On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:24:07 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Leo wrote:

On 09 Jan 2005 04:51:35 GMT, (Lenof21) wrote:


In article , Leo
writes:


On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:36:59 -0800 (PST), "Phil Kane"
wrote:


On 08 Jan 2005 21:31:53 GMT, N2EY wrote:


Lenof21 wrote:

snip

Some even enter a batch of posts on a variety of subjects, apparently
hoping to get sonething on the hook.......what's the word for that
again...?

To imagine anyone on Usenet would do that. 8^)

......found it - "Trolling" - that's the word I was looking for!

snip


Note: All those wonderful braggarts are PCTA extra. They can say
anything, write anything, do anything in here and are absolved from ANY
criticism. Should they be taken to task, the task-taker is soundly
objected to with endearing personal perjoratives having little to do with
the subject.


Ipso facto, with a few exceptions - there are several OMs here who are
quite civil, knowledgeable and conversational, and do not possess the
NetNanny gene.....


It's a plain simple fact that all NCTA in here are always wrong, no matter
what they write on anything. No one who is of the NCTA persuasion
should bother debating the subject in here. The matter is closed and all
NCTA are forever wrong, incorrect, and probably have underarm odor.


.....and skinned knuckles!

Here's a challenge, Leo, if you're up to it.

Name the PCTA's in here (active) that have called NCTA's by such names.
I'll give you a start:

Steve is pretty famous for name calling.

Great idea! - that would certainly get a nice warm flamefest going,
wouldn't it?

Request respectfully declined.


And since this subthread turned into a Mike and Jim "tag-team" thing,
where do our names show up in that list? When have I called anyone a
nasty name? I don't think Jim ever has either.

note: I will admit the one time I called Len "Lennie". No insult was
intended, but he didn't like it, so I stopped.

Hmmm - maybe you're one of the exceptions?

Your pal was doing just fine too, until he decided to start using
profanities in his posts. To claim that another is speaking
"bull$#!+" is to directly infer that they are a "bull$#!+ter".

Acgeed that this example does not meet your specification of "PCTA vs
NCTA", but as I said earlier it's more about personalities than it is
about affiliation.

And character.

YMMV.

snip

- Mike KB3EIA -

73, Leo

Leo wrote:
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:24:07 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:


Leo wrote:


On 09 Jan 2005 04:51:35 GMT, (Lenof21) wrote:



In article , Leo
writes:



On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:36:59 -0800 (PST), "Phil Kane"
wrote:



On 08 Jan 2005 21:31:53 GMT, N2EY wrote:



Lenof21 wrote:


snip


Some even enter a batch of posts on a variety of subjects, apparently
hoping to get sonething on the hook.......what's the word for that
again...?

To imagine anyone on Usenet would do that. 8^)


.....found it - "Trolling" - that's the word I was looking for!


Here is a bit of a question. I had started a number of these threads
recently in order to get some newsgroup related activities going,
because in December the group simply was losing ground to the wild and
whacky adventures of some West Virginia hams, and some others of
indeterminate origin, but of the sort to turn us into a clone of
r.r.a.misc. So far, It has had its intended effect, to get some
discussion going.

So was that a troll?


snip


Note: All those wonderful braggarts are PCTA extra. They can say
anything, write anything, do anything in here and are absolved from ANY
criticism. Should they be taken to task, the task-taker is soundly
objected to with endearing personal perjoratives having little to do with
the subject.


Ipso facto, with a few exceptions - there are several OMs here who are
quite civil, knowledgeable and conversational, and do not possess the
NetNanny gene.....



It's a plain simple fact that all NCTA in here are always wrong, no matter
what they write on anything. No one who is of the NCTA persuasion
should bother debating the subject in here. The matter is closed and all
NCTA are forever wrong, incorrect, and probably have underarm odor.


.....and skinned knuckles!

Here's a challenge, Leo, if you're up to it.

Name the PCTA's in here (active) that have called NCTA's by such names.
I'll give you a start:

Steve is pretty famous for name calling.


Great idea! - that would certainly get a nice warm flamefest going,
wouldn't it?

Request respectfully declined.




And since this subthread turned into a Mike and Jim "tag-team" thing,
where do our names show up in that list? When have I called anyone a
nasty name? I don't think Jim ever has either.

note: I will admit the one time I called Len "Lennie". No insult was
intended, but he didn't like it, so I stopped.


