In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.

Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)

So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing. When that someone is part of the Lennie/Steve/Brian-William
troika in *their* ongoing whizzing contest is much more amusing.

Try a quartet. :-)

I'm not into any "whizzing contest" with the gunnery nurse. :-)

YOU are the one making that charge.

I just call them as everyone else can see them.

Or, as someone else wrote, "the replies just seem to write themselves!"

Heh heh heh.

Well, except to some who wish to turn this newsgroup into
a quasi-private Chat Room involving their own desires and
preferences..and to have them damn all others for not thinking
and feeling as they do. [yourself excluded]


That's a pretty good summation of what *you* want from this newsgroup, Len.
After all, you're the one telling other people to "shut the hell up"..

I've thought that Lenover21 wanted to be the moderator in here. He
claims otherwise.

Tsk. Nice troll cast, but inaccurate.

Now YOU tell us what the Titanic's sinking of 92 years ago has to
do with amateur radio policy of today?

1912 was the year of the first U.S. radio regulating agency. That's
about the only "relation" to the subject of the Titanic and a very
tenuous one...if at all. :-)

For the bleeding-heart imaginary sailors aboard, I won't cry
great crocodile tears of a thousand-plus humans who perished
on the Titanic in 1912. Nope.

"Bleeding-heart imaginary sailors"? Who would that be?

Yeah, what's with that?

Tsk. You two don't really READ what you've written? :-)

Jimmie wanted me to show ten kinds of respect and sorrow for all
the passengers and crew of the Titanic who perished in 1912!

I'll just reflect that the subject
made a LOT of money for Linda Hamilton's ex-husband

You mean James Cameron? If so, why not just use his name?

You seem to have a serious problem calling people by their names. Perhaps
you
don't have the guts to do it.

Tsk. "Serious problem?" More tsk. :-)

Not much show-biz action in PA...but there is in this neck o' the woods.

and
employed many Mexican laborers on the set of "Titanic"...
many many years later with a little gilt statuette awarded for
Best Motion Picture to the producer-director. No crying great
tears on-stage on that Oscar Night.

What possible significance does that have?

And is that on topic for rrap? ;^)

Tsk. More PCTA extra Double Standard.

Linda is quite quirky in a cute sort of way... or is that quite cute in

a quirky sort of way?

Why do you wish to continue talking about Linda Hamilton?

Does she have a ham license? [pun intended]

[just think what fun the ARRL news page would have with...drum
roll...HAM ACTOR! :-)


Boeing doesn't test fly
new aircraft with commercial paying passengers.

Not many aircraft companies were busy working out Test
Proceedures for test-flying new aircraft in 1912... :-)

How did Bill Boeing's company get into ham radio policy?

You guys just can't focus! :-)

Boeing innovated the pre-flight checklist around 1940 or
thereabouts after they lost a prototype Flying Fortress (and
their chief test pilot) on takeoff.

Of course there was the PROFESSIONAL pilot who tried to roll a B-52 at low
altitude.

Did you see the case study of that one, Jim? Spooky! Too bad so many of

the folk flying with him knew they were probably going to die some day
with him at the yoke.

So...this is now a FLYING newsgroup?

Or are you PCTAs just "high?"


Not to worry. U.S. amateur radio regulations are Up To Date.

Yes, they are.

Seems like it to me!

For maybe, 1913... :-)

They still require all amateurs to test for beloved morse code
cognition capability in order to have priveleges of operating
below 30 MHz...in the ham bands.

Why does that bother you so much?

Tsk. Doesn't bother me much. I haven't gotten an amateur radio
license yet. :-)

Why should I sell my soul for some high-rate morsemanship? :-)


It seems that some amateurs
bent on constantly re-living the past (in almost anything) think
that morse code skill is still the epitome of "radio operation" in
the year 2004.

Perhaps some do.

Jimmie Who do.

Many more think that a simple test of Morse code skill at a very basic
level is a worthwhile requirement for an amateur license.

Only because THEY had to do it...therefore everyone else has to
do the same! :-)

Why does that bother you so much, Len?

Why is Jimmie so bothered that he has to keep asking that?

Very "progressive." State of the Art.

Len, do you live in a "State Of The Art" house? Drive a "State Of The Art"
car?
Wear "State Of The Art" clothes?

Is your computer "State Of The Art", complete with broadband connection?

Far more modern in all respects on all items compared to 1912. :-)

If we owns PC's, we isn't state of the art.

Tsk. Bad grammar to boot...up.

Try "If we own PCs, we are not state of the art." :-)

Your English syntax and grammar is NOT state of the art...

Heck, the only HF radio equipment you've admitted to owning is over 20 years
old. Definitely not "State Of The Art", yet you lecture others about it.

Tsk. Jimmie have loss of memory. Poor fella. Has to "recycle" all his
radio construction in order to do "state of the art" TUBE designs in the
1990s. Tsk. With a double degree... :-)

Random though mode on:

I have a 1987 Transciever. IC-745. Suits me just fine. All digital
(excluding the necessary analog bits)

Wow, even digital radios are getting old hat.

"Why", the Grinch said as a smile lit his face, "Maybe for everything,
everymode all has it's place."

I have a chunk of galena setting on the shelf in front of me - maybe
I'll make a cat's whisker detector and radio from it

Random thought mode off.......

Put a carbon mike in your antenna lead and you can do AM like
Reggie F. in his Big Broadcast of 1906! :-)

Wow! "State of the Art!"

Amaze your friends and neighbors by being able to talk without wires
for at least 10 miles! :-)

Have a Happy, your Grinchness...

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


N2EY wrote:


In article ,



(Len Over 21) writes:


In article , Robert Casey
writes:


One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.

Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)

So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing. When that someone is part of the Lennie/Steve/Brian-William
troika in *their* ongoing whizzing contest is much more amusing.


Try a quartet. :-)

I'm not into any "whizzing contest" with the gunnery nurse. :-)

YOU are the one making that charge.


Charge is such a nasty legalese sounding term. It's more like
"observation". And yes, I do make that observation.


I just call them as everyone else can see them.

Wouldn't it be better to shed light on what others may not be able to see?


Or, as someone else wrote, "the replies just seem to write themselves!"

Heh heh heh.


Well, except to some who wish to turn this newsgroup into
a quasi-private Chat Room involving their own desires and
preferences..and to have them damn all others for not thinking
and feeling as they do. [yourself excluded]


That's a pretty good summation of what *you* want from this newsgroup, Len.
After all, you're the one telling other people to "shut the hell up"..

I've thought that Lenover21 wanted to be the moderator in here. He
claims otherwise.


Tsk. Nice troll cast, but inaccurate.

Now YOU tell us what the Titanic's sinking of 92 years ago has to
do with amateur radio policy of today?

Very very little.



1912 was the year of the first U.S. radio regulating agency. That's
about the only "relation" to the subject of the Titanic and a very
tenuous one...if at all. :-)


For the bleeding-heart imaginary sailors aboard, I won't cry
great crocodile tears of a thousand-plus humans who perished
on the Titanic in 1912. Nope.

