"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
From: Dan/W4NTI on Sep 13, 1:25 pm

More BS from the non ham Lennie the loser.
plonk

Dan/W4NTI

Per SOP ignore any data insult any oposition Boring Dan realy getting
boring


As usual A-O-F you got it wrong. My problem with Lennie is he simply can't
stay on subject. Spins everything that is said. And his one track mind of
anti-CW and basically anti-ham rhetoric gets tired quickly. So I have
decided to plonk him. He is not relevant to a serious discussion in this
group, since he is not a member of the society. Dig it?

Sorta like you are getting to be A-O-F.

Dan/W4NTI

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
From: Dan/W4NTI on Sep 13, 1:25 pm

More BS from the non ham Lennie the loser.
plonk

Dan/W4NTI

Per SOP ignore any data insult any oposition Boring Dan realy getting
boring


As usual A-O-F you got it wrong. My problem with Lennie is he simply can't
stay on subject. Spins everything that is said. And his one track mind of
anti-CW and basically anti-ham rhetoric gets tired quickly. So I have
decided to plonk him. He is not relevant to a serious discussion in this
group, since he is not a member of the society. Dig it?

Aagin SoP ranting form you, anyone different knows nothing of value

Boring Dan Boring

Sorta like you are getting to be A-O-F.

Dan/W4NTI

an_old_friend wrote:
Dan/W4NTI wrote:

"an_old_friend" wrote in message
groups.com...

Dan/W4NTI wrote:

wrote in message
egroups.com...
From: Dan/W4NTI on Sep 13, 1:25 pm

More BS from the non ham Lennie the loser.
plonk

Dan/W4NTI

Per SOP ignore any data insult any oposition Boring Dan realy getting
boring


As usual A-O-F you got it wrong. My problem with Lennie is he simply can't
stay on subject. Spins everything that is said. And his one track mind of
anti-CW and basically anti-ham rhetoric gets tired quickly. So I have
decided to plonk him. He is not relevant to a serious discussion in this
group, since he is not a member of the society. Dig it?


Aagin SoP ranting form you, anyone different knows nothing of value

Boring Dan Boring


He has a point, Mark. There are people in this group who I don't
regularly post to. There is a fringe element that seems to be really
concerned with each others sexual habits, there is a group of
Ham-baiters, and there are those who simply hate Amateurs.

All my exchanges with him have become drearily predictable and not very
interesting, at least to me. I don't need the non-sequitars, the name
calling, or the constant attempts to steer most every thread to CW testing.

Mr. Anderson simply hates Hams. That is okay, no one has to like Hams,
me, or chunk light tuna.

So I seldom bother to reply. No point to it.


- Mike KB3EIA -

From: Michael Coslo on Sep 16, 9:44 am

an_old_friend wrote:
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote in message
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
wrote in message
From: Dan/W4NTI on Sep 13, 1:25 pm


More BS from the non ham Lennie the loser.
plonk

Per SOP ignore any data insult any oposition Boring Dan realy getting
boring

As usual A-O-F you got it wrong. My problem with Lennie is he simply can't
stay on subject. Spins everything that is said. And his one track mind of
anti-CW and basically anti-ham rhetoric gets tired quickly. So I have
decided to plonk him. He is not relevant to a serious discussion in this
group, since he is not a member of the society. Dig it?

Aagin SoP ranting form you, anyone different knows nothing of value

Boring Dan Boring

He has a point, Mark. There are people in this group who I don't
regularly post to. There is a fringe element that seems to be really
concerned with each others sexual habits, there is a group of
Ham-baiters, and there are those who simply hate Amateurs.

All my exchanges with him have become drearily predictable and not very
interesting, at least to me.

Poor baby. "Sore loser-ism" displayed for all to see. :-)

The whines have been pressed from grapes of morsemen's wrath!

I don't need the non-sequitars, the name
calling, or the constant attempts to steer most every thread to CW testing.

"Non sequitur." [from the Latin]

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Coslo wishes to be "correct" in any discussion
or argument? Not possible in an OPEN forum when his discussions
and arguments are NOT winning/correct/valid or on the subject of
amateur radio.