Hmmm - maybe you're one of the exceptions?

Your pal was doing just fine too, until he decided to start using
profanities in his posts. To claim that another is speaking
"bull$#!+" is to directly infer that they are a "bull$#!+ter".

I admit, that was a bit odd. I'm known to drop the very occasional off
colored word, but only for effect.


Acgeed that this example does not meet your specification of "PCTA vs
NCTA", but as I said earlier it's more about personalities than it is
about affiliation.

And character.

Well sure.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo wrote:
Leo wrote:
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:24:07 -0500, Mike Coslo

wrote:

Leo wrote:

On 09 Jan 2005 04:51:35 GMT, (Lenof21) wrote:

In article , Leo

writes:

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:36:59 -0800 (PST), "Phil Kane"
wrote:

On 08 Jan 2005 21:31:53 GMT, N2EY wrote:

Lenof21 wrote:

snip

Some even enter a batch of posts on a variety of subjects,
apparently
hoping to get sonething on the hook.......what's the word for that
again...?

To imagine anyone on Usenet would do that. 8^)

.....found it - "Trolling" - that's the word I was looking for!

Here is a bit of a question. I had started a number of these threads

recently in order to get some newsgroup related activities going,
because in December the group simply was losing ground to the wild
and
whacky adventures of some West Virginia hams, and some others of
indeterminate origin, but of the sort to turn us into a clone of
r.r.a.misc. So far, It has had its intended effect, to get some
discussion going.

So was that a troll?

Not that I can see.

snip

Note: All those wonderful braggarts are PCTA extra.

Is one of them Mike Deignan? If so, Len is wrong *again*,
because ol' Mike was/is for the elimination of the Morse Code test.

At least that's what he wrote in his comments to the FCC.

They can say
anything, write anything, do anything in here and are absolved
from ANY
criticism. Should they be taken to task, the task-taker is
soundly
objected to with endearing personal perjoratives having little
to do with
the subject.

Ipso facto, with a few exceptions - there are several OMs here who
are
quite civil, knowledgeable and conversational, and do not possess
the
NetNanny gene.....

Len obviously isn't one of them ;-)

It's a plain simple fact that all NCTA in here are always wrong,
no matter
what they write on anything. No one who is of the NCTA
persuasion
should bother debating the subject in here. The matter is
closed and all
NCTA are forever wrong, incorrect, and probably have underarm
odor.

.....and skinned knuckles!

Here's a challenge, Leo, if you're up to it.

Name the PCTA's in here (active) that have called NCTA's by such
names.
I'll give you a start:

Steve is pretty famous for name calling.

Great idea! - that would certainly get a nice warm flamefest going,
wouldn't it?

Request respectfully declined.

And since this subthread turned into a Mike and Jim "tag-team"
thing,
where do our names show up in that list? When have I called anyone
a
nasty name? I don't think Jim ever has either.

note: I will admit the one time I called Len "Lennie". No insult
was
intended, but he didn't like it, so I stopped.

Hmmm - maybe you're one of the exceptions?

Your pal was doing just fine too, until he decided to start using
profanities in his posts.

Do you mean me, Leo?

If so - when have I called Len a nasty name? Or anyone else here?
Specific instances, please.

To claim that another is speaking
"bull$#!+" is to directly infer that they are a "bull$#!+ter".

Actually it would be "to imply". The listener/reader draws the
inference.

I admit, that was a bit odd. I'm known to drop the very occasional
off
colored word, but only for effect.

"Sometimes the pool-pah defies the efforts to describe it".

I think if you compare the nasty names Len has called me, with the
names I have
called him, you will see a distinct contrast. Unless you consider "Len"
and "Mr. Anderson" to be nasty names.

Acgeed that this example does not meet your specification of "PCTA
vs
NCTA", but as I said earlier it's more about personalities than it
is
about affiliation.

And character.

Well sure.

Some people take the correction of their mistakes as an insult. I
don't.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article . com,
writes:

Some people take the correction of their mistakes as an insult. I
don't.

Tsk. You don't even "take" them. :-)

Lenof21 wrote:
In article . com,

writes:

Some people take the correction of their mistakes as an insult. I
don't.

Tsk. You don't even "take" them.

Leonard H, Anderson has expressed yet another lie.