"Bleeding-heart imaginary sailors"? Who would that be?

Yeah, what's with that?


Tsk. You two don't really READ what you've written? :-)

Jimmie wanted me to show ten kinds of respect and sorrow for all
the passengers and crew of the Titanic who perished in 1912!

When one would have been sufficient. Respect doesn't make a person a
"bleeding heart".



I'll just reflect that the subject
made a LOT of money for Linda Hamilton's ex-husband

You mean James Cameron? If so, why not just use his name?

You seem to have a serious problem calling people by their names. Perhaps

you

don't have the guts to do it.


Tsk. "Serious problem?" More tsk. :-)

Not much show-biz action in PA...but there is in this neck o' the woods.


and
employed many Mexican laborers on the set of "Titanic"...
many many years later with a little gilt statuette awarded for
Best Motion Picture to the producer-director. No crying great
tears on-stage on that Oscar Night.

What possible significance does that have?

And is that on topic for rrap? ;^)


Tsk. More PCTA extra Double Standard.


Linda is quite quirky in a cute sort of way... or is that quite cute in


a quirky sort of way?


Why do you wish to continue talking about Linda Hamilton?


Well you brought her to the conversation. 8^)


Does she have a ham license? [pun intended]

[just think what fun the ARRL news page would have with...drum
roll...HAM ACTOR! :-)


Boeing doesn't test fly
new aircraft with commercial paying passengers.

Not many aircraft companies were busy working out Test
Proceedures for test-flying new aircraft in 1912... :-)


How did Bill Boeing's company get into ham radio policy?

You guys just can't focus! :-)


Not a matter of focus. Just some discussion among friends. And the
discussions among friends tend to go where they will.


Boeing innovated the pre-flight checklist around 1940 or
thereabouts after they lost a prototype Flying Fortress (and
their chief test pilot) on takeoff.

Of course there was the PROFESSIONAL pilot who tried to roll a B-52 at low
altitude.

Did you see the case study of that one, Jim? Spooky! Too bad so many of


the folk flying with him knew they were probably going to die some day
with him at the yoke.


So...this is now a FLYING newsgroup?

No, but there are some on Netnews, I'm sure.



Or are you PCTAs just "high?"


Ick, getting high is a sure fire method of wasting one's life.




Not to worry. U.S. amateur radio regulations are Up To Date.

Yes, they are.

Seems like it to me!


For maybe, 1913... :-)


I took the tests recently, all within the past 5 years, and a couple
within 3 years. They are up to date enough, covering satellite ops, all
manner of relevant band and technical questions dealing with present day
equipment. They are up to date for at least mid 2001.


They still require all amateurs to test for beloved morse code
cognition capability in order to have priveleges of operating
below 30 MHz...in the ham bands.

Why does that bother you so much?


Tsk. Doesn't bother me much. I haven't gotten an amateur radio
license yet. :-)

Why should I sell my soul for some high-rate morsemanship? :-)


Ahh, maybe there is the problem. You don't have to sell your soul, just
study the material. I had great difficulty with Element 1 preparation,
but it didn't do me a bit of damage. Here I am, soul intact , and just
as fat dumb and happy as ever! 8^)



It seems that some amateurs
bent on constantly re-living the past (in almost anything) think
that morse code skill is still the epitome of "radio operation" in
the year 2004.

Perhaps some do.


Jimmie Who do.

Jimmie do the voodoo that who do? 8^)



Many more think that a simple test of Morse code skill at a very basic
level is a worthwhile requirement for an amateur license.


Only because THEY had to do it...therefore everyone else has to
do the same! :-)

Nahh, I think they should take it because that is the rule at present.


Why does that bother you so much, Len?


Why is Jimmie so bothered that he has to keep asking that?


Oh, Bother..... W.T. Pooh


Very "progressive." State of the Art.

Len, do you live in a "State Of The Art" house? Drive a "State Of The Art"

car?

Wear "State Of The Art" clothes?

Is your computer "State Of The Art", complete with broadband connection?


Far more modern in all respects on all items compared to 1912. :-)


If we owns PC's, we isn't state of the art.


Tsk. Bad grammar to boot...up.

Yup, kind of illustrating the point that many people seem to think that
they are some kind of high tech wizard because they own a PC or cell
phone, or other such icons.


Try "If we own PCs, we are not state of the art." :-)

Thanks for the suggestion, but I kind of like the other way if you
don't mind. 8^)

Your English syntax and grammar is NOT state of the art...

Oh, but they are as necessary!


Heck, the only HF radio equipment you've admitted to owning is over 20 years
old. Definitely not "State Of The Art", yet you lecture others about it.


Tsk. Jimmie have loss of memory. Poor fella. Has to "recycle" all his
radio construction in order to do "state of the art" TUBE designs in the
1990s. Tsk. With a double degree... :-)


Despite their virtual obsolescence, hollow state technology is quite
interesting, at least to me.


Random though mode on:

I have a 1987 Transciever. IC-745. Suits me just fine. All digital
(excluding the necessary analog bits)

Wow, even digital radios are getting old hat.

"Why", the Grinch said as a smile lit his face, "Maybe for everything,
everymode all has it's place."

I have a chunk of galena setting on the shelf in front of me - maybe
I'll make a cat's whisker detector and radio from it

Random thought mode off.......


Put a carbon mike in your antenna lead and you can do AM like
Reggie F. in his Big Broadcast of 1906! :-)

AM never really appealed to me. Takes a lot of energy for all you get
out of it. But I do like historical processes and equipment as a
diversion after working all day with much more modern techniques. Kinda fun.

Wow! "State of the Art!"

I suppose at one time it was!

Amaze your friends and neighbors by being able to talk without wires
for at least 10 miles! :-)

Hehe, AM is probably just about at the bottom of the heap (with
apologies to all the AM'ers out there)


Have a Happy, your Grinchness...


You also, Lenover21.



I do have a question. I had called you Lennie once, and I think you
didn't particularly care for that. I've been calling you Lenover21, but
that sounds kind of formal if a screen name can be called formal.

Do you have a preference? Does simply "Len" work? Or "Leonard"?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS....
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 10/25/2004 12:05 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

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

I'm not into any "whizzing contest" with the gunnery nurse.

YOU are the one making that charge.

Charge is such a nasty legalese sounding term. It's more like
"observation". And yes, I do make that observation.

Lennie does love to make those "tough sounding" accusations, then
chastises anyone who dares to do the same.

I just call them as everyone else can see them.

Wouldn't it be better to shed light on what others may not be able to
see?

When you're already in the dark without a clue as to where the light
switch is, the best you can do is fumble around and hope to hit it sooner or
later...

Lennie's DEFINITELY in the "...or later" stage.

Now YOU tell us what the Titanic's sinking of 92 years ago has to
do with amateur radio policy of today?

Very very little.

Actually, quite a bit.

It was the need to have a "universal" communications medium that has drive
the Morse Code issue for all these decades.

Of course Lennie KNOWS that, has stated it himself...Re-stating it would
ruined the rant effect.

