| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
June 1st 05, 10:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
wrote: From: on Tues 31 May 2005 15:55 wrote: Heh heh, I've heard the particular lament of "we can't get these (darn) kids to LISTEN to us!" for lots of generations and have read of the same thing in books printed before I existed. :-) It's a VERY common parental angst. Gee, Len, since you've never actually been a parent, it sounds like you're talking about something you've never actually done.. Gee, Quitefine, I HAVE. [too bad for you...] A lie. Hello? You have failure to comprehend what I wrote? Of course you've failed. Tsk, tsk, tsk, OTHERS have written and said for decades that "those darn kids just don't LISTEN to us!" OTHERS have written and said that. And you have yet to prove an example of just ONE kid that ever violated FCC rules requiring FCC intervention. Have you ever been a teacher of young people, Len? An invited speaker at a couple of local "magnet" schools, Jimmie. Went over rather well. You see, I've had some experience speaking before groups and can "gauge" an audience's attention while speaking. That comes from practice. "Young people" (teen-agers to everyone else) is just another group having different likes/dislikes than adults. "...speaking before groups..." An invited speaker to an organized class presentation is NOT child rearing. So? You've never been a radio amateur, either. It's very difficult for me to step down to what YOU call "amateur radio." Been too long in grown-up commercial radio and electronics. Oh! It's a "step down" now... In many other posts you've 'expressed" alleged admiration for Amateur Radio...especially for your ham buddy best man and Gene in NJ. Were you lying then, or lying now? Tsk, tsk. A radio does NOT operate by different laws of physics because some government agency designates it as "amateur." Didn't you learn that in Ivy school? Who, Lennie, other than you, has ever suggested otherwise in this forum? My argument in here is simply to eliminate the morse code test for a radio license. I have NO desire to "tell you what to do," and such a thing you would never obey anyway... WHAT AN ABSOLUTE AND AUDACIOUS LIE! "TXT-ing" is a modern FAD amongst teeners, the ability to send little notes to another, hardly any restrictions, and much easier to do than the old way with actual paper. It is a FUN social act for them, a minor rebelliousness against old strict rules of behavior in class, in assemblies, in any area where they were not allowed to pass paper notes back and forth. They can "TXT" with one hand, less observable by teachers or other adults. It is NOT a "hobby" Jimmie, it is just a thing they DO. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...I see! So...teenaagers sending messages by Morse Code is a hobby...Teenagers sending messages by text message is "...just a thing they do..." Are you still beating your wife? Are you still lying to yours? Jimmie, TRY to realize that the real "tribe" is the entire world of radio communications, and has been ever since 1896. That "tribe" has DROPPED morse code in favor of other, better, faster, more reliable communications modes for decades. There's no "tribes" on the electromagnetic spectrum save for licenses issued to recognized Tribal agencies by the FCC. Even the international maritime distress and safety frequency of 500 KHz was supplanted by GMDSS by the REAL mariners themselves. Ahem...How is this pertinent to Amateur radio? Drop the discussion, Jimmie. You haven't "won" any sort of argument...rather you've helped FABRICATE a non-issue. Hey Jim... This is Lennie's way of saying "Shut up...I'm embarraased enough already..." And it's rather surreal to see you lecturing and posturing on "young'uns in Ham Radio" when it was *you* who suggested to FCC that *no-one* below the age of 14 years be allowed to obtain *any* class of amateur radio license. Jimmie boy, STOP bringing up that six-year-old argument which (I perceive) you tried to use as some kind of "character flaw." Hans Brakob floated the first argument on that in here, we argued on it, but YOU have to keep bringing it up, bringing it up, bringing it up. It's like you have intellectual bullemia. If you must vomit so much please do it someplace else. Then Lennie.... YOU stop bring up ADA... YOU stop telling us about guys you never knew dying in a fight you were never in... YOU stop telling us about your alleged non-Amateur Radio related "career" as if it were pertinent to the Morse Code issue...It's not... YOU are NOT going to "win" OLD arguments that you didn't "win" some time ago. Quit acting the age of that old Comment of mine on FCC 98-143. Two little tykes of 6 years got their amateur radio licenses (Novice and Technician) plus got their pictures taken with a kindly, grandfatherly-looking VE who "administered" their tests. It was on the ARRL web page news some time ago. LET IT GO. He's already won. You've been discredited over and over, and your snivvelling little "shut up I don't want to talk about it anymore" rant isn't going to change things. If you want things to be "let go", then YOU have to "let go" of YOUR repetitive, insulting, demeaning behaviour here...We're just as tired of your insults as you are of us rubbing your nose in them. Putz. Steve, K4YZ |
|
#3
June 1st 05, 01:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
From: on Tues 31 May 2005 15:55 wrote: Heh heh, I've heard the particular lament of "we can't get these (darn) kids to LISTEN to us!" for lots of generations and have read of the same thing in books printed before I existed. :-) It's a VERY common parental angst. Gee, Len, since you've never actually been a parent, it sounds like you're talking about something you've never actually done.. Gee, Quitefine, I HAVE. [too bad for you...] You have been a parent, Len? That's news - you've told us all about your life and never mentioned that. Hello? You have failure to comprehend what I wrote? No, I understood it well. Of course you've failed. Tsk, tsk, tsk, OTHERS have written and said for decades that "those darn kids just don't LISTEN to us!" OTHERS have written and said that. :-) And you agree with them - even though you have no experience as a parent. You're lecturing others on things you have no real experience with. So, Jimmy/Quitefine, ARE YOU A PARENT? Suppose I am, Len - would that cause your behavior to change in a positive way? Or would you simply use that information to make fun of me? I suspect the latter. And why is parenthood some kind of "essential" in radio? It's not. But when you lecture the newsgroup on "young'uns in ham radio", your lack of experience is relevant, don't you think? You make a big deal about others' lack of military service or other experience - now the shoe is on the other foot. Gosh, I've asked before in here..."does one now have to present a medical doctor's statement of prospective licensee's sperm count" to VEs? Does one? I don't think so. The FCC didn't ask for that in 1956 when I got my first (commercial) radio operator license. When you were 24 years old.... You are very wrought-up on this subject of "parenting." Why? Why for discussion of amateur radio policy? Look at the subject line. Oh, I see now...you want to REVIVE and old newsgroup argument of 1998 and hope to "win" this go-around again! I won before and I'll win again. But it goes back farther than 1998 and continues into the present. For example, back in 1996 you wrote: "I've always had trouble with integrating "youngsters" in what is a primarily _adult_ skill/technique recreational activity." http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...?output=gplain That pretty much says it all - *you* have a problem including young people. The surreal part is that you're neither a parent nor a radio amateur. Yes, you are still (apparently) nursing several severe "wounds" suffered in newsgroup word "battle." Not me. I'm not the one shouting, tsking and calling people names. Have you ever been a teacher of young people, Len? An invited speaker at a couple of local "magnet" schools, Jimmie. Went over rather well. You see, I've had some experience speaking before groups and can "gauge" an audience's attention while speaking. That comes from practice. "Young people" (teen-agers to everyone else) is just another group having different likes/dislikes than adults. In other words, no. You gave some talks (subject unknown) but as far as actually teaching a course, where the results could be measured (testing results), you're again talking without experience. You don't seem to be able to do any teaching here, though, Len. Tsk, tsk. Some groups remain UNABLE to learn, heads of incredible density bone, anchored in their brainwashed BELIEFS. NOBODY human can get through to them... :-) Seems like the poor workman blaming his tools. You get insulted by someone disagreeing with you, or pointing out your mistakes. So? You've never been a radio amateur, either. It's very difficult for me to step down to what YOU call "amateur radio." Ah, there you are. Talking down to the audience. Been too long in grown-up commercial radio and electronics. Yet you seek to ban young people from amateur radio - of which you are not a part. Your answer indicates what many have long suspected: that you expect to be instantly recognized as an expert without having to meet the requirements for a license. Tsk, tsk. A radio does NOT operate by different laws of physics because some government agency designates it as "amateur." So what? "Physics" isn't the only consideration. Do you think the rules for the amateur radio service should be the same as for other radio services? And they don't require any license by the user. They're almost totally automatic in operation, too. Is that what you think amateur radio should be? Tsk, tsk. You are "loading' a question again. :-) How? You brought up cell phones, not me. You keep saying something like it is "improper" (or whatever you have in mind) for me to tell any radio amateur what to do or "what amateur radio should be. That's simply not true, Len. I say it's "surreal". You can lecture and posture all you want. I've never told you to shut up, either directly or indirectly. But you have told me and others to do so. Like your classic "feldwebel post" to K8MN... If I say anything remotely associated with such an act, you mount your figurative high horse and gallop off in another (misdirection) to do some kind of figurative