"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
an_old_friend wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:

an_old_friend wrote:

Dan/W4NTI wrote:


"an_old_friend" wrote in message
glegroups.com...


Dan/W4NTI wrote:


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


[snip]

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.


realy I don't see that. Len does certainly get rather verbose,
sometimes to point of undermining his his point but that is also the
hallamrk Jim, N2EY

Better go back and read them posts, Mark.


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


No Len doesn't hate hams, he does hate that fairly visible segment of
the ham world that is very inflexible and frankly are dishonest to
themselves, and then to the rest of us

Your opinion, Mark. My opinion is otherwise.


From what I can see, Mr Anderson hates ham radio, children, women, and
anyone younger than he is.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

an_old_friend wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:


an_old_friend wrote:


Dan/W4NTI wrote:



"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oglegroups.com...



Dan/W4NTI wrote:



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



[snip]


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.


realy I don't see that. Len does certainly get rather verbose,
sometimes to point of undermining his his point but that is also the
hallamrk Jim, N2EY

Better go back and read them posts, Mark.



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


No Len doesn't hate hams, he does hate that fairly visible segment of
the ham world that is very inflexible and frankly are dishonest to
themselves, and then to the rest of us

Your opinion, Mark. My opinion is otherwise.



From what I can see, Mr Anderson hates ham radio, children, women, and
anyone younger than he is.


Oh, OH! Now you're going to be accused of personal insults and lying for
expressing your opinion, Dee! 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Dee Flint wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

an_old_friend wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:


an_old_friend wrote:


Dan/W4NTI wrote:



"an_old_friend" wrote in message
ooglegroups.com...



Dan/W4NTI wrote:



wrote in message
news:1126725620.609058.35740@g47g2000cwa. googlegroups.com...
From: Dan/W4NTI on Sep 13, 1:25 pm



[snip]


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.


realy I don't see that. Len does certainly get rather verbose,
sometimes to point of undermining his his point but that is also the
hallamrk Jim, N2EY

Better go back and read them posts, Mark.



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


No Len doesn't hate hams, he does hate that fairly visible segment of
the ham world that is very inflexible and frankly are dishonest to
themselves, and then to the rest of us

Your opinion, Mark. My opinion is otherwise.



From what I can see, Mr Anderson hates ham radio, children, women, and
anyone younger than he is.


Oh, OH! Now you're going to be accused of personal insults and lying for
expressing your opinion, Dee! 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

I can live with it !

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:



From what I can see, Mr Anderson hates ham radio, children, women, and
anyone younger than he is.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



Which must be just about everyone.

Dee Flint wrote:

From what I can see, Mr Anderson hates ham radio, children,
women, and anyone younger than he is.

His behavior here sure indicates that, but I think it's really much
simpler.

Len just likes to argue online. So he writes all kinds of
stuff full of insults, wisecracks, put-downs, errors, and
other nonsense in an attempt to get an argument going. Of
course an argument requires a disagreement, so he'll do
everything he can to be disagreeable.

In fact, he takes any disagreement with his views as a
personal insult. The worst thing you can do is to prove
him factually wrong about something, or observe how
predictable his behavior here is.

His behavior here can be predicted with very high accuracy
by reference to the profile I have posted. Watch - you'll
see examples of it. Of course pointing that out is
considered "character assassination" by him.

He's even gone so far as to try to get such arguments going in
ECFS, by posting the same sort of errors there as he posts here.

The question is: why waste time on him, knowing his behavior?

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote in message
oups.com...
Dee Flint wrote:

From what I can see, Mr Anderson hates ham radio, children,
women, and anyone younger than he is.

His behavior here sure indicates that, but I think it's really much
simpler.

Len just likes to argue online. So he writes all kinds of
stuff full of insults, wisecracks, put-downs, errors, and
other nonsense in an attempt to get an argument going. Of
course an argument requires a disagreement, so he'll do
everything he can to be disagreeable.

In fact, he takes any disagreement with his views as a
personal insult. The worst thing you can do is to prove
him factually wrong about something, or observe how
predictable his behavior here is.

His behavior here can be predicted with very high accuracy
by reference to the profile I have posted. Watch - you'll
see examples of it. Of course pointing that out is
considered "character assassination" by him.

He's even gone so far as to try to get such arguments going in
ECFS, by posting the same sort of errors there as he posts here.

The question is: why waste time on him, knowing his behavior?

73 de Jim, N2EY


I don't as I killfiled him quite some time ago so as to not get sucked into
one of those long running arguments.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

wrote:
Dee Flint wrote:

From what I can see, Mr Anderson hates ham radio, children,
women, and anyone younger than he is.


His behavior here sure indicates that, but I think it's really much
simpler.

Len just likes to argue online. So he writes all kinds of
stuff full of insults, wisecracks, put-downs, errors, and
other nonsense in an attempt to get an argument going. Of
course an argument requires a disagreement, so he'll do
everything he can to be disagreeable.

