| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes: In article , (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message e.com... Nor will I. Heck, I can't remember all the names Len has invented for me to avoid calling me "Jim" or "N2EY". Let's see....there's "Jimmie" (note the feminized ending), "Jimmie Who", "Rev. Jim", "negative j", "Miccolis", etc. What purpose does all that serve? None, other than to prove what a creep he is. Apply that same logic to someone who replies in kind. If I respond to being called "Jimmie" by calling him "Lennie", what does that make me? And he does that well and frequently. Without any help from anyone else. Independence is a wonderful thing. Try some. It is useful in the amateur service and many like it! The "Newington-South" routine got tiring years ago... :-) |
In article ,
(William) writes: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (William) Date: 9/23/2004 8:25 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message .com... (William) wrote in message . com... (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (William) Date: 9/22/2004 5:00 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: Hans, it warms the heart to see someone other than Len saying those things. I don't know why. Because it validates what Len has said for years. That's why. It doesn't "validate" anything, Brian. Yes, it does. It's Hans' opinion, and nothing more. And the more folks that have this opinion the greater the validation. See how it works? See how WHAT works? Validation! You might want to get back on your meds and improve your attention span. He ought to check with a Real MD...the old meds might have some side-effect which is responsible for the latest behavior... That Hans doesn't like me? Oooooooh.....I am soooooo hurt. Nobody -likes you-. You are dislike by some, tolerated by others. The only thing you have going for you is your desire to keep code exams. If you didn't have that you would be kicked to the curb in half a heartbeat. His various personalities like him, maybe? Hans has proven himself to chastise and demean others about one form of conduct and then steps right on out and does it himself. Gosh, you mean it's not OK to be two-faced? Oh, my! His Janus argues with hisself? Interesting... You think the opinion of someone who can't march to his own tune is problematic to me? Are you still marching? Someone order this idiot to "halt." He hears the drumbeat...except there's no drum. No doubt. And no doubt the never endings there long since lost thier ability to sense danger. "thier" Hi, hi! If my misuse of one word out of thousands is your only "defense", your "position" is even weaker than I assumed. Then you've obviously missed the above, the below, and the last 9 years. Get back on your meds. I would suggest he's on the wrong meds... and you still publically admire him For all to see. Yep. Fool that you are. and condone his conduct. I've never witnessed Len threatening to throw bricks through windows, slash tires, or terrorize anyone's wife. I've never done it either, Brian. So what's your point. You create little twisted scenarios where you imagine that other people will do these evil things that you wish will happen to Len and his loved ones. You don't know these other people with evil intent, but you know that they are thinking evil thoughts about Len. Strange how you can know that. Very, very strange. Sorry, Brian...It happens all the time. You dream up twisted little scenarios that actually play out in real life? He dreams up twisted little scenarios and thinks that IS real life. It isn't, but he can't tell the difference. Pehaps if you actually did have some training, education or other experience in evaluating human nature and conduct, it wouldn't come as such a surprise to you. You're probably right. Crazy people always suprise me. They don't surprise me despite having "no credentials" in psychology (only one of his alternate personalities has one, and that from a night school), but I must admit being astonished at the various WAYS they go bananas. Or if you read the news once in a while... I read where clairvoyants try to help out on cases but they don't really contribute a damned thing. But, you! You dream up twisted scenarios and they come true! You have a gift. Shhhh...he thinks they "come true" in real life...having an increasing difficulty separating real life from his fantasy one...that line becomes blurry and indistinct. One of the events that inspired that actually occured only a few miles from where Lennie lives. A few years ago a man spent a lot of time trying to demand changes to local zoning laws for his own benefit. He spent a great deal of his own time and money to "prove" why he was right and everyone else was wrong. Finally someone got tired of his outrageous allegations and demands and took it upon themselves to induce him to stop. I guess nothing happens in BFTennessee? Sounds like the nutso ex-Marine in what would become Chavez Ravine, the baseball stadium. LAPD finally subdued him and that was "stopped." :-) Was years and years ago...before the Los Angeles HRO store moved. :-) Whatta work of art you are. Coming from you, I take that as a compliment. I leave that for the Nat'l Endowment. :-) Or threaten to "Dial" a person into custody. You'd deserve it, Brian. You said that you were "dialing," and you say that I deserve it. Why didn't anyone show up at my door? I think you lied when you said that you were "dialing." Did you call the authorities or did you lie about it? Not every contact with Human Services generates an investigative contact, Brian. Ask them. Sometimes it's just a note in a file. Then eventually enough notes wind up in that file that when some other intervention becomes necessary, there is "background" from which to proceed. Why are you worried about it..?!?! If your conduct is as you claim it is, then it's just a piece of paper in a dusty file. If it's NOT as you claim...well...then... The only thing that worries me is that a crazy person is on the loose. And he has access to a drug locker. Anything could happen. Seems like there's been more and more male nurses who've been doing self-proclaimed "mercy killings" in the news in the last few years... You certainly need the help and observation. I'm good. No. You're not. You're overtly evasive and mistruthful on a wide range of topics. If you did the things you claim then why are you not willing to prove them? Then let's talk about your seven hostile actions. Spill your guts. Everybody ought to get to know the details on those "seven hostile actions!" Yell-yell could get instant recognition as the heroic "pilot in command" or something... You're not. Still waiting on your presentation of credentials upon which you base that assessment, Brian. Start "dialing." We'll see who they pick up. Uh huh. So you didn't call. You lied? Yell-yell NEVER lies. He say so hisself. LHA / WMD |
In article ,
(William) writes: Len, I think the training is working. He hasn't used that Yiddish word for penis for some time. Right now I've got him working on some low-level insults; I insult him, he tries to act grown-up about it. At least that's the plan. By the end of his training, we should have a fully functioning net citizen amongst us. I believe he'll even get around to apologizing to us and admitting he was wrong about so many things. Please, wish him luck. Amazing! Just amazing! We'll just have to wait until his tranquilizers run out and see if any of that holds... :-) |