Note: There exist OTHER forums for discussion of religion and
general moral-ethical behavior. Those do not involve amateur
radio per se, though, so it is best NOT to whine and carry on
about losing discussions and arguments by spouting "you hate
hams!"

Mr. Anderson simply hates Hams.

Incorrect. By so stating an incorrect falsehood, you create,
in effect, a mild sort of character assassination which is not
at all civil or mannerly.

If you cannot stand to have your statements rebutted, talked
against, or shown to be invalid or incorrect, then you have NO
validity in engaging in uncivil character assassination by
hurling falsehoods or even personal insults.

That is okay, no one has to like Hams, me, or chunk light tuna.

This newsgroup was NOT created to "like Michael Coslo" or to
discuss various forms of comestible fish or meat.

If you cannot stand the heat of debate or strong discussion,
this newsgroup is NOT for you.

So I seldom bother to reply. No point to it.

Yet you engage in uncivil character assassination, being the
hypocrite to your statement of saying "no point to it."

Obviously you HAVE a "point." That is to personally insult
those who disagree with you, such as saying "I hate hams!"
I do not. Disagreement with you or anyone else on amateur
radio policy is NOT "hating hams." Disagreement with certain
policies expressed by the ARRL is NOT "hating hams."

You seem to forget (conveniently) that I've been IN radio and
electronics for a long time, first as a hobbyist, then as a
radio operator and maintainer in the United States military.
That military experience was enlightening and interesting
enough to me to change my working career goal from industrial
illustration to electronics engineering. That became my
career and I've retired from regular hours at that. Radio
and electronics hobby interests continue with me still,
begun in 1947 and still with me 58 years later.

Not having as much exposure to other forms of radio
communication, certainly not for as long as I, you consider
"radio" as being ONLY that which you are familiar with:
Amateur radio, CB, cellular telephony. RADIO is far larger
than that. Amateur radio is a small subset of the larger
world of ALL radio communication. Radio amateurs can
benefit by learning more about other forms of radio
communication since all the physical principles are the
same. You get bogged down on expressing your views almost
entirely from the standards and practices of amateur radio
as you know it. That is short-sighted and detrimental to
overall policy - the adminstrative regulations imposed by
authority of government law.

At present, in terms of amateur radio policy, there is only
ONE MAJOR topic before the Federal Communications Commission:
NPRM 05-143 on the elimination or retention of the morse code
test. Elimination of the morse code test threatens the
traditional, mind-conditioned "soul" of many radio amateurs.
Elimination of the code test will prove to be of much larger
impact on the future of United States amateur radio than
did the "restructuring" of mid-2000. That impact will be
far longer than dozens of future hurricane disasters, far
more reaching than some creation of "classes" of licenses
that give status and prestige to certain radio amateurs. It
spells "the end of ham radio" to some who are unable to
change, unable to accept anything but their own comfortable
fantasy of the "amateur community." That traditionalists
refuse to recognize change is not my problem, not a
requirement that I toady to those self-professed "experts of
radio" by giving gratuitous praise on their mighty self-
stated accomplishments. CHANGE has happened to ALL OTHER
radio services. No God has divined that amateur radio
refuse to change nor has the Divine Being blessed all those
of "higher" classes wisdom and judgement because they've
met older artificial standards imposed by older amateurs.

In my career work I've seen tremendous change in as many
forms of electronics and radio as I've been fortunate to
experience (a great deal many). Nowhere have I experienced
as hidebound and stubborn refusal of so many to accept
change in amateur radio...and to blatantly insult the person
of those seeking change, seeking modernization. Some in
amateur radio seem to be the living embodiment of ultra-uber-
conservatism. For an avocational activity that is NOT vital
to the nation. Amateur radio is basically a hobby, a
personal activity involving radio, a fun recreation but one
that requires federal regulation due to the physical nature
of electromagnetic radiation. If you think that amateur
radio is "more" than that, you are mistaken and are living
in an idealized but fantasy concept of an avocational
pursuit. Not my problem. It is yours. It is Jeswald's.
It is all those who think they "own" amateur radio as it
is now.