In fact, he takes any disagreement with his views as a
personal insult. The worst thing you can do is to prove
him factually wrong about something, or observe how
predictable his behavior here is.

His behavior here can be predicted with very high accuracy
by reference to the profile I have posted. Watch - you'll
see examples of it. Of course pointing that out is
considered "character assassination" by him.

I hit the Novice bands in 1963 with a Heathkit DX-40 and Knight R-100
and a couple of wire antennas. I didn't encounter the unpleasant
Leonard H. Anderson on the ham bands then. It is now late 2005 and I'm
closing on half a million QSOs. I've still not had to deal with Len
Anderson on the ham bands. Professionally, I never had to put up with
Leonard Anderson in any capacity. Life is good.

Dave K8MN

From: on Sep 18, 1:16 pm

Dee Flint wrote:

From what I can see, Mr Anderson hates ham radio, children,
women, and anyone younger than he is.

[Wow! Kinda over-extended a bit aincha? :-) ]

His behavior here sure indicates that, but I think it's really much
simpler.

It is. I am simply against morse code testing for a license.

Said that years ago, still say that today.

Len just likes to argue online. So he writes all kinds of
stuff full of insults, wisecracks, put-downs, errors, and
other nonsense in an attempt to get an argument going. Of
course an argument requires a disagreement, so he'll do
everything he can to be disagreeable.

Definition: "Disagreeable" = anyone against code testing;
"Disagreeable" = anyone not loving, honoring, obeying the
heart and soul of amateur radio that is morse code;
"Disagreeable" = anyone not agreeing with Jimmie, your
one true voice of the "amateur community." :-)

In fact, he takes any disagreement with his views as a
personal insult.

Not really. :-)

But, if all YOU can talk about is the PERSONALITIES of the
communicators here, then stating so can also be a
"disagreement." :-)

Tsk, tsk, tsk...Jimmie takes any disagreement with his opinions
as an "insult" (true voices of the amateur community get like
that) and starts in on "profiling" and "his comments are all in
'error' when others aren't "nice" to him.

The worst thing you can do is to prove
him factually wrong about something, or observe how
predictable his behavior here is.

Tsk tsk tsk...Jimmie be even more predictable, no "profile"
necessary. See "disagreement" definitions preceding.

His behavior here can be predicted with very high accuracy
by reference to the profile I have posted. Watch - you'll
see examples of it. Of course pointing that out is
considered "character assassination" by him.

There you have it! [character assassination in "profiling"]

He's even gone so far as to try to get such arguments going in
ECFS, by posting the same sort of errors there as he posts here.

The ECFS is open to everyone for Comments until 31 October
and 14 November on WT Docket 05-235.

You can even Comment on WT Docket 98-143 and have it "published"
except that it won't matter; R&O 99-412 pretty much nulled those
out. Still, if you insist, as some have up to June, 2005, you
can "comment" and "correct those 'errors'" all you want.

Jimmie is very judgemental on what constitutes an "error." In
Jimmie's world, anyone not in agreement with him is "in error."
Quod erat demonstrandum.

The question is: why waste time on him, knowing his behavior?

Because YOU CAN'T HELP YOURSELF! :-)

That's utterly PREDICTABLE! :-)

Been repeated here over and over and over and over again! :-)

Now get busy with the FCC, Jimmie, MAKE them all get amateur
radio licenses so they can "qualify" to regulate, mitigate,
and enforce United States amateur radio! If they don't, then
the FCC is "in error" and is "subject to profiling" by
yourself!

Or...just roll with it. Show your superiority. Jeswald can't
roll with it but has to get into personal insult thingy. Heil
can't roll with it but has to get into the personal insult mode.
Others, like Dudly the Imposter and the anony-mousies are truly
into personal insult mode and can't talk on subjects. The
problem you have is that the SUBJECTS are taken too subjectively,
you believe in them too strongly on a personal level to be
objective, cannot separate the two. You just can't invalidate
VALID arguments against your personal views without coming
unglued and obsessively commenting on personalities.

wrote:
From: on Sep 18, 1:16 pm
Dee Flint wrote:

From what I can see, Mr Anderson hates ham radio, children,
women, and anyone younger than he is.

[Wow! Kinda over-extended a bit aincha? :-) ]

I love amatuer radio, children, women, and especially women younger
than I am.

His behavior here sure indicates that, but I think it's really much
simpler.

It is. I am simply against morse code testing for a license.

Said that years ago, still say that today.

Hey! Me too!

Len just likes to argue online. So he writes all kinds of
stuff full of insults, wisecracks, put-downs, errors, and
other nonsense in an attempt to get an argument going. Of
course an argument requires a disagreement, so he'll do
everything he can to be disagreeable.

Definition: "Disagreeable" = anyone against code testing;
"Disagreeable" = anyone not loving, honoring, obeying the
heart and soul of amateur radio that is morse code;
"Disagreeable" = anyone not agreeing with Jimmie, your
one true voice of the "amateur community." :-)

Jim always likes to be right. He won't reply to anyone who's called
him on the carpet for making stupid statements.