Jimmie wanted me to show ten kinds of respect and sorrow for all
the passengers and crew of the Titanic who perished in 1912!

When one would have been sufficient. Respect doesn't make a person a
"bleeding heart".

Of course Lennie has no respect or sorrow for those people.

How can you respect anyone else when you have no SELF respect?

Why do you wish to continue talking about Linda Hamilton?

Well you brought her to the conversation. 8^)

Who wouldn't...Unless, of course, your "preferences" of the "alternative
lifestyle" mode...?

So...this is now a FLYING newsgroup?

No, but there are some on Netnews, I'm sure.

It's only a "FLYING" newsgroup when Lennie wants to discuss his student
pilot days in 1950-something.

And it's a "MILITARY COMMUNICATIONS" newsgroup when Lennie wants to
discuss 1950's-era Army RTTY or 1980's era "SINCGARS" radio.

It's also a MODEL AIRPLANE newsgroup when he wants to parallel the AMA
with the ARRL.

And it's a "MENTAL HEALTH" newsgroup when Lennie wants to make allegations
about other's "meds" or how "crazy" they are.

In short, it can be ANY KIND of newsgroup that Lennie wants WHEN Lennie
wants, but WOE BE to the Licensed Amateur who dares to deviate from Lennie's
topic-du-jour.

Why should I sell my soul for some high-rate morsemanship?

Ahh, maybe there is the problem. You don't have to sell your soul, just

study the material. I had great difficulty with Element 1 preparation,
but it didn't do me a bit of damage. Here I am, soul intact , and just
as fat dumb and happy as ever! 8^)

Mike, if you ever notice, Lennie doesn't do ANYthing that requires him
being more than an arm-length away from the computer.



I do have a question. I had called you Lennie once, and I think you
didn't particularly care for that. I've been calling you Lenover21, but
that sounds kind of formal if a screen name can be called formal.

Do you have a preference? Does simply "Len" work? Or "Leonard"?

How about just "Putz", Mike...?!?!

Works for me.

Steve, K4YZ

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

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

N2EY wrote:

In article ,



(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.

Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)

So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing. When that someone is part of the Lennie/Steve/Brian-William
troika in *their* ongoing whizzing contest is much more amusing.

Try a quartet. :-)

I'm not into any "whizzing contest" with the gunnery nurse. :-)

YOU are the one making that charge.

Charge is such a nasty legalese sounding term. It's more like
"observation". And yes, I do make that observation.

Then I advise that your seeing an opthalmologist for an
eye examination is a good idea. That way you could observe
the several fracases that nursie starts with ANYONE who
disagrees with him...besides Brian, try Hans and Dieter.

It's all been public. Nursie is eager and chomping at the bit
to FIGHT with anyone.

I just call them as everyone else can see them.

Wouldn't it be better to shed light on what others may not be able to
see?

Tsk. See that opthalmologist.

Warning: You could be a victim of presbyopia and not know it...

Or, as someone else wrote, "the replies just seem to write themselves!"

Heh heh heh.

Gosh...wonder who wrote that original phrase? :-)

It wasn't Mike Coslo. It wasn't nursie. It wasn't Brian. It wasn't Rev.
Jim, our Artist of the State. It wasn't Kellie. It wasn't Hans. It
wasn't Dieter. It wasn't Jim Hampton. It wasn't Dee. It wasn't Kim.
OK, that about exhausts the regulars in here. :-)


Now YOU tell us what the Titanic's sinking of 92 years ago has to
do with amateur radio policy of today?

Very very little.

Actually, NONE.

However, the Titanic disaster is a favorite subject of his lordship,
Sir James. As Lord High Admiral of the newsgroup (sailing these
turbid waters every day), he has decreed the Titanic disaster IS a
worthy subject for amateur radio policy.

There we have it.


When one would have been sufficient. Respect doesn't make a person a
"bleeding heart".

True enough. But only in the literal sense.

Hello? Can you see some sarcasm in my remarks? :-)


How did Bill Boeing's company get into ham radio policy?

You guys just can't focus! :-)

Not a matter of focus. Just some discussion among friends. And the
discussions among friends tend to go where they will.

So...you've joined the Society of Friends?

We quake at the thought...

But, of curse, you regulars all OWN this newsgroup. Despite it going
wherever the Internet carries it. What you dictate as Right and Proper
MUST be observed at all times!


Or are you PCTAs just "high?"

Ick, getting high is a sure fire method of wasting one's life.

I'm "high" on life itself. No drugs or substances needed.

Nor any morse code fantasies as the epitome of hobby radio arts.

:-)

I took the tests recently, all within the past 5 years, and a couple
within 3 years. They are up to date enough, covering satellite ops, all
manner of relevant band and technical questions dealing with present day
equipment. They are up to date for at least mid 2001.

You missed my point on that.

The present-day U.S. amateur regulations are just fine and dandy
to those who want to keep the morse code test for a license
examination.

Other than to this circle of "friends," somewhere in the neighborhood
of 700 thousand (give or take) licensed amateurs MIGHT have some
disagreement with that "up to date."

There are presently 18 ("count 'em, 18") petitions for consideration
on changes to U.S. amateur radio regulations made public by the
FCC. It should be obvious (except to the oblivious) that all is NOT
"up to date" in those regulations.


Ahh, maybe there is the problem. You don't have to sell your soul, just

study the material.

Why? :-)

I'm really only interested in ending the U.S. amateur radio license exam
morse code test.

I do NOT need to "study material on morsemanship" to do that.

I do NOT need to "study material on any other test element" just to
get a federal merit badge saying I am "authorized" something or
other. You seem to forget that I was ON HF very legally and
correctly over a half century ago, over four decades ago, over three
decades ago, and even earlier this year...all without having ANY
requirement to "study morsemanship material."

I had great difficulty with Element 1 preparation,
but it didn't do me a bit of damage.

I always study for my blood tests. So far I've passed every time.




I do have a question. I had called you Lennie once, and I think you
didn't particularly care for that. I've been calling you Lenover21, but
that sounds kind of formal if a screen name can be called formal.

What do you see on my "signature" line?

Tsk. If you can't understand my preferences, then that trip to an
opthalmologist for you is necessary. [remember, watch out for
presbyopia...]

If you pick up an IEEE Membership Directory, you wil see my legal
name in there. Been in there since 1973. That's the formal version.

Or you can call me any name, nasty or otherwise, that you care to
use. Even enclose it in quote marks as "Dave" does it. Just don't
call me late for dinner.

Shirley you jest. Roger that. Go to the John. Etc.

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


Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


N2EY wrote:


In article ,




(Len Over 21) writes:


In article , Robert Casey
writes:


One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.

Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)

So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing. When that someone is part of the Lennie/Steve/Brian-William
troika in *their* ongoing whizzing contest is much more amusing.

Try a quartet. :-)

I'm not into any "whizzing contest" with the gunnery nurse. :-)

YOU are the one making that charge.

Charge is such a nasty legalese sounding term. It's more like
"observation". And yes, I do make that observation.