See what we mean? He just can't stay on subject. Always brings in Morse
code "Morsemen", same same all the time. Then he gets into his "Military
career". Predictable as a Sun set.

Dan/W4NTI

wrote in message
ups.com...
From: Michael Coslo on Sep 16, 9:44 am

an_old_friend wrote:
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote in message
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
wrote in message
From: Dan/W4NTI on Sep 13, 1:25 pm


More BS from the non ham Lennie the loser.
plonk

Per SOP ignore any data insult any oposition Boring Dan realy getting
boring

As usual A-O-F you got it wrong. My problem with Lennie is he simply
can't
stay on subject. Spins everything that is said. And his one track mind
of
anti-CW and basically anti-ham rhetoric gets tired quickly. So I have
decided to plonk him. He is not relevant to a serious discussion in
this
group, since he is not a member of the society. Dig it?

Aagin SoP ranting form you, anyone different knows nothing of value

Boring Dan Boring

He has a point, Mark. There are people in this group who I don't
regularly post to. There is a fringe element that seems to be really
concerned with each others sexual habits, there is a group of
Ham-baiters, and there are those who simply hate Amateurs.

All my exchanges with him have become drearily predictable and not
very
interesting, at least to me.

Poor baby. "Sore loser-ism" displayed for all to see. :-)

The whines have been pressed from grapes of morsemen's wrath!

I don't need the non-sequitars, the name
calling, or the constant attempts to steer most every thread to CW
testing.

"Non sequitur." [from the Latin]

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Coslo wishes to be "correct" in any discussion
or argument? Not possible in an OPEN forum when his discussions
and arguments are NOT winning/correct/valid or on the subject of
amateur radio.

Note: There exist OTHER forums for discussion of religion and
general moral-ethical behavior. Those do not involve amateur
radio per se, though, so it is best NOT to whine and carry on
about losing discussions and arguments by spouting "you hate
hams!"

Mr. Anderson simply hates Hams.

Incorrect. By so stating an incorrect falsehood, you create,
in effect, a mild sort of character assassination which is not
at all civil or mannerly.

If you cannot stand to have your statements rebutted, talked
against, or shown to be invalid or incorrect, then you have NO
validity in engaging in uncivil character assassination by
hurling falsehoods or even personal insults.

That is okay, no one has to like Hams, me, or chunk light tuna.

This newsgroup was NOT created to "like Michael Coslo" or to
discuss various forms of comestible fish or meat.

If you cannot stand the heat of debate or strong discussion,
this newsgroup is NOT for you.

So I seldom bother to reply. No point to it.

Yet you engage in uncivil character assassination, being the
hypocrite to your statement of saying "no point to it."

Obviously you HAVE a "point." That is to personally insult
those who disagree with you, such as saying "I hate hams!"
I do not. Disagreement with you or anyone else on amateur
radio policy is NOT "hating hams." Disagreement with certain
policies expressed by the ARRL is NOT "hating hams."

You seem to forget (conveniently) that I've been IN radio and
electronics for a long time, first as a hobbyist, then as a
radio operator and maintainer in the United States military.
That military experience was enlightening and interesting
enough to me to change my working career goal from industrial
illustration to electronics engineering. That became my
career and I've retired from regular hours at that. Radio
and electronics hobby interests continue with me still,
begun in 1947 and still with me 58 years later.

Not having as much exposure to other forms of radio
communication, certainly not for as long as I, you consider
"radio" as being ONLY that which you are familiar with:
Amateur radio, CB, cellular telephony. RADIO is far larger
than that. Amateur radio is a small subset of the larger
world of ALL radio communication. Radio amateurs can
benefit by learning more about other forms of radio
communication since all the physical principles are the
same. You get bogged down on expressing your views almost
entirely from the standards and practices of amateur radio
as you know it. That is short-sighted and detrimental to
overall policy - the adminstrative regulations imposed by
authority of government law.

