|
a cmoment about Part 97
Sec. 97.305 Authorized emission types.
(a) An amateur station may transmit a CW emission on any frequency authorized to the control operator. and 75 m Entire band.......... Phone, image...................... (1), (2). 40 m 7.000-7.100 MHz...... RTTY, data........................ (3), (9). 40 m 7.075-7.100 MHz...... Phone, image...................... (1), (2), (9), (11). 40 m 7.100-7.150 MHz...... RTTY, data........................ (3), (9). 40 m 7.150-7.300 MHz...... Phone, image...................... (1), (2). No mention int the section of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all |
"an_old_friend" wrote ...of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all... §97.303(s) is very clear on the topic. You're correct that it doesn't specifically call it a "60 metter" band, but it DOES spell out in detail the mode restrictions and other technical requirements and restrictions of the frequencies I think you call "60 metters". "97.303(s) An amateur station having an operator holding a General, Advanced or Amateur Extra Class license may only transmit single sideband, suppressed carrier, (emission type 2K8J3E) upper sideband on the channels 5332 kHz, 5348 kHz, 5368 kHz, 5373 kHz, and 5405 kHz. Amateur stations shall ensure that their transmission occupies only the 2.8 kHz centered around each of these frequencies. Transmissions shall not exceed an effective radiated power (e.r.p.) of 50 W PEP. For the purpose of computing e.r.p. the transmitter PEP will be multiplied with the antenna gain relative to a dipole or equivalent calculation in decibels. A half wave dipole antenna will be presumed to have a gain of 0 dBd. Licenses using other antennas must maintain in their records either the manufacturer data on the antenna gain or calculations of the antenna gain. No amateur station may cause harmful interference to stations authorized in the mobile and fixed services; nor is any amateur station protected from interference due to the operation of any such station." 73, de Hans, K0HB |
K=D8HB wrote: "an_old_friend" wrote ...of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all... Hans I copied from FCC.gov =A797.303(s) is very clear on the topic. You're correct that it doesn't specifically call it a "60 metter" band, but it DOES spell out in detail = the mode restrictions and other technical requirements and restrictions of the frequencies I think you call "60 metters". "97.303(s) An amateur station having an operator holding a General, Advan= ced or Amateur Extra Class license may only transmit single sideband, suppressed carrier, (emission type 2K8J3E) upper sideband on the channels 5332 kHz, = 5348 kHz, 5368 kHz, 5373 kHz, and 5405 kHz. Amateur stations shall ensure that= their transmission occupies only the 2.8 kHz centered around each of these frequencies. Transmissions shall not exceed an effective radiated power (= e=2Er.p.) of 50 W PEP. For the purpose of computing e.r.p. the transmitter PEP will= be multiplied with the antenna gain relative to a dipole or equivalent calcu= lation in decibels. A half wave dipole antenna will be presumed to have a gain o= f 0 dBd. Licenses using other antennas must maintain in their records either = the manufacturer data on the antenna gain or calculations of the antenna gain= .. No amateur station may cause harmful interference to stations authorized in = the mobile and fixed services; nor is any amateur station protected from interference due to the operation of any such station." That Is not accessable from the FCC's website =20 73, de Hans, K0HB |
"an_old_friend" wrote That Is not accessable from the FCC's website I got it from the FCC website. (Did you think I made it up?) 73, de Hans, K0HB |
"an_old_friend" wrote in message oups.com... Sec. 97.305 Authorized emission types. (a) An amateur station may transmit a CW emission on any frequency authorized to the control operator. and 75 m Entire band.......... Phone, image...................... (1), (2). 40 m 7.000-7.100 MHz...... RTTY, data........................ (3), (9). 40 m 7.075-7.100 MHz...... Phone, image...................... (1), (2), (9), (11). 40 m 7.100-7.150 MHz...... RTTY, data........................ (3), (9). 40 m 7.150-7.300 MHz...... Phone, image...................... (1), (2). No mention int the section of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all You have an out-of-date copy or website. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
pre4haps but that is where the FCC sent me Dee Flint wrote: "an_old_friend" wrote in message oups.com... Sec. 97.305 Authorized emission types. (a) An amateur station may transmit a CW emission on any frequency authorized to the control operator. and 75 m Entire band.......... Phone, image...................... (1), (2). 40 m 7.000-7.100 MHz...... RTTY, data........................ (3), (9). 40 m 7.075-7.100 MHz...... Phone, image...................... (1), (2), (9), (11). 40 m 7.100-7.150 MHz...... RTTY, data........................ (3), (9). 40 m 7.150-7.300 MHz...... Phone, image...................... (1), (2). No mention int the section of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all You have an out-of-date copy or website. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
K=D8HB wrote: "an_old_friend" wrote That Is not accessable from the FCC's website I got it from the FCC website. (Did you think I made it up?) but that is NOT what clicking on FCC.gov get you when you click through thier link "Rules and regulations" I don't know where you got it =20 73, de Hans, K0HB |
From: K0HB on Jul 12, 6:33 pm
an_old_friend" wrote That Is not accessable from the FCC's website I got it from the FCC website. (Did you think I made it up?) Incorrect. You got it from the GPO website (Government Printing Office). [FCC website will link all users to the GPO website] The ONLY Parts of Title 47 available AT the FCC webiste is a "courtesy copy" of Part 15 regulations. Title 47 C.F.R. is published at two-year intervals. For CHANGES to any Part, you and all others can get them from NARA (National Archives and Records Administration) via the Federal Register website. bit bit |
"an_old_friend" wrote but that is NOT what clicking on FCC.gov get you when you click through thier link "Rules and regulations" Yes, it is. I don't know where you got it I'll give you step-by-step directions. 1) Start at http://www.fcc.gov 2) On the right column of that page, click the "Wireless Telecommunications" link. 3) When that page loads, in the left column click the "Rules and Regulations" link. 4) A new frame comes up. Scroll down and click "97 Amateur radio service" 5) On the page which loads, click the link near the top ending in "...47cfr97_04.html" 6) On the page which loads, scroll down and click the pdf icon for "97.303" 7) Scroll to the bottom of page 605 and read: "97.303(s) An amateur station having an operator holding a General, Advanced or Amateur Extra Class license may only transmit single sideband, suppressed carrier, (emission type 2K8J3E) upper sideband on the channels 5332 kHz, 5348 kHz, 5368 kHz, 5373 kHz, and 5405 kHz. Amateur stations shall ensure that their transmission occupies only the 2.8 kHz centered around each of these frequencies. Transmissions shall not exceed an effective radiated power (e.r.p.) of 50 W PEP. For the purpose of computing e.r.p. the transmitter PEP will be multiplied with the antenna gain relative to a dipole or equivalent calculation in decibels. A half wave dipole antenna will be presumed to have a gain of 0 dBd. Licenses using other antennas must maintain in their records either the manufacturer data on the antenna gain or calculations of the antenna gain. No amateur station may cause harmful interference to stations authorized in the mobile and fixed services; nor is any amateur station protected from interference due to the operation of any such station." 73, de Hans, K0HB |
wrote You got it from the GPO website (Government Printing Office). [FCC website will link all users to the GPO website] Wherever it physically (virtually?) resides, it is directly accessable from the http://www.fcc.gov website "Rules and Regulations" link which Todd asserts it is NOT accessable from. He did some half-vast browsing, told me it wasn't accessable, but now has step-by-step directions to reach it. You can lead a Todd to water...... dit dit de Hans, K0HB |
K=D8HB wrote: "an_old_friend" wrote but that is NOT what clicking on FCC.gov get you when you click through thier link "Rules and regulations" Yes, it is. I don't know where you got it I'll give you step-by-step directions. 1) Start at http://www.fcc.gov 2) On the right column of that page, click the "Wireless Telecommunicatio= ns" link. 3) When that page loads, in the left column click the "Rules and Regulati= ons" link. 4) A new frame comes up. Scroll down and click "97 Amateur radio servic= e" 5) On the page which loads, click the link near the top ending in "...47cfr97_04.html" 6) On the page which loads, scroll down and click the pdf icon for "97.30= 3" 7) Scroll to the bottom of page 605 and read: Amusing that at FCC.gov there is a link labeled rules and regulation anf then you scroll for part 97 and you get something diferent "97.303(s) An amateur station having an operator holding a General, Advan= ced or Amateur Extra Class license may only transmit single sideband, suppressed carrier, (emission type 2K8J3E) upper sideband on the channels 5332 kHz, = 5348 kHz, 5368 kHz, 5373 kHz, and 5405 kHz. Amateur stations shall ensure that= their transmission occupies only the 2.8 kHz centered around each of these frequencies. Transmissions shall not exceed an effective radiated power (= e=2Er.p.) of 50 W PEP. For the purpose of computing e.r.p. the transmitter PEP will= be multiplied with the antenna gain relative to a dipole or equivalent calcu= lation in decibels. A half wave dipole antenna will be presumed to have a gain o= f 0 dBd. Licenses using other antennas must maintain in their records either = the manufacturer data on the antenna gain or calculations of the antenna gain= .. No amateur station may cause harmful interference to stations authorized in = the mobile and fixed services; nor is any amateur station protected from interference due to the operation of any such station." =20 73, de Hans, K0HB |