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 9/27/2004 5:49 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (William) writes: Len, I think the training is working. He hasn't used that Yiddish word for penis for some time. Right now I've got him working on some low-level insults; I insult him, he tries to act grown-up about it. At least that's the plan. By the end of his training, we should have a fully functioning net citizen amongst us. I believe he'll even get around to apologizing to us and admitting he was wrong about so many things. Please, wish him luck. Amazing! Just amazing! We'll just have to wait until his tranquilizers run out and see if any of that holds.. What tranquilizers? And no amount of medicines will EVER change the fact that both of you are liars... Documented, Proven, and Unrepentant. That's YOUR legacies as "net citizens". Embrace it...You've earned it. Steve, K4YZ |
In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 9/27/2004 5:49 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (William) writes: Len, I think the training is working. He hasn't used that Yiddish word for penis for some time. Right now I've got him working on some low-level insults; I insult him, he tries to act grown-up about it. At least that's the plan. By the end of his training, we should have a fully functioning net citizen amongst us. I believe he'll even get around to apologizing to us and admitting he was wrong about so many things. Please, wish him luck. Amazing! Just amazing! We'll just have to wait until his tranquilizers run out and see if any of that holds.. What tranquilizers? ...maybe that's your problem... And no amount of medicines will EVER change the fact that both of you are liars... Documented, Proven, and Unrepentant. Only in nursieworld. What, no "pathological" liar thingy? Tsk. That was so much fun...sort of like visiting the Gift Shop at the L.A. County Coroner's Office... Your pathologist license get revoked? That's YOUR legacies as "net citizens". Tsk. Well, ol' Yell-yell has to back in step 1 of training again. Sigh. [a LOT more steps than 12 in that program...] |
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 9/27/2004 5:49 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (William) writes: Len, I think the training is working. He hasn't used that Yiddish word for penis for some time. Right now I've got him working on some low-level insults; I insult him, he tries to act grown-up about it. At least that's the plan. By the end of his training, we should have a fully functioning net citizen amongst us. I believe he'll even get around to apologizing to us and admitting he was wrong about so many things. Please, wish him luck. Amazing! Just amazing! We'll just have to wait until his tranquilizers run out and see if any of that holds.. What tranquilizers? ...maybe that's your problem... And no amount of medicines will EVER change the fact that both of you are liars... Documented, Proven, and Unrepentant. Only in nursieworld. What, no "pathological" liar thingy? Tsk. That was so much fun...sort of like visiting the Gift Shop at the L.A. County Coroner's Office... Your pathologist license get revoked? That's YOUR legacies as "net citizens". Tsk. Well, ol' Yell-yell has to back in step 1 of training again. Sigh. [a LOT more steps than 12 in that program...] Steve just blew his training. Back to week 1, day 1. Oh, how I wish I were a real doctor of pathos and could help him more. Back to reading Pavlov. |
|
In article ,
(William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , "Kim" writes: "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , (Steve In article , (Len Over 21) writes: Morse code is slower that ALL modes. "slower that ALL"?? Dug this up this morning. Goodness, it's getting hard to find anything on this newsgroup that is really worth even bothering with. "Morse code is slower than ALL modes." Hmmmm, that's a rather interesting observation. I think it would have to be determined on when and where. If there's a CW net in progress and there are not very experienced people, then it probably would be pretty darned slow--and repetitive. Kim, you are welcome to hold any belief system you wish, but the FACT that on-off-keyed "CW" morse IS the slowest communications mode in use today or in use a half century ago. I've seen it up close and personal throughout this whole past half century. It is evidenciary in the REST of the radio communications world. The slowest teleprinter rates of a half century ago was 60 WPM and, to some degree still with old, worn-out surplus teleprinters of that era. With Mark-Space shift of 170 Hz, those old, cranky 60 WPM Teletypes need less than 400 Hz of bandwidth to transmit in FSK. Those ancient machines (already around well before Jimmie was born) can run continuously at 60 WPM throughput as long as they are fed paper rolls and paper tape. I once watched over 200 such teleprinters busy, busy working continuously 24/7 in the same place on several "networks." The old electromechanical Teletypes of the 1970s can sustain 100 WPM throughput as long as the old 1940s era machines did. A modern PC can emulate either of them and go faster, having much more mass memory to store archives of network messages. It is the EXCEPTIONAL rarity now to find any two morsemen at each end of a ham radio circuit who can do SUSTAINED "network" communications by on-off-keyed "CW" morse at 40 WPM for hours. HOURS. Networks need hours if the number of messages are great. I've known a couple of speed freak morsemen who had regular QSOs along the California coast, doing bursting rates of about 60 WPM for a minute or so at a time. I took their word for it, not hearing their ham transmissions. A minute or so at a high rate of morse is not good enough for real networking, copying down and recording for later re-transmission of message content. However, under dire circumstances when, presumably, a CW net would be underway with very experienced communicators and would be the fastest, most efficient method of communication (hands down, no pun intended). For once, this is a thread wherein the real point of CW can be highlighted. CW may or may not ALWAYS be the "one mode that gets through when no other will." But, it's hard to argue that CW--if clear and done well--is the fastest and most efficient mode. Nonsense alive and well only in the imaginative fantasies of mighty macho morsemen. Real networks don't operate on imagination. "Error-free" messages don't get relayed through self-glorified boasting. The rest of the radio communications AND wire communications world learned that between a full century and a half century ago. That's why NONE of them use morse code for message communications now. All that said, I think that radiotelegraphy IS faster than the old British and French semaphore communications systems. Morse radio- telegraphy IS faster than the pony express and IS faster than paper surface mail. Radiotelegraphy does reach out farther than the human voice can transmit unaided by anything but the human body. Other than that, morse radiotelegraphy still remains the slowest mode of communications available to radio amateurs. Those who want to fantasize that morse is "faster" or "better" will have to set up a controlled test NOT in morse favor to demonstrate that alleged fact. Let all those might macho morsemen sustain 20 to 40 WPM continuously for an 8-hour period...and do the communications with LESS error than any teleprinter circuit. 