John Smith wrote:
Len:

As long as evil exists in the world, there will always be a "John Smith"
to oppose it--a thousand deaths and the spirit of John Smith will live on.
This man is invincible and immortal, death is only a tunnel to the next
life, and to pick up the fight of evil men once again!

Yep, what we need is more men who hide behind a pseudonym rather than
openly standing by their convictions. As "John Smith", you can post
your views without any personal repercussions--and you can check into a
cheap motel with some floozy.

Dave K8MN

wrote:
From: John Smith on Aug 7, 3:43 pm


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!


Absolutely cannot be done unless "we" become MEMBERS and
"work for change from the 'inside'." [repeated warnings
from Dee Flint in here]

Problem is, the entrenched officials and BoD are RESISTANT
to "change from within" as evident from their regular BoD
Meeting Minutes given on their websites. They do things
THEIR way and expect all to fall-in and pop-to. After all,
they "represent all amateurs in the USA" and say so up
front.

I'll have to check out the QST advertising page on the website,
see if they have a new "Publisher's Sworn Statement" on their
membership numbers. ARRL have never had more than a quarter
of all licensed U.S. radio amateurs and, at the end of 2004,
had only about 20 percent of them according to membership
numbers they gave.

However, in THIS newsgroup, all of the PCTA extras bow down
and accept all League words as sacrosanct. After all, Hiram
Went To Washington right after the end of WW1 and "saved
ham radio" all by hisself. For that all are supposed to
forever show gratitude and obediance to the ARRL, even 86
years after that "fact"!

Something to consider: The present elected President of
the ARRL was a former salesman. [see connection? :-) ]

ant how



You are as involved in the ARRL as you are in amateur radio--not at all.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
John Smith wrote:
Len:

As long as evil exists in the world, there will always be a "John Smith"
to oppose it--a thousand deaths and the spirit of John Smith will live on.
This man is invincible and immortal, death is only a tunnel to the next
life, and to pick up the fight of evil men once again!

Yep, what we need is more men who hide behind a pseudonym rather than
openly standing by their convictions. As "John Smith", you can post
your views without any personal repercussions--and you can check into a
cheap motel with some floozy.

boy oh boy you are obsessed with what other MEN do with their genitals


Dave K8MN

an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an_old_friend wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote:


an old friend wrote:


Dave Heil wrote:



Mike Coslo wrote:



Dave Heil wrote:

There are some pretty darn good reasons why high-speed digital HF won't
work well. And they aren't related to early "knowledge" that caused hams
to be relegated to those higher frequencies at the time.


agreed there are reasons of course as there were then

but it is folks like you with "it can not be Done.. therefore it should
not be disused etc. that insure it can't be done

So, according to your view, it is quite possible that you *could* pass a
morse test.


Of course I could If write enough stuff in response to enough tests I
am certain I could indeed pass, assuming of course I live that long

OTOH I more likely to get a kind word from Stevie on my spelling or
even my honesty

But you've told Jim that he wasn't reading when you said you'd simply
tried everything, some of them a number of times and that you just
couldn't pass a morse exam. Now you'd have us believe that it is
possible for you to do so. You're making some improvement but it makes
your previous statements sound a bit disingenuous.

Dave K8MN

Dave:

Your ideas are bit strange, you probably didn't like old ben franklin when
he assumed a pen name. Perhaps you refuse to read books when the author
has adopted a pen name? Perhaps you despise actors for adopting a stage
name? Perhaps your appreciation of a rose is solely based upon its' name,
and "by another name, a rose is NOT a rose?"

Funny, it is principals and NOT personalities which have the true merit
and worth--you seem to lack ability to grasp that concept... a good old
buddies club where you only accept argument when it comes from a name you
recognize is not available to you always, let me see, in real life
those individuals who assign worth of an idea based on the persons
identity whose idea it is, is called, in slang mind you, a "Kiss Ass"
or "Brown Noser"... you are lost without knowing the identity behind
the idea!

Perhaps the voting system of the USA is found in fault with
you--it seems to guarantee anonymity... you seem to need a face and a
character to attack--character assassination is your forte!