"an_old_friend" wrote Amusing that at FCC.gov there is a link labeled rules and regulation anf then you scroll for part 97 and you get something diferent Nope. Just skip Step 2 in my list. I just tried it, and it takes you to EXACTLY the same place. Bottom line of this whole Chinese fire drill.... ..... your opening statement in this thread about "no mention" is disproven. There's a whole paragraph devoted to "mentioning" the topic, placed there 2 years ago in July of 2003 by Docket 02-98. Good luck on this one now! dit dit de Hans, K0HB |
|
K=D8HB wrote: "an_old_friend" wrote ...of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all... =A797.303(s) is very clear on the topic. You're correct that it doesn't specifically call it a "60 metter" band, but it DOES spell out in detail = the mode restrictions and other technical requirements and restrictions of the frequencies I think you call "60 metters". Markie doesn't like getting his nose just RUBBBED in something...he has to have it slammed, poked, jabbed and nearly ripped off until the point gets through to him. See y'all on "60 metters"...! All except Markie and Lennie, that is! Steve, K4YZ |
K4YZ wrote: K=D8HB wrote: "an_old_friend" wrote ...of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all... =A797.303(s) is very clear on the topic. You're correct that it doesn't specifically call it a "60 metter" band, but it DOES spell out in detai= l the mode restrictions and other technical requirements and restrictions of = the frequencies I think you call "60 metters". Markie doesn't like getting his nose just RUBBBED in something...he has to have it slammed, poked, jabbed and nearly ripped off until the point gets through to him. See y'all on "60 metters"...! All except Markie and Lennie, that is! as is normal for HIm Steve chooses to post without bothing with the subject =20 Steve, K4YZ |
an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: K=D8HB wrote: "an_old_friend" wrote ...of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all... =A797.303(s) is very clear on the topic. You're correct that it does= n't specifically call it a "60 metter" band, but it DOES spell out in det= ail the mode restrictions and other technical requirements and restrictions o= f the frequencies I think you call "60 metters". Markie doesn't like getting his nose just RUBBBED in something...he has to have it slammed, poked, jabbed and nearly ripped off until the point gets through to him. See y'all on "60 metters"...! All except Markie and Lennie, that is! as is normal for HIm Steve chooses to post without bothing with the subject It had everything to do with the subject, Markie. You. For the last 2 weeks I've been berating you for your childish, uncivil behaviour towards Hans. You treated him rudely, and there was no excuse for it. Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going "there". So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your arrogance and ignorance. This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part 97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans. It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN. Steve, K4YZ |
K4YZ wrote: an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: K=D8HB wrote: "an_old_friend" wrote ...of any restriction of modes on 60m nor any mention of 60 metter in part 97 at all... =A797.303(s) is very clear on the topic. You're correct that it do= esn't specifically call it a "60 metter" band, but it DOES spell out in d= etail the mode restrictions and other technical requirements and restrictions= of the frequencies I think you call "60 metters". Markie doesn't like getting his nose just RUBBBED in something...he has to have it slammed, poked, jabbed and nearly ripped off until the point gets through to him. See y'all on "60 metters"...! All except Markie and Lennie, that is! as is normal for HIm Steve chooses to post without bothing with the subject break It had everything to do with the subject, Markie. You. Nope the Subject was amonoulous data coming fromt the FCC on the Rules of the ARS For the last 2 weeks I've been berating you for your childish, uncivil behaviour towards Hans. You treated him rudely, and there was no excuse for it. wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd through FCC.gov Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going "there". So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your arrogance and ignorance. no I was comening on content of FCC.gov you are the one that never let anything drop You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998 This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part 97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans. nope It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN. =20 Steve, K4YZ |
an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: It had everything to do with the subject, Markie. You. Nope the Subject was amonoulous data coming fromt the FCC on the Rules of the ARS Nope. It had to do with YOUR gross ignorance and inability to comprehend even the For the last 2 weeks I've been berating you for your childish, uncivil behaviour towards Hans. You treated him rudely, and there was no excuse for it. wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd through FCC.gov I found the items Hans was refering to without the slightest impediment or error. Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going "there". So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your arrogance and ignorance. no I was comening on content of FCC.gov You were trying to find a way out of the public spanking you've been taking for your rude behaviour. It backfired on you. you are the one that never let anything drop Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on you right now. You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998 You just stated 2 days ago that you allegedly continue to use the fictitious $5.00/hr ISP. And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to your humourous This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part 97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans. nope Yep. And it STILL didn't work. It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN. Do you not see that there's nothing you do that even the most common of common sense can't see through, Markie? You're SO transparent that one not need be a gastroenerologist to see where your head is.... Steve, K4yz |
K4YZ wrote: an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: It had everything to do with the subject, Markie. You. Nope the Subject was amonoulous data coming fromt the FCC on the Rules of the ARS Nope. It had to do with YOUR gross ignorance and inability to comprehend even the even the ... gues you can't even read the topic For the last 2 weeks I've been berating you for your childish, uncivil behaviour towards Hans. You treated him rudely, and there was no excuse for it. wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd through FCC.gov I found the items Hans was refering to without the slightest impediment or error. I found something very different as well as what Hans posted Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going "there". So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your arrogance and ignorance. no I was comening on content of FCC.gov You were trying to find a way out of the public spanking you've been taking for your rude behaviour. nope It backfired on you. Back fired how? You decided as expected to attack anything and everything I post you are the one that never let anything drop Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on you right now. more threats You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998 You just stated 2 days ago that you allegedly continue to use the fictitious $5.00/hr ISP. which harms you how? affect you how? I still use concentric on the road to gather my email why does that concern you? And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to your humourous you were going on and on about the ISP, one would tend to assume you were tlaking about what you were saying but even that is rash with you This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part 97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans. nope Yep. And it STILL didn't work. wasn't doin git It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN. Do you not see that there's nothing you do that even the most common of common sense can't see through, Markie? You're SO transparent that one not need be a gastroenerologist to see where your head is.... Stevie grow up Steve, K4yz |