battle! Remarkable desire to "do battle" by someone who never did any military service. See? There you go.. My argument in here is simply to eliminate the morse code test for a radio license. Then why do you go off on so many tangents? Like the age- requirement thing? I have NO desire to "tell you what to do," HAW! That's a good one! You've told me "what to do" many times here. Even in this very post. and such a thing you would never obey anyway...NO ONE can tell Jimmie what to do! :-) Jimmie boy, Why do you call me that, Len? Do you want to be addressed in similar manner? Or is it just your desire to insult and demean? what YOU want in automatons is for every ham to emulate a modem so that they can automatically decode morse code. A modem cannot understand Morse Code, Len. You are very, very (almost unnaturally) firm on that, giving all sorts of specious "reasons" for that "entrance exam" into narrow amateur bands below 30 MHz. Why is a basic test of Morse Code skill such a problem for you, Len? Using cell phones as a "hobby" is wrong. Says who? Semi-private communications is a social group act, not a hobby. What in the world does that mean? Tsk, Tsk, TSK! Jimmie implies he has "parenting skills" and yet he is BLIND to what modern-day teeners DO in their peer group activities? :-) Your writing is simply unclear, Len. "TXT-ing" is a modern FAD amongst teeners, the ability to send little notes to another, hardly any restrictions, and much easier to do than the old way with actual paper. Guess what, Len - people of all ages do text messaging. It's not just teenagers. For example, if I know a coworker is in a meeting, and needs some piece of information, I'll send a text message rather than call. Much less intrusive and the information is already in text form. Been doing that for *years*. It is a FUN social act for them, a minor rebelliousness against old strict rules of behavior in class, in assemblies, in any area where they were not allowed to pass paper notes back and forth. It's not acceptable behavior in class. Not in the schools I know, anyway. They can "TXT" with one hand, less observable by teachers or other adults. Do you think that's a good way to spend class time, Len? Did the kids text message when you were giving your lecture? It is NOT a "hobby" Jimmie, Of course it's a hobby - they do it for fun, it's not required, and they don't get paid for it. Isn't that the definition? What's your defintion of "hobby", Len? it is just a thing they DO. You wrote: "Using cell phones as a "hobby" is wrong." But you don't say why. You sound like a powerboater trying to ruin the fun of sailboaters. Jimmie, this is a newsgroup for amateur radio policy. Sailing and power-boat driving is quite another newsgroup. It's an analogy, Len. Sailboats used to be the dominant way of water transport. Navies used sail, cargo ships used sail, fishing vessels, explorers, etc. Just like Morse Code. Now sail has all but disappeared, except in a few special applications and in "hobby" (pleasure) boating. Just like Morse Code. See the analogy? Yep, we see your same old tired wornout attitudes here again and again, Len...;-) I'm not the one bringing up my 6-year-old comment on amateur radio minimum age. YOU are. You've done that several times, twice now after I've said I had not pursued the matter since 1999. It's more than your comments to FCC in 1999, Len. There's also your charges of fraud against ARRL and some VEs in the licensing of young children. There's your posts against those of us who were licensed at young ages (13 in my case). There's your post where you wrote: "I've always had trouble with integrating "youngsters" in what is a primarily _adult_ skill/technique recreational activity." http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...?output=gplain And there's the fact that you don't have a single example of *any* problems caused by the licensing of young people, yet you would deny a license to *anyone* under the age of 14. Why? The paradigms of yesterday just DON'T apply today. Some of them do. Or do you insist on a continuous techno- cultural revolution? Look at the contest between the text messagers and the Morse Code operators. The "tribe" (the audience) was so sure the world-champion text messagers would be faster than the Morse Code operators in their historic costumes. Yet the Morse Code ops, going about 1/3 world record speed, passed the message perfectly, without abbreviations, and presented the result in written form before the text messagers could even get the message inputted into the 'phone. (They had two words to go - "car insurance"). Jimmie, TRY to realize that the real "tribe" is the entire world of radio communications, and has been ever since 1896. So? That "tribe" has DROPPED morse code in favor of other, better, faster, more reliable communications modes for decades. Not true, Len. The maritime services were still using Morse Code extensively as recently as 1997. Less than a decade ago. Besides - *hams* still use Morse Code extensively. Even the international maritime distress and safety frequency of 500 KHz was supplanted by GMDSS by the REAL mariners themselves. No. It was replaced by the ship owners who wanted to save money on crew costs. There's no need for morsemanship on 500 KHz to avoid a repeat of the Titanic disaster. So what? Amateurs don't use 500 kHz. Air traffic has dropped morse on long, over-water flights; sea traffic now uses HF SSB voice and TORs for data; the military long since dropped morse code for communications purposes. In the USA all you have left is some AUTOMATIC ID machines at VORs and VORTACs and a few LF beacons that few pilots actually use over land. AUTOMATIC machines, Jimmie, which can endlessly generate the ID in morse code. Just like the way sailboats have been mostly replaced by power boats. NOBODY is considering "TXT-ing" as any sort of replacement for modern data modes for written communications. So? That's not the point. That "test" on an Entertainment show was deliberately staged to poke fun at this relatively recent FAD of "TXT-ing." People in the Staff of the Tonight Show on NBC at Burbank, CA, have informed me of the intent of that short bit. The fact is that the Morse Code operators proved the "tribe" to be wrong. Drop the discussion, Jimmie. You previously wrote: "I have NO desire to "tell you what to do,"" but now you're doing just that! You're telling me to shut up, Len. You haven't "won" any sort of argument...rather you've helped FABRICATE a non-issue. Wasn't me that told FCC to deny licenses to anyone under 13. It isn't me that has "trouble with integrating "youngsters" in what is a primarily _adult_ skill/technique recreational activity." It isn't me accusing VEs of fraud. It's *you*, Len. And it's rather surreal to see you lecturing and posturing on "young'uns in Ham Radio" when it was *you* who suggested to FCC that *no-one* below the age of 14 years be allowed to obtain *any* class of amateur radio license. Jimmie boy, There you go again. Why do you call names like that, Len? Is there a reason you can't just call me "Jim", the way I call you "Len"? STOP bringing up that six-year-old argument which (I perceive) you tried to use as some kind of "character flaw." There you go, telling me to shut up. Again. I bring up the issue because it shows your true attitude about "young'uns in ham radio". (see the subject line). It's right on the subject. Hans Brakob floated the first argument on that in here, we argued on it, but YOU have to keep bringing it up, bringing it up, bringing it up. Why not? You haven't admitted that you were wrong in the first place about age limits. Besides, you bring up the same stuff over and over again. Much more than I. Like your experience at ADA.... It's like you have intellectual bullemia. If you must vomit so much please do it someplace else. In other words, you want me to shut up. YOU are NOT going to "win" OLD arguments that you didn't "win" some time ago. So you think age limits for a ham license are a good idea? Why? Quit acting the age of that old Comment of mine on FCC 98-143. I'm not the one calling people names, shouting, etc., Len. You are. Two little tykes of 6 years got their amateur radio licenses (Novice and Technician) plus got their pictures taken with a kindly, grandfatherly-looking VE who "administered" their tests. It was on the ARRL web page news some time ago. And you said there must have been fraud involved. You accused ARRL and the VEs involved of dishonesty. Right here. That's a fact. Shall I repost those claims? LET IT GO. Why? So the truth is ignored? Fun fact, Len: Recently, a six-year-old earned her *General* class license. Code test and all. It was on the ARRL webpage. |
|
#4
June 2nd 05, 08:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote: wrote: From: on Tues 31 May 2005 15:55 wrote: Heh heh, I've heard the particular lament of "we can't get these (darn) kids to LISTEN to us!" for lots of generations and have read of the same thing in books printed before I existed. :-) It's a VERY common parental angst. Gee, Len, since you've never actually been a parent, it sounds like you're talking about something you've never actually done.. Gee, Quitefine, I HAVE. [too bad for you...] You have been a parent, Len? That's news - you've told us all about your life and never mentioned that. Hello? You have failure to comprehend what I wrote? No, I understood it well. Of course you've failed. Tsk, tsk, tsk, OTHERS have written and said for decades that "those darn kids just don't LISTEN to us!" OTHERS have written and said that. :-) And you agree with them - even though you have no experience as a parent. You're lecturing others on things you have no real experience with. So, Jimmy/Quitefine, ARE YOU A PARENT? Suppose I am, Len - would that cause your behavior to change in a positive way? Or would you simply use that information to make fun of me? I suspect the latter. And why is parenthood some kind of "essential" in radio? It's not. But when you lecture the newsgroup on "young'uns in ham radio", your lack of experience is relevant, don't you think? Lennie's not a parent, if we follow his own logic. Lennie has repeatedly insisted that if I did certain things in the Armed Forces, then I would be quick to brag about them and discuss them readily. Since HE does it, EVERYONE must do it too..... That's not the truth, but that's what Lennie has insisted. Therefore, that being the case, and Lennie having