Then I advise that your seeing an opthalmologist for an
eye examination is a good idea. That way you could observe
the several fracases that nursie starts with ANYONE who
disagrees with him...besides Brian, try Hans and Dieter.

Takes at least two people to make a fight. Steve and mayself don't get
into verbal battles. And I'm certainly not afraid of him. If I disagree,
I'll tell him so. And despite what "William" wants me to do, I'm not
going to step into one of you three's battles and slap his hand. You are
all big boys now, and responsible for your own behavior!


It's all been public. Nursie is eager and chomping at the bit
to FIGHT with anyone.

Okay, if you and Brian aren't, then show it. But you enjoy it, IMO, so
why defend it. If you like having verbal sparring matches with Steve
(the boys down at the shop used to call 'em whizzing contests) then have
at it. Want to have a nasty toned battle of wits? Enjoy! 8^)

Its the complaints and defenses I don't get.


I just call them as everyone else can see them.

Wouldn't it be better to shed light on what others may not be able to

see?

Tsk. See that opthalmologist.

Warning: You could be a victim of presbyopia and not know it...


Or, as someone else wrote, "the replies just seem to write themselves!"

Heh heh heh.


Gosh...wonder who wrote that original phrase? :-)

It wasn't Mike Coslo. It wasn't nursie. It wasn't Brian. It wasn't Rev.
Jim, our Artist of the State. It wasn't Kellie. It wasn't Hans. It
wasn't Dieter. It wasn't Jim Hampton. It wasn't Dee. It wasn't Kim.
OK, that about exhausts the regulars in here. :-)



Now YOU tell us what the Titanic's sinking of 92 years ago has to
do with amateur radio policy of today?

Very very little.


Actually, NONE.

However, the Titanic disaster is a favorite subject of his lordship,
Sir James. As Lord High Admiral of the newsgroup (sailing these
turbid waters every day), he has decreed the Titanic disaster IS a
worthy subject for amateur radio policy.

There we have it.

I enjoy talking on any subject with Jim.



When one would have been sufficient. Respect doesn't make a person a
"bleeding heart".


True enough. But only in the literal sense.

Hello? Can you see some sarcasm in my remarks? :-)

Of course. And there was some kind of something in my retort (limited
retort?) 8^)

Just a habit of mine to not speak ill of the dead.

As Yogi Berra said "If you don't go to your friend's funerals, they
won't go to yours!"




How did Bill Boeing's company get into ham radio policy?

You guys just can't focus! :-)

Not a matter of focus. Just some discussion among friends. And the
discussions among friends tend to go where they will.


So...you've joined the Society of Friends?

We quake at the thought...

Good people, all the Quakers I met.



But, of curse, you regulars all OWN this newsgroup. Despite it going
wherever the Internet carries it. What you dictate as Right and Proper
MUST be observed at all times!





Or are you PCTAs just "high?"

Ick, getting high is a sure fire method of wasting one's life.


I'm "high" on life itself. No drugs or substances needed.

Been a lonnng time since I heard that one!


Nor any morse code fantasies as the epitome of hobby radio arts.


Never had a Morse code fantasy in my life.

Linda Hamilton has entered my thoughts on an occasion or two! ;^)

:-)

8^)



I took the tests recently, all within the past 5 years, and a couple
within 3 years. They are up to date enough, covering satellite ops, all
manner of relevant band and technical questions dealing with present day
equipment. They are up to date for at least mid 2001.


You missed my point on that.

The present-day U.S. amateur regulations are just fine and dandy
to those who want to keep the morse code test for a license
examination.

You seem to give the Morse test the same amount of weight as
Pseudo-Conservatives give to the mythical "Liberal". This critter is
responsible for all the ills in the country, despite there being almost
no liberals left. Somehow, some way, the one or two liberals left manage
to gum everything up.


Other than to this circle of "friends," somewhere in the neighborhood
of 700 thousand (give or take) licensed amateurs MIGHT have some
disagreement with that "up to date."

There are presently 18 ("count 'em, 18") petitions for consideration
on changes to U.S. amateur radio regulations made public by the
FCC. It should be obvious (except to the oblivious) that all is NOT
"up to date" in those regulations.



Ahh, maybe there is the problem. You don't have to sell your soul, just


study the material.


Why? :-)

Each person must answer their own "Why". I figured that since I only
have so many years on this earth, I would take the time and learn Morse
code. Spent 6 months of an hour or so a day. The rewards have been that
I have had my (Morse code tested) license for 3 years now. That's three
years out of my life that I wouldn't have had it if I refused to learn it.

YMMV

Your "Why" would indicate that you simply aren't interested in the ARS
to the level that you would take the effort to get the license.

That's okay. If you don't want to be a Ham, no one is can stop you. Or
even a hamme! ;^)


I'm really only interested in ending the U.S. amateur radio license exam
morse code test.

I do NOT need to "study material on morsemanship" to do that.

Nope, you don't have to. Purely voluntary stuff.

I do NOT need to "study material on any other test element" just to
get a federal merit badge saying I am "authorized" something or
other.

Purely voluntary stuff there.



You seem to forget that I was ON HF very legally and
correctly over a half century ago, over four decades ago, over three
decades ago, and even earlier this year...all without having ANY
requirement to "study morsemanship material."

I could never forget! 8^)

Of course if you are happy, then that is great. I've only been on HF
for a few years now. Enjoying every minute of it.

I must confess I don't personally compartmentalize it into HF or Not
HF. It's all good, MF, HF, VHF, UHF!



I had great difficulty with Element 1 preparation,
but it didn't do me a bit of damage.


I always study for my blood tests. So far I've passed every time.


Good job, that! 8^)





I do have a question. I had called you Lennie once, and I think you
didn't particularly care for that. I've been calling you Lenover21, but
that sounds kind of formal if a screen name can be called formal.


What do you see on my "signature" line?

I've seen

I've seen LHA / WMD

I've seen LHA

Sometimes nothing

My Newsreader wants to call you Len Over 21




Tsk. If you can't understand my preferences, then that trip to an
opthalmologist for you is necessary. [remember, watch out for
presbyopia...]


Which of your preferences?

If you pick up an IEEE Membership Directory, you wil see my legal
name in there. Been in there since 1973. That's the formal version.

So is that what you want to be called?


Or you can call me any name, nasty or otherwise, that you care to
use. Even enclose it in quote marks as "Dave" does it. Just don't
call me late for dinner.

I don't call people nasty names. Just what they prefer to be called.
that's why I asked


Shirley you jest. Roger that. Go to the John. Etc.

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

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


Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


N2EY wrote:


In article ,




(Len Over 21) writes:


In article , Robert Casey
writes:


One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.

Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)

So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing. When that someone is part of the Lennie/Steve/Brian-William
troika in *their* ongoing whizzing contest is much more amusing.

Try a quartet. :-)

I'm not into any "whizzing contest" with the gunnery nurse. :-)

YOU are the one making that charge.

Charge is such a nasty legalese sounding term. It's more like
"observation". And yes, I do make that observation.


