John Smith wrote:
AOF:

Hey! You got proof the FCC is interested in an amateurs equipment? What,
is it a gay organization now?

John

not at all they are as interested in Feamle hams equipment as well as,
male hams, nothing gay there. a Bit nosey prehaps not gay


On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 20:40:09 -0700, an_old_friend wrote:


robert casey wrote:


Because you can never be certain that the ham will NOT
ever build anything. Additionally, all hams have technical
responsibility for their stations and the RF signals they
transmit.


If the FCC is to trust us with the legal ability to
pop the covers off our transmitters and make
adjustments and modifications, we need to have passed
tests to show that we have basic knowledge of RF and
such. That we'd know how to run and maintain a clean
operation.

It's quite rare that the FCC busts a ham for faulty
equipment anymore.

you know the last time the FCC busted a ham for faulty equipment

Dave Heil wrote:
John Smith wrote:
Kelly:

I wish your mother would have told you it is not only pointless to attempt
to control others, it is also impolite... not to mention fruitless...
you guys, which attempt this meaningless control, make me ponder on what
type of idiots you have surrounded yourself with, which would take orders?

What do you call your little group, "Kellys' dummies?" Or, are you just
pulling a fast one on us, and truth is they ignore you and march to their
own drum? Are you sure you are an official in charge, or just
self-appointed?

Who is asking?


I mean this all seems quite ridiculous, are you sure the world revolves
upon your commands? I try to keep an open mind, even when ridiculous
posturing people pose preposterous ideas.

Well, there you go, "John". I'm trying to keep an open mind in reading
your material. It isn't easy.

Easy? It's impossible. Even Don Quixote would write this strange unit
off as a loon.

Dave K8MN

w3rv

Dave:

I don't agree with bush on a lot, but don't want to focus on running for
president either. Wasn't really happy with some teachers my son had, but
didn't want to go full-time academic either. I really don't like the way
the garbage men handle the trash, but refrain from that line of work also...

Really, make sense, drop the BS and out-right crap...

John

On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 05:58:40 +0000, Dave Heil wrote:

John Smith wrote:
Dave:

When the arrl sees fit to serve amateur radio to its' best purpose, and
the purpose of this country and its' citizens, I would be a fool not to be
a member... I await future times...

Sure, "John", let someone else do it all for you.

Dave K8MN

John

On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 03:31:56 +0000, Dave Heil wrote:


John Smith wrote:

Len:

I await the day when the arrl (ancient retarded religious league) goes the
way of the dodo, or else, is taken over by under 40 year olds!

We need someone to crack a window and let some fresh air in!

We? Are you an ARRL member? Len certainly isn't.

Dave K8MN

Dave:

I am only thankful the others don't have such difficulty as you. Have you
checked into medication, I hear they have something for alzheimers these
days... have a nice day...

John

On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 06:01:10 +0000, Dave Heil wrote:

John Smith wrote:
Kelly:

I wish your mother would have told you it is not only pointless to attempt
to control others, it is also impolite... not to mention fruitless...
you guys, which attempt this meaningless control, make me ponder on what
type of idiots you have surrounded yourself with, which would take orders?

What do you call your little group, "Kellys' dummies?" Or, are you just
pulling a fast one on us, and truth is they ignore you and march to their
own drum? Are you sure you are an official in charge, or just
self-appointed?

Who is asking?


I mean this all seems quite ridiculous, are you sure the world revolves
upon your commands? I try to keep an open mind, even when ridiculous
posturing people pose preposterous ideas.

Well, there you go, "John". I'm trying to keep an open mind in reading
your material. It isn't easy.

Dave K8MN

John

On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 20:22:53 -0700, kelly wrote:


John Smith wrote:

Dee:

I was a boy scout leader in my late 20's into my early 30's, it was hard,
my job made some allowances, heck, some of the people over me had kids in
my troop.

I think it can be done alright...

