|
|
wrote An analogy: Suppose there are a group of hams who regularly QSO on VHF or UHF FM. Although they use different rigs, all have signals with "good audio" - clean, crisp, clear, easy to listen to and understand. Then a newcomer shows up, with a signal that has really poor audio. Muffled, distorted, very unclear. Not weak, off-frequency or over-deviating, just not clear. Varies from 'requires a careful listen' to 'completely impossible to understand'. Fortunately it is discovered that the problem lies in the microphone being used by the newcomer. It's the original that came with the rig, which is no longer made. Nothing wrong with the rig itself, it's the mike which is the problem. Your analogy is broken, Jim. The newcomers microphone is analogous to Marks computer keyboard, which works just fine. As you well know (unless you just fell off the turnip truck) the reason for Marks difficult-(sometimes impossible)-to-read posts is a medical condition. Give your newcomer a medical problem (speech impediment?) and rewrite the story. Then we'll answer your question "How should the group respond?" 73, de Hans, K0HB |
"John Smith" wrote in message ... Dee: I like it when the girl plays hard to get, then acquiesces in the end, been movies made about that yanno!!! tongue-in-cheek John ///////////////////////////////////////////// On Yeah...kinda like John's past "accomplishments". The Heroine in question jots down his phone number, says she will call him... then tosses John's TX number in the nearest dumpster. The prettier they are, the greater the rejection, eh, John? |
K=D8HB wrote:
wrote An analogy: Suppose there are a group of hams who regularly QSO on VHF or UHF FM. Although they use different rigs, all have signals with "good audio" - clean, crisp, clear, easy to listen to and understand. Then a newcomer shows up, with a signal that has really poor audio. Muffled, distorted, very unclear. Not weak, off-frequency or over-deviating, just not clear. Varies from 'requires a careful listen' to 'completely impossible to understand'. Fortunately it is discovered that the problem lies in the microphone being used by the newcomer. It's the original that came with the rig, which is no longer made. Nothing wrong with the rig itself, it's the mike which is the problem. Your analogy is broken, Jim. Not at all, Hans. You snipped off the rest of the analogy, in which it is revealed that although there is a way to fix or at least improve the situation, the newcomer refuses to do anyhting about it. That's the central issue: the *refusal* to use an available tool to fix or at least improve a problem. The newcomers microphone is analogous to Marks computer keyboard, which works just fine. As you well know (unless you just fell off the turnip truck) the reason for Marks difficult-(sometimes impossible)-to-read posts is a medical condition. Allegedly. Mark has claimed a lot of things in the past that simply did not add up. Like claims of a 248 IQ... Perhaps his condition is real, perhaps it isn't. That's not the issue at all - the issue is what he does about it. He says the use of a spellchecker would slow him down too much and that we're not worth the effort. Give your newcomer a medical problem (speech impediment?) and rewrite the story. How about a person with a speech problem who refuses to go to speech therapy, even though the cost is low and improvement is clearly possible? Then we'll answer your question "How should the group respond?" Who is "we"?=20 73 de Jim, N2EY |
an old friend wrote: K4YZ wrote: an old friend wrote: wrote: Dee Flint wrote: I agree 100% with Dee's ideas expressed above. If something is worth writing, it's worth writing clearly. When are you going to start writng clearly yourself? BBBWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! ! ! ! ! You're such a card, Markie! Always the comedian! Not realy but you can tell yourself that lie Yes, REALLY! It's no lie. You write like a 3rd grader then have the temerity to redress others on "writing clearly"....! Jim wanders on and on to the point no one is quite sure what his point is I have absolutely NO problem following what Jim writes...Nor do I have a problem following Hans, Dee, Kim, Lennie, Brain, John, Cecil, nor almost anyone else here. Toiddie can be a bit challenging. Every once in a while he becomes lucid, then slides right back into his profane rants. You, on the otherhand, not only intersperse a small share of profanity, but your spelling sucks and more often than not your "sentences" are fractured and open-ended. This doesn't mean we're all Shakespeares. It does mean we can at least do what we can to use correct spelling, grammar, punctuation and capitalization. Ok He says "ok", but my money's on "But I won't do a darned thing about it". which is of course the same thing For once we agree, but not for the same reasons...... An analogy: Suppose there are a group of hams who regularly QSO on VHF or UHF FM. Although they use different rigs, all have signals with "good audio" - clean, crisp, clear, easy to listen to and understand. Then a newcomer shows up, with a signal that has really poor audio. Muffled, distorted, very unclear. Not weak, off-frequency or over-deviating, just not clear. Varies from 'requires a careful listen' to 