Then I advise that your seeing an opthalmologist for an
eye examination is a good idea. That way you could observe
the several fracases that nursie starts with ANYONE who
disagrees with him...besides Brian, try Hans and Dieter.

Takes at least two people to make a fight.

Not in computer-modem communications venues. :-)

Steve and mayself don't get into verbal battles.

Not yet. :-)

And I'm certainly not afraid of him.

Oooooo! :-) Is someone afraid of the big bad wolf? :-)

If I disagree, I'll tell him so.

That's all it takes to start a fight with nursie. :-)

And despite what "William" wants me to do, I'm not
going to step into one of you three's battles and slap his hand.

The avenging angel of rrap is unshutupable. :-)

He putz me to sleep sometimes. :-)

You are
all big boys now, and responsible for your own behavior!

Thank you Mike Tyson. [excellent taste? :-) ]


Okay, if you and Brian aren't, then show it.

Show what?

Stop objecting to personal insults? Stop objecting to insulting remarks
about spouses? Stop objecting to manufactured lies he makes about
my past?

I've stopped that. You haven't noticed.

But you enjoy it, IMO, so why defend it.

I don't enjoy it. It's tiring because his emotional tirades are repetitive,
sometimes mirroring what I've said about him in the past.

In general, the PCTA comments on retention of the code test are
(and were long ago) repetitive, puerile, and invalid. All any of them
can do is resort to is pejorating any outspoken NCTA.

If you like having verbal sparring matches with Steve
(the boys down at the shop used to call 'em whizzing contests) then have
at it.

We are all big boys now. You can call them ****ing contests
rather than use the cutesy euphemisms.

Want to have a nasty toned battle of wits? Enjoy! 8^)

****ing contests with nursie are NOT any "battle of wits." :-)

Its the complaints and defenses I don't get.

So...do the "boys down at the shop" call you "penis head?"

In any language or dialect? :-)

Do you LIKE that sort of thing?


Just a habit of mine to not speak ill of the dead.

Feel free to say nice things about Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Ted
Bundy. They are all dead. :-)


I'm "high" on life itself. No drugs or substances needed.

Been a lonnng time since I heard that one!

It's still true.

Nor any morse code fantasies as the epitome of hobby radio arts.

Never had a Morse code fantasy in my life.

Others DO. "Try it, you'll like it!" :-)


You seem to give the Morse test the same amount of weight as
Pseudo-Conservatives give to the mythical "Liberal". This critter is
responsible for all the ills in the country, despite there being almost
no liberals left. Somehow, some way, the one or two liberals left manage
to gum everything up.

Tsk. You mistake persistence for obsession. :-)

Morse code was a boon to landline communications two centuries
back (in the 1800s), enabling the wired telegraphy service providers
to give good service to all needing quick communications.

When radio as a communications medium was demonstrated, morse
code was used...not because it was unique, the best, or any other
positive attribute. On-off keying of early radio transmitters was the
ONLY practical means to use technologically-primitive early radio
apparatus for communications.

For some radio amateurs in the United States, morse code skill is
about the ONLY thing they have to show their "superiority" in a
radio service that is still just a hobby. Tsk. Those amateurs are
the ones seeing a mythical "sky is falling" scenario if the code test
is ever eliminated. Not my paranoia. :-)

I've been transmitting RF energy legally since 1953, over more
parts of the EM spectrum than is allowed to radio amateurs. Never
had any requirement to demonstrate any morse code skill to anyone
in order to transmit below 30 MHz...or above it. Doesn't make any
personal difference to me whether or not the code test stays or is
tossed in the dumpster. It's time the code test went to the landfill.
It's long overdue.

All those PCTA extras just hate the thought of removing the code
test. For so many of them it's all they've got to show their eliteness
in a hobby. shrug Some of them get rather angry and want to
"fight" about it, calling any persistent NCTA personal insults.


Each person must answer their own "Why". I figured that since I only
have so many years on this earth, I would take the time and learn Morse
code. Spent 6 months of an hour or so a day. The rewards have been that
I have had my (Morse code tested) license for 3 years now. That's three
years out of my life that I wouldn't have had it if I refused to learn it.

I've operated in many radio services. Never once had to use any old
morse or be required to know it...even though I did "know it" once,
way back in time. Doesn't matter. I don't look on the code test as
some kind of my-personal sort of thing. The code test isn't necessary
for the FCC nor anyone else except all those Archaic Radiotelegraphy
Society "extras."

As to personal time spent "learning" something, I've spent many
more hours per day over many, many more months to complete
my formal schooling. One PCTA extra considers that on-par with
remedial "night school" classes held for immigrants and such. :-)
Of course, the same individual considers the University of Illinois
or the University of Wisconsin as "correspondence schools!" Hi hi.

Your "Why" would indicate that you simply aren't interested in the ARS
to the level that you would take the effort to get the license.

Tsk. I don't "owe" anyone a reason for my doing anything. :-)

Do you "owe" someone anything for talking about politics? Does one
HAVE to be IN politics to talk about it? :-)

I'm not interested in joining any Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society.
You forget I HAVE a federal radio operator license and obtained it
long ago. :-) Not a big deal. Had to use it only two years after
getting that in 1956. Such federal licenses make some folks think
they are real big shots (stretch that O vertically). Not me. Just a
piece of paper.


You seem to forget that I was ON HF very legally and
correctly over a half century ago, over four decades ago, over three
decades ago, and even earlier this year...all without having ANY
requirement to "study morsemanship material."

I could never forget! 8^)

Of course if you are happy, then that is great. I've only been on HF
for a few years now. Enjoying every minute of it.

Enjoy, enjoy.

I must confess I don't personally compartmentalize it into HF or Not
HF. It's all good, MF, HF, VHF, UHF!

You MUST compartmentalize in THIS newsgroup. Tested
morsemanship is "necessary" to operate on HF ham bands!
Absolutely! :-)

I always study for my blood tests. So far I've passed every time.

Good job, that! 8^)

The trick to that is staying away from downtown Transylvania...


My Newsreader wants to call you Len Over 21

If your newsreader is licensed, have it call my Internet software
on 9015 KHz USB. They can do electronic lunch.


I don't call people nasty names. Just what they prefer to be called.
that's why I asked

"Putz" (penis head in Yiddish) is not "nasty" to another PCTA extra
in here. It is very nasty along Maxwell Street in Chicago. Another
in here just calls me "wrong" and "incorrect." :-)

You can call me anything...but that would be incorrect. :-)

You can't figure out from my "signature" what a preferred short form
given name of mine should be? Tsk.

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


Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


N2EY wrote:


In article ,




(Len Over 21) writes:


In article , Robert Casey
writes:


One could sumise that if all the other ships in the area were
taking it slow, Titanic should have taken heed and go slow
as well. One doesn't have to have knowledge of a field to
realize that. I'm sure that the ship's owners would have preferred
and understood a late but intact Titanic at the destination.
Maybe the ship was "unsinkable" but I wouldn't want to test
that with paying passangers aboard.

Robert, I will agree with you, but what happened to the Titanic
NINETY-TWO YEARS AGO isn't really a subject of this
newsgroup and doesn't come close (maybe a couple of light-
years) to amateur radio policy. :-)

So what, Len? Much of what you talk about doesn't come close to amateur
radio policy either.