Why does he do this?

What causes a person with his alleged years of education and
experience to intentionally make untruthful statements in a public
forum...?!?!? ESPECIALLY a forum that is automatically archived and
immediately retrievable?

What an I D I O T ! ! ! !

Steve, K4YZ

In article ,
(Lenof21) writes:

In article . com,

writes:

Some people take the correction of their mistakes as an insult. I
don't.

Tsk. You don't even "take" them. :-)

Gee, Len, you must be talking to the mirror again.

Do you still think that it's perfectly legal for *all* amateurs to operate with
expired-but-in-the-grace-period licenses?

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

Do you still think that it's perfectly legal for *all* amateurs to operate
with
expired-but-in-the-grace-period licenses?

"Operate" what? :-)

Tsk. Operate on a patient? [need lots of qualifications from government
on that, but not from FCC]

Operate a motor vehicle? [need a state driver's license to do that legally]

Operate a high-power broadcast transmitter? [most broadcast stations
don't need any FCC-tested licensed radio operators nowadays and the
amateur radio license didn't apply to that anyway...]

Operate a small boat radio transceiver? [you need to check Part 90
of Title 47 C.F.R. - include the HF bands - before opening your
keyboard...some licensing required but it isn't amateur radio kind]

Operate any RF emitter of high or low power while in the performance
of a Department of Defense contract? [civilian radio operator license
does not apply there]

Tsk. Jimmie, you best go back and read ALL of what was written
and try, try very hard, to discern when someone is using sarcasm
or pulling your leg. :-)

Tsk, tsk. Do you have a valid Expounding-Guru license valid for
giving us all the gracious benefit of "cures" to modern national
socio-poliitcal problems? You do that all the time in this amateur
radio policy forum. Those Guru opinions aren't even close to being
about amateur radio...not even when you shake your fists and
stamp your feet saying "they apply! they apply!" :-)

You haven't even figured out what "401 Alarm" means yet or where
it is from... :-)

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:


Do you still think that it's perfectly legal for *all* amateurs to operate

with

expired-but-in-the-grace-period licenses?


"Operate" what? :-)

Tsk. Operate on a patient? [need lots of qualifications from government
on that, but not from FCC]

Operate a motor vehicle? [need a state driver's license to do that legally]

Operate a high-power broadcast transmitter? [most broadcast stations
don't need any FCC-tested licensed radio operators nowadays and the
amateur radio license didn't apply to that anyway...]

Operate a small boat radio transceiver? [you need to check Part 90
of Title 47 C.F.R. - include the HF bands - before opening your
keyboard...some licensing required but it isn't amateur radio kind]

Operate any RF emitter of high or low power while in the performance
of a Department of Defense contract? [civilian radio operator license
does not apply there]

Is that your point? That Jim didn't specify "what"?


good one!


- Mike KB3EIA -

"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...

:
: You haven't even figured out what "401 Alarm" means yet or where
: it is from... :-)
:

Nothing to "figure out", LenOver. Since no password is required by usenet,
no 401 Alarm will sound even for your nonsensical 401 Alarm.

M.A.N.
--
"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord,
make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it."
- Voltaire

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article ,
PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

Do you still think that it's perfectly legal for *all* amateurs to
operate
with
expired-but-in-the-grace-period licenses?

"Operate" what? :-)

Their amateur radio stations.

Tsk.

Poor baby.

Jimmie, you best go back and read ALL of what was written
and try, try very hard, to discern when someone is using sarcasm
or pulling your leg. :-)

You were caught in a mistake and now you're trying to tap dance
out of it. Too bad, Len, won't work.

Tsk, tsk. Do you have a valid Expounding-Guru license valid for
giving us all the gracious benefit of "cures" to modern national
socio-poliitcal problems? You do that all the time in this
amateur
radio policy forum. Those Guru opinions aren't even close to being
about amateur radio...not even when you shake your fists and
stamp your feet saying "they apply! they apply!" :-)

Where have I written that? You're misquoting again, Mr. Anderson. But
truth and reality aren't your strong suits anyway.

You haven't even figured out what "401 Alarm" means yet or where
it is from... :-)

Sure I have. Didn't even have to look it up. I do remember the
Apollo space program.

Say, you have an anniversary coming up, Len. Five years since you
told us you were going for Extra. Not that anybody cares.