an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd through FCC.gov I found the items Hans was refering to without the slightest impediment or error. I found something very different as well as what Hans posted I am sure that you find a lot of things very different, Markie. Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going "there". So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your arrogance and ignorance. no I was comening on content of FCC.gov You were trying to find a way out of the public spanking you've been taking for your rude behaviour. nope Absolutely. First you claim that you want the information. Then you insult the person who gives it to you. Then you claim you don't need to know anyway, but then open another thread about Part 97 IRT "60 mettres" It backfired on you. Back fired how? You decided as expected to attack anything and everything I post Not everything. Just the assinine, idiotic and mistruthful parts. you are the one that never let anything drop Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on you right now. more threats Nope. Just a figure of speech. You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998 You just stated 2 days ago that you allegedly continue to use the fictitious $5.00/hr ISP. which harms you how? affect you how? It doesn't. I just laugh out loud when you complain about it on the one hand, then defend it on the other. I still use concentric on the road to gather my email why does that concern you? Concentric what? And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to your humourous you were going on and on about the ISP, one would tend to assume you were tlaking about what you were saying but even that is rash with you You weren't paying attention. (news there, eh?) This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part 97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans. nope Yep. And it STILL didn't work. wasn't doin git Huh? It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN. Do you not see that there's nothing you do that even the most common of common sense can't see through, Markie? You're SO transparent that one not need be a gastroenerologist to see where your head is.... Stevie grow up Back at ya, LiarBoy. Steve, K4YZ |
K4YZ wrote: an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd through FCC.gov I found the items Hans was refering to without the slightest impediment or error. I found something very different as well as what Hans posted I am sure that you find a lot of things very different, Markie. then you admit I am right so lets move on Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going "there". So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your arrogance and ignorance. no I was comening on content of FCC.gov You were trying to find a way out of the public spanking you've been taking for your rude behaviour. nope Absolutely. First you claim that you want the information. Then you insult the person who gives it to you. Then you claim you don't need to know anyway, but then open another thread about Part 97 IRT "60 mettres" so? you berate for not doing my reasearch and then berate for doing it It backfired on you. Back fired how? You decided as expected to attack anything and everything I post Not everything. Just the assinine, idiotic and mistruthful parts. evrything you are the one that never let anything drop Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on you right now. more threats Nope. Just a figure of speech. a threatening one but you admit it more bluster then BTW we will see what Aol thinks of you Some has Aids post. Likely nothing as AOl is notorious for toleating the abuse of folks from their domain You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998 You just stated 2 days ago that you allegedly continue to use the fictitious $5.00/hr ISP. which harms you how? affect you how? It doesn't. I just laugh out loud when you complain about it on the one hand, then defend it on the other. again with the distoritons I still use concentric on the road to gather my email why does that concern you? Concentric what? concetric they have another name but they use use the domain last time I cjecked And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to your humourous you were going on and on about the ISP, one would tend to assume you were tlaking about what you were saying but even that is rash with you You weren't paying attention. (news there, eh?) yes I was you were ranting and raving This had zero-point-squat to do with your "cmoment about Part 97"....It had everything to do with you trying to find some way out of the spanking you were taking for your behaviour. You were looking for SOME vector to allow you to redirect ANY of that to Hans. nope Yep. And it STILL didn't work. wasn't doin git Huh? It didn't work. Landed right back in YOUR lap AGAIN. Do you not see that there's nothing you do that even the most common of common sense can't see through, Markie? You're SO transparent that one not need be a gastroenerologist to see where your head is.... Stevie grow up Back at ya, LiarBoy. I am adult not sure you are even human Steve, K4YZ |
an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd through FCC.gov I found the items Hans was refering to without the slightest impediment or error. I found something very different as well as what Hans posted I am sure that you find a lot of things very different, Markie. then you admit I am right so lets move on I didn't say you are right...Not by a long stretch... I said you find them different. "Different" is not "right"... Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going "there". So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your arrogance and ignorance. no I was comening on content of FCC.gov You were trying to find a way out of the public spanking you've been taking for your rude behaviour. nope Absolutely. First you claim that you want the information. Then you insult the person who gives it to you. Then you claim you don't need to know anyway, but then open another thread about Part 97 IRT "60 mettres" so? you berate for not doing my reasearch and then berate for doing it No. I am just berating you for being a rude punk. It backfired on you. Back fired how? You decided as expected to attack anything and everything I post Not everything. Just the assinine, idiotic and mistruthful parts. evrything Nope. Just the assinine, idiotic and mistruthful parts. Unless you're AGREEING that ALL of your posts are assinine, idiotic and mistruthful...?!?! you are the one that never let anything drop Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on you right now. more threats Nope. Just a figure of speech. a threatening one Nope. One used quite frequently in common American lexicon. but you admit it more bluster then Nope. BTW we will see what Aol thinks of you Some has Aids post. Likely nothing as AOl is notorious for toleating the abuse of folks from their domain Since I clearly defined what AIDS stood for, good luck. You see, Mark...Unlike you, I clearly define the parameters of what I am discussing. Not making them up as I go and hoping they are understood along the way... You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998 You just stated 2 days ago that you allegedly continue to use the fictitious $5.00/hr ISP. which harms you how? affect you how? It doesn't. I just laugh out loud when you complain about it on the one hand, then defend it on the other. again with the distoritons No distortions. Facts. "Back in the day" you used to claim that you were paying those rediculous fees and as such refused to keep these discussions in e mail. The truth, of course, is that you LIKE to be publically humiliated, hence your insistance to be slapped around in here. No problem. You certainly provide enough materail to work with. I still use concentric on the road to gather my email why does that concern you? Concentric what? concetric they have another name but they use use the domain last time I cjecked That sentence made no sense at all. And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to your humourous you were going on and on about the ISP, one would tend to assume you were tlaking about what you were saying but even that is rash with you You weren't paying attention. (news there, eh?) yes I was you were ranting and raving Nope. Just pointing out your inconsistencies. Again...there are so many to work with... Stevie grow up Back at ya, LiarBoy. I am adult not sure you are even human Your body may have reached the age of majority, Markie, but there is STRONG evidence that you have some very significant development issues yet to be resolved. First and foremeost being your writing and English comprehension skills. Steve, K4YZ |