At present, in terms of amateur radio policy, there is only
ONE MAJOR topic before the Federal Communications Commission:
NPRM 05-143 on the elimination or retention of the morse code
test. Elimination of the morse code test threatens the
traditional, mind-conditioned "soul" of many radio amateurs.
Elimination of the code test will prove to be of much larger
impact on the future of United States amateur radio than
did the "restructuring" of mid-2000. That impact will be
far longer than dozens of future hurricane disasters, far
more reaching than some creation of "classes" of licenses
that give status and prestige to certain radio amateurs. It
spells "the end of ham radio" to some who are unable to
change, unable to accept anything but their own comfortable
fantasy of the "amateur community." That traditionalists
refuse to recognize change is not my problem, not a
requirement that I toady to those self-professed "experts of
radio" by giving gratuitous praise on their mighty self-
stated accomplishments. CHANGE has happened to ALL OTHER
radio services. No God has divined that amateur radio
refuse to change nor has the Divine Being blessed all those
of "higher" classes wisdom and judgement because they've
met older artificial standards imposed by older amateurs.

In my career work I've seen tremendous change in as many
forms of electronics and radio as I've been fortunate to
experience (a great deal many). Nowhere have I experienced
as hidebound and stubborn refusal of so many to accept
change in amateur radio...and to blatantly insult the person
of those seeking change, seeking modernization. Some in
amateur radio seem to be the living embodiment of ultra-uber-
conservatism. For an avocational activity that is NOT vital
to the nation. Amateur radio is basically a hobby, a
personal activity involving radio, a fun recreation but one
that requires federal regulation due to the physical nature
of electromagnetic radiation. If you think that amateur
radio is "more" than that, you are mistaken and are living
in an idealized but fantasy concept of an avocational
pursuit. Not my problem. It is yours. It is Jeswald's.
It is all those who think they "own" amateur radio as it
is now.

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
See what we mean? He just can't stay on subject. Always brings in Morse
code "Morsemen", same same all the time. Then he gets into his "Military
career". Predictable as a Sun set.

Right, so what is the point, eh?

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
See what we mean? He just can't stay on subject. Always brings in Morse
code "Morsemen", same same all the time. Then he gets into his
"Military career". Predictable as a Sun set.

Right, so what is the point, eh?

- Mike KB3EIA -


I can't think of a one actually Mike.

Dan/W4NTI

" wrote in
ups.com:

From: Michael Coslo on Sep 16, 9:44 am

an_old_friend wrote:
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"an_old_friend" wrote in message
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
wrote in message
From: Dan/W4NTI on Sep 13, 1:25 pm


More BS from the non ham Lennie the loser. plonk

Per SOP ignore any data insult any oposition Boring Dan realy
getting boring

As usual A-O-F you got it wrong. My problem with Lennie is he simply
can't stay on subject. Spins everything that is said. And his one
track mind of anti-CW and basically anti-ham rhetoric gets tired
quickly. So I have decided to plonk him. He is not relevant to a
serious discussion in this group, since he is not a member of the
society. Dig it?

Aagin SoP ranting form you, anyone different knows nothing of value

Boring Dan Boring

He has a point, Mark. There are people in this group who I
don't
regularly post to. There is a fringe element that seems to be really
concerned with each others sexual habits, there is a group of
Ham-baiters, and there are those who simply hate Amateurs.

All my exchanges with him have become drearily predictable and
not very interesting, at least to me.

Poor baby. "Sore loser-ism" displayed for all to see. :-)

The whines have been pressed from grapes of morsemen's wrath!

I don't need the non-sequitars, the name calling, or the constant
attempts to steer most every thread to CW testing.

"Non sequitur." [from the Latin]

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Coslo wishes to be "correct" in any discussion
or argument? Not possible in an OPEN forum when his discussions
and arguments are NOT winning/correct/valid or on the subject of
amateur radio.

Note: There exist OTHER forums for discussion of religion and
general moral-ethical behavior. Those do not involve amateur
radio per se, though, so it is best NOT to whine and carry on
about losing discussions and arguments by spouting "you hate
hams!"

Mr. Anderson simply hates Hams.

Incorrect. By so stating an incorrect falsehood, you create,
in effect, a mild sort of character assassination which is not
at all civil or mannerly.

