Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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 - |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Len Over 21 wrote:
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. You have a point. There is no reasoning with emotional belief systems. Take a guy who believes that those tested in amateur radio are "jumping through hoops" or that the testing elements given today are the same as those in years past. How would you deal with such a guy? Let me know when there's a federal requirement to run for some political office in order to talk about political affairs, OK? You can talk about politics but that doesn't make you a politician. You can talk about amateur radio but that doesn't make you a radio amateur. You can talk about running for office but there are requirements to be met before you appear on the ballot. In the end, there is no guarantee that anyone will vote for you. You could be laughed at and heckled. You can talk about becoming a radio amateur but there are requirements to be met before you'll receive a license. You can talk about changing the requirements for becoming a radio amateur. In the end, there is no guarantee that anyone will support your ideas. You could be laughed at and heckled. 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. You've done that. This newsgroup is not government and you are offered no protection from being laughed at or heckled. Pontificate at your own risk. Insult others at your own risk. Tsk. I might, at some future date, get an amateur radio license. Hoooooooooooo! That's a GOOD one, Leonard. 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!] Around here, a man is generally taken at his word...until he shows that his word means little. Why should I take the trouble to relearn morse code just for a chance to get a low-cost federal merit badge? Why? Because it is the price of admission to HF amateur radio operation. I don't need to prove myself in anything to anyone on any endeavor. So you won't be getting the amateur radio license? Tsk. I was into HF radio communications without ANY sort of license requirement from 1953 to 1956. Fine and dandy. The circumstances are different and it is nearly fifty years later. 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. I follow you, Len. Now, back to amateur radio. For an HF license, there is a 5 wpm simple morse test. 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. You know, it's funny that you mentioned that. That's just like it is in amateur radio, Len. Those of us who have been in the game for a long time have already run into fellows who blow smoke and "know all about it". We know when someone is trying to pass himself off as something he isn't. Why, a guy like that could get stewed in his own juices. I know of a couple of fellows like that. 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. You hit it right on the head, Len. Do you know any fellows like that? 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. No need to go that far, Leonard. Just climb up on your personal cross and tell the boys how you like to have the nails placed. I have a feeling that the shebang is going to look like a piranha nailed to a couple of boards. Dave K8MN |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote: 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. You have a point. There is no reasoning with emotional belief systems. Take a guy who believes that those tested in amateur radio are "jumping through hoops" or that the testing elements given today are the same as those in years past. How would you deal with such a guy? True enough. The Volunteer Examiners are giving Farnsworth exams rather than the FCC/Part 97 specified Morse Code exams. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Dave Heil wrote:
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? I want to know why asking a person what they wish to be called garnishes a lecture! Oh well, I'm a big boy. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Designed And Built By PROFESSIONALS.... | General |