| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#22
October 22nd 04, 01:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence
From: (William) Date: 10/21/2004 6:26 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: 1. Not my rant. 2. I merely reposted W3RV's post and N2EY's response. 3. He agreed with the sentiment being retold. 4. Jim still does not acknowledge his own remark. 5. Steve still does not acknowledge that he was wrong. Never apologizes either. 1. Sure it was. You started it with that silly "several Extras on RRAP" claim. 2. Talking about a specific club with specific requirements. 3. Talking about a specific club with specific requirement. 4. Does he need to? It certainly doe NOT affirm YOUR assertion, Brain. 5. Wrong. Your message is date-time-grouped Thursday at 6:26PM CST. Hans had acknowledged and ACCEPTED my aplogy HOURS before you made this post...More than enough time for you to get your facts right. Now...Since YOUR statement is obviously VERY wrong on TWO counts as demonstrated by Hans' acknowledgement and acceptance of the apology hours before you made this post, let's see how long it takes YOU to acknowledge YOUR error and apologize to me........ Steve, K4YZ |
|
#23
October 23rd 04, 01:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence From: (William) Date: 10/21/2004 6:26 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: 1. Not my rant. 2. I merely reposted W3RV's post and N2EY's response. 3. He agreed with the sentiment being retold. 4. Jim still does not acknowledge his own remark. 5. Steve still does not acknowledge that he was wrong. Never apologizes either. 1. Sure it was. You started it with that silly "several Extras on RRAP" claim. 2. Talking about a specific club with specific requirements. 3. Talking about a specific club with specific requirement. 4. Does he need to? It certainly doe NOT affirm YOUR assertion, Brain. 5. Wrong. Your message is date-time-grouped Thursday at 6:26PM CST. Hans had acknowledged and ACCEPTED my aplogy HOURS before you made this post...More than enough time for you to get your facts right. Now...Since YOUR statement is obviously VERY wrong on TWO counts as demonstrated by Hans' acknowledgement and acceptance of the apology hours before you made this post, let's see how long it takes YOU to acknowledge YOUR error and apologize to me........ Steve, K4YZ 1. Nope. Just a straight clip of what Kelly and Micolis exchanged in RRAP. "Don't blame me, I'm only the messenger," another PCTA once told me. Hi! 2. Sure. 3. Sure. 4. He's in denial. You're still getting the attributions wrong. Hi! 5. I use Google. I read one thread at a time, and respond as appropriate. Too bad. 6. You did not apologize with the intent of sorrow or remorse. Your so called apology was very narrowly focused, merely buying you time while you continue to check out all other possible avenues for calling Hans a liar. I think you even called Hans "slimy." Hi! |
|
#24
October 23rd 04, 02:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence From: (William) Date: 10/21/2004 6:26 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: 1. Not my rant. 2. I merely reposted W3RV's post and N2EY's response. 3. He agreed with the sentiment being retold. 4. Jim still does not acknowledge his own remark. 5. Steve still does not acknowledge that he was wrong. Never apologizes either. 1. Sure it was. You started it with that silly "several Extras on RRAP" claim. W3RV, N2EY. See the attributions. Oh, nevermind. Forgot you can't "decipher" them. 2. Talking about a specific club with specific requirements. If it is so specific, please name the -offending- club. 3. Talking about a specific club with specific requirement. If it is so specific, please name the -offending- club. 4. Does he need to? a. No, the attributions are correct regardless of whether you can read/interpret them or not. It certainly doe NOT affirm YOUR assertion, Brain. Doe a deer... Google archives don't lie. Your master is guilty of license-class elitism. 5. Wrong. Your message is date-time-grouped Thursday at 6:26PM CST. Hans had acknowledged and ACCEPTED my aplogy HOURS before you made this post...More than enough time for you to get your facts right. You're not so smart. I work one thread at a time and then I move on. Now...Since YOUR statement is obviously VERY wrong on TWO counts as demonstrated by Hans' acknowledgement and acceptance of the apology hours before you made this post, let's see how long it takes YOU to acknowledge YOUR error and apologize to me........ Steve, K4YZ After I check with the ARRL, 73, World Radio, defunct Ham Radio, and Nuts&Volts. Do hold your breath. |
|
#25
October 23rd 04, 09:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence
From: (William) Date: 10/22/2004 7:15 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: 1. Nope. Just a straight clip of what Kelly and Micolis exchanged in RRAP. "Don't blame me, I'm only the messenger," another PCTA once told me. Hi! 2. Sure. 3. Sure. 4. He's in denial. You're still getting the attributions wrong. Hi! 5. I use Google. I read one thread at a time, and respond as appropriate. Too bad. 6. You did not apologize with the intent of sorrow or remorse. Your so called apology was very narrowly focused, merely buying you time while you continue to check out all other possible avenues for calling Hans a liar. I think you even called Hans "slimy." Hi! 1. Still doesn't change the "message", whichg has nothing to do with YOUR assertion that "numerous Extras" thumb their noses at lower class operators. You still haven't provided a single valid quote. 