You seem to avoid argument on only an ideas worth, resorting to
attacking thin air in an effort to confuse the unwitting... well, some
just must proceed with the handicaps the world, God and nature assigns
them, or they choose to shackle themselves with... strange though, how
you choose to make yourself a prime example of the close minded "good ole
boys" I mention, it almost makes me think you get the idea on some
unconscious level and act out emotionally (but in text form) on what is
presented--strange...

John

On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 03:38:08 +0000, Dave Heil wrote:

John Smith wrote:
Len:

As long as evil exists in the world, there will always be a "John Smith"
to oppose it--a thousand deaths and the spirit of John Smith will live on.
This man is invincible and immortal, death is only a tunnel to the next
life, and to pick up the fight of evil men once again!

Yep, what we need is more men who hide behind a pseudonym rather than
openly standing by their convictions. As "John Smith", you can post
your views without any personal repercussions--and you can check into a
cheap motel with some floozy.

Dave K8MN

an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

John Smith wrote:

Len:

As long as evil exists in the world, there will always be a "John Smith"
to oppose it--a thousand deaths and the spirit of John Smith will live on.
This man is invincible and immortal, death is only a tunnel to the next
life, and to pick up the fight of evil men once again!

Yep, what we need is more men who hide behind a pseudonym rather than
openly standing by their convictions. As "John Smith", you can post
your views without any personal repercussions--and you can check into a
cheap motel with some floozy.


boy oh boy you are obsessed with what other MEN do with their genitals

Colonel Morgan,

"John Smith", so the jokes go, is a commonly used name by those checking
into a hotel with a woman other than one's wife. I didn't mention "John
Smith's" or anyone else's genitals.

Dave K8MN

John Smith wrote:
Robert:

HUH? attempting-to-keep-a-straight-face

John



How else am I gonna get my "Worked All Hams" award, then?

:-)



To get the "Worked All Hams" award one has to work each
and every licensed ham in the USA. All 600 thousand of them.
Which means they all must be active...

:-)

Robert:

You may have to enlist Sylvia Brownes' help, I think (my belief, opinion)
is that some of those hams still on the books have entered the "here
after." Propagation into that area is rare at best, and most reports are
highly questionable...

Psychic communications is still in its' infancy, highly sporadic successes
to this date, equipment is sparse... don't prepare a spot on the wall for
that award, yet... grin

John


On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 04:59:33 +0000, robert casey wrote:

John Smith wrote:
Robert:

HUH? attempting-to-keep-a-straight-face

John



How else am I gonna get my "Worked All Hams" award, then?

:-)



To get the "Worked All Hams" award one has to work each
and every licensed ham in the USA. All 600 thousand of them.
Which means they all must be active...

:-)

From: Mike Coslo on Aug 7, 2:53 pm


wrote:
From: Mike Coslo on Aug 7, 9:24 am
an old friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:


HF will never be the place for high speed digital transmission. There
is too much noise and signals are subject to the vagaries of wave
propagation phenomena.

Why do you keep beating this Dead Horse on "rapid transmission
of high speed digital transmission?"

Dave wrote that last. But I agree with him

Sweetums, you've been plugging for that all by yourself for
lots of messages in here. You NEGLECT any other forms of
communications and concentrate on imagery, many-pixel images.

"HF will never be the place for high-speed transmission?"
What do you "extra experts" think BPL is basically? Clue:
High-speed data transmission, most of it on HF.

And the answer to "why" is that other people bring it up. So I answer.

Is that not allowed?

It's allowed. It's also allowed that YOU *might* consider
OTHER forms of communications on beloved HF other than what
the holy Handbook says is "good."

Quit acting petulant.

The "charge" that high-speed data transmission is "impossible"

Who said that? It is most certainly possible. We just have to be
patient, very patient.

Sorry, I've lost my patience with the brain-draggers in here
only considering U.S. ham radio "high-tech" being some finished
product advertised in QST and having a "lab review" on it all
glowing with praise.

There's an INFINITY of POSSIBILITIES that can be done in U.S.
ham radio and about the ONLY innovation of late is the Tayloe
Mixer (patent pending). Mike Gingell in the UK came up with
the polyphase audio phase shifter for better phasing SSB
and Peter Martinez, also in the UK, came up with PSK31. Once
in a while some U.S. guys come out with an innovating product
and all you "communications experts" all get together and
carp it up, refuse to buy it, or say whatever each one of you
has is "so much better" than anything new. Newness is to be
feared?