failed to discuss his successful procreation and subsequent rearing of offspring, we can conclude that it never happened. You are very wrought-up on this subject of "parenting." Why? Why for discussion of amateur radio policy? Look at the subject line. Lennie claims to be an engineer, but can't seem to make notes of the "details"... Oh, I see now...you want to REVIVE and old newsgroup argument of 1998 and hope to "win" this go-around again! I won before and I'll win again. But it goes back farther than 1998 and continues into the present. For example, back in 1996 you wrote: "I've always had trouble with integrating "youngsters" in what is a primarily _adult_ skill/technique recreational activity." http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...?output=gplain That pretty much says it all - *you* have a problem including young people. The surreal part is that you're neither a parent nor a radio amateur. Lennie doesn't let little things like "no practical experience" keep him from expressing an "expert" opinion on a great many range of issues. Your answer indicates what many have long suspected: that you expect to be instantly recognized as an expert without having to meet the requirements for a license. It was suggested to Lennie that he take some of this energy and submit a proposal to the FCC to allow "engineers" either a free pass or some sort of a "bridge" exam to get licensure. Never did it. Tsk, tsk. A radio does NOT operate by different laws of physics because some government agency designates it as "amateur." So what? "Physics" isn't the only consideration. And Lennie's been asked to please show where ANYone, other than him, has made said issue of it... No answers. Using cell phones as a "hobby" is wrong. Says who? Semi-private communications is a social group act, not a hobby. What in the world does that mean? Tsk, Tsk, TSK! Jimmie implies he has "parenting skills" and yet he is BLIND to what modern-day teeners DO in their peer group activities? Your writing is simply unclear, Len. It's also assinine. Would Lennie suggest that because people drive cars and trucks for "business" that no one may then drive, maintain or collect them for a "hobby"...?!?! Lennie has AOL...Just put the word "cell phone" into the "hobbies" search criteria of the "Members Directory" and watch the hits flow in. "TXT-ing" is a modern FAD amongst teeners, the ability to send little notes to another, hardly any restrictions, and much easier to do than the old way with actual paper. Guess what, Len - people of all ages do text messaging. It's not just teenagers. For example, if I know a coworker is in a meeting, and needs some piece of information, I'll send a text message rather than call. Much less intrusive and the information is already in text form. Been doing that for *years*. Once upon a time the idea that "teeners" using spark gaps and old Model T ignition coils for "communications" would be nothing more than a fad... You sound like a powerboater trying to ruin the fun of sailboaters. Jimmie, this is a newsgroup for amateur radio policy. Sailing and power-boat driving is quite another newsgroup. It's an analogy, Len. Sailboats used to be the dominant way of water transport. Navies used sail, cargo ships used sail, fishing vessels, explorers, etc. Just like Morse Code. Now sail has all but disappeared, except in a few special applications and in "hobby" (pleasure) boating. Just like Morse Code. See the analogy? He can't see his an...uh...nose. How can he see an "analogy"...?!?! Drop the discussion, Jimmie. You previously wrote: "I have NO desire to "tell you what to do,"" but now you're doing just that! You're telling me to shut up, Len. And this kind of behaviour is unknown from him...?!?! Jimmie boy, There you go again. Why do you call names like that, Len? Is there a reason you can't just call me "Jim", the way I call you "Len"? That might make you his "peer", Jim... Can't have that! STOP bringing up that six-year-old argument which (I perceive) you tried to use as some kind of "character flaw." There you go, telling me to shut up. Again. I bring up the issue because it shows your true attitude about "young'uns in ham radio". (see the subject line). It's right on the subject. He wasn't a Ham at a young age, ergo NO one should be a Ham at ANY age... Two little tykes of 6 years got their amateur radio licenses (Novice and Technician) plus got their pictures taken with a kindly, grandfatherly-looking VE who "administered" their tests. It was on the ARRL web page news some time ago. And you said there must have been fraud involved. You accused ARRL and the VEs involved of dishonesty. Right here. That's a fact. Shall I repost those claims? LET IT GO. Why? So the truth is ignored? So Lennie can quit getting his nose rubbed in yet another of his fallicies. Fun fact, Len: Recently, a six-year-old earned her *General* class license. Code test and all. It was on the ARRL webpage. Our local club recently added two new licensees...both 9....No record, but yet more evidence that there ARE "young 'uns" entering Amateur Radio. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
|
#5
June 2nd 05, 09:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: "K4YZ" on Wed 1 Jun 2005 23:00
[the lonely sentinel bursts out in rage and anger, unable to control his emotions...mighty flashes issue from his red pilot lights...he raises his USMC bayonetted soldering iron and strikes! Whiff...the unconnected strike punctures the empty air...] wrote: wrote: From: on Tues 31 May 2005 15:55 It's not. But when you lecture the newsgroup on "young'uns in ham radio", your lack of experience is relevant, don't you think? Lennie's not a parent, if we follow his own logic. Lennie has repeatedly insisted that if I did certain things in the Armed Forces, then I would be quick to brag about them and discuss them readily. Since HE does it, EVERYONE must do it too..... That's not the truth, but that's what Lennie has insisted. That's simply untrue, Stebie. Stebie NEVER worked HF communications in the USMC. Indeed, he was NEVER in any sort of radio communications tasks as a helicopter ground maintenance crew. Stebie still hasn't verified his CLAIM of being "Assistant" NCOIC at a USMC MARS station. The United States military used NON-morse HF communications for the major tactical/strategic radio communications since 1948. [Stebie wasn't even conceived until much later...] Thousands of men (and a few women) have worked in HF communications in the military. I was one of those thousands IN the military working on HF communications, "getting the messages through" and on a 24/7 basis. Stebie, the Avenging Angle of Dearth, has NOT. Stebie is jealous, poor thing. Therefore, that being the case, and Lennie having failed to discuss his successful procreation and subsequent rearing of offspring, we can conclude that it never happened. Stebie, in his RAGE and ANGER, has lost his bearings on what this newsgroup is about. Hint: It is about radio amateur policy matters. Pediatrics is NOT the subject. Stebie has expressed an inordinate desire to talk about others' families, especially WIVES. This newsgroup is NOT about Stebie's fantasies about others' marital relationships nor is it about SEX. Yet, Stebie keeps on mentioning his "enemies" (in the newsgroup and probably everywhere) as "penis head," using a Yiddish pejorative (even when he is unfamiliar with Judaism nor its Central European ethnic group of Yiddish. You are very wrought-up on this subject of "parenting." Why? Why for discussion of amateur radio policy? Look at the subject line. Lennie claims to be an engineer, but can't seem to make notes of the "details"... Tsk, tsk, tsk. Both "Quitefine" and Stebie (Assistant NCOIC of Rage and Anger among the PCTA) don't understand that "young ones" are not necessarily just their "own" offspring. Stebie, the self-appointed "ethnic puritan" of this newsgroup, couldn't make it on his own as a Purchasing Agent of a small electronics company, yet claims/postures/implies that he "knows" all about radio-electronics engineering, what the engineers know, what the engineers do, etc., etc., etc. CLAIMS. Brags. Posturing. Stebie's forte' as a mighty macho morseman. I make no "claim" of engineering. I AM one and have been for many years. My professional occupation. Stebie is a NURSE. "Quitefine" (James Miccolis) will NOT reveal what HE works on or for...other than letting slip once that he "works in vehicular technology" (in one of his comments on one of the 18 Petitions for amateur radio restructuring. "Quitefine" is NOT a member of the worldwide Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), a professional association. That pretty much says it all - *you* have a problem including young people. The surreal part is that you're neither a parent nor a radio amateur. Lennie doesn't let little things like "no practical experience" keep him from expressing an "expert" opinion on a great many range of issues. The "surreal" part of Miccolis and Robeson's diatribes is that: 1. No pediatrician is required to be a "parent." There is NO such "requirement" in any academic organization to "be a parent" in ANY degreed/titled work involving children OR procreation of children. 2. "Quitefine" (Miccolis) seems to disregard laws of physics in that ALL radios work by the SAME physical laws, regardless of human designations as to their application. [inconceivable that a claimed double-degree individual would insist that ONLY licensed radio amateurs (who have obtained a federal merit badge only in amateurism) can express any opinion at all. 3. In the United States of America, ANY citizen has the RIGHT to comment to their government on ANY law or regulation REGARDLESS of whether or not they have any "license" or other "authorization" to "operate" under some rules or regulations. 4. Neither Miccolis ("Quitefine") nor Robeson have ANY "authority" to RULE on U.S. amateur radio regulations, yet the seek to bar, to subjugate, to eliminate ANYONE BUT licensed radio amateurs from even talking about it. Apparently those two control freaks do not understand that NO FCC Commissioner or staff member is "required" to possess an amateur radio license in order to offcially regulate U.S. amateur radio. 