K4YZ wrote: an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: wether I was or wasnt has nothing to do with what posted and accesd through FCC.gov I found the items Hans was refering to without the slightest impediment or error. I found something very different as well as what Hans posted I am sure that you find a lot of things very different, Markie. then you admit I am right so lets move on I didn't say you are right...Not by a long stretch... yes you did I said you find them different. "Different" is not "right"... nor is it wrong you see things deferently than I Grow up and get over it Hans already gave you the exact information that you needed...And THEN you said "I don't need to know that since I can't operate there"...Well...Obviously it's an issue for you since you DO keep going "there". So instead of letting it drop, you further exacerbate the issue by opening a whole new thread and get your nose rubbed even deeper in your arrogance and ignorance. no I was comening on content of FCC.gov You were trying to find a way out of the public spanking you've been taking for your rude behaviour. nope Absolutely. First you claim that you want the information. Then you insult the person who gives it to you. Then you claim you don't need to know anyway, but then open another thread about Part 97 IRT "60 mettres" so? you berate for not doing my reasearch and then berate for doing it No. I am just berating you for being a rude punk. rude to ask question **** you It backfired on you. Back fired how? You decided as expected to attack anything and everything I post Not everything. Just the assinine, idiotic and mistruthful parts. evrything Nope. Just the assinine, idiotic and mistruthful parts. everything Unless you're AGREEING that ALL of your posts are assinine, idiotic and mistruthful...?!?! Nope I am not I am asaying that you claim everthing is assinine idoitic and un truthfull Never seen the word Mistruthful before you are the one that never let anything drop Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on you right now. more threats Nope. Just a figure of speech. a threatening one Nope. One used quite frequently in common American lexicon. which does not alter its threatening nature esp from a guy saying "one shot one Kill even in illiopolis" but you admit it more bluster then Nope. then you are lying if not admiting bluster BTW we will see what Aol thinks of you Some has Aids post. Likely nothing as AOl is notorious for toleating the abuse of folks from their domain Since I clearly defined what AIDS stood for, good luck. you header is enough in theory You see, Mark...Unlike you, I clearly define the parameters of what I am discussing. Not making them up as I go and hoping they are understood along the way... what didn't I define? You are still harrasing me about changing ISP's In 1998 You just stated 2 days ago that you allegedly continue to use the fictitious $5.00/hr ISP. which harms you how? affect you how? It doesn't. I just laugh out loud when you complain about it on the one hand, then defend it on the other. again with the distoritons No distortions. plenty of distorion Facts. "Back in the day" you used to claim that you were paying those rediculous fees and as such refused to keep these discussions in e mail. I complains about paying for your dreck twice any other statemnt is a lie on your part The truth, of course, is that you LIKE to be publically humiliated, hence your insistance to be slapped around in here. another Stevie Lie No problem. You certainly provide enough materail to work with. sadist then I still use concentric on the road to gather my email why does that concern you? Concentric what? concetric they have another name but they use use the domain last time I cjecked That sentence made no sense at all. to you nothing I say makes sense so? And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to your humourous you were going on and on about the ISP, one would tend to assume you were tlaking about what you were saying but even that is rash with you You weren't paying attention. (news there, eh?) yes I was you were ranting and raving Nope. Just pointing out your inconsistencies. what in consitancies you frabricate some kind of intent to decieve out of changing ISP sorely to confuse you and others Again...there are so many to work with... all in your head Stevie grow up Back at ya, LiarBoy. I am adult not sure you are even human Your body may have reached the age of majority, Markie, but there is STRONG evidence that you have some very significant development issues yet to be resolved. and you display signs that you are dangerously unbalanced First and foremeost being your writing and English comprehension skills. I understand english but you are not using english very well either Steve, K4YZ |
an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: then you admit I am right so lets move on I didn't say you are right...Not by a long stretch... yes you did We've found yet ANOTHER MarkieLie. I said you find them different. "Different" is not "right"... nor is it wrong you see things deferently than I Grow up and get over it In this case I AM "right". Not that it takes a rocket scientist to be so with you. so? you berate for not doing my reasearch and then berate for doing it No. I am just berating you for being a rude punk. rude to ask question No. Rude for treating Hans the way you did for ANSWERING your question. #### you Now see...there you go with your sexual deviance again. Unless you're AGREEING that ALL of your posts are assinine, idiotic and mistruthful...?!?! Nope I am not I am asaying that you claim everthing is assinine idoitic and un truthfull Never seen the word Mistruthful before And I've never seen the word "truthfull" either. "Mistruthful" is in Websters. you are the one that never let anything drop Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on you right now. more threats Nope. Just a figure of speech. a threatening one Nope. One used quite frequently in common American lexicon. which does not alter its threatening nature esp from a guy saying "one shot one Kill even in illiopolis" More out-of-context quotes, Markie! Forgot your "Is that your best shot" comment that inspired the response? but you admit it more bluster then Nope. then you are lying if not admiting bluster It's not lying, nor was the comment "bluster". BTW we will see what Aol thinks of you Some has Aids post. Likely nothing as AOl is notorious for toleating the abuse of folks from their domain Since I clearly defined what AIDS stood for, good luck. you header is enough in theory That you have some minimum quantity of human DNA qualifies you as a human... in theory... You see, Mark...Unlike you, I clearly define the parameters of what I am discussing. Not making them up as I go and hoping they are understood along the way... what didn't I define? About half of your uses of words. Like "drafted" until a year later.... No distortions. plenty of distorion Only yours. Markie. Facts. "Back in the day" you used to claim that you were paying those rediculous fees and as such refused to keep these discussions in e mail. I complains about paying for your dreck twice any other statemnt is a lie on your part Nope. I sent you several letters to keep thsi stuff off the board. You came to the board and lied, saying I was threatening you, and costing you all that money for your ISP. The truth, of course, is that you LIKE to be publically humiliated, hence your insistance to be slapped around in here. another Stevie Lie Nope. No problem. You certainly provide enough material to work with. sadist then Nope. concetric they have another name but they use use the domain last time I cjecked That sentence made no sense at all. to you nothing I say makes sense so? So fix it. And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to your humourous you were going on and on about the ISP, one would tend to assume you were tlaking about what you were saying but even that is rash with you You weren't paying attention. (news there, eh?) yes I was you were ranting and raving Nope. Just pointing out your inconsistencies. what in consitancies you frabricate some kind of intent to decieve out of changing ISP sorely to confuse you and others You do. Like lying about your "identity" when you changed screen names...trying to make it appear as though there were "others" who supported you, when indeed all it was WAS you... Again...there are so many to work with... all in your head Nope. All from your keyboard. Stevie grow up Back at ya, LiarBoy. I am adult not sure you are even human Your body may have reached the age of majority, Markie, but there is STRONG evidence that you have some very significant development issues yet to be resolved. and you display signs that you are dangerously unbalanced And you claim I make comments "not in your fiield" Please, Markie... Tell us of YOUR credentials to determine mental instability...! First and foremeost being your writing and English comprehension skills. I understand english but you are not using english very well either If you understood English well, you'd have a better than average likelyhood of spelling it correctly. Obviously I was correct. Steve, K4YZ |