Go back in time to the late Dick Carroll complaining and
grousing about his peripheral DSP audio filter...he said
outright in here that he had difficulty setting the
controls! Waaa...waaaa...if it ain't like it usta was in
the 1950s and 1960s it ain't no good!

Okay, so somebody INNOVATE something.

INNOVATE something besides sitting around gabbling how "good"
and "expert" you all are because you are morsemen and grand
champions in radio because you are federally authorized for
beeping. The rest of the radio world is NOT buying it. The
rest of the radio world will continue to improve as it has
been for years. The U.S. amateur radio world can only play
copycat and steal from that, having the ARRL say that "hams
invented it" when it didn't.

Tayloe did it. What have the other 700K+ done? Sit around
griping because none of you have done anything?

non seq

John Smith wrote:
Dave:

Your ideas are bit strange, you probably didn't like old ben franklin when
he assumed a pen name.

I've read Ben Franklin. You're no Ben Franklin.

Perhaps you refuse to read books when the author
has adopted a pen name?

If he claims to speak "the truth" then, no. Have you written books as
"John Smith"?

Perhaps you despise actors for adopting a stage
name?

I'm fine with actors. I've watched Alec Baldwin in movies and don't
have a problem with him *as an actor*. When Alec Baldwin pontificates
on politics, I don't give him any credence. Are you the actor "John Smith"?

Perhaps your appreciation of a rose is solely based upon its' name,
and "by another name, a rose is NOT a rose?"

You may have a point. I'm not likely to purchase a rose bush of the
variety "John Smith".

Funny, it is principals and NOT personalities which have the true merit
and worth--you seem to lack ability to grasp that concept...

Your recent stuff reads like the rantings of homeless folks I've
encountered in New York. There is little of principal and little of
fact. Actually, there's been little of your stuff in which true merit
and worth has been addressed or established.

a good old
buddies club where you only accept argument when it comes from a name you
recognize is not available to you always, let me see, in real life
those individuals who assign worth of an idea based on the persons
identity whose idea it is, is called, in slang mind you, a "Kiss Ass"
or "Brown Noser"... you are lost without knowing the identity behind
the idea!

Not so, "John Smith". If I'm present at a town council meeting, folks
are free to state their opinions. They have faces and they give their
names. No pseudonyms are permitted and no one stands behind a velvet
drape to present his views.

Perhaps the voting system of the USA is found in fault with
you--it seems to guarantee anonymity... you seem to need a face and a
character to attack--character assassination is your forte!

You can't walk into any polling place, unregistered and vote. Your
identity is known and you've previously presented credentials which
establish your right to vote. What is not known on election day is *how
you voted*.

You don't have a face nor any identifiable character to attack and here
I am attacking your statements. Go figure!

You seem to avoid argument on only an ideas worth, resorting to
attacking thin air in an effort to confuse the unwitting... well, some
just must proceed with the handicaps the world, God and nature assigns
them, or they choose to shackle themselves with... strange though, how
you choose to make yourself a prime example of the close minded "good ole
boys" I mention, it almost makes me think you get the idea on some
unconscious level and act out emotionally (but in text form) on what is
presented--strange...

Your recent rantings present wild numbers and unverified percentages of
individuals within amateur radio. You've made some unsubstantiated
claims about the ARRL and about currently licensed radio amateurs. I'm
not going to let you get by with that unchallenged. It is quite easy to
hide behind your sofa and make pathetic claims as an anonymous writer.

Dave K8MN

John

On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 03:38:08 +0000, Dave Heil wrote:


John Smith wrote:

Len:

As long as evil exists in the world, there will always be a "John Smith"
to oppose it--a thousand deaths and the spirit of John Smith will live on.
This man is invincible and immortal, death is only a tunnel to the next
life, and to pick up the fight of evil men once again!

Yep, what we need is more men who hide behind a pseudonym rather than
openly standing by their convictions. As "John Smith", you can post
your views without any personal repercussions--and you can check into a
cheap motel with some floozy.

Dave K8MN