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. Jimmie apparently has lots and lots of teleprinter inexperience to draw contusions from. Hi hi. The old, old Teletypes could be handled by relatively inexperienced touch typists at about 40 WPM without preparing any p-tape. Not a problem as I found out in the Army after a year's absence from any typing device and four years after taking my first middle school typing class. After a week of that, simple practice allowed doing it at the machine maximum of 60 WPM. [the Model 15 through Model 19 would actually "kick back" and refuse to accept key input faster than 60 WPM]. 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. It's a fact, visible to anyone around a real communications center, that p-tape is what is used for continuous throughput. It was that way during WW2 at Washington Army Radio and continued on through AUTODIN days until the DSN replaced almost all of it. Even though Jimmie is ready to make remarks about an older article on "morse code mainstay" (or something like it) at WAR, the Signal Corps historical facts are that teleprinting was the bulk message carrier in the U.S. military back in WW2 times. I responded that the throughput of a CW system might be limited by the Morse Code operator only knowing the code at 10wpm. That's totally irrelevant when trying to "discuss" morsemanship with a morseman. :-) Morsemanship is always "discussed" by morsemen at the highest possible rates, of course with zero errors at both ends of the circuit. Non-morse communications are always done (according to morsemen) at the slowest possible rates and with a maximum of errors. So, according to the mighty macho morsemen, all those OTHER radio services NOT using morse code for messaging are always "in error," "telling lies," "misrepresenting the facts," etc. :-) Tsk. All those other radio services involved in communications simply stopped using on-off keyed "CW" morse because it was slow, error-prone, and subject to human frailties of many kinds. I wanted to know how that was different from his example. So far no response. Don't expect any. :-) Jimmie dreams his dreams of being the Best, or at least among the very best morsemen at a time when the rest of the world has gotten on with change and long ago changed to newer, faster, better techniques of communications by radio. He wants all of amateur radio to idolize, revere, respect, and honor morsemen and to keep on recreating the past of the 30s and 20s when the real radio communications pioneering was going on. Not having existed at that time, he wants to relive it over and over again to the point of making tube rigs during the 1990s as an example of "advancing the state of the amateur radio art." [using "recycled" parts, of course...:-) ] Recycled "state of the art" also. The Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society should be proud of him. :-) |
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/14/2004 2:03 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Jimmie dreams his dreams...(SNIP) I see that Jim Miccolis still calls you "Len" or "Mr Anderson", yet you still engage him with disrespectful diminutives despite insisting you don't address other people that way unless they do you that way. Ever the liar. And I am sure THEY are proud of you too. I am sure you represent the highest calibre of what the American engineering community has to offer. Putz. Steve, K4YZ |
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. Morsemanship is always "discussed" by morsemen at the highest possible rates, of course with zero errors at both ends of the circuit. Non-morse communications are always done (according to morsemen) at the slowest possible rates and with a maximum of errors. 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. Jimmie dreams his dreams of being the Best, or at least among the very best morsemen at a time when the rest of the world has gotten on with change and long ago changed to newer, faster, better techniques of communications by radio. Uh...Len? You're not doing much communicating via amateur radio, are you? Does the fact that morse remains a popular mode, in wide use by radio amateurs bother you? Dave K8MN |
In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/14/2004 2:03 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: And I am sure THEY are proud of you too. I am sure you represent the highest calibre of what the American engineering community has to offer. Putz. Tsk, tsk, tsk. I'm proud to be a member of the electronic engineering community and of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers professional organization. I became a Life Member without paying anything extra and even gained...no more membership dues required from Life Members! Sunnuvagun! But, I've never represented myself as being any "highest calibre [sic]" and there are thousands more skilled in the profession than I. Of course, to those who are ignorant of the most basic electrical theories, I'm sure that a working knowledge of most radio circuits would appear as astounding, almost science fiction. [pun not obvious to any long-time Analog readers, heh heh] From your standpoint as an ex-purchasing agent for a small company who couldn't hack that for more than about a half year, I doubt you possess enough smarts to do a reasonable evaluation of what real engineers do, know, or act. :-) Sunnuvagun! Tsk, tsk. You went and used that Yiddish pejorative of "Putz," meaning "penis head," again. Must be that PCTA extra Double Standard thing. Sir James of Miccolis may or may not slap you on the wrist with a moist hankie for that. Probably not. Sir James has not been in the best of moods since he got his "state of the art" (with tubes) "type 7" unrewarded with gratuitous praise, admiration, and respect for his 1990s design. The noble laureate is concentrating on more nastygrams against those who dare call a kluge a kluge. :-) So, big "qualified" medical health professional, have you "dialled" and made that "call to authorities" yet? I'm just sitting here waiting for some other things to arrive. Good opportunity for those "authorities" (under your mighty telephoned orders, of course) to come and "have me committed!" :-) |
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 7:52 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/14/2004 2:03 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: And I am sure THEY are proud of you too. I am sure you represent the highest calibre of what the American engineering community has to offer. Putz. Tsk, tsk, tsk. I'm proud to be a member of the electronic engineering community and of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers professional organization. I became a Life Member without paying anything extra and even gained...no more membership dues required from Life Members! Doesn't matter how you came into your membership, Lennie. If I were an officer of the IEEE and had occassion to see how you "represent" engineers in general and the IEEE in particular, I'd see what I could do to remove you from my rolls. Sunnuvagun! Sunnuvagun, indeed... But, I've never represented myself as being any "highest calibre [sic]" and there are thousands more skilled in the profession than I. And there are even MORE thousands more skilled than you in the Amateur Radio Service. And yes, you HAVE represented yourself as being of the "highest calibre", and yes that suggestion is VERY sic[k]. Of course, to those who are ignorant of the most basic electrical theories, I'm sure that a working knowledge of most radio circuits would appear as astounding, almost science fiction. [pun not obvious to any long-time Analog readers, heh heh] Those of us that use the technology everyday are hardly "astound(ed)" by it...And certainly in as much as YOU had absolutely nothing to do with it, Lennie. From your standpoint as an ex-purchasing agent for a small company who couldn't hack that for more than about a half year...