That anyone should chide another on OT posting here in rrap is mildly
amusing. When that someone is part of the Lennie/Steve/Brian-William
troika in *their* ongoing whizzing contest is much more amusing.

Try a quartet. :-)

I'm not into any "whizzing contest" with the gunnery nurse. :-)

YOU are the one making that charge.

Charge is such a nasty legalese sounding term. It's more like
"observation". And yes, I do make that observation.


Then I advise that your seeing an opthalmologist for an
eye examination is a good idea. That way you could observe
the several fracases that nursie starts with ANYONE who
disagrees with him...besides Brian, try Hans and Dieter.

Takes at least two people to make a fight.


Not in computer-modem communications venues. :-)

Have to say I can't understand that one.


Steve and mayself don't get into verbal battles.

Not yet. :-)

And I'm certainly not afraid of him.


Oooooo! :-) Is someone afraid of the big bad wolf? :-)


If I disagree, I'll tell him so.


That's all it takes to start a fight with nursie. :-)


And despite what "William" wants me to do, I'm not
going to step into one of you three's battles and slap his hand.


The avenging angel of rrap is unshutupable. :-)

He putz me to sleep sometimes. :-)


You are
all big boys now, and responsible for your own behavior!


Thank you Mike Tyson. [excellent taste? :-) ]

Tyson foods?


Okay, if you and Brian aren't, then show it.


Show what?



Stop objecting to personal insults? Stop objecting to insulting remarks
about spouses? Stop objecting to manufactured lies he makes about
my past?

Now your getting it!

I've stopped that. You haven't noticed.

But you enjoy it, IMO, so why defend it.

I don't enjoy it. It's tiring because his emotional tirades are repetitive,
sometimes mirroring what I've said about him in the past.

In general, the PCTA comments on retention of the code test are
(and were long ago) repetitive, puerile, and invalid. All any of them
can do is resort to is pejorating any outspoken NCTA.

Exactly as are the arguments against it. THere are no new arguments, no
new material. It's so old.


If you like having verbal sparring matches with Steve
(the boys down at the shop used to call 'em whizzing contests) then have
at it.

We are all big boys now. You can call them ****ing contests
rather than use the cutesy euphemisms.

Michael Powell's gonna get us! ;^)


Want to have a nasty toned battle of wits? Enjoy! 8^)

****ing contests with nursie are NOT any "battle of wits." :-)

Its the complaints and defenses I don't get.


So...do the "boys down at the shop" call you "penis head?"

In any language or dialect? :-)

I've been called much worse than that. One fine fellow even threatened
to kill me. Before I could do anything about it, he was arrested and
jailed on some other charges, so an offhand threat - and a real one to
boot - wasn't going to add a whole lot more time to his sentence.

Do you LIKE that sort of thing?

Life in the jungle, sir! 8^)

Just a habit of mine to not speak ill of the dead.


Feel free to say nice things about Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Ted
Bundy. They are all dead. :-)



I'm "high" on life itself. No drugs or substances needed.

Been a lonnng time since I heard that one!


It's still true.


Nor any morse code fantasies as the epitome of hobby radio arts.

Never had a Morse code fantasy in my life.


Others DO. "Try it, you'll like it!" :-)



You seem to give the Morse test the same amount of weight as
Pseudo-Conservatives give to the mythical "Liberal". This critter is
responsible for all the ills in the country, despite there being almost
no liberals left. Somehow, some way, the one or two liberals left manage
to gum everything up.


Tsk. You mistake persistence for obsession. :-)

And many obsessed people just think they are persistent. Null.

Morse code was a boon to landline communications two centuries
back (in the 1800s), enabling the wired telegraphy service providers
to give good service to all needing quick communications.

When radio as a communications medium was demonstrated, morse
code was used...not because it was unique, the best, or any other
positive attribute. On-off keying of early radio transmitters was the
ONLY practical means to use technologically-primitive early radio
apparatus for communications.

For some radio amateurs in the United States, morse code skill is
about the ONLY thing they have to show their "superiority" in a
radio service that is still just a hobby. Tsk. Those amateurs are
the ones seeing a mythical "sky is falling" scenario if the code test
is ever eliminated. Not my paranoia. :-)

I've been transmitting RF energy legally since 1953, over more
parts of the EM spectrum than is allowed to radio amateurs. Never
had any requirement to demonstrate any morse code skill to anyone
in order to transmit below 30 MHz...or above it. Doesn't make any
personal difference to me whether or not the code test stays or is
tossed in the dumpster. It's time the code test went to the landfill.
It's long overdue.

All those PCTA extras just hate the thought of removing the code
test. For so many of them it's all they've got to show their eliteness
in a hobby. shrug Some of them get rather angry and want to
"fight" about it, calling any persistent NCTA personal insults.

Thanks for another story. I really do enjoy them (and I'm not being
sarcastic.


Each person must answer their own "Why". I figured that since I only
have so many years on this earth, I would take the time and learn Morse
code. Spent 6 months of an hour or so a day. The rewards have been that
I have had my (Morse code tested) license for 3 years now. That's three
years out of my life that I wouldn't have had it if I refused to learn it.


I've operated in many radio services. Never once had to use any old
morse or be required to know it...even though I did "know it" once,
way back in time. Doesn't matter. I don't look on the code test as
some kind of my-personal sort of thing. The code test isn't necessary
for the FCC nor anyone else except all those Archaic Radiotelegraphy
Society "extras."

As to personal time spent "learning" something, I've spent many
more hours per day over many, many more months to complete
my formal schooling. One PCTA extra considers that on-par with
remedial "night school" classes held for immigrants and such. :-)
Of course, the same individual considers the University of Illinois
or the University of Wisconsin as "correspondence schools!" Hi hi.


Your "Why" would indicate that you simply aren't interested in the ARS
to the level that you would take the effort to get the license.


Tsk. I don't "owe" anyone a reason for my doing anything. :-)

Of course not. But I must admit that I find that a rather odd response
to my statement.

Do you "owe" someone anything for talking about politics? Does one
HAVE to be IN politics to talk about it? :-)

I'm not interested in joining any Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society.

Right. Your why comes up that way. Just as I note above.

You forget I HAVE a federal radio operator license and obtained it
long ago. :-) Not a big deal. Had to use it only two years after
getting that in 1956.

Hehe, I was just about in diapers then! 8^)

Such federal licenses make some folks think
they are real big shots (stretch that O vertically). Not me. Just a
piece of paper.



You seem to forget that I was ON HF very legally and
correctly over a half century ago, over four decades ago, over three
decades ago, and even earlier this year...all without having ANY
requirement to "study morsemanship material."

I could never forget! 8^)

Of course if you are happy, then that is great. I've only been on HF
for a few years now. Enjoying every minute of it.


Enjoy, enjoy.