If you cannot stand to have your statements rebutted, talked
against, or shown to be invalid or incorrect, then you have NO
validity in engaging in uncivil character assassination by
hurling falsehoods or even personal insults.

That is okay, no one has to like Hams, me, or chunk light tuna.

This newsgroup was NOT created to "like Michael Coslo" or to
discuss various forms of comestible fish or meat.

If you cannot stand the heat of debate or strong discussion,
this newsgroup is NOT for you.

So I seldom bother to reply. No point to it.

Yet you engage in uncivil character assassination, being the
hypocrite to your statement of saying "no point to it."

Obviously you HAVE a "point." That is to personally insult
those who disagree with you, such as saying "I hate hams!"
I do not. Disagreement with you or anyone else on amateur
radio policy is NOT "hating hams." Disagreement with certain
policies expressed by the ARRL is NOT "hating hams."

You seem to forget (conveniently) that I've been IN radio and
electronics for a long time, first as a hobbyist, then as a
radio operator and maintainer in the United States military.
That military experience was enlightening and interesting
enough to me to change my working career goal from industrial
illustration to electronics engineering. That became my
career and I've retired from regular hours at that. Radio
and electronics hobby interests continue with me still,
begun in 1947 and still with me 58 years later.

Not having as much exposure to other forms of radio
communication, certainly not for as long as I, you consider
"radio" as being ONLY that which you are familiar with:
Amateur radio, CB, cellular telephony. RADIO is far larger
than that. Amateur radio is a small subset of the larger
world of ALL radio communication. Radio amateurs can
benefit by learning more about other forms of radio
communication since all the physical principles are the
same. You get bogged down on expressing your views almost
entirely from the standards and practices of amateur radio
as you know it. That is short-sighted and detrimental to
overall policy - the adminstrative regulations imposed by
authority of government law.

At present, in terms of amateur radio policy, there is only
ONE MAJOR topic before the Federal Communications Commission:
NPRM 05-143 on the elimination or retention of the morse code
test. Elimination of the morse code test threatens the
traditional, mind-conditioned "soul" of many radio amateurs.
Elimination of the code test will prove to be of much larger
impact on the future of United States amateur radio than
did the "restructuring" of mid-2000. That impact will be
far longer than dozens of future hurricane disasters, far
more reaching than some creation of "classes" of licenses
that give status and prestige to certain radio amateurs. It
spells "the end of ham radio" to some who are unable to
change, unable to accept anything but their own comfortable
fantasy of the "amateur community." That traditionalists
refuse to recognize change is not my problem, not a
requirement that I toady to those self-professed "experts of
radio" by giving gratuitous praise on their mighty self-
stated accomplishments. CHANGE has happened to ALL OTHER
radio services. No God has divined that amateur radio
refuse to change nor has the Divine Being blessed all those
of "higher" classes wisdom and judgement because they've
met older artificial standards imposed by older amateurs.

In my career work I've seen tremendous change in as many
forms of electronics and radio as I've been fortunate to
experience (a great deal many). Nowhere have I experienced
as hidebound and stubborn refusal of so many to accept
change in amateur radio...and to blatantly insult the person
of those seeking change, seeking modernization. Some in
amateur radio seem to be the living embodiment of ultra-uber-
conservatism. For an avocational activity that is NOT vital
to the nation. Amateur radio is basically a hobby, a
personal activity involving radio, a fun recreation but one
that requires federal regulation due to the physical nature
of electromagnetic radiation. If you think that amateur
radio is "more" than that, you are mistaken and are living
in an idealized but fantasy concept of an avocational
pursuit. Not my problem. It is yours. It is Jeswald's.
It is all those who think they "own" amateur radio as it
is now.





I'll admit that Len can be irritating at times, but this accusation that he
hates radio hams is nonsensical. I've never seen any evidence of that.

I also agree with his post that dropping the Morse test is THE big issue,
more important than any restructuring, etc. I have taught ham radio
classes, and IME the biggest factor in whether people succeed in the theory
tests is whether they are genuinely interested in radio. If they just want
to chat and aren't into radio as a medium, there's always CB. OTOH, it's
absolutely possible to be totally radio obsessed and yet not give a fig for
Sam Morse and his silly old bleeping noises. This is why it's a big issue.