(SNIP) Wrong again, Lennie, but then facts aren't your strongpoint. (UNSNIP)...I doubt you possess enough smarts to do a reasonable evaluation of what real engineers do, know, or act. Then we have something in common, Lennie. Neither did you Sunnuvagun! Sunnuvagun, indeed. Tsk, tsk. You went and used that Yiddish pejorative of "Putz," meaning "penis head," again. Well, Lennie...It fits, what can I say? You lie. You don't get your facts right. You misrepresent factual events, you are deceitful and just plain lousy as human beings go. Must be that PCTA extra Double Standard thing. Sir James of Miccolis may or may not slap you on the wrist with a moist hankie for that. Probably not. Sir James has not been in the best of moods since he got his "state of the art" (with tubes) "type 7" unrewarded with gratuitous praise, admiration, and respect for his 1990s design. The noble laureate is concentrating on more nastygrams against those who dare call a kluge a kluge. So, while chastising me for some perceived personal transgression, you furhter perpetuate yet another LennieLie by yet again using diminutives Jim Micciolis, despite the fact that he does nothing of the like to you. So, big "qualified" medical health professional, have you "dialled" and made that "call to authorities" yet? I'm just sitting here waiting for some other things to arrive. Good opportunity for those "authorities" (under your mighty telephoned orders, of course) to come and "have me committed!" Indeed I did have some conversations with folks very close to you, Lennie. Interesting stuff, too. Brought me up-to-date on Chapter 5150, and what are recordable events, etc. A report by a duly-licensed healthcare worker is a recordable event. It may or maynot warrant an investigation, however files are started and any similar report by another licensed person or law enforcement flags the subject's name in future investigations. Aren't you glad you asked? Steve, K4YZ |
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 message ...
In article , (William) writes: Steve just blew his training. Back to week 1, day 1. Oh, how I wish I were a real doctor of pathos and could help him more. Back to reading Pavlov. All he can say is "Arf, Arf!" We have to watch him salivate. :-) A french poodle in a flight suit. Watch him do tricks. Hi, hi! |
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 ,
(William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (William) writes: Steve just blew his training. Back to week 1, day 1. Oh, how I wish I were a real doctor of pathos and could help him more. Back to reading Pavlov. All he can say is "Arf, Arf!" We have to watch him salivate. :-) A french poodle in a flight suit. Watch him do tricks. Hi, hi! That "poodle" got too close to a trimming razor last time...:-) He be a little poodle on the flight line, close to the landing gear... But...a "pilot in command!" Hi hi. |
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! :-) |
In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/14/2004 7:52 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/14/2004 2:03 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: And I am sure THEY are proud of you too. I am sure you represent the highest calibre of what the American engineering community has to offer. Putz. Tsk, tsk, tsk. I'm proud to be a member of the electronic engineering community and of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers professional organization. I became a Life Member without paying anything extra and even gained...no more membership dues required from Life Members! Doesn't matter how you came into your membership, Lennie. If I were an officer of the IEEE and had occassion to see how you "represent" engineers in general and the IEEE in particular, I'd see what I could do to remove you from my rolls. Tsk, you can't even remove rolls from a bakery... :-) 1. Nursie is NOT a member of the IEEE, can't even qualify. 2. Nursie is NOT therefore any "officer" in the IEEE. 3. I've been in the annual IEEE Membership Directory for years; anyone having an access to that book can see it. 4. Nursie's "removal vision" is seeing things in his fantasy wish-fulfillment. Those of us that use the technology everyday are hardly "astound(ed)" by it...And certainly in as much as YOU had absolutely nothing to do with it, Lennie. Tsk, tsk. Many olde-tymers in here have expressed wonder at the magic of radio. That's a nice emotional thought, nothing wrong with it. However, "magic" it isn't since it is bounded by laws of physics and repeatable by those who can handle it. From your standpoint as an ex-purchasing agent for a small company who couldn't hack that for more than about a half year...(SNIP) Wrong again, Lennie, but then facts aren't your strongpoint. So...you LIED about working as a purchasing agent? :-) Tsk, tsk. You went and used that Yiddish pejorative of "Putz," meaning "penis head," again. Well, Lennie...It fits, what can I say? You lie. You don't get your facts right. You misrepresent factual events, you are deceitful and just plain lousy as human beings go. Tsk. You DID use the word "Putz." Again. Many times. That's not "deceit." Everyone else who reads here saw it. :-) So, while chastising me for some perceived personal transgression, you furhter perpetuate yet another LennieLie by yet again using diminutives Jim Micciolis, despite the fact that he does nothing of the like to you. Tsk. I've written nothing to some "Jim Micciolis." :-) So, big "qualified" medical health professional, have you "dialled" and made that "call to authorities" yet? I'm just sitting here waiting for some other things to arrive. Good opportunity for those "authorities" (under your mighty telephoned orders, of course) to come and "have me committed!" Indeed I did have some conversations with folks very close to you, Lennie. Tsk, Tsk, TSK! You've had NOTHING of the kind. You blatantly LIE. The only "conversations" you've had are with your alternate personalities in your head... Interesting stuff, too. Brought me up-to-date on Chapter 5150, and what are recordable events, etc. "Chapter?" What "chapter" and from what? A work of fiction? Nursie seems to be confusing Lewis Carroll's "Through The Looking Glass" with reality. Too many trips through that "glass" with the Mad Hatter... :-) A report by a duly-licensed healthcare worker is a recordable event. It may or maynot warrant an investigation, however files are started and any similar report by another licensed person or law enforcement flags the subject's name in future investigations. Tsk. More implied threats, compounding the original lie. Nursie's list of threats grows and grows like a magical beanstalk...but with no giant at the top... Want "investigations?" Investigate your own blathering outpourings of implied threats in here. Plenty enough for some shrinks to make a recycled paper of... Feel free to send a letter to Tom Ridge, if you want. :-) Or the FBI. Or the CIA. Or the DIA. Or even the IBEW. :-) [try not to use crayon again...they didn't like that the last time...] Tsk. Get some REAL medical help, nursie...your meds just aren't working...too many side effects visible to all readers here. |