2. Yep. 3. Yep. 4. No, I'm not. 5. It doesn't matter WHERE you post from...the FACT remains that your post was several HOURS after the initial exchange occured. You had more than adequate time to read the posts before trying to weasle your way into yet another feeble rant. 6. "Sorrow or remorse"....No. Sincere apology for having got the attribute on the article's true origin, yes. "Sorrow or remorse" is for the death of a relative or friend, or backing ovr one of the kid's bikes. And when it comes to "buying time", YOU are the master of that...We've waited almost four years now for some proof of the validity of your alleged Somalia operation, and it's been almost a year now since your silly "Unlicensed devices" rants. If I take a week to get a response from ARRL to determine the nature of the article that I recall, "SO WHAT...?!?! I've already proven you wrong on your assertion that I allegedly never say I am sorry or acknowledge an error. Done that in the last 24 hours. Still no apology from YOU for it...Just some lame "you really didn't mean it" claim. Seems it was good enough for Hans, the aggrieved one in this case, to accept it. It's just as well...If you HAD done it I'd be in ICU with a stroke at this very moment! Steve, K4YZ |
|
#26
October 23rd 04, 09:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence
From: (William) Date: 10/22/2004 8:04 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... 5. Wrong. Your message is date-time-grouped Thursday at 6:26PM CST. Hans had acknowledged and ACCEPTED my aplogy HOURS before you made this post...More than enough time for you to get your facts right. You're not so smart. I work one thread at a time and then I move on. Excuses, excuses, excuses. Coward. Now...Since YOUR statement is obviously VERY wrong on TWO counts as demonstrated by Hans' acknowledgement and acceptance of the apology hours before you made this post, let's see how long it takes YOU to acknowledge YOUR error and apologize to me........ After I check with the ARRL, 73, World Radio, defunct Ham Radio, and Nuts&Volts. Sorry...too late. Your claim was that I never acknowledge an error or make apologies. You've already been proven wrong, now compounded by your refusal to admit to it even after it was shown to be hours old. Thank you for proving me right on THIS issue, that Brian P. Burke IS a lying coward, again. Steve, K4YZ |
|
#27
October 23rd 04, 08:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(William) writes: 6. You did not apologize with the intent of sorrow or remorse. Your so called apology was very narrowly focused, merely buying you time while you continue to check out all other possible avenues for calling Hans a liar. I think you even called Hans "slimy." Hi! Gunnery nurse Yell-yell has used all sorts of epithets in his "apologies." As an example, see the thread heading where Hans Brakob is called "Brokeslob" (or something close to that). Anyone continuing to not agree with Robeson's opinions is called a "coward and a liar." Repeated disagreement with his opinions makes one a "'Documented' liar." ! :-) The only way to avoid being called nasty names is to travel in the same direction as the gunnery nurse: "His way or the highway." Hi hi. Problem is, he is on a one-way street (without posted signs). Not much traffic along his way... |
|
#28
October 24th 04, 12:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence From: (William) Date: 10/22/2004 8:04 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... 5. Wrong. Your message is date-time-grouped Thursday at 6:26PM CST. Hans had acknowledged and ACCEPTED my aplogy HOURS before you made this post...More than enough time for you to get your facts right. You're not so smart. I work one thread at a time and then I move on. Excuses, excuses, excuses. Coward. Now...Since YOUR statement is obviously VERY wrong on TWO counts as demonstrated by Hans' acknowledgement and acceptance of the apology hours before you made this post, let's see how long it takes YOU to acknowledge YOUR error and apologize to me........ After I check with the ARRL, 73, World Radio, defunct Ham Radio, and Nuts&Volts. Sorry...too late. Your claim was that I never acknowledge an error or make apologies. You've already been proven wrong, now compounded by your refusal to admit to it even after it was shown to be hours old. Thank you for proving me right on THIS issue, that Brian P. Burke IS a lying coward, again. Steve, K4YZ Steve, you only admitted that you were wrong about the particular magazine that you cited; you still accuse Hans of being a plagiarist until QST is checked out. Am I wrong? |
|
#29
October 24th 04, 12:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: operator's licence vs. station licence From: (William) Date: 10/22/2004 7:15 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: 1. Nope. Just a straight clip of what Kelly and Micolis exchanged in RRAP. "Don't blame me, I'm only the messenger," another PCTA once told me. Hi! 2. Sure. 3. Sure. 4. He's in denial. You're still getting the attributions wrong. Hi! 5. I use Google. I read one thread at a time, and respond as appropriate. Too bad. 6. You did not apologize with the intent of sorrow or remorse. Your so called apology was very narrowly focused, merely buying you time while you continue to check out all other possible avenues for calling Hans a liar. I think you even called Hans "slimy." Hi! 1. Still doesn't change the "message", whichg has nothing to do with YOUR assertion that "numerous Extras" thumb their noses at lower class operators. You still haven't provided a single valid quote. See how you twist everything? There aren't even "numerous" hams on RRAP, so why would I say "numerous??? Idiot. 2. Yep. 3. Yep. 4. No, I'm not. Yes, you do, and yes, you are. 5. It doesn't matter WHERE you post from...the FACT remains that your post was several HOURS after the initial exchange occured. You had more than adequate time to read the posts before trying to weasle your way into yet another feeble rant. Feeble apology. 