Why yes, I do! I have spent most of my career in computers, from the
old IBM mainframes of the 70's to today's so called cutting edge PC's.
Ended up making videos and doing photography in addition. So now I am
interested in learning more about RF, yet don't want to go back to
school. Here I is! Having a whale of a good time, learning all kinds of
new stuff!


I must confess I don't personally compartmentalize it into HF or Not
HF. It's all good, MF, HF, VHF, UHF!


You MUST compartmentalize in THIS newsgroup. Tested
morsemanship is "necessary" to operate on HF ham bands!
Absolutely! :-)


I always study for my blood tests. So far I've passed every time.

Good job, that! 8^)


The trick to that is staying away from downtown Transylvania...



My Newsreader wants to call you Len Over 21


If your newsreader is licensed, have it call my Internet software
on 9015 KHz USB. They can do electronic lunch.



I don't call people nasty names. Just what they prefer to be called.
that's why I asked


"Putz" (penis head in Yiddish) is not "nasty" to another PCTA extra
in here. It is very nasty along Maxwell Street in Chicago. Another
in here just calls me "wrong" and "incorrect." :-)


Had a friend in Junior High school. Short fellow, pretty funny guy. The
guys in our group started calling him "Stub", referring to a particular
body part. That irritated the heck out of him. He'd yell at them, tell
'em to knock it off. This was getting pretty stressful for the guy. Once
he even got into a fight with another kid over being called "Stub". As
one of the few people in the group that didn't call him that, he often
talked with me about how frustrated he was. I gave what advice I could,
but he found it lacking. Finally one day a new kid shows up, and we're
doing introductions. When I introduced him to the new guy in front of
everyone by his proper name, (Tim) he just went up to the new guy, shook
his hand, and said "Aww F**K it, just call me Stub!" Name went away
immediately.

You can call me anything...but that would be incorrect. :-)

HAH! Good segue. 8^)

You can't figure out from my "signature" what a preferred short form
given name of mine should be? Tsk.

ORG? Just kidding! Okay, talk to you later, Len.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


Then I advise that your seeing an opthalmologist for an
eye examination is a good idea. That way you could observe
the several fracases that nursie starts with ANYONE who
disagrees with him...besides Brian, try Hans and Dieter.

Takes at least two people to make a fight.

Not in computer-modem communications venues. :-)

Have to say I can't understand that one.

Tsk. After 20 years of computer-modem communications (on BBSs
as well as the Internet), there are still individuals who jump on in
with some ranting on someone or something, daring all to "challenge"
them about that. Funny as well as pathetic.



Thank you Mike Tyson. [excellent taste? :-) ]

Tyson foods?

Tyson the ear-biter. :-)


Stop objecting to personal insults? Stop objecting to insulting remarks
about spouses? Stop objecting to manufactured lies he makes about
my past?

Now your getting it!

Ah, so score one for "rules" favoring the PCTA extras!

They are allowed to DO anything, SAY anything...but no one else
should be posting?

Gosh, you sure know how to wall off the playing field only for your
team...


In general, the PCTA comments on retention of the code test are
(and were long ago) repetitive, puerile, and invalid. All any of them
can do is resort to is pejorating any outspoken NCTA.

Exactly as are the arguments against it. THere are no new arguments, no

new material. It's so old.

There's no reasoning with emotional belief systems...such as the
PCTA's insistence that all who come after must jump through the
same hoops they had to when younger.

I agree it's "old." Morse code was first used in 1844. 160 years ago.
Quite OLD. :-)


We are all big boys now. You can call them ****ing contests
rather than use the cutesy euphemisms.

Michael Powell's gonna get us! ;^)

For what? Failure to gratuitously use cutesy euphemisms? :-)

Mikey Powell is already getting in more hot water that he can't
swim in very well. Try reading the business section of your paper
beyond the Howard Stern BS pieces. FCC and Powell have been
prominent in the bigger papers for other than broadcasting.


****ing contests with nursie are NOT any "battle of wits." :-)

Its the complaints and defenses I don't get.

You aren't controversial enough, try too hard to work both sides of
the aisle. Align yourself with one or the other side and you will
get MANY complaints! :-)

I've been called much worse than that. One fine fellow even threatened
to kill me. Before I could do anything about it, he was arrested and
jailed on some other charges, so an offhand threat - and a real one to
boot - wasn't going to add a whole lot more time to his sentence.

Tsk. Offing him would have freed up some taxpayer monies, no?

Do you LIKE that sort of thing?

Life in the jungle, sir! 8^)

No problem in here. Bunch of snarling PCTA pussiecats. :-)

Bunch of wussies here compared to other newsgroups or the
nonsense that went on in some of the BBSs before Internet.

Just a habit of mine to not speak ill of the dead.

Feel free to say nice things about Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Ted
Bundy. They are all dead. :-)

Okay, I'm still waiting for those "nice things" about that trio.

Should I name some more? :-)


Tsk. You mistake persistence for obsession. :-)

And many obsessed people just think they are persistent. Null.

You got a null-null score...try a remedial class next summer.

Let me know when there's a federal requirement to run for some
political office in order to talk about political affairs, OK?

Since when did the First Amendment get altered? Every one who
is a USA citizen has the Right to communicate with their
government...about any existing laws and potential, pending laws.


Morse code was a boon to landline communications two centuries
back (in the 1800s), enabling the wired telegraphy service providers
to give good service to all needing quick communications.

When radio as a communications medium was demonstrated, morse
code was used...not because it was unique, the best, or any other
positive attribute. On-off keying of early radio transmitters was the
ONLY practical means to use technologically-primitive early radio
apparatus for communications.

For some radio amateurs in the United States, morse code skill is
about the ONLY thing they have to show their "superiority" in a
radio service that is still just a hobby. Tsk. Those amateurs are
the ones seeing a mythical "sky is falling" scenario if the code test
is ever eliminated. Not my paranoia. :-)

I've been transmitting RF energy legally since 1953, over more
parts of the EM spectrum than is allowed to radio amateurs. Never
had any requirement to demonstrate any morse code skill to anyone
in order to transmit below 30 MHz...or above it. Doesn't make any
personal difference to me whether or not the code test stays or is
tossed in the dumpster. It's time the code test went to the landfill.
It's long overdue.

All those PCTA extras just hate the thought of removing the code
test. For so many of them it's all they've got to show their eliteness
in a hobby. shrug Some of them get rather angry and want to
"fight" about it, calling any persistent NCTA personal insults.

Thanks for another story. I really do enjoy them (and I'm not being
sarcastic.

Tsk. NOT a "story." Documented fact.

Your "Why" would indicate that you simply aren't interested in the ARS
to the level that you would take the effort to get the license.

Tsk. I don't "owe" anyone a reason for my doing anything. :-)

Of course not. But I must admit that I find that a rather odd response
to my statement.

Tsk. You are too into ham radio as a personal thing. You must think
that unlicensed folks (unlicensed in the amateur radio service, that is)
don't know anything about radio?

There are lots and lots of Parts to Title 47 C.F.R. From time to time
all of them MUST be corrected, revised, brought up to date. "Radio"
is still evolving, has existed only for 108 years. It has grown much
since its infancy, changed considerably. No one Part of Title 47 can
remain as-is forever, nor is amateur radio solely the provence of some
olde-tyme hammes to use as their private playground.