If CW had been on the ITU agenda back in '93, which it was supposed to be,
s25 would have been amended back then, and we could have seen an explosion
in our numbers before the Internet really caught on. As it is, ham radio is
as old as yesterday's newspaper. In short, it's probably too late to get a
major boost in numbers, even if we gave the licences away, which abolishing
the code test certainly doesn't do (and no, I'm not proposing we make the
theory easier).

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
" wrote in
ups.com:


From: Michael Coslo on Sep 16, 9:44 am


an_old_friend wrote:

Dan/W4NTI wrote:

"an_old_friend" wrote in message

Dan/W4NTI wrote:

wrote in message

From: Dan/W4NTI on Sep 13, 1:25 pm


More BS from the non ham Lennie the loser. plonk

Per SOP ignore any data insult any oposition Boring Dan realy
getting boring

As usual A-O-F you got it wrong. My problem with Lennie is he simply
can't stay on subject. Spins everything that is said. And his one
track mind of anti-CW and basically anti-ham rhetoric gets tired
quickly. So I have decided to plonk him. He is not relevant to a
serious discussion in this group, since he is not a member of the
society. Dig it?

Aagin SoP ranting form you, anyone different knows nothing of value

Boring Dan Boring

He has a point, Mark. There are people in this group who I
don't
regularly post to. There is a fringe element that seems to be really
concerned with each others sexual habits, there is a group of
Ham-baiters, and there are those who simply hate Amateurs.

All my exchanges with him have become drearily predictable and
not very interesting, at least to me.

Poor baby. "Sore loser-ism" displayed for all to see. :-)

The whines have been pressed from grapes of morsemen's wrath!


I don't need the non-sequitars, the name calling, or the constant
attempts to steer most every thread to CW testing.

"Non sequitur." [from the Latin]

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Coslo wishes to be "correct" in any discussion
or argument? Not possible in an OPEN forum when his discussions
and arguments are NOT winning/correct/valid or on the subject of
amateur radio.

Note: There exist OTHER forums for discussion of religion and
general moral-ethical behavior. Those do not involve amateur
radio per se, though, so it is best NOT to whine and carry on
about losing discussions and arguments by spouting "you hate
hams!"


Mr. Anderson simply hates Hams.

Incorrect. By so stating an incorrect falsehood, you create,
in effect, a mild sort of character assassination which is not
at all civil or mannerly.

If you cannot stand to have your statements rebutted, talked
against, or shown to be invalid or incorrect, then you have NO
validity in engaging in uncivil character assassination by
hurling falsehoods or even personal insults.


That is okay, no one has to like Hams, me, or chunk light tuna.

This newsgroup was NOT created to "like Michael Coslo" or to
discuss various forms of comestible fish or meat.

If you cannot stand the heat of debate or strong discussion,
this newsgroup is NOT for you.


So I seldom bother to reply. No point to it.

Yet you engage in uncivil character assassination, being the
hypocrite to your statement of saying "no point to it."

Obviously you HAVE a "point." That is to personally insult
those who disagree with you, such as saying "I hate hams!"
I do not. Disagreement with you or anyone else on amateur
radio policy is NOT "hating hams." Disagreement with certain
policies expressed by the ARRL is NOT "hating hams."

You seem to forget (conveniently) that I've been IN radio and
electronics for a long time, first as a hobbyist, then as a
radio operator and maintainer in the United States military.
That military experience was enlightening and interesting
enough to me to change my working career goal from industrial
illustration to electronics engineering. That became my
career and I've retired from regular hours at that. Radio
and electronics hobby interests continue with me still,
begun in 1947 and still with me 58 years later.