'completely impossible to understand'. Fortunately it is discovered that the problem lies in the microphone being used by the newcomer. It's the original that came with the rig, which is no longer made. Nothing wrong with the rig itself, it's the mike which is the problem. But the newcomer refuses to replace the microphone. Says it's too much trouble, costs too much money, and a new mike wouldn't be as easy to use as the old one. Plus he doesn't think his audio is all that bad in the first place. Newcomer finally says that if the group can't understand him, it's *their* problem, not his, and he shouldn't be expected to spend money, time and effort to get a new microphone for his rig. How should the group respond? One you you try analogy that is valid It's absolutely valid. nope it isn't Sure it is. I am sure that YOU would like to think otherwise, most likely because you no dobut sound just as bad in person as you do on a keyboard and Jim's tale hit's close-to-home. you could also be man enough to say what you mean Seem's pretty straight forward to me. For example to addmto your analogy "addmto"...?!?! That's not even close to being a "word". It is only those that disgree with the newcomers views that find him so impossible to understand I don't always agree with Jim and it made perfect sence to me. It it also truns out not to be his mike but his voice that has problem "turns" and of course tell get off the air till you can fix your voice and of course Ham operators are so accepting Sure they are...Unless you're blatantly lying or deceiving. Not lying or decieving...(SNIP) Sure you are. You've already admitted it. Why stop now? (UNSNIP)...you are lying and decieving in claiming to know the medcial state of a person you have never met Nope. You know this since you are an LPN Nope. I know it from YOUR words. Unless you've been (dare I say it?) lying? Steve, K4YZ |
"KØHB" wrote in message nk.net... wrote If something is worth writing, it's worth writing clearly. Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. 73, de Hans, K0HB Doesn't apply. The case at hand doesn't meet the stated criteria of first and last letters in the right place and doesn't meet the criteria of containing the right letters. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"KØHB" wrote in message nk.net... wrote An analogy: Suppose there are a group of hams who regularly QSO on VHF or UHF FM. Although they use different rigs, all have signals with "good audio" - clean, crisp, clear, easy to listen to and understand. Then a newcomer shows up, with a signal that has really poor audio. Muffled, distorted, very unclear. Not weak, off-frequency or over-deviating, just not clear. Varies from 'requires a careful listen' to 'completely impossible to understand'. Fortunately it is discovered that the problem lies in the microphone being used by the newcomer. It's the original that came with the rig, which is no longer made. Nothing wrong with the rig itself, it's the mike which is the problem. Your analogy is broken, Jim. The newcomers microphone is analogous to Marks computer keyboard, which works just fine. As you well know (unless you just fell off the turnip truck) the reason for Marks difficult-(sometimes impossible)-to-read posts is a medical condition. Give your newcomer a medical problem (speech impediment?) and rewrite the story. Then we'll answer your question "How should the group respond?" 73, de Hans, K0HB We have exactly that case locally. And I've already described how the group responds and how the individual deals with the problem. It's a two way street. The individual is responsible for taking the steps necessary to minimize the problem and the group accepts that. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Digital" wrote The prettier they are, the greater the rejection, eh, John? No matter how pretty they are, some other guy is sick of their crap. |
wrote That's the central issue: the *refusal* to use an available tool to fix or at least improve a problem. Aha! The "central issue"! He refuses to do what *you* think he ought to do. Sunnuvagun! 73, de Hans, K0HB |
Digital:
In the real world, it is a higher power which runs the show, I am but one actor on this great stage. I just follow anothers' script, fortunately, I am given control over myself. I can choose to view this as a great challenge and do my best to meet ever changing courses in the flow of the great stream of life, or give up--I march ahead. The world is for the living, but I allow myself to grieve for those no longer with us... and it ain't over till I say it's over. Nice try... John On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 03:01:33 -0500, Digital wrote: "John Smith" wrote in message ... Dee: I like it when the girl plays hard to get, then acquiesces in the end, been movies made about that yanno!!! tongue-in-cheek John ///////////////////////////////////////////// On Yeah...kinda like John's past "accomplishments". The Heroine in question jots down his phone number, says she will call him... then tosses John's TX number in the nearest dumpster. The prettier they are, the greater the rejection, eh, John? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:21 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com