5. Miccolis-"Quitefine" has NOT YET stated how many offspring HE has parented. He implies he has but the number, gender, are all big unknowns. Robeson has only mentioned his "offspring" from his second marriage...neglecting any mention of "offspring" from his first, failed marriage. Regardless of the NON-applicability of "offspring" as the ONLY "authoritative experience" in discussing young people, they implore (if not directly order) "offspring" as a "prime requirement" to talk about young people. Your answer indicates what many have long suspected: that you expect to be instantly recognized as an expert without having to meet the requirements for a license. It was suggested to Lennie that he take some of this energy and submit a proposal to the FCC to allow "engineers" either a free pass or some sort of a "bridge" exam to get licensure. Never did it. Tsk, tsk, tsk. A NON-applicable "request" NOT required. That so-called "request" was simply a MISDIRECTION to try to stop any further talk on ELIMINATION OF THE MORSE CODE TEST for an amateur radio license. As is quite obvious under any U.S. citizens' RIGHTS under the Constitution (of the United States, NOT the ARRL), "licensure" in amateur radio is NOT REQUIRED to talk about GETTING INTO amateur radio. To reiterate, NO FCC Commissioner or Staffer is required to possess any amateur radio license in order to lawfully regulate U.S. amateur radio. Both of these control freaks have been invited to take their "authority" and "shove it up their I/O ports." They never did it. However, they might have...and enjoyed it. Tsk, tsk. A radio does NOT operate by different laws of physics because some government agency designates it as "amateur." So what? "Physics" isn't the only consideration. And Lennie's been asked to please show where ANYone, other than him, has made said issue of it... No answers. TSK, TSK, TSK. MANY ANSWERS. Apparently these two control freaks do not have sufficient reading comprehension...or have a psychological inability to separate their fantasies from reality. They are continuously "making issues" of such "clubhouse rules" where only THEY can "rule" yet neither one has legal/lawful/actual authority to rule. Your writing is simply unclear, Len. It's also assinine. Stebie, the Avenging Angle of Dearth, the newsgroup's counterpart to Elfren Saldivar, can only "reply" with a series of Personal Insults...which is little more than his RAGE and ANGER and personal frustration showing clearly. Would Lennie suggest that because people drive cars and trucks for "business" that no one may then drive, maintain or collect them for a "hobby"...?!?! Stebie is still unable to focus on the newsgroup subject. Matters of vehicular transportation do NOT belong here. Once upon a time the idea that "teeners" using spark gaps and old Model T ignition coils for "communications" would be nothing more than a fad... "SPARK," technically damped impulse oscillation, is FORBIDDEN by law. Neither "Quitefine" nor Stebie were alive in the early days of radio when "Spark" was all that was available to amateur radio. They've only READ about it, could NOT have used it LEGALLY. See the analogy? He can't see his an...uh...nose. How can he see an "analogy"...?!?! Stebie is overly concerned with anal-genital areas of the body. Stebie is overly concerned with other people's wives, including desires to talk about their sexual or marital practices. This is NOT the newsgroup to talk about those things. Jimmie boy, There you go again. Why do you call names like that, Len? Is there a reason you can't just call me "Jim", the way I call you "Len"? That might make you his "peer", Jim... Can't have that! PCTA Extra Double Standard. "Quitefine" and Stebie both "allow" name-calling such as "PUTZ" and "gutless coward" to others, yet object to their aliases or diminutive forms of their given names. Miccolis is NOT my "peer." He has not identified his actual place of employment, has not identified his own "parenthood" (which he REQUIRES of others), and has claimed to be a "radio manufacturer." Tsk, he is not even a member of any professional association. Stebie is a NURSE, has not even worked IN any electronics engineering position...nor has he done HF communications while in the military. And you said there must have been fraud involved. You accused ARRL and the VEs involved of dishonesty. Right here. That's a fact. Shall I repost those claims? Tsk, tsk. I wrote, some time ago, that the ARRL "sins by omission." They do so often, especially in their publications on the history of radio. The ARRL over-emphasizes (from omitting other workers in radio) the "role" that radio amateurs have played in the evolution of radio communications. The first use of Single Sideband techniques was in long-distance wired telephony. The first consistent use of SSB in HF communications was by commercial and government organizations beginning in the 1930s...and continues to this day. The ARRL seems to have lost touch with the activities of commercial and government users of SSB and imply that "SSB pioneering" was done by radio amateurs in the 1950s, two decades after the fact. One case of intellectual fraud...but it serves the purpose of making hobbyist hams feel "important." They (and many self- important hams) point to the Strategic Air Command about SSB and forget that such was SINGLE-CHANNEL SSB, something already done prior to WW2, dropped before WW2 due to lack of frequency stability techniques to keep costs low. The ARRL has implied that quartz crystal frequency stability owes its existance (especially after WW2) to "efforts by hams" (in more pioneering). They neglect an overall electronics industry need for stable frequency control. They neglect the tremendous effort on wartime production of quartz crystal units by the electronics industry - A million quartz units a month in the last three years of WW2 and a national priority second only to the Manhattan Project. By not mentioning what has been known in the electronics industry they imply that hams are responsible for the pioneering...which tells ham hobbyists nice emotional things that make them feel important. The first use of VHF FM in mobile communications was pioneered by commercial companies (Link and Motorola) and a few police departments prior to WW2. That was vastly increased by the U.S. military during WW2. The EM spectrum from VHF and up was opened by the whole radio world just before and certainly after WW2. Real history. The ARRL in QST magazine still refers to that huge part of the EM spectrum as "the world above 50 MHz" as if it is a sort of ghetto. Where the HF part of the EM spectrum was once a major carrier of long-distance communications (especially over water), that is now greatly reduced, supplanted by geostationary sattelite radio relay, under-water digital fiber cable (using optically- "pumped" non-electronic amplifiers) carrying thousands of comm channels, troposcatter low microwave multi-channel beyond the line of sight distance. Users on HF have gone to single- channel SSB voice and TORs (Teleprinter Over Radio) data instead of manual morse code modes. The U.S. military no longer requires morsemanship for any communications occupation specialties. Still, the ARRL features HF communications, especially by "CW" as a "prime" communications spectrum...and the consign the "world above 50 MHz" to a sort of ghetto for those of lesser "ability." The ARRL loves to emphasize morsemanship as the epitome of amateur radio "excellence" to satisfy the old men at the League and the membership who want to feel good and "important in radio." The ARRL still want to ignore the obvious fact of the overwhelmingly-most-increasing class in amateur radio being Technicians. They want to gloss over the fact that most of those are NO-CODE-TEST Technicians. That pleases the old man hams who still think that morsemanship is "important" in radio. Those old men (chronologically or in mindset) want to fantasize their dreams of "being somebody." They like the words that feed their fantasies...and that lets the League hang onto them and keep them members. There are several more subjects on radio history that can be shown, but the fantasizers and imaginers and those who want to posture about their "importance" will object and call names. Their "intellectual" response is to bring out idolated cases that are supposed to "refute" challenges of the actual sinning by omission by the mighty League. Our local club recently added two new licensees...both 9....No record, but yet more evidence that there ARE "young 'uns" entering Amateur Radio. Irrelevant, relatively isolated case. Apparently neither one is the offspring of Stebie - who once touted the "ability" and "dedication" of his own 9-year-old. So, all you mental nine-year-olds, feel good about your sub- teen intellectual prowess on passing the TEST. Continue to scamper about your "private clubhouse" and generally behave emotionally like kiddies about your "superiorities." Sooner or later your kinder-kind MIGHT grow up. [I'm losing my optimism on that] The rest of us IN the radio-electronics industry will continue doing our adult things. We will pat you on the head when you are nice and spank you when you misbehave. Go to your room. |
|
#6