6. "Sorrow or remorse"....No. Sincere apology for having got the attribute on the article's true origin, yes. Not -even- that. You merely apologised for getting the magazine citation wrong. Your accusation of plagiarism stands. "Sorrow or remorse" is for the death of a relative or friend, or backing ovr one of the kid's bikes. And when it comes to "buying time", YOU are the master of that...We've waited almost four years now for some proof of the validity of your alleged Somalia operation, and it's been almost a year now since your silly "Unlicensed devices" rants. If I take a week to get a response from ARRL to determine the nature of the article that I recall, "SO WHAT...?!?! So your accusation of plagiarism stands. You apologized for the wrong thing, which is what makes your "sincere" apology completely worthless. I've already proven you wrong on your assertion that I allegedly never say I am sorry or acknowledge an error. Done that in the last 24 hours. Still no apology from YOU for it...Just some lame "you really didn't mean it" claim. The accusation was one of plagiarism, not which magazine it was published in. Your "sincere" apology over the incorrect citation is completely meaningless. Seems it was good enough for Hans, the aggrieved one in this case, to accept it. He was in such shock that you actually apologized he almost missed your insincerity. Then he said he was waiting for the rest of the apology, (the part about plagiarism). It's just as well...If you HAD done it I'd be in ICU with a stroke at this very moment! Steve, K4YZ If that's all it would take I'd lie and make an apology right now. But you're the one lying, so your promise of a stroke will just have to wait. Hi, hi! |
|
#30
October 24th 04, 07:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(William) wrote in message . com...
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... 1. Still doesn't change the "message", whichg has nothing to do with YOUR assertion that "numerous Extras" thumb their noses at lower class operators. You still haven't provided a single valid quote. See how you twist everything? Nothing's "twisted", Brain, except your perceptions of reality. There aren't even "numerous" hams on RRAP, so why would I say "numerous??? Idiot. Sure there are. Just the "regulars" alone are 12-15. Don't agree? Check Webster's. 2. Yep. 3. Yep. 4. No, I'm not. Yes, you do, and yes, you are. 5. It doesn't matter WHERE you post from...the FACT remains that your post was several HOURS after the initial exchange occured. You had more than adequate time to read the posts before trying to weasle your way into yet another feeble rant. Feeble apology. It wasn't for you to say, Brain. You lied. Yuo go caught. You won't apologize. Feeble. 6. "Sorrow or remorse"....No. Sincere apology for having got the attribute on the article's true origin, yes. Not -even- that. You merely apologised for getting the magazine citation wrong. Yep...Exactly right. Your accusation of plagiarism stands. And so far it appears I was wrong. We'll know in a day or two. "Sorrow or remorse" is for the death of a relative or friend, or backing over one of the kid's bikes. And when it comes to "buying time", YOU are the master of that...We've waited almost four years now for some proof of the validity of your alleged Somalia operation, and it's been almost a year now since your silly "Unlicensed devices" rants. If I take a week to get a response from ARRL to determine the nature of the article that I recall, "SO WHAT...?!?! So your accusation of plagiarism stands. You apologized for the wrong thing, which is what makes your "sincere" apology completely worthless. I apologized for that which I know to be wrong. And so far, your assertion of what is "worthless" or not sincere still don't stand since the person they were offered to DID think they were worthy and sincere since he accepted them. I've already proven you wrong on your assertion that I allegedly never say I am sorry or acknowledge an error. Done that in the last 24 hours. Still no apology from YOU for it...Just some lame "you really didn't mean it" claim. The accusation was one of plagiarism, not which magazine it was published in. Your "sincere" apology over the incorrect citation is completely meaningless. Completely meaningless to YOU, however you were not the intended recipient, ergo YOUR definition of what is meaningless or insincere is itself worthless. Seems it was good enough for Hans, the aggrieved one in this case, to accept it. He was in such shock that you actually apologized he almost missed your insincerity. Then he said he was waiting for the rest of the apology, (the part about plagiarism). Oh...IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE...YOU are now reading and interpreting Hans' mail for him! I didn't realize that Hans was so physically or mentally incapable of making his on assessments and he had you to depend on for making those It's just as well...If you HAD done it I'd be in ICU with a stroke at this very moment! Steve, K4YZ If that's all it would take I'd lie and make an apology right now. But you're the one lying, so your promise of a stroke will just have to wait. Well..you'e already half way there, Brain...You've already lied today, some again in this post. As for the stroke, I know you don't have the strength of character to apologize even when the evidence is so overwhelmingly against you...like the last 2 days, Brain. Brian P. Burke is a documented liar without the strength of character to admit an error or apologize for it. Period. Steve, K4YZ |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| RILEY SAYS K1MAN BROADCASTS ARE LEGAL | Policy | |||
| FCC Amateur Radio Enforcement Letters for the Period Ending May 1, 2004 | General | |||
| Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #617 | Dx | |||
| Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #617 | Dx | |||
| Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #617 | General | |||
Linear Mode