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 |
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message A french poodle in a flight suit. Watch him do tricks. Hi, hi! That "poodle" got too close to a trimming razor last time...:-) He be a little poodle on the flight line, close to the landing gear... But...a "pilot in command!" "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue" From the Anthology of Lies Of Leonard H. Anderson (and now including a preface entitled "How Learning To Lie From Lennie Made Me the Man I am Today", By Brian (PuppetBoy) Burke) Sheeeesh. Steve, K4YZ |
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: 1. Nursie is NOT a member of the IEEE, can't even qualify. And with "role models" like you, do you think I'd want to join? I could be a pathological liar without paying the dues, Lennie. From your standpoint as an ex-purchasing agent for a small company who couldn't hack that for more than about a half year...(SNIP) Wrong again, Lennie, but then facts aren't your strongpoint. So...you LIED about working as a purchasing agent? Nope. But you still don't have your facts right, Lennie. Do some research. Get it right. You DO know how to do RESEARCH, don't you Mr Engineer? Well, Lennie...It fits, what can I say? You lie. You don't get your facts right. You misrepresent factual events, you are deceitful and just plain lousy as human beings go. Tsk. You DID use the word "Putz." Again. Many times. That's not "deceit." Everyone else who reads here saw it. You are a putz, Lennie. Everytime you enter this forum and try to play "King of the Hill" you prove it. So, while chastising me for some perceived personal transgression, you furhter perpetuate yet another LennieLie by yet again using diminutives Jim Micciolis, despite the fact that he does nothing of the like to you. Tsk. I've written nothing to some "Jim Micciolis." Ahhhh...I see..... Slide out on my addition of an "i" to Jim's surename. But you sure HAVE written to "Parson Jim", "Jimmie", "Reverend Jim", and other diminuitives for Jim Miccolis. He has never used any alteration of your name except as you have, ie: Len, Leonard, or Mr. Anderson. Really puts some perspective on who the real men are here and who's a putz. So, big "qualified" medical health professional, have you "dialled" and made that "call to authorities" yet? I'm just sitting here waiting for some other things to arrive. Good opportunity for those "authorities" (under your mighty telephoned orders, of course) to come and "have me committed!" Indeed I did have some conversations with folks very close to you, Lennie. Tsk, Tsk, TSK! You've had NOTHING of the kind. You blatantly LIE. Keep repeating that to yourself over and over and over and over and......... The only "conversations" you've had are with your alternate personalities in your head... Sorry, Your Putziness...a real, live, California Licensed Mental Health Social Worker and a real, live, Registered Nurse Case Manager. Interesting stuff, too. Brought me up-to-date on Chapter 5150, and what are recordable events, etc. "Chapter?" What "chapter" and from what? A work of fiction? Nursie seems to be confusing Lewis Carroll's "Through The Looking Glass" with reality. Too many trips through that "glass" with the Mad Hatter... Why don't you Google up "5150" and see what you get, Lennie. A report by a duly-licensed healthcare worker is a recordable event. It may or maynot warrant an investigation, however files are started and any similar report by another licensed person or law enforcement flags the subject's name in future investigations. Tsk. More implied threats, compounding the original lie. Nursie's list of threats grows and grows like a magical beanstalk...but with no giant at the top... Not an implied threat, Lennie. Fact of law in the State of California. Want "investigations?" Investigate your own blathering outpourings of implied threats in here. Plenty enough for some shrinks to make a recycled paper of... No "implied threats", Lennie. You have demonstrated chronic obsessive-compulsive behaviour compounded by repeated lying and willful deception. Feel free to send a letter to Tom Ridge, if you want. Why? Does he have licensure as an LMHSW in California? Or the FBI. Or the CIA. Or the DIA. Or even the IBEW. [try not to use crayon again...they didn't like that the last time...] Now compounded by illusions and fantasy. Your above statement suggests that a factual event occcured. You are now obligated to prove that assertion of have yet ANOTHER LennieLie piled on the stack that has gotten you flagged as a pathological liar. Tsk. Get some REAL medical help, nursie...your meds just aren't working...too many side effects visible to all readers here. What "side effects", Lennie? What level of healthcare licensure do you hold that allows you to make such diagnosis and suggestions? Or would you like to cut to the chace and admit that you are, once again, manifesting a lie in order to cover your own tracks? Putz. Steve, K4YZ |
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: 1. Nursie is NOT a member of the IEEE, can't even qualify. I could be a pathological liar without paying the dues, Lennie. Len, that's a slam dunk. Steve's pathologies have nothing to do with the IEEE. |
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message A french poodle in a flight suit. Watch him do tricks. Hi, hi! That "poodle" got too close to a trimming razor last time...:-) He be a little poodle on the flight line, close to the landing gear... But...a "pilot in command!" "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue" Steve's here to display his pathologies. |
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 |
|
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/16/2004 11:00 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: 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. Rest snipped. Same typo repeated over and over. According to Lennie's Newsgroup Rules of Engagement, a typo is an indicator that the respondant is "mad". Until Lennie calms down, I say we not talk to him any more. Steve, K4YZ |
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (William) Date: 10/16/2004 6:17 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message A french poodle in a flight suit. Watch him do tricks. Hi, hi! That "poodle" got too close to a trimming razor last time...:-) He be a little poodle on the flight line, close to the landing gear... But...a "pilot in command!" "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue" Steve's here to display his pathologies. Still Waiting on Brain to produce his halthcare licensure that documents his training/education in any medical/mental healthcare discipline. Still wondering what those "pathologies" are supposed to be. Please, Brain,.you're the medically trained one here...Tell us... Steve, K4YZ |