K4YZ wrote: an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: then you admit I am right so lets move on I didn't say you are right...Not by a long stretch... yes you did We've found yet ANOTHER MarkieLie. nope first you hack out the post and then you enter with another lie I said you find them different. "Different" is not "right"... nor is it wrong you see things deferently than I Grow up and get over it In this case I AM "right". Not that it takes a rocket scientist to be so with you. no you simply see things differently and you refuse to accept that I will ans should respond to things as I preceive them so? you berate for not doing my reasearch and then berate for doing it No. I am just berating you for being a rude punk. rude to ask question No. Rude for treating Hans the way you did for ANSWERING your question. stevie you are flaimng me for reareaching part 97 which you complained I wasn't doing making up wityhput eveident that I am trying to decieve folks you are a paraniod and obseesed #### you Now see...there you go with your sexual deviance again. **** you **** off the use of language you don't like is not eveidennce of sexual devaiance even if I wanted to **** your butt that would not be a sign a deviance merely a lack of taste Unless you're AGREEING that ALL of your posts are assinine, idiotic and mistruthful...?!?! Nope I am not I am asaying that you claim everthing is assinine idoitic and un truthfull Never seen the word Mistruthful before And I've never seen the word "truthfull" either. lie Ich habe 'truthfull" im desse Morgan schriben "Mistruthful" is in Websters. never seen it before you are the one that never let anything drop Sure I can. As a matter of fact, I'm letting the hammer drop on you right now. more threats Nope. Just a figure of speech. a threatening one Nope. One used quite frequently in common American lexicon. which does not alter its threatening nature esp from a guy saying "one shot one Kill even in illiopolis" More out-of-context quotes, Markie! nope Forgot your "Is that your best shot" comment that inspired the response? nope but you admit it more bluster then Nope. then you are lying if not admiting bluster It's not lying, nor was the comment "bluster". yes it was BTW we will see what Aol thinks of you Some has Aids post. Likely nothing as AOl is notorious for toleating the abuse of folks from their domain Since I clearly defined what AIDS stood for, good luck. you header is enough in theory That you have some minimum quantity of human DNA qualifies you as a human... huh I have 100% Hukman DNA in theory... In fact too but your point? You see, Mark...Unlike you, I clearly define the parameters of what I am discussing. Not making them up as I go and hoping they are understood along the way... what didn't I define? About half of your uses of words. Stevie noone can gues what distorted uses you will aply to words witness your torture of the words CLaim Like "drafted" until a year later.... Lair answers as soon as you asked a amatter of days You needed reapeated a year later and again 6 years later No distortions. plenty of distorion Only yours. Markie. nope Facts. "Back in the day" you used to claim that you were paying those rediculous fees and as such refused to keep these discussions in e mail. I complains about paying for your dreck twice any other statemnt is a lie on your part Nope. yes it is I sent you several letters to keep thsi stuff off the board. you sent abusive and threatening letters off the borad you demanded I stop posting or you would out me on RRAP as Gay (dispite my being Bisexual) You are a blackmailer, and a foolish one since don't my sxual orientation just don't advertise it You came to the board and lied, saying I was threatening you, and costing you all that money for your ISP. you were blackmailing me you were also sending a copy of every post to me both in RRAP and in private Email wasting my time and money The truth, of course, is that you LIKE to be publically humiliated, hence your insistance to be slapped around in here. another Stevie Lie Nope. yes You don't humilate me. anoy harrass stalker threaten me yes humilate me no therefore it is a lie to say I like being humilated since it doesn't happen You might be humilatied if treated the way you trat me, but it is old home week for me No problem. You certainly provide enough material to work with. sadist then Nope. since you claim to enjoy trying to humilate me you are a sadist concetric they have another name but they use use the domain last time I cjecked That sentence made no sense at all. to you nothing I say makes sense so? So fix it. why? you are still ranting on about my changing ISP's 6 years ago And it wasn't about changing ISP's to which I alluded...It was to your humourous you were going on and on about the ISP, one would tend to assume you were tlaking about what you were saying but even that is rash with you You weren't paying attention. (news there, eh?) yes I was you were ranting and raving Nope. Just pointing out your inconsistencies. what in consitancies you frabricate some kind of intent to decieve out of changing ISP sorely to confuse you and others You do. prove it I simply look for better deals and take them Like lying about your "identity" when you changed screen names...trying to make it appear as though there were "others" who supported you, when indeed all it was WAS you... never did that Again...there are so many to work with... all in your head Nope. yes all in that **** brains head of yours All from your keyboard. nope Stevie grow up Back at ya, LiarBoy. I am adult not sure you are even human Your body may have reached the age of majority, Markie, but there is STRONG evidence that you have some very significant development issues yet to be resolved. and you display signs that you are dangerously unbalanced And you claim I make comments "not in your fiield" Not in my feild I agree but I can tell a threat when i read it and anyne who make the threats you do over Ham radio must be unblanced, not sure exactly how, but you must be Please, Markie... Tell us of YOUR credentials to determine mental instability...! years of reading your posts First and foremeost being your writing and English comprehension skills. I understand english but you are not using english very well either If you understood English well, you'd have a better than average likelyhood of spelling it correctly. not realy proves you don't know much about dyslexia still reling on Tom Cruise for expertise on the subject Obviously I was correct. nope Steve, K4YZ |
an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: then you admit I am right so lets move on I didn't say you are right...Not by a long stretch... yes you did We've found yet ANOTHER MarkieLie. nope first you hack out the post and then you enter with another lie Nope. You keep insisting that I am "agreeing" with you. You lied. No. Rude for treating Hans the way you did for ANSWERING your question. stevie you are flaimng me for reareaching part 97 which you complained I wasn't doing No...I was complaining that you're lying. Which was evident in your post. making up wityhput eveident that I am trying to decieve folks "wityhput eveident"...?!?! What the heck is that? you are a paraniod Nope. and obseesed Nope. #### you Now see...there you go with your sexual deviance again. #### you #### off WTG! 50% of those 2 sentences was profanities! the use of language you don't like is not eveidennce of sexual devaiance No. You suggested intercourse. We are the same gender, and that's deviant. even if I wanted to #### your butt that would not be a sign a deviance merely a lack of taste It would be deviance. And you could do worse... Unless you're AGREEING that ALL of your posts are assinine, idiotic and mistruthful...?!?! Nope I am not I am asaying that you claim everthing is assinine idoitic and un truthfull Never seen the word Mistruthful before And I've never seen the word "truthfull" either. lie Nope. Ich habe 'truthfull" im desse Morgan schriben "Mistruthful" is in Websters. never seen it before Maybe because Webster's isn't written in crayon...?!?! which does not alter its threatening nature esp from a guy saying "one shot one Kill even in illiopolis" More out-of-context quotes, Markie! nope Yep. Sure is. Just like Brain keeps trying to insinuate that I allegedly threatened to "slash tires" and "terrorize wives". Forgot your "Is that your best shot" comment that inspired the response? nope Obviously you did. What "shot" were YOU suggesting, Markie...?!?! That you have some minimum quantity of human DNA qualifies you as a human... huh See what I mean... "Minimum quantity" I have 100% Hukman DNA ROTMFFLMMFAO...AGAIN ! ! ! ! WHAT AN IDIOT ! ! ! ! ! You see, Mark...Unlike you, I clearly define the parameters of what I am discussing. Not making them up as I go and hoping they are understood along the way... what didn't I define? About half of your uses of words. Stevie noone can gues what distorted uses you will aply to words There's no "distorted uses" I can apply to words that YOU won't print clearly. Like "drafted" until a year later.... Lair I'm not a "lair" answers as soon as you asked a amatter of days An absolute lie, Markie. You were MONTHS with that song-and-dance! You needed reapeated a year later and again 6 years later Nope. YOU needed to be reminded that there is only ONE meaning of the word "drafted" as applied to military service. It's not for Mark Morgan to change at will. I sent you several letters to keep thsi stuff off the board. you sent abusive and threatening letters off the borad LiarLiar pants on fire! you demanded I stop posting or you would out me on RRAP as Gay (dispite my being Bisexual) More lies! Sheesh, Morgan, where DO you get this stuff...?!?! You are a blackmailer, and a foolish one since don't my sxual orientation just don't advertise it Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiight! You came to the board and lied, saying I was threatening you, and costing you all that money for your ISP. you were blackmailing me Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiight. you were also sending a copy of every post to me both in RRAP and in private Email wasting my time and money What time? What money? You're a useless layabout. What have YOU got to do? The truth, of course, is