all
amateurs MUST test for it...won't you? :-)

As pointed out quite a few times to you, thousands of radio amateurs use
morse daily despite what the "rest of the radio world" decides to do.

Well, isn't that spay-shul? :-)

So...because morse is the distant second-most used mode on HF
by hams, the FCC *must* test for it in order to get an amateur radio
license with HF privileges?

Most strange. There is NO other mode allocated to amateurs which
requires a separate pass-fail test for manual operation.

Ah, but YOU had to take that morse test to achieve your rank, status,
and privilege...therefore all others must do as you did.


Incorrect. I was simply pointing out that morse code telegraphy
is the SLOWEST of all modes available to U.S. radio amateurs.

Incorrect. That isn't what you were doing.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. It was very correct. You are incorrect.

Since you don't use morse
and aren't a radio amateur, why do you worry about morse throughput?

More tsk. I don't "worry" about it. I KNOW by example of history
of radio and seeing it used, hearing it used, that morse IS the
slowest form of communications allocated to hams for communications
pursposes.

But, you cannot keep on the subject and must always attack
the persons of those who disagree with you. Tsk.

You can't possibly realize how silly the above statement makes you look.

Tsk, tsk. What I said is true. Denial of your own arrogant tactics,
of bullying, doesn't help you...but you keep on denying them even
though all other readers can see it.


Lacking a few received characters in morse? Why, just fill in the
blanks. Who will know? :-)

One thing for su You won't.

Tsk, tsk. That's any easy thing to prove by recordings at both end
of a bad radio circuit relying on manual morse. :-)

But...mighty macho morsemen think that they are SO spay-shul
that they can claim anything they want to to non-morse persons
and get away with it. :-)


Why this concern about what the "rest of the radio world" is doing?
Hams aren't required to follow other services.

They don't seem to. They seem to regard amateur radio as having
its own distinct laws of physics, different from other radio. They
seem to think that discussion about federal regulations on amateur
radio should be forbidden to non-amateurs!

They seem to think that the First Amendment Rights don't belong
to non-amateur-licensed U.S. citizens.


Tell you what: You settle on a subject and perhaps we can do that...if
you can't keep from launching into personalities.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. YOU jumped into this thread ranting and raving
about "not having an amateur license" in a remark I wrote to Kim.

Your usual diatribe has been noted by all other readers and
recorded at Google message archives.


TRY to understand that the rest of the radio communications
world does NOT use morse code for communications.

Try coming up with a valid explanation as to why I should concern myself
with that.

No need to expect the impossible. Your royal mind is made up.
It is unchangeable. :-)


Tsk. You ARE seeing things that aren't there...

Incorrect. You've snipped them so they aren't there.

Tsk. You are STILL seeing things that aren't there... :-)


I'm using the Internet to send these messages. Whether that uses
radio or other means is not an issue.

We'll never know. Your snippage removes any context.

Tsk. I never introduced the communications methods used by
the Internet. One thing for sure, the Internet doesn't use any
manual morse for communications! :-)


I can't see them. You snipped 'em.

"If thine eye offend thee, cast it out..."


Very relevant. Why should radio amateurs follow the methods of
unrelated services?

Tsk. Then why do radio amateurs require all the formalism of
"correct" methods, "correct" jargon, even the "official radiogram"
forms sold by the ARRL? :-)

Tsk, tsk...all the play-acting the professional in amateur comms
as if deviation from that would mean loss of a job! :-)


Note that USE has no real relation to the MORSE TEST.

I don't agree.

That was understood. :-)


Or do you spend all your amateur radio time "taking tests?" :-)

I'll spend my amateur radio time doing what I choose. You spend your
amateur radio time....Oh, never mind.

:-)


Tsk...with role models like the archtypical PCTA extra, who would
want to be "involved" in amateur radio? :-)

Lots of folks want to and do. You haven't and won't.

Define the numerical quantity in "lots." :-)

Tsk. Look at the published numbers from the FCC databasee. You
will find that the non-morse-test licensees have grown far more than
all the morse-tested licensee numbers...and that continues to grow.

You don't accept that any more than a "renowned historian" in here
accepts it. You must defend your imperial territory of rank/status/
privilege via passing a 20 WPM morse test.


I know all about the fun in amateur radio. I know quite a bit about the
fun in usenet.

Tsk. Not demonstrated in here.


Not really. I just took a look at amateur radio. I didn't see you.

Wow! One glance and his imperiousness sees ALL!

Superhuman. [gods of radio are like that...]

Tsk. Still trying to forbid First Amendment Rights to U.S. citizens,
aren't you?

Ave, Imperator!



Is it? You've written and written and written and written. I've not
attempted to prevent you from doing so at any time. I have often
ridiculed you and laughed at you. I intend to continue doing so.

I didn't expect you to do anything else. :-)

Sociopaths usually use that rationale to excuse their behavior.


According to "Dave," one can't have ANY "interest in radio" without
getting an amateur radio license! :-)

You've been corrected on this one a number of times. You persist in
writing the same thing. It is a lie.

Tsk. I've not been "corrected." "Dave" tried to back-track from what
he originally wrote that anyone having an "interest" in radio would or
should get an amateur radio license first. :-)

Apparently some of the old State Department so-called "diplomacy"
had rubbed off since "Dave" doesn't admit to errors he openly made.
"Dave" always explains that "Dave" is "correct" in whatever he does.