In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (William) Date: 10/16/2004 6:17 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message A french poodle in a flight suit. Watch him do tricks. Hi, hi! That "poodle" got too close to a trimming razor last time...:-) He be a little poodle on the flight line, close to the landing gear... But...a "pilot in command!" "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue" Steve's here to display his pathologies. Still Waiting on Brain to produce his halthcare licensure that documents his training/education in any medical/mental healthcare discipline. Riiiiiight...a certificate in nursing means Dr. Strangelove knows as much as any real MD. :-) That's on par with the famous Purchasing Agent job (of less than a half year) wherein Dr. Strangelove "knew all about electronic engineering!" :-) Still wondering what those "pathologies" are supposed to be. Go down to the morgue. Slide open one of the drawers and have a look at yourself. It's all there. It's just that simple. :-) Please, Brain,.you're the medically trained one here...Tell us... Tsk. Dr. Strangelove is NUTS. :-) No medical training needed to "diagnose" sociopathy...but the mighty macho morsemen Know All through that 20 WPM test certificate. :-) |
In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes: 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. By how much? Give us all the benefit of your long experience in commercial HF communications and demonstrate the total uselessness of RTTY as compared to mighty morse code. 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. Amazing...Rev. Jim finally appeared out of his haze and admitted that other radio services exist! Should hams stop using Morse Code? No. Should the FCC keep on testing for morse code just because some amateurs "still use it?" Then there are a number of radio services which never bothered with any morse code when they began. So what? Tsk. It should really hurt the egos of mighty macho morsemen to know that many radio services just never bothered with morse code when they began. Tsk, tsk...all that flouting of "tradition" from when on-off keying was the ONLY way to communicate by radio! 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". Tsk, tsk. NO confusion. :-) Morse Code is *not* the "SLOWEST of all modes available to U.S. radio amateurs." Awww...now you are thinking that my statement was a "direct personal attack" on your mighty morsemanship? :-) Is manual morse code faster than 100+ WPM data? Is manual morse code faster than the spoken word? If you answer "yes" to either, show your work. Preferrably on a home page using recycled pixels. :-) Nobody but FM broadcaster uses the stereo multiplex system developed over a half-century ago by Armstrong. Hello? Ol' Ed developed the "L+R, L-R on a subcarrier" method of present-day FM stereo sound broadcasting? Tsk, I don't think so. Rev. Jim is getting too much like his buddy, the gunnery nurse. :-) And the word is spelled "focused". Try not to use dirty words in here. The children might object. :-) Why is that important to amateur radio, Len? You repeat that statement over and over like a mantra, but never explain its significance. Tsk, tsk. I never once thought I could get dyed-in-the-wool (before their eyes) morsemen to think their ultra-favorite mode was (shudder!) "inferior" to anything else! :-) Right - you don't support the use of Morse Code. You'd ban it from ham radio if you could. Tsk, tsk, TSK. Trying to put words in other people's opinions? Nasty lie, jungle Jim. You swung on the wrong vine again... You posts often look like, and contain, the contents of said mug.....;-) Tsk, tsk. Direct personal attacks again. Yup, jungle Jim left his taxi to join the gunnery nurse... I care to emulate K8MN. Keep us informed on which embassy post you get...bye... Then why are you here, Len? Just advocating the elimination of the morse code test for any amateur radio license. :-) |
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 , PAMNO (N2EY) writes: 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. By how much? Depends on the situation. Give us all the benefit of your long experience in commercial HF communications and demonstrate the total uselessness of RTTY as compared to mighty morse code. Who says RTTY is useless? Not me. 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. Amazing...Rev. Jim finally appeared out of his haze and admitted that other radio services exist! Who has ever denied that other radio services exist? Not me. Should hams stop using Morse Code? No. Should the FCC keep on testing for morse code just because some amateurs "still use it?" Yes. Then there are a number of radio services which never bothered with any morse code when they began. So what? Tsk. It should really hurt the egos of mighty macho morsemen to know that many radio services just never bothered with morse code when they began. Tsk, tsk...all that flouting of "tradition" from when on-off keying was the ONLY way to communicate by radio! Doesn't answer the question. 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". Tsk, tsk. NO confusion. :-) You're confused. Morse Code is *not* the "SLOWEST of all modes available to U.S. radio amateurs." Awww...now you are thinking that my statement was a "direct personal attack" on your mighty morsemanship? :-) Nope. Just a mistake on your part. Is manual morse code faster than 100+ WPM data? Depends on the situation. Is manual morse code faster than the spoken word? Depends on the situation. In some cases, Morse Code *is* faster. If you answer "yes" to either, show your work. Why? I've already given examples of situations where Morse Code is faster than other modes. Preferrably on a home page using recycled pixels. :-) It's spelled "preferably". Nobody but FM broadcaster uses the stereo multiplex system developed over a half-century ago by Armstrong. Hello? Ol' Ed developed the "L+R, L-R on a subcarrier" method of present-day FM stereo sound broadcasting? Tsk, I don't think so. Irrelevant. Does any other service use that system? Why is that important to amateur radio, Len? You repeat that statement over and over like a mantra, but never explain its significance. Tsk, tsk. I never once thought I could get dyed-in-the-wool (before their eyes) morsemen to think their ultra-favorite mode was (shudder!) "inferior" to anything else! :-) Doesn't answer the question. Right - you don't support the use of Morse Code. You'd ban it from ham radio if you could. Tsk, tsk, TSK. Trying to put words in other people's opinions? No, just an opinion on my part based on lots of observations. You seem to have a big problem with opposing opinions, Len. You posts often look like, and contain, the contents of said mug.....;-) Tsk, tsk. Direct personal attacks again. Not at all, Len. I simply expressed an opinion of your postings here, not of you personally. I didn't say *you* resemble the contents of said mug....;-) Perhaps you so closely identify your own self-image with your postings here that you take any uncomplimentary opinion as a direct personal attack. Perhaps you are upset because all did not fall down in awe and worship of your wordsmithing here. Besides, I used one of those smiley-thingies. That means it's OK, right? ;-) I care to emulate K8MN. Keep us informed on which embassy post you get...bye... Then why are you here, Len? Just advocating the elimination of the morse code test for any amateur radio license. :-) The smiley tells me not to take that sentence seriously ;-) |