June 3rd 05, 01:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... From: "K4YZ" on Wed 1 Jun 2005 23:00 [the lonely sentinel bursts out in rage and anger, unable to control his emotions...mighty flashes issue from his red pilot lights...he raises his USMC bayonetted soldering iron and strikes! Whiff...the unconnected strike punctures the empty air...] wrote: wrote: From: on Tues 31 May 2005 15:55 It's not. But when you lecture the newsgroup on "young'uns in ham radio", your lack of experience is relevant, don't you think? Lennie's not a parent, if we follow his own logic. Lennie has repeatedly insisted that if I did certain things in the Armed Forces, then I would be quick to brag about them and discuss them readily. Since HE does it, EVERYONE must do it too..... That's not the truth, but that's what Lennie has insisted. That's simply untrue, Stebie. Stebie NEVER worked HF communications in the USMC. Indeed, he was NEVER in any sort of radio communications tasks as a helicopter ground maintenance crew. Stebie still hasn't verified his CLAIM of being "Assistant" NCOIC at a USMC MARS station. The United States military used NON-morse HF communications for the major tactical/strategic radio communications since 1948. [Stebie wasn't even conceived until much later...] Thousands of men (and a few women) have worked in HF communications in the military. I was one of those thousands IN the military working on HF communications, "getting the messages through" and on a 24/7 basis. Stebie, the Avenging Angle of Dearth, has NOT. Stebie is jealous, poor thing. Therefore, that being the case, and Lennie having failed to discuss his successful procreation and subsequent rearing of offspring, we can conclude that it never happened. Stebie, in his RAGE and ANGER, has lost his bearings on what this newsgroup is about. Hint: It is about radio amateur policy matters. Pediatrics is NOT the subject. Stebie has expressed an inordinate desire to talk about others' families, especially WIVES. This newsgroup is NOT about Stebie's fantasies about others' marital relationships nor is it about SEX. Yet, Stebie keeps on mentioning his "enemies" (in the newsgroup and probably everywhere) as "penis head," using a Yiddish pejorative (even when he is unfamiliar with Judaism nor its Central European ethnic group of Yiddish. You are very wrought-up on this subject of "parenting." Why? Why for discussion of amateur radio policy? Look at the subject line. Lennie claims to be an engineer, but can't seem to make notes of the "details"... Tsk, tsk, tsk. Both "Quitefine" and Stebie (Assistant NCOIC of Rage and Anger among the PCTA) don't understand that "young ones" are not necessarily just their "own" offspring. Stebie, the self-appointed "ethnic puritan" of this newsgroup, couldn't make it on his own as a Purchasing Agent of a small electronics company, yet claims/postures/implies that he "knows" all about radio-electronics engineering, what the engineers know, what the engineers do, etc., etc., etc. CLAIMS. Brags. Posturing. Stebie's forte' as a mighty macho morseman. I make no "claim" of engineering. I AM one and have been for many years. My professional occupation. Stebie is a NURSE. "Quitefine" (James Miccolis) will NOT reveal what HE works on or for...other than letting slip once that he "works in vehicular technology" (in one of his comments on one of the 18 Petitions for amateur radio restructuring. "Quitefine" is NOT a member of the worldwide Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), a professional association. That pretty much says it all - *you* have a problem including young people. The surreal part is that you're neither a parent nor a radio amateur. Lennie doesn't let little things like "no practical experience" keep him from expressing an "expert" opinion on a great many range of issues. The "surreal" part of Miccolis and Robeson's diatribes is that: 1. No pediatrician is required to be a "parent." There is NO such "requirement" in any academic organization to "be a parent" in ANY degreed/titled work involving children OR procreation of children. 2. "Quitefine" (Miccolis) seems to disregard laws of physics in that ALL radios work by the SAME physical laws, regardless of human designations as to their application. [inconceivable that a claimed double-degree individual would insist that ONLY licensed radio amateurs (who have obtained a federal merit badge only in amateurism) can express any opinion at all. 3. In the United States of America, ANY citizen has the RIGHT to comment to their government on ANY law or regulation REGARDLESS of whether or not they have any "license" or other "authorization" to "operate" under some rules or regulations. 4. Neither Miccolis ("Quitefine") nor Robeson have ANY "authority" to RULE on U.S. amateur radio regulations, yet the seek to bar, to subjugate, to eliminate ANYONE BUT licensed radio amateurs from even talking about it. Apparently those two control freaks do not understand that NO FCC Commissioner or staff member is "required" to possess an amateur radio license in order to offcially regulate U.S. amateur radio. 5. Miccolis-"Quitefine" has NOT YET stated how many offspring HE has parented. He implies he has but the number, gender, are all big unknowns. Robeson has only mentioned his "offspring" from his second marriage...neglecting any mention of "offspring" from his first, failed marriage. Regardless of the NON-applicability of "offspring" as the ONLY "authoritative experience" in discussing young people, they implore (if not directly order) "offspring" as a "prime requirement" to talk about young people. Your answer indicates what many have long suspected: that you expect to be instantly recognized as an expert without having to meet the requirements for a license. It was suggested to Lennie that he take some of this energy and submit a proposal to the FCC to allow "engineers" either a free pass or some sort of a "bridge" exam to get licensure. Never did it. Tsk, tsk, tsk. A NON-applicable "request" NOT required. That so-called "request" was simply a MISDIRECTION to try to stop any further talk on ELIMINATION OF THE MORSE CODE TEST for an amateur radio license. As is quite obvious under any U.S. citizens' RIGHTS under the Constitution (of the United States, NOT the ARRL), "licensure" in amateur radio is NOT REQUIRED to talk about GETTING INTO amateur radio. To reiterate, NO FCC Commissioner or Staffer is required to possess any amateur radio license in order to lawfully regulate U.S. amateur radio. Both of these control freaks have been invited to take their "authority" and "shove it up their I/O ports." They never did it. However, they might have...and enjoyed it. Tsk, tsk. A radio does NOT operate by different laws of physics because some government agency designates it as "amateur." So what? "Physics" isn't the only consideration. And Lennie's been asked to please show where ANYone, other than him, has made said issue of it... No answers. TSK, TSK, TSK. MANY ANSWERS. Apparently these two control freaks do not have sufficient reading comprehension...or have a psychological inability to separate their fantasies from reality. They are continuously "making issues" of such "clubhouse rules" where only THEY can "rule" yet neither one has legal/lawful/actual authority to rule. Your writing is simply unclear, Len. It's also assinine. Stebie, the Avenging Angle of Dearth, the newsgroup's counterpart to Elfren Saldivar, can only "reply" with a series of Personal Insults...which is little more than his RAGE and ANGER and personal frustration showing clearly. Would Lennie suggest that because people drive cars and trucks for "business" that no one may then drive, maintain or collect them for a "hobby"...?!?! Stebie is still unable to focus on the newsgroup subject. Matters of vehicular transportation do NOT belong here. Once upon a time the idea that "teeners" using spark gaps and old Model T ignition coils for "communications" would be nothing more than a fad... "SPARK," technically damped impulse oscillation, is FORBIDDEN by law. Neither "Quitefine" nor Stebie were alive in the early days of radio when "Spark" was all that was available to amateur radio. They've only READ about it, could NOT have used it LEGALLY. See the analogy? He can't see his an...uh...nose. How can he see an "analogy"...?!?! Stebie is overly concerned with anal-genital areas of the body. Stebie is overly concerned with other people's wives, including desires to talk about their sexual or marital practices. This is NOT the newsgroup to talk about those things. Jimmie boy, There you go again. Why do you call names like that, Len? Is there a reason you can't just call me "Jim", the way I call you "Len"? That might make you his "peer", Jim... Can't have that! PCTA Extra Double Standard. "Quitefine" and Stebie both "allow" name-calling such as "PUTZ" and "gutless coward" to others, yet object to their aliases or diminutive forms of their given names. Miccolis is NOT my "peer." He has not identified his actual place of employment, has not identified his own "parenthood" (which he REQUIRES of others), and has claimed to be a "radio manufacturer." Tsk, he is not even a member of any professional association. Stebie is a NURSE, has not even worked IN any electronics engineering position...nor has he done HF communications while in the military. And you said there must have been fraud involved. You accused ARRL and the VEs involved of dishonesty. Right here. That's a fact. Shall I repost those claims? Tsk, tsk. I wrote, some time ago, that the ARRL "sins by omission." They do so often, especially in their publications on the history of radio. The ARRL over-emphasizes (from omitting other workers in radio) the "role" that radio amateurs have played in the evolution of radio communications. The first use of Single Sideband techniques was in long-distance wired telephony. The first consistent use of SSB in HF communications was by commercial and government organizations beginning in the 1930s...and continues to this day. The ARRL seems to have lost touch with the activities of commercial and government users of SSB and imply that "SSB pioneering" was done by radio amateurs in the 1950s, two decades after the fact. One case of intellectual fraud...but it serves the purpose of making hobbyist hams feel "important." They (and many self- important hams) point to the Strategic Air Command about SSB and forget that such was SINGLE-CHANNEL SSB, something already done prior to WW2, dropped before WW2 due to lack of frequency stability techniques to keep costs low. The ARRL has implied that quartz crystal frequency stability owes its existance (especially after WW2) to "efforts by hams" (in more pioneering). They neglect an overall electronics industry need for stable frequency control. They neglect the tremendous effort on wartime production of quartz crystal units by the electronics industry - A million quartz units a month in the last three years of WW2 and a national priority second only to the Manhattan Project. By not mentioning what has been known in the electronics industry they imply that hams are responsible for the pioneering...which tells ham hobbyists nice emotional things that make them feel important. The first use of VHF FM in mobile communications was pioneered by commercial companies (Link and Motorola) and a few police departments prior to WW2. That was vastly increased by the U.S. military during WW2. The EM spectrum from VHF and up was opened by the whole radio world just before and certainly after WW2. Real history. The ARRL in QST magazine still refers to that huge part of the EM spectrum as "the world above 50 MHz" as if it is a sort of ghetto. Where the HF part of the EM spectrum was once a major carrier of long-distance communications (especially over water), that is now greatly reduced, supplanted by geostationary sattelite radio relay, under-water