Not having as much exposure to other forms of radio
communication, certainly not for as long as I, you consider
"radio" as being ONLY that which you are familiar with:
Amateur radio, CB, cellular telephony. RADIO is far larger
than that. Amateur radio is a small subset of the larger
world of ALL radio communication. Radio amateurs can
benefit by learning more about other forms of radio
communication since all the physical principles are the
same. You get bogged down on expressing your views almost
entirely from the standards and practices of amateur radio
as you know it. That is short-sighted and detrimental to
overall policy - the adminstrative regulations imposed by
authority of government law.

At present, in terms of amateur radio policy, there is only
ONE MAJOR topic before the Federal Communications Commission:
NPRM 05-143 on the elimination or retention of the morse code
test. Elimination of the morse code test threatens the
traditional, mind-conditioned "soul" of many radio amateurs.
Elimination of the code test will prove to be of much larger
impact on the future of United States amateur radio than
did the "restructuring" of mid-2000. That impact will be
far longer than dozens of future hurricane disasters, far
more reaching than some creation of "classes" of licenses
that give status and prestige to certain radio amateurs. It
spells "the end of ham radio" to some who are unable to
change, unable to accept anything but their own comfortable
fantasy of the "amateur community." That traditionalists
refuse to recognize change is not my problem, not a
requirement that I toady to those self-professed "experts of
radio" by giving gratuitous praise on their mighty self-
stated accomplishments. CHANGE has happened to ALL OTHER
radio services. No God has divined that amateur radio
refuse to change nor has the Divine Being blessed all those
of "higher" classes wisdom and judgement because they've
met older artificial standards imposed by older amateurs.

In my career work I've seen tremendous change in as many
forms of electronics and radio as I've been fortunate to
experience (a great deal many). Nowhere have I experienced
as hidebound and stubborn refusal of so many to accept
change in amateur radio...and to blatantly insult the person
of those seeking change, seeking modernization. Some in
amateur radio seem to be the living embodiment of ultra-uber-
conservatism. For an avocational activity that is NOT vital
to the nation. Amateur radio is basically a hobby, a
personal activity involving radio, a fun recreation but one
that requires federal regulation due to the physical nature
of electromagnetic radiation. If you think that amateur
radio is "more" than that, you are mistaken and are living
in an idealized but fantasy concept of an avocational
pursuit. Not my problem. It is yours. It is Jeswald's.
It is all those who think they "own" amateur radio as it
is now.






I'll admit that Len can be irritating at times, but this accusation that he
hates radio hams is nonsensical. I've never seen any evidence of that.

Your opinion. I have read enough of his posts to come to a different
conclusion.

I also agree with his post that dropping the Morse test is THE big issue,
more important than any restructuring, etc.

So What? Does every post have to be about Morse code testing?

If I make a post about something else, and he turns it to Morse code
testing, does that mean I am *required* to reply?

So far, he has called me a "poor baby", a "sore loser", and as having a
drinking problem. He accuses me of character assassination and more than
I care to look up at this time. And if I care to point it out, I am
guaranteed another poor baby thing. He calls many people Nazis, or
other derisive terms. All because they have the unmitigated gall to
disagree with him.

What exactly have I done to him? He is here having his brand of good
time. I am here having my brand of fun. They are apparently rather
exclusive.

Do you approve of such activity Alun? Is that a good way to act? Even
if Mr Anderson is 100 percent correct, Is that an excuse for his "style".


And you can tell him that I do like good strong discussion and debate.
It has to be good though.

Tell me Alun, how long do you think his "style" of discussion would
stand up in a real debate?

- Mike KB3EIA -

From: Mike Coslo on Sat 17 Sep 2005 14:12

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
" wrote in
From: Michael Coslo on Sep 16, 9:44 am


I'll admit that Len can be irritating at times, but this accusation that he
hates radio hams is nonsensical. I've never seen any evidence of that.

Your opinion. I have read enough of his posts to come to a different
conclusion.

Translation: You didn't get the answer you wanted. Tsk, tsk.

I also agree with his post that dropping the Morse test is THE big issue,
more important than any restructuring, etc.

So What? Does every post have to be about Morse code testing?

NPRM 05-143 is THE hot-button topic for United States amateur
radio right now...and until 14 November. License testing
regulations ARE amateur radio policy.

But, YOU have passed your code test...and can now declare that
all talk of morse code testing does not matter in here?