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , Dave Heil writes: 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. :-) Tsk. Poor baby. It isn't spin, much less political :-) :-) All other modes BUT morse has errors. An absolute. Yet you say morse "isn't necessarily free of error." :-) A decided qualified non- statement. I wrote what I intended to convey. If two morse ops exchange information for two hours without an error, their communication is error free. Anyplace else but in PCTA haven, such antics would be called "sinning by omission." If this were anywhere else, nobody would likely be discussing this at all. 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. :-) No, you didn't. You tap danced all over the place. I have no interest in educating the rest of the radio world in anything. Riiiight. All should revere and respect you because you Are. How does my lack of interest in educating the "world of radio" equate to a desire to be revered and respected? I'd think I'd merit much more of that for educating the "rest of the radio world". 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? :-) I can't see what isn't there :-) 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. Under certain propagation conditions, CW can outperform RTTY. I've personally experienced severe multipath echo where a morse circuit was operating normally while RTTY machines were printing gibberish. 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] So, you hadn't any real response. 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? That's right. Most strange. There is NO other mode allocated to amateurs which requires a separate pass-fail test for manual operation. There wasn't any such exam even back when the only two modes in use were CW and AM phone. So? Ah, but YOU had to take that morse test to achieve your rank, status, and privilege...therefore all others must do as you did. You are particularly thick these days. Others (read newcomers) not only aren't required to do as I did, they can't possibly. 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. Ah, non, non, non, Gaston. 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. Your voluminous output here suggests otherwise. 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. Seeing morse doesn't do much. Hearing it if you can't copy it, does even less. I've seen voice ops take more time to exchange information than morse ops, especially in dealing with formal message traffic. 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. Thanks for the giggles, Leonard. You keep describing your own actions and attributing them to others. 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. :-) Not if you and guy with like morse skills are at the ends of the circuit, it won't be easy. :-) 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. :-) Well ya see, Foghorn, it's like this: A morse op can pretty much do that with someone like yourself. Anyone with a skill has it all over someone who lacks that skill. That's a good reason for a guy to develop as many skills as he can in this life. You seem to be lacking several of 'em. 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. Not different physics, Leonard. Different methods of operation in pursuit of different goals. HF amateur communications aren't much like the old military point-to-point circuits you are familiar with. They seem to think that discussion about federal regulations on amateur radio should be forbidden to non-amateurs! There is no indication that "they" do that. I, however, note that you've had ample opportunity (and Lord knows you've taken the opportunity) to present your ideas. Those ideas are based on your very limited knowledge of and exposure to amateur radio. I don't think your ideas are very sound. Take your couple of ideas about amateur radio regulation and couple them with your litany of insults directed toward amateur radio operators and toward the ARRL; toss in your unique ability to grate on folks and maybe you can see why you haven't brought more people around to your way of thinking. They seem to think that the First Amendment Rights don't belong to non-amateur-licensed U.S. citizens. That seems to be what you believe, though there are loads of your posts which could be shown to anyone with the stomach to sift through them. They'd tend to make your statement about the First Amendment ring hollow. 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. Here's what Kim wrote: "However, under dire circumstances when, presumably, a CW net would be underway with very experienced communicators and would be the fastest, most efficient method of communication (hands down, no pun intended). For once, this is a thread wherein the real point of CW can be highlighted. CW may or may not ALWAYS be the "one mode that gets through when no other will." But, it's hard to argue that CW--if clear and done well--is the fastest and most efficient mode." Here's how you responded: "Kim, you are welcome to hold any belief system you wish, but the FACT that on-off-keyed "CW" morse IS the slowest communications mode in use today or in use a half century ago. I've seen it up close and personal throughout this whole past half century. It is evidenciary in the REST of the radio communications world." You added gems like: "It is the EXCEPTIONAL rarity now to find any two morsemen at each end of a ham radio circuit who can do SUSTAINED "network" communications by on-off-keyed "CW" morse at 40 WPM for hours. HOURS. Networks need hours if the number of messages are great." and "Nonsense alive and well only in the imaginative fantasies of mighty macho morsemen. Real networks don't operate on imagination. "Error-free" messages don't get relayed through self-glorified boasting." and "Those who want to fantasize that morse is "faster" or "better" will have to set up a controlled test NOT in morse favor to demonstrate that alleged fact. Let all those might macho morsemen sustain 20 to 40 WPM continuously for an 8-hour period...and do the communications with LESS error than any teleprinter circuit." Those statements demonstrate your lack of knowledge of morse code and of what good operators can achieve. There are a couple of other paragraphs dealing with RTTY opeation that lead me to believe that you don't know all that much about the limitations of radio teletype. You're a guy who often whines about his First Amendment rights being trampled. Yet you're complaining that I shouldn't comment on something you've written which has a number of glaring errors. I have experience with both RTTY and morse circuits. You have decades-old experience with RTTY. Your morse experience is pretty much non-existent. By the way, you seldom limit yourself to "a remark" to anyone. Your usual diatribe has been noted by all other readers and recorded at Google message archives. It surely has and if you like, you can be treated to it again. 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. :-) So you've conceded that your "rest of the radio world" claim has no real relevance to amateur radio operators. 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... :-) Nope, it doesn't work. They aren't there and I'm not seeing them %) 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. That's a frank admission but why not go all the way: You never introduced any communications methods used anywhere. 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..." Yeah, if it was mine eye, I'd likely go along with that. In this instance, it is you attempting to cast out mine eyes. 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? :-) Why are you concerned? Tsk, tsk...all the play-acting the professional in amateur comms as if deviation from that would mean loss of a job! :-) That's the kind of thing for which you are well known. 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." :-) Don't make DEMANDS, Leonard. 