digital fiber cable (using optically- "pumped" non-electronic amplifiers) carrying thousands of comm channels, troposcatter low microwave multi-channel beyond the line of sight distance. Users on HF have gone to single- channel SSB voice and TORs (Teleprinter Over Radio) data instead of manual morse code modes. The U.S. military no longer requires morsemanship for any communications occupation specialties. Still, the ARRL features HF communications, especially by "CW" as a "prime" communications spectrum...and the consign the "world above 50 MHz" to a sort of ghetto for those of lesser "ability." The ARRL loves to emphasize morsemanship as the epitome of amateur radio "excellence" to satisfy the old men at the League and the membership who want to feel good and "important in radio." The ARRL still want to ignore the obvious fact of the overwhelmingly-most-increasing class in amateur radio being Technicians. They want to gloss over the fact that most of those are NO-CODE-TEST Technicians. That pleases the old man hams who still think that morsemanship is "important" in radio. Those old men (chronologically or in mindset) want to fantasize their dreams of "being somebody." They like the words that feed their fantasies...and that lets the League hang onto them and keep them members. There are several more subjects on radio history that can be shown, but the fantasizers and imaginers and those who want to posture about their "importance" will object and call names. Their "intellectual" response is to bring out idolated cases that are supposed to "refute" challenges of the actual sinning by omission by the mighty League. Our local club recently added two new licensees...both 9....No record, but yet more evidence that there ARE "young 'uns" entering Amateur Radio. Irrelevant, relatively isolated case. Apparently neither one is the offspring of Stebie - who once touted the "ability" and "dedication" of his own 9-year-old. So, all you mental nine-year-olds, feel good about your sub- teen intellectual prowess on passing the TEST. Continue to scamper about your "private clubhouse" and generally behave emotionally like kiddies about your "superiorities." Sooner or later your kinder-kind MIGHT grow up. [I'm losing my optimism on that] The rest of us IN the radio-electronics industry will continue doing our adult things. We will pat you on the head when you are nice and spank you when you misbehave. Go to your room. This newsgroup is not about Pediatrics. Nor is it about a weak bladder, and you sure seem to be "****ing" an awful lot of late, Lennie. -- The correctness of the original opinion is directly proportional to the length of the attempted rebuttal |
|
#7
June 3rd 05, 03:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote: From: "K4YZ" on Wed 1 Jun 2005 23:00 [the lonely sentinel...(SNIP) At least you took the hint about your horrific behaviour vis-a-vis parodies of the Tomb of the Unknowns...You may be teachable yet. Lennie has repeatedly insisted that if I did certain things in the Armed Forces, then I would be quick to brag about them and discuss them readily. Since HE does it, EVERYONE must do it too..... That's not the truth, but that's what Lennie has insisted. That's simply untrue, Stebie. It's absolutely true, Lennie. You've stated that exactly before. Stebie NEVER worked HF communications in the USMC. THAT is abslutely UNRUE, Lennie, and you've been provided references to verify same. Indeed, he was NEVER in any sort of radio communications tasks as a helicopter ground maintenance crew. I guess ann those COM/NAV Avionics MOS'es were for naught, eh? Stebie still hasn't verified his CLAIM of being "Assistant" NCOIC at a USMC MARS station. That's not what I said, Lennie. Get your facts straight. Therefore, that being the case, and Lennie having failed to discuss his successful procreation and subsequent rearing of offspring, we can conclude that it never happened. Stebie, in his RAGE and ANGER...(SNIP) Just give us the kid's names, Lennie. The rest is just subterfuge on your part to avoid the question. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Both "Quitefine" and Stebie (Assistant NCOIC of Rage and Anger among the PCTA) don't understand that "young ones" are not necessarily just their "own" offspring. No siad "their own" offspring, Lennie. Why do you continue to avoid the fact that there are NO documented (as per FCC records) of "children" being a regulatory burden on their enforcement requirements. Stebie, the self-appointed "ethnic puritan" of this newsgroup...(SNIP) Another lie, Lennie. Stop lying. couldn't make it on his own as a Purchasing Agent of a small electronics company, yet claims/postures/implies that he "knows" all about radio-electronics engineering, what the engineers know, what the engineers do, etc., etc., etc. CLAIMS. Brags. Posturing. Stebie's forte' as a mighty macho morseman. More lies. Why does Leonard H Anderson continue to lie? Where are these alleged "claims" of "know(ing) all about radio-engineering..." You've beena sked before. You never substantiate your claim. YOU prove MY claim that you are a liar. Again. I make no "claim" of engineering. I AM one and have been for many years. My professional occupation. You claim to be an engineer. You refuse to produce any references, other than a few by-lines in a failed Amateur magazine, to show such work. Stebie is a NURSE. That's not quite correct. I am GOOD Nurse. The "surreal" part of Miccolis and Robeson's diatribes is that: 1. No pediatrician is required to be a "parent." There is NO such "requirement" in any academic organization to "be a parent" in ANY degreed/titled work involving children OR procreation of children. There's nothing "surreal" about it at all. What's "surreal" is an unlicensed, childless old man petitioning the FCC to enact an age limit where one is not called for. 2. "Quitefine" (Miccolis) seems to disregard laws of physics in that ALL radios work by the SAME physical laws, regardless of human designations as to their application. [inconceivable that a claimed double-degree individual would insist that ONLY licensed radio amateurs (who have obtained a federal merit badge only in amateurism) can express any opinion at all. Leonard H. Anderson perpetrates yet ANOTHER lie. NEVER ONCE has Jim Miccolis, myself, or any other licensed participant in this fourm suggested anything of the like. 3. In the United States of America, ANY citizen has the RIGHT to comment to their government on ANY law or regulation REGARDLESS of whether or not they have any "license" or other "authorization" to "operate" under some rules or regulations. Sure they do. And it's also glaring apparent when the "petitioner" has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. That usually comes from not having any practical experience in the subject matter they are commenting on. IE: Lennie and Amateur Radio or Child Rearing. 4. Neither Miccolis ("Quitefine") nor Robeson have ANY "authority" to RULE on U.S. amateur radio regulations, yet the seek to bar, to subjugate, to eliminate ANYONE BUT licensed radio amateurs from even talking about it. Apparently those two control freaks do not understand that NO FCC Commissioner or staff member is "required" to possess an amateur radio license in order to offcially regulate U.S. amateur radio. You continue THIS misrepresentation despite there being absolutely no evidence of ANYone except YOU trying to "enforce" some kind of censorship...As a matter of fact, within the last 5 days alone you've made no fewer than four direct demands to "shut up", "drop it", and "LEAVE IT ALONE" and "just forget it"... 5. Miccolis-"Quitefine" has NOT YET stated how many offspring HE has parented. He implies he has but the number, gender, are all big unknowns. Robeson has only mentioned his "offspring" from his second marriage...neglecting any mention of "offspring" from his first, failed marriage. Regardless of the NON-applicability of "offspring" as the ONLY "authoritative experience" in discussing young people, they implore (if not directly order) "offspring" as a "prime requirement" to talk about young people. Lies, lies and more lies. I've mentioned all of my kids at one time or another, Lennie. Tsk, tsk. A radio does NOT operate by different laws of physics because some government agency designates it as "amateur." So what? "Physics" isn't the only consideration. And Lennie's been asked to please show where ANYone, other than him, has made said issue of it... No answers. TSK, TSK, TSK. MANY ANSWERS. A blatant lie. Provide JUST ONE quote rom ANY of us wherein we state that the physics of radiowave propagation are any different for Amateur Radio than any other service. Apparently these two control freaks do not have sufficient reading comprehension...or have a psychological inability to separate their fantasies from reality. They are continuously "making issues" of such "clubhouse rules" where only THEY can "rule" yet neither one has legal/lawful/actual authority to rule. We'll see when you produce the above requested cite. Once upon a time the idea that "teeners" using spark gaps and old Model T ignition coils for "communications" would be nothing more than a fad... "SPARK," technically damped impulse oscillation, is FORBIDDEN by law. Sure it is. But that doesn't negate my (factual) notation that early radio was once deemed nothing mroe than a "fad", just like text messaging is for kids today. Jimmie boy, There you go again. Why do you call names like that, Len? Is there a reason you can't just call me "Jim", the way I call you "Len"? That might make you his "peer", Jim... Can't have that! PCTA Extra Double Standard. "Quitefine" and Stebie both "allow" name-calling such as "PUTZ" and "gutless coward" to others, yet object to their aliases or diminutive forms of their given names. Jim, in ANY "manifestation", has never called you ANY name. Miccolis is NOT my "peer." Acutally, in THIS forum, you are not HIS peer. You aren't even in the same room, let alone sitting at the same table with him. Stebie is a NURSE, has not even worked IN any electronics engineering position...