Old pharts shine in positions like supreme court justices, you don't need
the constitution to change all that much, indeed, in over 200 years it has
been a real benefit NOT having much change at all... you just have to
realize where you need young minds and where you need old ones...

It's like this "John": The ARRL is run by an elected, unpaid volunteer
BoD. In any practical sense the ARRL cannot be changed from the outside
but it can and has been changed from the inside. The "solution" is
rather obvious isn't it "John"? So go round up all your ARRL
like-minded member buddies and campaign to get one elected to the BoD
to kick off the "revolution".

In other words "John" "lead, follow or quit whining, trolling and
sucking up pointless bandwidth" on the topic.


John

w3rv




On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 21:43:33 -0400, Dee Flint wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
...

Len:

I await the day when the arrl (ancient retarded religious league) goes the
way of the dodo, or else, is taken over by under 40 year olds!

We need someone to crack a window and let some fresh air in!

John

They won't get to it until they are over 40 themselves. Right now they are
building their careers and raising families. Doesn't leave much time for
the major commitment of being in charge of the ARRL.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

AOF:

Frankly, I have been much more interested in the lady hams equipment
myself... I think the FCC got that one right!

John

On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 23:19:28 -0700, an_old_friend wrote:


John Smith wrote:
AOF:

Hey! You got proof the FCC is interested in an amateurs equipment? What,
is it a gay organization now?

John

not at all they are as interested in Feamle hams equipment as well as,
male hams, nothing gay there. a Bit nosey prehaps not gay


On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 20:40:09 -0700, an_old_friend wrote:


robert casey wrote:


Because you can never be certain that the ham will NOT
ever build anything. Additionally, all hams have technical
responsibility for their stations and the RF signals they
transmit.


If the FCC is to trust us with the legal ability to
pop the covers off our transmitters and make
adjustments and modifications, we need to have passed
tests to show that we have basic knowledge of RF and
such. That we'd know how to run and maintain a clean
operation.

It's quite rare that the FCC busts a ham for faulty
equipment anymore.

you know the last time the FCC busted a ham for faulty equipment

Kelly:

You make a pathetic antagonist, also...

John

On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 23:40:35 -0700, kelly wrote:


Dave Heil wrote:
John Smith wrote:
Kelly:

I wish your mother would have told you it is not only pointless to attempt
to control others, it is also impolite... not to mention fruitless...
you guys, which attempt this meaningless control, make me ponder on what
type of idiots you have surrounded yourself with, which would take orders?

What do you call your little group, "Kellys' dummies?" Or, are you just
pulling a fast one on us, and truth is they ignore you and march to their
own drum? Are you sure you are an official in charge, or just
self-appointed?

Who is asking?


I mean this all seems quite ridiculous, are you sure the world revolves
upon your commands? I try to keep an open mind, even when ridiculous
posturing people pose preposterous ideas.

Well, there you go, "John". I'm trying to keep an open mind in reading
your material. It isn't easy.

Easy? It's impossible. Even Don Quixote would write this strange unit
off as a loon.

Dave K8MN

w3rv

John Smith wrote:
AOF:

Frankly, I have been much more interested in the lady hams equipment
myself... I think the FCC got that one right!

John

these days I am payng more attention to a certain future lady ham's
equipment myself although I would not care to share her with the FCC

an aside It would be nice if you pruned some the endless stuff is
piling up at the end of your post, slows down my conection something
feirce indeed tonight I have felt like I was back on Dailup

shudder

Unclaimed Mysteries wrote:
wrote in part:


*Besides* eliminating the code test, what would *you* change about
the license tests?



I think the swimsuit competition needs to go.


HOWL! Ohhh, just the thought!

- I concur -

- Mike KB3EIA -

Dave Heil wrote:


I don't know if John is a loon or if, as I orginally surmised, he is
simply a troll. He is strange and he has bonded with Leonard. Water
always seeks its own level.


With no anon-a-mousie comments or anything!

- Mike KB3EIA -