You seem to have some trouble making up your mind on the issue. There
is an archived record on the subject.

I have no problem at all on eliminating morse code testing. I advocate
its elimination.

I have no problem at all on recognizing bullies and sociopaths viciously
defending their alleged "honors" in rank/status/privileges achieved by
passing a 20 WPM morse code test. There are several in here. :-)


Poor baby. You can't get used to the idea that you'll have to climb
that 5 wpm mountain in order to partake in HF amateur radio.

Tsk. You keep saying that one MUST "demonstrate" willingness to
be licensed in amateur radio?

To whom? To some dead-in-the-mind PCTA extra?

PCTA extras do NOT regulate U.S. amateur radio. They never did.
But, they keep thinking they do. :-)


Quite correct. I took a 20 wpm morse exam. It isn't possible for you
take it.

Incorrect. I could still take a COMMERCIAL radiotelegraphy license
test for 20 WPM. I have NO desire to do so, but the USA allows
that option. Tsk, for an ex-federal employee you seem strangely
unaware of licensing according to Part 2 of Title 47 C.F.R.

I took and passed written exams for the Novice, General,
Advanced and Extra.

Are you expecting to be a guest of honor at the Kennedy Center
for doing so?

It is no longer possible for you to do so.

Ave, Imperator! [old Roman statement roughly translatable to
"no s**t?!" ]

No exams are given for two of those classes. Exams very different from
those taken by me are now being used to test for both the General and
Amateur Extra.

...therefore YOU are a "superior" ham.

Here, I give you a AAAAA grade as a ham according to FDA regs.


But, it is impossible to get you to admit to an error.

I'd first have to make one.

Gods of radio NEVER make errors. They even say so... :-)


Try to play with your Orion some more. Seriously, not trivially.
Can't have a god of radio use equipment trivially. :-)

Irrelevant.

No, I'm being oscarlevant. :-)

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:


Can a morse radiotelegraph circuit introduce error or is it supposedly
free from error of any kind?

Any mode can introduce errors in a message.

No, I haven't forgotten any of those things. My experience in such
things is much more recent than your own and it is therefore fresher in
my memory. All of those things introduce a time lag.

Tsk. Are you saying that TTY "introduces a time lag" now?

It does. And when things like prepunched tape are used, the time lag increases.


All the rest of those radio services that once used morse have
dropped it for communications purposes.

Not all. Almost all. And so what? They are not amateur radio.

Should hams stop using Morse Code?

Then there are a number of radio services which never bothered
with any morse code when they began.

So what?

But, you will then "argue" that "this is amateur radio" as if it was
a haven, shrine, or religious temple for morse code and that all
amateurs MUST test for it...won't you? :-)

You are confused between "test" and "use".

They surely do "affect" morse reception, but you were touting the
superiority of RTTY.

Incorrect. I was simply pointing out that morse code telegraphy
is the SLOWEST of all modes available to U.S. radio amateurs.

Morse Code is *not* the "SLOWEST of all modes available to U.S. radio
amateurs."

But, you cannot keep on the subject and must always attack
the persons of those who disagree with you. Tsk.

That's your game, Len.

Fact is,
on/off keying cuts it quite well in the communications world of now.

By whom?

Radio amateurs.

Face the facts. The rest of the radio world does NOT use morse
code for communications.

So? What is your point, Len?

Nobody but FM broadcaster uses the stereo multiplex system developed over a
half-century ago by Armstrong.

That hasn't changed just because you aren't proficient in its use.

TRY to stay focussed on the subject instead of (once more)
launching into personalities.

Gee, Len, you launch into other people's personalities all the time. ;-)

And the word is spelled "focused".

TRY to understand that the rest of the radio communications
world does NOT use morse code for communications.

Why is that important to amateur radio, Len? You repeat that statement over and
over like a mantra, but never explain its significance.

I don't think any other radio service still uses 5 level FSK Baudot for radio
communications either. Nor PSK-31.

Despite the statement above, your diatribe doesn't read like someone who
supports use of morse code.

Tsk. You ARE seeing things that aren't there...

Right - you don't support the use of Morse Code. You'd ban it from ham radio if
you could.

"Arrogant thundering" = any disagreement with your views.

You can't stay focussed on the subject. All you can do is act
the thunder mug on anything I post. :-)

You posts often look like, and contain, the contents of said mug.....;-)

That's a load of manure, Leonard. That isn't the "only" at all. It is
any radio amateur who uses morse and supports continuation of morse
testing. I, for one, couldn't care less if you decide to "emulate" me
or not.

Irrelevant.

NO one cares to "emulate" you. :-)

I care to emulate K8MN.

Let's see....

IIRC, he's retired, living in a beautiful area of his choice, with a wonderful
loving family, a great home and ham station, and the time and resources to
persue multiple interests.

I'll follow that lead any day.

What YOU write here isn't the case simply because YOU write it. Radio
amateurs worldwide are using morse code daily for real communications.
That you don't approve doesn't change that.

Again, irrelevant.

Totally relevant.

At issue is the morse code TEST, not whether or not "Dave" or his ilk
"use morse."

Note that USE has no real relation to the MORSE TEST.

Then why do you keep pointing out that other services don't use Morse?

You aren't even involved.

Tsk...with role models like the archtypical PCTA extra, who would
want to be "involved" in amateur radio? :-)

Then why are you here, Len?