(SNIP) True. (UNSNIP)...nor has he done HF communications while in the military. Not true. And you said there must have been fraud involved. You accused ARRL and the VEs involved of dishonesty. Right here. That's a fact. Shall I repost those claims? Tsk, tsk. I wrote, some time ago, that the ARRL "sins by omission." They do so often, especially in their publications on the history of radio. The ARRL over-emphasizes (from omitting other workers in radio) the "role" that radio amateurs have played in the evolution of radio communications. Big snip of irrelevent historical diversion... You point-blank called the League, in general, and the BoD in particular, "dishonest". You've been challenged over and over to provide SOME sort of verifiable reference that at least corroborates a CLAIM of dishonesty, let alone any facts to substantiate it. The first use of Single Sideband techniques...(SNIP) 13 lines of non-pertinet diversion. The ARRL has implied that quartz crystal frequency stability owes its existance (especially after WW2) to "efforts by hams" (in more pioneering). They neglect an overall electronics industry need for stable frequency control. They neglect the tremendous effort on wartime production of quartz crystal units by the electronics industry - A million quartz units a month in the last three years of WW2 and a national priority second only to the Manhattan Project. By not mentioning what has been known in the electronics industry they imply that hams are responsible for the pioneering...which tells ham hobbyists nice emotional things that make them feel important. The FACTS are that this crystanl control WAS pioneered by Amateurs and implemented by them. The first use of VHF FM in mobile communications was pioneered by commercial companies (Link and Motorola) and a few police departments prior to WW2. That was vastly increased by the U.S. military during WW2. The EM spectrum from VHF and up was opened by the whole radio world just before and certainly after WW2. Real history. The ARRL in QST magazine still refers to that huge part of the EM spectrum as "the world above 50 MHz" as if it is a sort of ghetto. No... The characteristics of radio wave propagation ARE different above 50Mhz. Perhaps if you were actually PRACTICED in the radio arts you'd know this. Where the HF part...(SNIP) Seventeen lines of diversion. The ARRL still want to ignore the obvious fact of the overwhelmingly-most-increasing class in amateur radio being Technicians. They want to gloss over the fact that most of those are NO-CODE-TEST Technicians. That pleases the old man hams who still think that morsemanship is "important" in radio. Those old men (chronologically or in mindset) want to fantasize their dreams of "being somebody." They like the words that feed their fantasies...and that lets the League hang onto them and keep them members. More absolutley dishonest and deceitful rhetoric. WHY does Leonard H Anderson continue to lie in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary...?!?! There are several more subjects on radio history that can be shown, but the fantasizers and imaginers and those who want to posture about their "importance" will object and call names. Their "intellectual" response is to bring out idolated cases that are supposed to "refute" challenges of the actual sinning by omission by the mighty League. Even a casual perusal of ARRL publications will show Lennie's tales to be exactly that...tales... Our local club recently added two new licensees...both 9....No record, but yet more evidence that there ARE "young 'uns" entering Amateur Radio. Irrelevant, relatively isolated case. Apparently neither one is the offspring of Stebie - who once touted the "ability" and "dedication" of his own 9-year-old. Not irrelevent. Factual. It's happening all over the United States. Even in Southern California. The rest of us IN the radio-electronics industry will continue doing our adult things. Like what? You've not done a single "adult" thing here. You lie...you insult...you deceive... We will pat you on the head when you are nice and spank you when you misbehave. No you won't. Go to your room. Yet another Lennieism for "shut up" Steve, K4YZ |
|
#8
June 3rd 05, 08:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: "K4YZ" on 2 Jun 2005 18:34:43 -0700
wrote: From: "K4YZ" on Wed 1 Jun 2005 23:00 Stebie NEVER worked HF communications in the USMC. THAT is abslutely UNRUE, Lennie, and you've been provided references to verify same. Poor Stebie, already "UNRUE-ing" his words... Just give us the kid's names, Lennie. The rest is just subterfuge on your part to avoid the question. Poor Stebie, wanna-be sub-stitute and "ASSISTANT" NCOIC. Stebie striking for TERRORIST now? Tsk, tsk. No siad "their own" offspring, Lennie. Tsk, tsk. Quit jumping up and down with clenched fists, Stebie. Write understandable English. Or Yiddish... Stebie, the self-appointed "ethnic puritan" of this newsgroup...(SNIP) Another lie, Lennie. Stop lying. Stebie no say he gonna "keep after me?" :-) Stebie say dat once. More lies. etc You've beena sked before. You never substantiate your claim. Talking German? Scandinavian? Ya, aye bin a "sked" before, aye had a "sked" ven small boy, play-ed inna snow. Lotsa fun. Voopee! You claim to be an engineer. You refuse to produce any references, other than a few by-lines in a failed Amateur magazine, to show such work. Tsk, tsk, tsk, wanna-be torquemada lost his grip on the torture machine handle, got tangled in the rack chains. :-) Poor Stebie got a whole short-form resume of mine plus names of hams as references. Stebie no check them out. Poor Stebie, red in face, froth on lips, consumed by anger and hate. Stebie NO LIKE resume, say it "CV" (curriculum vitae) and have no place here. Bad Stebie. What's "surreal" is an unlicensed, childless old man petitioning the FCC to enact an age limit where one is not called for. Stebie be nutso, ipso facto. Len he got FCC commercial license. Len he got California driver's license. Len he got poetic license. Len NOT "petition FCC." Len make Comment on 22 NPRMs and Petitions. NEVER ONCE has Jim Miccolis, myself, or any other licensed participant in this fourm suggested anything of the like. Stebie be perfect, nebber lie, say allatime odder pipples LIE! And it's also glaring apparent when the "petitioner" has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Stebie rite funny, he "aska sked" something. We not know what Stebie babbling about. You continue THIS misrepresentation despite there being absolutely no evidence of ANYone except YOU trying to "enforce" some kind of censorship...As a matter of fact, within the last 5 days alone you've made no fewer than four direct demands to "shut up", "drop it", and "LEAVE IT ALONE" and "just forget it"... Poor poor Stebie. He show signs of early memory loss. Stebie forget comment to FCC on 25 January 1999? One where Stebie say I no can say nothing to FCC? Tsk, tsk, tsk. I've mentioned all of my kids at one time or another, Lennie. Stebie make Big Issue out of issue? Stebie get 9-year-old's license? Stebie be big macho man wid fambly. Two fambly. Lotsa alimony paid to wifie #1. Provide JUST ONE quote rom ANY of us wherein we state that the physics of radiowave propagation are any different for Amateur Radio than any other service. Tsk, tsk. Stebie not show signs of understanding physics of radio. Stebie take too many other "physics?" Take funny stuff out of hospital pharmacy storage? But that doesn't negate my (factual) notation that early radio was once deemed nothing mroe than a "fad", just like text messaging is for kids today. Stebie gonna make Petition wid FCC? Stebie say all cellphone user gotta take morse code test? Mebbe dey all get ham license? Stebie hab fun in China. China got 300 MILLION cell phone users. Stebie know morse code version for Chinese? You point-blank called the League, in general, and the BoD in particular, "dishonest". Ooooo! Ooooo! Stebie be BELIEVER in Church of St. Hiram! Stebie NOT understand "sin by omission." Tsk, tsk. League nebber lie to Stebie. League be Church to Stebie! You've been challenged over and over to provide SOME sort of verifiable reference that at least corroborates a CLAIM of dishonesty, let alone any facts to substantiate it. Ooooo! Ooooo! Stebie forget long-ago postings in here! Stebie hopping mad over anybody calling League dishonest! Tsk, tsk, tsk. The FACTS are that this crystanl control WAS pioneered by Amateurs and implemented by them. Stebie be implemented wid brainwash. Stebie not know history of piezoelectric phenomenon, think amateurs invent ALL... The characteristics of radio wave propagation ARE different above 50Mhz. Perhaps if you were actually PRACTICED in the radio arts you'd know this. Stebie now think he be James Clerk Maxwell 2nd? Stebie nuts. ...the sun sets on the Tomb of the Unknown Solder as a solitary figure in a patch-adorned flight suit slowly paces out his lonely path of anger, J-38 in one hand, bayonetted USMC soldering iron in the other. Pre-recorded marine marches softly fill the air, interspersed with dits and dahs of a few PCTA morsebirds not yet extinct. The Tomb of the Unknown Solder is a lonely place, deep in the valley of neuroses, anger, and frustration. The single sentinel counts cadennce to himself, muttering "flux you, flux you" between the slow steps. His fists are clenched, eager to do bottle but only sipping a cup of unkindness. It is sad but the sentinel at the Tomb of the Unknown Solder keeps going. He does not know why and that is the tragedy. The sun slowly sets on the Tomb of the Unknown Solder leaving only the red light of fire in the eyes of the muttering sentinel. Those glow in the dark like LED pilot lights. Hatred lives on in his twilight of despair. Temper fry. |
|
#9
June 3rd 05, 10:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#10
June 4th 05, 03:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