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 asked who would want to be involved in amateur radio. Apparently those folks would. Apparently you don't. Was that your point? You don't accept that any more than a "renowned historian" in here accepts it. I don't accept that Technician Class licensees want to be in amateur radio? You're silly. You must defend your imperial territory of rank/status/ privilege via passing a 20 WPM morse test. I defend my rank/status/privilege by passing the highest class amateur radio license available. It gives me *all* U.S. amateur radio privileges. I know all about the fun in amateur radio. I know quite a bit about the fun in usenet. Tsk. Not demonstrated in here. That it isn't evident to you is quite believable. 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...] One glance through the RAC database shows that there is no Leonard H. Anderson at your address, licensed as a radio amateur. It really is that easy. Tsk. Still trying to forbid First Amendment Rights to U.S. citizens, aren't you? Maybe you'll take a little time from your busy schedule to explain just how you feel that your rights have been abridged. I'd be really interested in reading it. 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. :-) Then you won't be disappointed. Sociopaths usually use that rationale to excuse their behavior. Well, good for them. 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. :-) Would you like a good googling, Leonard? 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. That's great. Now back to this "You are a god"/"You are no god" issue; how do you feel about that? I have no problem at all on recognizing bullies and sociopaths.... There seems to be some difference of opinion on that issue. 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. When did COMMERCIAL radiotelegraphy license come into the discussion? Are you planning to ship out? I thought you were discussing those being forced to do as I did. I don't have a COMMERCIAL radiotelegraph license. Are you getting enough sleep, Len? I have NO desire to do so, but the USA allows that option. So, its pretty much like your efforts toward obtaining an amateur radio license, huh? 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'd be nice, but it really isn't necessary. It is no longer possible for you to do so. Ave, Imperator! [old Roman statement roughly translatable to "no s**t?!" ] I'm happy that you have understood. 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. Wrong conclusion, Leonard. Therefore, you can't take the. 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... :-) It is really more simple than that. All that's necessary is to demonstrate that one of your statements contains an error. 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. :-) Oh--It's the booze and heroin talking? Well, you're just like him except for the wit...and the fact that he has been dead for some time. Dave K8MN |
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (William) Date: 10/16/2004 6:17 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message A french poodle in a flight suit. Watch him do tricks. Hi, hi! That "poodle" got too close to a trimming razor last time...:-) He be a little poodle on the flight line, close to the landing gear... But...a "pilot in command!" "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue" Steve's here to display his pathologies. Still Waiting on Brain to produce his halthcare licensure that documents his training/education in any medical/mental healthcare discipline. Riiiiiight...a certificate in nursing means Dr. Strangelove knows as much as any real MD. :-) That's on par with the famous Purchasing Agent job (of less than a half year) wherein Dr. Strangelove "knew all about electronic engineering!" :-) Still wondering what those "pathologies" are supposed to be. Go down to the morgue. Slide open one of the drawers and have a look at yourself. It's all there. It's just that simple. :-) Please, Brain,.you're the medically trained one here...Tell us... Tsk. Dr. Strangelove is NUTS. :-) No medical training needed to "diagnose" sociopathy...but the mighty macho morsemen Know All through that 20 WPM test certificate. :-) Always making demands. That's part of the pathology. |
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/17/2004 2:03 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (William) Date: 10/16/2004 6:17 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Steve's here to display his pathologies. Still Waiting on Brain to produce his halthcare licensure that documents his training/education in any medical/mental healthcare discipline. Riiiiiight...a certificate in nursing means Dr. Strangelove knows as much as any real MD. Hmmmmm.... "Certificate in nurisng".... I am going to ahve to look for one of those. I don't have one. That's on par with the famous Purchasing Agent job (of less than a half year) wherein Dr. Strangelove "knew all about electronic engineering!" Still with the errors, Lennie... Y'aint figgered it out YET, have you, Your Putziness? Still wondering what those "pathologies" are supposed to be. Go down to the morgue. Slide open one of the drawers and have a look at yourself. It's all there. It's just that simple. Please, Brain,.you're the medically trained one here...Tell us... Tsk. Dr. Strangelove is NUTS. Who is "Dr Strangelove"? No medical training needed to "diagnose" sociopathy...but the mighty macho morsemen Know All through that 20 WPM test certificate. Sure it is. No person may "diagnose" anything medical without a license to practice medicine, osteopathy, chiropractic or related mental health discipline. I realize facts are your weakness, Lennie, but you're really at the bottom of your game again... Putz. Steve, K4YZ |
In article ,
(William) writes: (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message .com... (William) wrote in message .com... You're still deceitful and untrustworthy. Steve, K4YZ You are the deceitful one. Claiming to make an apology that is a lie. What apology that is a lie? What the what??? Your apology was for an incorrect attribution, but should have been for a false accusation of plagiarism. The intended recipient thought it was appropriate and sincere. He took what he could get knowing that's as good as it was likely to get. Well, that's how it goes. :-) Mike Coslo is mighty upset about talking back to CAPman. Mike thinks that's not "grown up" or something. PCTA extras have to stick together...even if they are stuck together with wild and Crazy glue. :-) The gunnery nurse has several times accused me of "plagiarism" in articles I wrote for Ham Radio magazine. Never had any sort of apology from him about that. HR had a whole staff of editors who were licensed radio amateurs...and were quite aware of the plagiarism possibilities and violations of copyright that could occur in publishing. So far I've never had any "challenges" on such alleged plagiarism except from da bigg CAPman (Pilot in Command!). He must think he is a Cancun judge...the "court of last resort." :-) |
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/27/2004 8:15 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: The gunnery nurse has several times accused me of "plagiarism" in articles I wrote for Ham Radio magazine. Never had any sort of apology from him about that. And you probably never will. To date, there's not been any corroboration of your claim of originality, nor has there ever been any referenceable "use" of any of your "works". Steve, K4YZ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:30 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com