How magnanimous of you! :-)

You got yours so screw everyone else?

If I make a post about something else, and he turns it to Morse code
testing, does that mean I am *required* to reply?

Are you or are you not a member of the Church of St. Hiram?

Coslo, you've posted a lot lately on religion, theology, ethics
and morals of past and present societies. Are you "qualified"
in those subjects in any way? How do those subjects "belong"
in a newsgroup ostensibly intended for amateur radio POLICY?


So far, he has called me a "poor baby", a "sore loser", and as having a
drinking problem.

Do you have a drinking problem? You demonstrate being a sore loser.

He accuses me of character assassination and more than
I care to look up at this time.

Yessir, you said I "HATE ALL HAMS!" [not in all capitals, but
it might as well have been...:-) ]

And if I care to point it out, I am guaranteed another poor baby thing.

You are? 100% Guarantee? Sorry, your guarantee expired.

Are you a disciple of Captain Future who is prescient?

He calls many people Nazis, or other derisive terms.

If those people act like nazis, then they get called such. TS.

All because they have the unmitigated gall to disagree with him.

Hoooooo...now THAT's being WAY too understated. :-)

Somebody disses me, I toss it right back. The disser gets it in
the kisser and then gets all ****er-y because he can't get
"protection" for his dissing. Tsk, tsk, tskery.

What exactly have I done to him?

Lessee...you called me a "HAM HATER!" :-)

He is here having his brand of good time.

No, I'm not.

If you were to discuss "The Necessity Of Amateur Radio" SUBJECT, it
would be of interest to me.

But, alas, what this sub-thread has turned to are the Travails of
Michael Coslo, subtitled How Mean People Are Picking On Him.
Boo hoo...let us all feel so sorry for Michael.


Do you approve of such activity Alun? Is that a good way to act? Even
if Mr Anderson is 100 percent correct, Is that an excuse for his "style".

"Style?" You want "style?" What kind? Is there a manual on
"style"
that is approved by Your Lordship?

How about "A Manual of Style" by Strunk and White, very much a
'have'
book for writers or anyone involved in American-English grammar.

Is there a Dale Caneigie charm-school manual on "style" for hams?

I've been through a Manager's Charm School course, got the texts,
but doesn't cover amateurs...it was for professionals. That's out.

Does QST have a "Dear Abby" column? Should I run down to the close
HRO store and pick up a copy? It's at the corner of Victory Blvd
and Buena Vista, about three miles from my house. Maybe they have
manuals of "style" there?

An acquaintence is a printer. I can get all kinds of TYPE styles
from him. I consider him a "font" of printing style, but not
of youth.

And you can tell him that I do like good strong discussion and debate.
It has to be good though.

Yes, yes, you've already written you "want to be ENTERTAINED."

"Entertainment" generally costs MONEY. You gots? Wanna call my
agent and negotiate a contract for "style?"

Oh, and you've told EVERYBODY what you want...but have been unable
to tell me direct. Tsk, tsk. No gots guts?

Tell me Alun, how long do you think his "style" of discussion would
stand up in a real debate?

Sweetums, these newsgroups that grew out of ARPANET into USENET were
supposed to be "discussion and debate." Back before USENET was
formed out of ARPANET, users discovered the "diss" and generally
insulted others with impunity, protected by geographic and
chronologic
distance safety. It's been that way ever since. Isn't that
ENTERTAINING enough for you? No? You insist on YOUR "style?"

Tell you what, just get in touch with an Internet-Usenet Boss and
negotiate your OWN STYLE of newsgroup or even chat room. Be the
moderator. Delete all those who don't meet your "style." That
way all within be Happy with "style" and nobody dare sass the
moderator. Nobody else will be able to see it, therefore nobody
will interrupt. Utopia/Nirvana for "STYLE." Your very OWN.

You just keep on repeating that FALSIE about "hating hams." That
will make you real popular. Jeswald already likes you for that
since he says the same scurrilous FALSIE. PCTA will applaud you
and that will make you HAPPY. You can LIE with impunity.

Stylishly yours,