that you LIKE to be publically humiliated, hence your insistance to be slapped around in here. another Stevie Lie Nope. yes You don't humilate me. No, I don't. You humilate yourself. anoy harrass stalker threaten me yes No. No. No. No. humilate me no therefore it is a lie to say I like being humilated since it doesn't happen Sure it does. Everytime you post. you frabricate some kind of intent to decieve out of changing ISP sorely to confuse you and others You do. prove it Already did. Refered folks to any of your old screen names. I simply look for better deals and take them I bet you do... Like lying about your "identity" when you changed screen names...trying to make it appear as though there were "others" who supported you, when indeed all it was WAS you... never did that Yep. Refer to posts made under "MWMORGAN" Again...there are so many to work with... all in your head Nope. yes all in that #### brains head of yours All from your keyboard. nope Yep. And you claim I make comments "not in your fiield" Not in my feild I agree but I can tell a threat when i read it Obviously not. and anyne who make the threats you do over Ham radio must be unblanced, not sure exactly how, but you must be What threats have I made "...over Ham Radio..." I don't discuss you on the air. I wouldn't be able to stop laughing long enough to get my call and QTH across... Please, Markie... Tell us of YOUR credentials to determine mental instability...! years of reading your posts Then you are acknowledging that you ahve NO credentials. Just more MarkieDreck. First and foremeost being your writing and English comprehension skills. I understand english but you are not using english very well either If you understood English well, you'd have a better than average likelyhood of spelling it correctly. not realy proves you don't know much about dyslexia I know it can be treated. still reling on Tom Cruise for expertise on the subject Nope. The American Medical Association Obviously I was correct. nope Yep. Again. Steve, K4YZ |
K4YZ wrote: an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: an_old_friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: then you admit I am right so lets move on I didn't say you are right...Not by a long stretch... yes you did We've found yet ANOTHER MarkieLie. nope first you hack out the post and then you enter with another lie Nope. You have agreed that I am deffeent and that I have the right to be defferent therfore I all right or at least not wroug You keep insisting that I am "agreeing" with you. you seem tobut then it like Senator Kerry you flipflop very fast You lied. nope Disagreed as is my right No. Rude for treating Hans the way you did for ANSWERING your question. stevie you are flaimng me for reareaching part 97 which you complained I wasn't doing No...I was complaining that you're lying. prove it i was rading the sections of part 97 and noticed this hole in the stuff from the FCC and decided to coment on it you claim everything I do is some of plot to confuse you and now Hans get over your self When was you last post on Radio here Which was evident in your post. lie making up wityhput eveident that I am trying to decieve folks "wityhput eveident"...?!?! What the heck is that? what you are engaged in attacks with nothing to back em up you are a paraniod Nope. yep and obseesed Nope. yep #### you Now see...there you go with your sexual deviance again. #### you #### off WTG! 50% of those 2 sentences was profanities! so what? nothing ilegal about it the use of language you don't like is not eveidennce of sexual devaiance No. You suggested intercourse. We are the same gender, and that's deviant. not according to medical authority nor did I suggest I would **** you and I never suggested you get ****ed by a man or a woman, but it is clear you need something abding is a good thing to try for someone obsessed with people sex lives even if I wanted to #### your butt that would not be a sign a deviance merely a lack of taste It would be deviance. And you could do worse... not according to medcial authority Unless you're AGREEING that ALL of your posts are assinine, idiotic and mistruthful...?!?! Nope I am not I am asaying that you claim everthing is assinine idoitic and un truthfull Never seen the word Mistruthful before And I've never seen the word "truthfull" either. lie Nope. and you cut stuff out again I have used the word before therefore you have seen therefore you are lieing about not having seen it Ich habe 'truthfull" im desse Morgan schriben "Mistruthful" is in Websters. never seen it before Maybe because Webster's isn't written in crayon...?!?! doubt that why are you so obsessed with crayons? which does not alter its threatening nature esp from a guy saying "one shot one Kill even in illiopolis" More out-of-context quotes, Markie! nope Yep. Sure is. Just like Brain keeps trying to insinuate that I allegedly threatened to "slash tires" and "terrorize wives". you typed it Forgot your "Is that your best shot" comment that inspired the response? nope Obviously you did. nope you just think you are above the law, fortunately for you it doesn't seem to bother with usenet What "shot" were YOU suggesting, Markie...?!?! I was not suggesting a gunshot That you have some minimum quantity of human DNA qualifies you as a human... huh See what I mean... "Minimum quantity" more ad homien attacks I have 100% Hukman DNA ROTMFFLMMFAO...AGAIN ! ! ! ! so WHAT AN IDIOT ! ! ! ! ! You see, Mark...Unlike you, I clearly define the parameters of what I am discussing. Not making them up as I go and hoping they are understood along the way... what didn't I define? About half of your uses of words. Stevie noone can gues what distorted uses you will aply to words There's no "distorted uses" I can apply to words that YOU won't print clearly. Stevie you didtort my words wether I type them clearly or not Like "drafted" until a year later.... Lair I'm not a "lair" answers as soon as you asked a amatter of days An absolute lie, Markie. You were MONTHS with that song-and-dance! nope you just did not bother to read it so I had to repate it and then these years later you claim I never did at all which lie is your final answer? You needed reapeated a year later and again 6 years later Nope. YOU needed to be reminded that there is only ONE meaning of the word "drafted" as applied to military service. the choie of the word was alas unforunate, but I am not bound by your narrowminded vision It's not for Mark Morgan to change at will. I can any definifation I care to I don't have to choose the same one as you do I sent you several letters to keep thsi stuff off the board. you sent abusive and threatening letters off the borad LiarLiar pants on fire! nope you demanded I stop posting or you would out me on RRAP as Gay (dispite my being Bisexual) More lies! Sheesh, Morgan, where DO you get this stuff...?!?! you sent those email I remember them well You are a blackmailer, and a foolish one since don't my sxual orientation just don't advertise it Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiight! yep You came to the board and lied, saying I was threatening you, and costing you all that money for your ISP. you were blackmailing me Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiight. yep you were also sending a copy of every post to me both in RRAP and in private Email wasting my time and money What time? What money? You're a useless layabout. What have YOU got to do? Stevie I run my own company. a small one, I take care of a Terminal ill man, I am active in politics. I even try to get on the air my income is the range of about 30K a year, and I own my home (not me and the bank but me) I have a family that you are bigoted enough to judge a person by his typing is not my fault The truth, of course, is that you LIKE to be publically humiliated, hence your insistance to be slapped around in here. another Stevie Lie Nope. yes You don't humilate me. No, I don't. progress boyo You humilate yourself. nope anoy harrass stalker threaten me yes No. No. No. No. yes yes yes you dare to claim you don't anoy me? Jesus Mary and Joeseph humilate me no therefore it is a lie to say I like being humilated since it doesn't happen Sure it does. nope it does not Everytime you post. nope only in your mind ( and prehaps a few others) you frabricate some kind of intent to decieve out of changing ISP sorely to confuse you and others You do. prove it Already did. no you have not you simply claimed it Refered folks to any of your old screen names. which porvenothing but i changed ISP's as I said I simply look for better deals and take them I bet you do... something wroung with that too getting a better deal Like lying about your "identity" when you changed screen names...trying to make it appear as though there were "others" who supported you, when indeed all it was WAS you... never did that Yep. nope Refer to posts made under "MWMORGAN" so Again...there are so many to work with... all in your head Nope. yes all in that #### brains head of yours that **** for brains of yours All from your keyboard. nope Yep. nope And you claim I make comments "not in your fiield" Not in my feild I agree but I can tell a threat when i read it Obviously not. yes I can talking about killing people is always a threat and never justified on usenet and anyne who make the threats you do over Ham radio must be unblanced, not sure exactly how, but you must be What threats have I made "...over Ham Radio..." to kill me of course you are distring the context again I gues I shoudl have said over the subject of Ham radio but that would hardly help since youd just find some other way to twist my words I don't discuss you on the air. I wouldn't be able to stop laughing long enough to get my call and QTH across... never said you did another of your distortions Please, Markie... Tell us of YOUR credentials to determine mental instability...! years of reading your posts Then you are acknowledging that you ahve NO credentials. i don't ahve anything nor does anyone else yes a cheap shot at your spelling, but I pass on most of them Just more MarkieDreck. First and foremeost being your writing and English comprehension skills. I understand english but you are not using english very well either If you understood English well, you'd have a better than average likelyhood of spelling it correctly. not realy proves you don't know much about dyslexia I know it can be treated. Yes according to Tom Cruise where did he get his MD? and as I have said it has been just ot to your satisfaction,which you seem to think is more important than my own still reling on Tom Cruise for expertise on the subject Nope. The American Medical Association Obviously I was correct. nope Yep. Again. nope Steve, K4YZ |