Do you "owe" someone anything for talking about politics? Does one
HAVE to be IN politics to talk about it? :-)

I'm not interested in joining any Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society.

Right. Your why comes up that way. Just as I note above.

Tsk. I might, at some future date, get an amateur radio license.
Or maybe not. [one can't get too specific in this bunch of anal-
retentive prissy literalists, they think everything one says is some
kind of Religious Vow taken before God!]

Why should I take the trouble to relearn morse code just for a
chance to get a low-cost federal merit badge? I don't need to
prove myself in anything to anyone on any endeavor.

You forget I HAVE a federal radio operator license and obtained it
long ago. :-) Not a big deal. Had to use it only two years after
getting that in 1956.

Tsk. I was into HF radio communications without ANY sort of
license requirement from 1953 to 1956. Certainly not having any
sort of requirement to learn or use morse code. Not once did
that come up for the next half century of radio transmitting.

Hehe, I was just about in diapers then! 8^)

Irrelevant.

Why yes, I do! I have spent most of my career in computers, from the
old IBM mainframes of the 70's to today's so called cutting edge PC's.
Ended up making videos and doing photography in addition. So now I am
interested in learning more about RF, yet don't want to go back to
school. Here I is! Having a whale of a good time, learning all kinds of
new stuff!

You've only just begun to learn.

Guaranteed you WON'T learn anything if you adopt a pose of being
the Great (Amateur) Communicator because you are a code-tested
extra in front of some long-time other-radio-service pros. Listen and
learn...there is much to be gained by taking advantage of their
knowledge...but be careful on HOW you act.

You have to realize that those older than you have ALREADY met
up with the braggarts and the insolents in life as well as having
gained an enormous amount of experience. They will KNOW when
you don't know something but are trying to pass yourself off as
something you are not. You get eaten alive in trying that.


Had a friend in Junior High school. Short fellow, pretty funny guy. The
guys in our group started calling him "Stub", referring to a particular
body part. That irritated the heck out of him. He'd yell at them, tell
'em to knock it off. This was getting pretty stressful for the guy. Once
he even got into a fight with another kid over being called "Stub". As
one of the few people in the group that didn't call him that, he often
talked with me about how frustrated he was. I gave what advice I could,
but he found it lacking. Finally one day a new kid shows up, and we're
doing introductions. When I introduced him to the new guy in front of
everyone by his proper name, (Tim) he just went up to the new guy, shook
his hand, and said "Aww F**K it, just call me Stub!" Name went away
immediately.

Nice tale, but life doesn't work that way all the time.

Those who do the name-calling don't get absolution from their sins
therefore they usually continue. They think they can "get away"
with anything they do.

The KKK is a good example of one group that not only liked to call
others whatever they wanted but also killed those that objected
to their actions too strongly.

Anything

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

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


Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


N2EY wrote:


In article ,




(Len Over 21) writes:


In article , Robert Casey
writes:



For some radio amateurs in the United States, morse code skill is
about the ONLY thing they have to show their "superiority" in a
radio service that is still just a hobby. Tsk. Those amateurs are
the ones seeing a mythical "sky is falling" scenario if the code test
is ever eliminated. Not my paranoia. :-)

Some radio amateurs have told you that morse skill is the only
"superiority" they have in amateur radio? I don't believe you.
The hobby is one in which you are not a participant, code tested or
otherwise.

I've been transmitting RF energy legally since 1953, over more
parts of the EM spectrum than is allowed to radio amateurs.

That's wonderful for you, Leonard. If it provides you solace, go to
those parts of the spectrum permitted to you and operate. Live it up.
The hams I know are pretty much content to stay within their allocated
bands. I know of none expressing envy of those who may legally transmit
elsewhere.
It seems obvious that you have some envy of radio amateurs. Why else
would you haunt this newsgroup and appoint yourself advocate for
something or other?

Never
had any requirement to demonstrate any morse code skill to anyone
in order to transmit below 30 MHz...or above it.

That's fine. In amateur radio, you'll need to demonstrate a little
knowledge to the tune of 5 wpm to operate below 30 MHz. If those
frequencies above 30 megs are your cup of tea, you needn't learn morse
at all.

Doesn't make any
personal difference to me whether or not the code test stays or is
tossed in the dumpster. It's time the code test went to the landfill.
It's long overdue.

Many disagree with you. I'm one of 'em.

All those PCTA extras just hate the thought of removing the code
test. For so many of them it's all they've got to show their eliteness
in a hobby. shrug Some of them get rather angry and want to
"fight" about it, calling any persistent NCTA personal insults.

You, on the other hand, never get angry and never insult anyone with a
different point of view than your own. :-) :-)


I've operated in many radio services. Never once had to use any old
morse or be required to know it...even though I did "know it" once,
way back in time. Doesn't matter. I don't look on the code test as
some kind of my-personal sort of thing. The code test isn't necessary
for the FCC nor anyone else except all those Archaic Radiotelegraphy
Society "extras."

It isn't only Extra class licensees who support continued morse testing.
Where did you get the idea that it was so?

As to personal time spent "learning" something, I've spent many
more hours per day over many, many more months to complete
my formal schooling.

You probably spent those hours because you had requirements to fulfill
in order to complete school. Amateur radio isn't any different. There
are requirements to fulfill to qualify for the three license classes.
No exceptions are granted for "I don't want to".

Your "Why" would indicate that you simply aren't interested in the ARS
to the level that you would take the effort to get the license.

Tsk. I don't "owe" anyone a reason for my doing anything. :-)

Mike wasn't asking for your reason for doing anything; he was asking for
your reason for doing nothing. :-) :-)


I'm not interested in joining any Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society.

Has someone invited to join one?

You forget I HAVE a federal radio operator license and obtained it
long ago. :-)

Well, there you go then. Use that one.

Not a big deal. Had to use it only two years after
getting that in 1956. Such federal licenses make some folks think
they are real big shots (stretch that O vertically). Not me. Just a
piece of paper.

It must have some meaning to you. After all, you've brought it up time
and time again.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo writes:


I do have a question. I had called you Lennie once, and I think you
didn't particularly care for that. I've been calling you Lenover21, but
that sounds kind of formal if a screen name can be called formal.

What do you see on my "signature" line?

Tsk. If you can't understand my preferences, then that trip to an
opthalmologist for you is necessary. [remember, watch out for
presbyopia...]

If you pick up an IEEE Membership Directory, you wil see my legal
name in there. Been in there since 1973. That's the formal version.

Or you can call me any name, nasty or otherwise, that you care to
use. Even enclose it in quote marks as "Dave" does it. Just don't
call me late for dinner.

Are you really the person posting as "William"? I don't recall using
"Len", "Leonard" or "Foghorn Lenhorn" when addressing you. I typically
refer to you as Len or Leonard until you start using the cutesy names.
That's when you become Foghorn.



Okay,

Per N2EY's query, why do you find it difficult to use another's given
name?

Dave K8MN