From: "K4YZ" on Wed 1 Jun 2005 23:00 wrote: wrote: From: on Tues 31 May 2005 15:55 It's not. But when you lecture the newsgroup on "young'uns in ham radio", your lack of experience is relevant, don't you think? Lennie's not a parent, if we follow his own logic. Not exactly correct. He's never mentioned being a parent, that's all. Given his tendency to tell us all about himself in extreme detail, it's unlikely he is a parent, but not impossible. The United States military used NON-morse HF communications for the major tactical/strategic radio communications since 1948. What does that have to do with "young'uns in ham radio", Len? btw, the US military *did* use Morse Code for a variety of communications purposes long after 1948. Therefore, that being the case, and Lennie having failed to discuss his successful procreation and subsequent rearing of offspring, we can conclude that it never happened. We can *presume* that. Stebie, in his RAGE and ANGER, has lost his bearings on what this newsgroup is about. Hint: It is about radio amateur policy matters. Pediatrics is NOT the subject. Actually it's about "young'uns in ham radio". The experiences of parents do have a direct bearing on that subject. You are very wrought-up on this subject of "parenting." Why? Why for discussion of amateur radio policy? Look at the subject line. Lennie claims to be an engineer, but can't seem to make notes of the "details"... Tsk, tsk, tsk. Both "Quitefine" ?? and Stebie (Assistant NCOIC of Rage and Anger among the PCTA) don't understand that "young ones" are not necessarily just their "own" offspring. Babysitting is not the same thing as being a parent, Len. Good parents are responsible 100% of the time. They can't give the kid back. Stebie, the self-appointed "ethnic puritan" of this newsgroup, couldn't make it on his own as a Purchasing Agent of a small electronics company, yet claims/postures/implies that he "knows" all about radio-electronics engineering, what the engineers know, what the engineers do, etc., etc., etc. CLAIMS. Brags. Posturing. Stebie's forte' as a mighty macho morseman. I make no "claim" of engineering. I AM one and have been for many years. My professional occupation. Old Russian saying: "Trust, but verify" ;-) Stebie is a NURSE. Among other things. (James Miccolis) will NOT reveal what HE works on or for. That's right. Is there *any* job I could hold that would change your mind about me and my opinions, Len? ..other than letting slip once that he "works in vehicular technology" (in one of his comments on one of the 18 Petitions for amateur radio restructuring. If that's what you got from those comments, you need to work on your reading comprehension, Len. I doubt very much that "works in vehicular technology" was in my comments. "Quitefine" is NOT a member of the worldwide Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), a professional association. Neither am I, Len. Membership in any professional organization has nothing to do with the qualifications to be an amateur radio operator. Nor does it have anything to do with "young'uns in ham radio". So why go on about it? That pretty much says it all - *you* have a problem including young people. The surreal part is that you're neither a parent nor a radio amateur. Lennie doesn't let little things like "no practical experience" keep him from expressing an "expert" opinion on a great many range of issues. The "surreal" part of Miccolis and Robeson's diatribes is that: 1. No pediatrician is required to be a "parent." But *all* pediatricians are required to have extensive training and practical experience with children. They are required to be certified and licensed in a variety of ways to do their jobs. Are you a pediatrician, Len? Are you trained, licensed, and/or certified in *any* medical/pediatric specialty? There is NO such "requirement" in any academic organization to "be a parent" in ANY degreed/titled work involving children OR procreation of children. But *all* in those jobs are required to have extensive training and practical experience with children. They are required to be certified and licensed in a variety of ways to do their jobs. Are you a teacher, Len? Are you trained, licensed, and/or certified in *any* educational/academic specialty? 2. (Miccolis) seems to disregard laws of physics in that ALL radios work by the SAME physical laws, regardless of human designations as to their application. That's just plain wrong, Len. [inconceivable that a claimed double-degree individual would insist that ONLY licensed radio amateurs (who have obtained a federal merit badge only in amateurism) can express any opinion at all. It's inconceivable because it's not true, Len. I've never said that you or anyone else can not or should not give their opinion. What I have done is to point out your lack of qualification and experience in certain areas. You, on the other hand, have actually told people to shut up. Big difference. 3. In the United States of America, ANY citizen has the RIGHT to comment to their government on ANY law or regulation REGARDLESS of whether or not they have any "license" or other "authorization" to "operate" under some rules or regulations. Who has tried to deny you that right, Len? Not me. 4. Neither Miccolis nor Robeson have ANY "authority" to RULE on U.S. amateur radio regulations, Nor do you, Len. yet the seek to bar, to subjugate, to eliminate ANYONE BUT licensed radio amateurs from even talking about it. Len, that's complete and utter bull****. There's just no other word for it. I challenge you to show *any* evidence or example where I have tried "to bar, to subjugate, to eliminate ANYONE BUT licensed radio amateurs from even talking" about *anything*. C'mon, Len. You've made that bull**** claim over and over again. Now show us where I ever did anything of the sort. I don't think you can. Apparently those two control freaks do not understand that NO FCC Commissioner or staff member is "required" to possess an amateur radio license in order to offcially regulate U.S. amateur radio. SHow us your evidence, Len. 5. Miccolis- has NOT YET stated how many offspring HE has parented. Why should I? Would it make any difference to you? He implies he has Where? but the number, gender, are all big unknowns. What difference would it make? Your answer indicates what many have long suspected: that you expect to be instantly recognized as an expert without having to meet the requirements for a license. It was suggested to Lennie that he take some of this energy and submit a proposal to the FCC to allow "engineers" either a free pass or some sort of a "bridge" exam to get licensure. Never did it. Good thing, too. It's a terrible idea. Tsk, tsk, tsk. A NON-applicable "request" NOT required. That so-called "request" was simply a MISDIRECTION to try to stop any further talk on ELIMINATION OF THE MORSE CODE TEST for an amateur radio license. As is quite obvious under any U.S. citizens' RIGHTS under the Constitution (of the United States, NOT the ARRL), "licensure" in amateur radio is NOT REQUIRED to talk about GETTING INTO amateur radio. To reiterate, NO FCC Commissioner or Staffer is required to possess any amateur radio license in order to lawfully regulate U.S. amateur radio. You're not the FCC, Len. Both of these control freaks have been invited to take their "authority" and "shove it up their I/O ports." Gee, Len, you've really made your point. Seems to me, Len, that you can't take *any* opposition to your views. If someone points out your lack of qualification or experience, you think they are telling you to shut up, even though they're not. They never did it. However, they might have...and enjoyed it. Is that your idea of a good time, Len? ;-) Tsk, tsk. A radio does NOT operate by different laws of physics because some government agency designates it as "amateur." So what? "Physics" isn't the only consideration. And Lennie's been asked to please show where ANYone, other than him, has made said issue of it... No answers. TSK, TSK, TSK. MANY ANSWERS. Where? Apparently these two control freaks do not have sufficient reading comprehension...or have a psychological inability to separate their fantasies from reality. No, you just don't write well, Len. Your writing is simply unclear, Len. It's also assinine. Stebie, the Avenging Angle of Dearth, the newsgroup's counterpart to Elfren Saldivar, can only "reply" with a series of Personal Insults...which is little more than his RAGE and ANGER and personal frustration showing clearly. Sounds like you two have a lot in common, Len.... Jimmie boy, There you go again. Why do you call names like that, Len? Is there a reason you can't just call me "Jim", the way I call you "Len"? Why not just call me "Jim" or "N2EY", Len? That might make you his "peer", Jim... Can't have that! PCTA Extra Double Standard. "Quitefine" and Stebie both "allow" name-calling such as "PUTZ" and "gutless coward" to others, yet object to their aliases or diminutive forms of their given names. Well, you can't be talking about me, then. All I call you is "Len" or "Mr. Anderson". Or maybe some combination of those names. Miccolis is NOT my "peer." Why not, Len? He has not identified his actual place of employment, has not identified his own "parenthood" (which he REQUIRES of others) No, I don't. , and has claimed to be a "radio manufacturer." Yep. I'm with Southgate Radio. Not my day job, of course. Here's a hint, Len: "Manufacture" means to make something. So anyone who makes a radio set is a radio manufacturer. Tsk, he is not even a member of any professional association. How do you know? If I join IEEE, will I become your peer? And you said there must have been fraud involved. You accused ARRL and the VEs involved of dishonesty. Right here. That's a fact. Shall I repost those claims? Tsk, tsk. I wrote, some time ago, that the ARRL "sins by omission." No, that's not what I'm referring to. It's about the licensing of six-year-olds. They do so often, especially in their publications on the history of radio. Such as? Tell us where it's actually done. Our local club recently added two new licensees...both 9....No record, but yet more evidence that there ARE "young 'uns" entering Amateur Radio. Irrelevant, relatively isolated case. Why is it irrelevant? It's right on target. So, all you mental nine-year-olds, feel good about your sub- teen intellectual prowess on passing the TEST. Continue to scamper about your "private clubhouse" and generally behave emotionally like kiddies about your "superiorities." Sooner or later your kinder-kind MIGHT grow up. [I'm losing my optimism on that] The rest of us IN the radio-electronics industry will continue doing our adult things. We will pat you on the head when you are nice and spank you when you misbehave. Sounds like a threat of violence, Len. I'd like to see you try! Go to your room. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| 197 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (23-NOV-04) | Shortwave | |||
| Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1402 Â June 25, 2004 | Policy | |||
| 209 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (04-APR-04) | Shortwave | |||
| Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1379 – January 16, 2004 | General | |||
| Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1379 – January 16, 2004 | Dx | |||
Hybrid Mode