"an_old_friend" wrote Hans I copied from FCC.gov So did I. That Is not accessable from the FCC's website Yes, it is. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
an_old_friend wrote:
Stevie you didtort my words wether I type them clearly or not He torted your words? You might have a legal case. ;-) nope you just did not bother to read it so I had to repate it Does that procedure involve a hair transplant? the choie of the word was alas unforunate, but I am not bound by your narrowminded vision It surely was "unforunate" since it wasn't the truth. Of course, you aren't bound by any narrow minded stuff like truth. I can any definifation I care to I don't have to choose the same one as you do When your "definifations" mean something other than what is commonly accepted, you make it impossible to communicate with others. Of course you've pretty much done that with your misspellings and grammatical abortions. Dave K8MN |
Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Stevie you didtort my words wether I type them clearly or not He torted your words? You might have a legal case. ;-) nope you just did not bother to read it so I had to repate it Does that procedure involve a hair transplant? the choie of the word was alas unforunate, but I am not bound by your narrowminded vision It surely was "unforunate" since it wasn't the truth. Of course, you aren't bound by any narrow minded stuff like truth. I can any definifation I care to I don't have to choose the same one as you do When your "definifations" mean something other than what is commonly accepted, you make it impossible to communicate with others. Of course you've pretty much done that with your misspellings and grammatical abortions. only to narrow minded people that everything spoon fed to them Dave K8MN |
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Stevie you didtort my words wether I type them clearly or not He torted your words? You might have a legal case. ;-) nope you just did not bother to read it so I had to repate it Does that procedure involve a hair transplant? the choie of the word was alas unforunate, but I am not bound by your narrowminded vision It surely was "unforunate" since it wasn't the truth. Of course, you aren't bound by any narrow minded stuff like truth. I can any definifation I care to I don't have to choose the same one as you do When your "definifations" mean something other than what is commonly accepted, you make it impossible to communicate with others. Of course you've pretty much done that with your misspellings and grammatical abortions. only to narrow minded people that everything spoon fed to them Gee, Mark, don't you get it? You are one of the narrow minded people who wants to be spoon fed. You want amateur radio to be easier in order to accomodate you. You want explanations about 5 MHz modes to be in Mark-sized chunks. You want all others to have to try to decipher your hieroglyphs rather than you doing the work to post messages in properly-spelled and grammatically correct English. You'd like folks to guess as to how you'll define terms which have a specific meaning to all the rest of us. Dave K8MN |
Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Stevie you didtort my words wether I type them clearly or not He torted your words? You might have a legal case. ;-) nope you just did not bother to read it so I had to repate it Does that procedure involve a hair transplant? the choie of the word was alas unforunate, but I am not bound by your narrowminded vision It surely was "unforunate" since it wasn't the truth. Of course, you aren't bound by any narrow minded stuff like truth. I can any definifation I care to I don't have to choose the same one as you do When your "definifations" mean something other than what is commonly accepted, you make it impossible to communicate with others. Of course you've pretty much done that with your misspellings and grammatical abortions. only to narrow minded people that everything spoon fed to them Gee, Mark, don't you get it? You are one of the narrow minded people who wants to be spoon fed. You want amateur radio to be easier in order No not at all, I want the ARs to respect the liberites of all Americans myself included you want to deprive american of their rights if they don't jump though the same hoops you did I opose hazing ritual frat boy rituals for access to the public airwaves to accomodate you. You want explanations about 5 MHz modes to be in No I want people to answer questions aksed instaed of droning on about irelavant garbage Hans has spent a couple of weeks ont eh suject of what is a band that is waste Mark-sized chunks. You want all others to have to try to decipher your can't you read it is a matter of indifference to me read or don't read at your pleasure hieroglyphs rather than you doing the work to post messages in properly-spelled and grammatically correct English. You'd like folks to guess as to how you'll define terms which have a specific meaning to all the rest of us. Really then form Stevie the NBA and NFL are lying ervy years when they say they are holding a draft no one has yet to come up with a term other than band to describe 60 m doesn't stop setvie and hans from going on and on about how wrong it is Dave K8MN |
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Stevie you didtort my words wether I type them clearly or not He torted your words? You might have a legal case. ;-) nope you just did not bother to read it so I had to repate it Does that procedure involve a hair transplant? the choie of the word was alas unforunate, but I am not bound by your narrowminded vision It surely was "unforunate" since it wasn't the truth. Of course, you aren't bound by any narrow minded stuff like truth. I can any definifation I care to I don't have to choose the same one as you do When your "definifations" mean something other than what is commonly accepted, you make it impossible to communicate with others. Of course you've pretty much done that with your misspellings and grammatical abortions. only to narrow minded people that everything spoon fed to them Gee, Mark, don't you get it? You are one of the narrow minded people who wants to be spoon fed. You want amateur radio to be easier in order No not at all, I want the ARs to respect the liberites of all Americans myself included Manure! Nothing in amateur radio takes away any of the "liberites" granted by the Constitution. you want to deprive american of their rights if they don't jump though the same hoops you did You have no Constitutional right to an amateur radio license. I opose hazing ritual frat boy rituals for access to the public airwaves I opossum your view. to accomodate you. You want explanations about 5 MHz modes to be in No I want people to answer questions aksed instaed of droning on about irelavant garbage Everything you needed for an answer was right before you--spelled out. That, of course, might have been the problem. Next time, ask Hans for the aural version. Hans has spent a couple of weeks ont eh suject of what is a band that is waste To try explaining it to you was certainly a waste. Mark-sized chunks. You want all others to have to try to decipher your can't you read it is a matter of indifference to me read or don't read at your pleasure hieroglyphs rather than you doing the work to post messages in properly-spelled and grammatically correct English. You'd like folks to guess as to how you'll define terms which have a specific meaning to all the rest of us. Really then form Stevie the NBA and NFL are lying ervy years when they say they are holding a draft Do you know the difference between a military draft and an NFL or NBA draft? Were you being drafted by either the NFL or NBA? The definition of both types of draft is the same, by the way. no one has yet to come up with a term other than band to describe 60 m doesn't stop setvie and hans from going on and on about how wrong it is Hans gave you a term to use. There is no 60m band by definition. Dave K8MN |
Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Stevie you didtort my words wether I type them clearly or not He torted your words? You might have a legal case. ;-) nope you just did not bother to read it so I had to repate it Does that procedure involve a hair transplant? the choie of the word was alas unforunate, but I am not bound by your narrowminded vision It surely was "unforunate" since it wasn't the truth. Of course, you aren't bound by any narrow minded stuff like truth. I can any definifation I care to I don't have to choose the same one as you do When your "definifations" mean something other than what is commonly accepted, you make it impossible to communicate with others. Of course you've pretty much done that with your misspellings and grammatical abortions. only to narrow minded people that everything spoon fed to them Gee, Mark, don't you get it? You are one of the narrow minded people who wants to be spoon fed. You want amateur radio to be easier in order No not at all, I want the ARs to respect the liberites of all Americans myself included Manure! Nothing in amateur radio takes away any of the "liberites" granted by the Constitution. the code test does indeed do so you want to deprive american of their rights if they don't jump though the same hoops you did You have no Constitutional right to an amateur radio license. I have a right to anything not denied to me by the constition of the USa unless regulated by treaty since the constitution of the US and the treaties we sign are the supreme law of the land Nothing in the Consittution allows the FCC to cintinue codetesting , and nothing in the treaty gives it that power there the power does not exist in law I opose hazing ritual frat boy rituals for access to the public airwaves I opossum your view. and the Constitution of the US to accomodate you. You want explanations about 5 MHz modes to be in No I want people to answer questions aksed instaed of droning on about irelavant garbage Everything you needed for an answer was right before you--spelled out. That, of course, might have been the problem. Next time, ask Hans for the aural version. not it wasn't Hans has spent a couple of weeks ont eh suject of what is a band that is waste To try explaining it to you was certainly a waste. do understand what I am saying when I type 60m Band or not? Mark-sized chunks. You want all others to have to try to decipher your can't you read it is a matter of indifference to me read or don't read at your pleasure hieroglyphs rather than you doing the work to post messages in properly-spelled and grammatically correct English. You'd like folks to guess as to how you'll define terms which have a specific meaning to all the rest of us. Really then form Stevie the NBA and NFL are lying ervy years when they say they are holding a draft Do you know the difference between a military draft and an NFL or NBA draft? Were you being drafted by either the NFL or NBA? The definition of both types of draft is the same, by the way. nope it isn't at least ot according to Stevie no one has yet to come up with a term other than band to describe 60 m doesn't stop setvie and hans from going on and on about how wrong it is Hans gave you a term to use. There is no 60m band by definition. and yet you, steve and Hans know better than the ARRL and W5YI Dave K8MN |
an_old_friend wrote:
Nothing in the Consittution allows the FCC to cintinue codetesting , and nothing in the treaty gives it that power there the power does not exist in law BZZZZZTTTT!!! Wrong!!! The Constitution has nothing to do with code testing, and the treaty now says that code testing isn't required. The FCC certainly can continue to require it if they deem it necessary, only they are no longer required by treaty to do so. |
an_old_friend wrote:
I opose hazing ritual frat boy rituals for access to the public airwaves Translation: "I don't want to learn anything technical, or anything about regulations, or take a test to determine if I am half-way capable of operating a transmitter responsibably on the ham bands". Looks like the Childrens Band is a perfect fit for you. |
an_old_friend wrote:
What power gives the FCC that power NOTHING The same power that gives the FCC to power to require a test of technical knowledge and regulations in order for one to operate a transmitter on the ham bands. IDJIT. |
an_old_friend wrote:
Cmd Buzz Corey wrote: an_old_friend wrote: I opose hazing ritual frat boy rituals for access to the public airwaves Translation: "I don't want to learn anything technical, or anything about regulations, or take a test to determine if I am half-way capable of operating a transmitter responsibably on the ham bands". guess you failed english Looks like the Childrens Band is a perfect fit for you. You failed English and spelling. Like I say, you would fit perfectly on the Chicken Band, they are all on just about your level. |
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: I can any definifation I care to I don't have to choose the same one as you do When your "definifations" mean something other than what is commonly accepted, you make it impossible to communicate with others. Of course you've pretty much done that with your misspellings and grammatical abortions. only to narrow minded people that everything spoon fed to them Gee, Mark, don't you get it? You are one of the narrow minded people who wants to be spoon fed. You want amateur radio to be easier in order No not at all, I want the ARs to respect the liberites of all Americans myself included Manure! Nothing in amateur radio takes away any of the "liberites" granted by the Constitution. the code test does indeed do so As with any number of things of late, you're simply wrong. you want to deprive american of their rights if they don't jump though the same hoops you did You have no Constitutional right to an amateur radio license. I have a right to anything not denied to me by the constition of the USa unless regulated by treaty since the constitution of the US and the treaties we sign are the supreme law of the land Oh, you have a right to attempt to pass an amateur radio exam but you aren't guaranteed success. The "constition" doesn't address or regulate motor car licensing but you still have to pass a test in order to obtain a driving license. It can be revoked by your state or denied if you have a medical or mental condition rendering you a hazard to others. Deal with the fact that you don't a right to something simply because you want to do it. Nothing in the Consittution allows the FCC to cintinue codetesting , and nothing in the treaty gives it that power there the power does not exist in law Nothing in the U.S. Constitution prevents the FCC from administering a morse code test for amateur radio licensing. You have no right to an amateur radio license. I opose hazing ritual frat boy rituals for access to the public airwaves I opossum your view. and the Constitution of the US Okay, I opossum the Constitution. to accomodate you. You want explanations about 5 MHz modes to be in No I want people to answer questions aksed instaed of droning on about irelavant garbage Everything you needed for an answer was right before you--spelled out. That, of course, might have been the problem. Next time, ask Hans for the aural version. not it wasn't Yes, Mark, it was. Your repeated denials of reality are just making you look stupid. Hans has spent a couple of weeks ont eh suject of what is a band that is waste To try explaining it to you was certainly a waste. do understand what I am saying when I type 60m Band or not? Yes, you mean the spot frequencies which are not a band at all. Mark-sized chunks. You want all others to have to try to decipher your can't you read it is a matter of indifference to me read or don't read at your pleasure hieroglyphs rather than you doing the work to post messages in properly-spelled and grammatically correct English. You'd like folks to guess as to how you'll define terms which have a specific meaning to all the rest of us. Really then form Stevie the NBA and NFL are lying ervy years when they say they are holding a draft Do you know the difference between a military draft and an NFL or NBA draft? Were you being drafted by either the NFL or NBA? The definition of both types of draft is the same, by the way. nope it isn't at least ot according to Stevie I don't know Steve's views on the NBA or NFL draft. I do know what you've written previously about being drafted. Now we're to understand that you didn't actually mean "drafted". no one has yet to come up with a term other than band to describe 60 m doesn't stop setvie and hans from going on and on about how wrong it is Hans gave you a term to use. There is no 60m band by definition. and yet you, steve and Hans know better than the ARRL and W5YI Yeah, it surely looks that way. It certainly won't be the first time. Dave K8MN |
Cmd Buzz Corey wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Nothing in the Consittution allows the FCC to cintinue codetesting , and nothing in the treaty gives it that power there the power does not exist in law BZZZZZTTTT!!! Wrong!!! The Constitution has nothing to do with code Agreed which the FCC has not authority testing, and the treaty now says that code testing isn't required. The FCC certainly can continue to require it if they deem it necessary, only What power gives the FCC that power NOTHING they are no longer required by treaty to do so. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:24 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com