In fact, he takes any disagreement with his views as a
personal insult.

Not really. :-)

I take disagreements as simply another persons point of view.

No harm, no foul, i.e., no running around shouting "liar, liar, pants
on fiar" nonsense.

Sometimes I really wish I could be convinced by their viewpoints. For
example, when Jim/N2EY said, "A Morse Code Exam would be a BARRIER to
Morse Code Use," I jumped with joy, whole-heartedly agreeing with Jim.
But then he dissed me because I've been claiming the same damned thing
for a decade and he couldn't stand to be welcomed into the NCI Camp.
For a brief moment, his lightbulb shined brighly, then it burned out.

But, if all YOU can talk about is the PERSONALITIES of the
communicators here, then stating so can also be a
"disagreement." :-)

I agree.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...Jimmie takes any disagreement with his opinions
as an "insult" (true voices of the amateur community get like
that) and starts in on "profiling" and "his comments are all in
'error' when others aren't "nice" to him.

He takes agreement even more seriously, especially when he hits a foul
ball and finds himself in the NCI Camp.

The worst thing you can do is to prove
him factually wrong about something, or observe how
predictable his behavior here is.

Tsk tsk tsk...Jimmie be even more predictable, no "profile"
necessary. See "disagreement" definitions preceding.

So sad.

His behavior here can be predicted with very high accuracy
by reference to the profile I have posted. Watch - you'll
see examples of it. Of course pointing that out is
considered "character assassination" by him.

There you have it! [character assassination in "profiling"]

Jim doesn't play well with others.

He's even gone so far as to try to get such arguments going in
ECFS, by posting the same sort of errors there as he posts here.

The ECFS is open to everyone for Comments until 31 October
and 14 November on WT Docket 05-235.

You can even Comment on WT Docket 98-143 and have it "published"
except that it won't matter; R&O 99-412 pretty much nulled those
out. Still, if you insist, as some have up to June, 2005, you
can "comment" and "correct those 'errors'" all you want.

Jimmie is very judgemental on what constitutes an "error." In
Jimmie's world, anyone not in agreement with him is "in error."
Quod erat demonstrandum.

Makes smoke pour out of his ears.

The question is: why waste time on him, knowing his behavior?

Because YOU CAN'T HELP YOURSELF! :-)

That's utterly PREDICTABLE! :-)

He desperately hopes that someone will comment to you so that he can
comment back to you indirectly through them. Dee is merely a surrogate
in this case. Wonder how she feels being used as a surrogate?

Been repeated here over and over and over and over again! :-)

Now get busy with the FCC, Jimmie, MAKE them all get amateur
radio licenses so they can "qualify" to regulate, mitigate,
and enforce United States amateur radio! If they don't, then
the FCC is "in error" and is "subject to profiling" by
yourself!

Hi!

Or...just roll with it. Show your superiority. Jeswald can't
roll with it but has to get into personal insult thingy. Heil
can't roll with it but has to get into the personal insult mode.
Others, like Dudly the Imposter and the anony-mousies are truly
into personal insult mode and can't talk on subjects. The
problem you have is that the SUBJECTS are taken too subjectively,
you believe in them too strongly on a personal level to be
objective, cannot separate the two.

Indeed.

You just can't invalidate
VALID arguments against your personal views without coming
unglued and obsessively commenting on personalities.

....via a surrogate.

From: Dee Flint on Sep 17, 5:07 pm

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
an_old_friend wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:
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



From what I can see, Mr Anderson hates ham radio, children, women, and
anyone younger than he is.

tsk, Tsk, TSK! Oh, my, what a STRONG bit of character
assassination!

Have you been taking testosterone, Dee? :-)

I "hate women?!?" No, on the contrary, I MARRIED one. My high
school sweetheart, in fact. A number of our classmates observed
that we truly LIKE each other at our 50th high school reunion.

I "hate children?!?" No. I dislkike CHILDISH, bitter, control-
freaks who think they can personally insult anyone they care to.
The PCTA in here seem to qualify for that trait. "Children"
who can't get along with anyone not sharing their beloved ideas.
They never grew up, the poor dears.

I "hate anyone younger than myself?!?" Absurd! Following Ben
Franklin's observation, the older I get, the more WOMEN there
are to LIKE! :-)

I "hate ham radio?!?" Another absurdity. I dislike the morse
code test for any radio operator license and endeavor to disprove
its necessity at many opportunities.

Amateur radio is, de facto, an enjoyable HOBBY, an avocation
(not an occupation of making money) done for personal pleasure.
Because of the nature of the physics of electromagnetic wave
propagation it must be regulated by a government agency created
to regulate, mitigate interference, and enforce it regulations.
In the USA that is the FCC. Why would anyone "hate" it?

Do you think that morse code is the end-all, be-all of amateur
radio? If you do, I'd say you "hate" talking in a normal voice,
"hate" communicating by data/teleprinter, "hate" sending any form
of television over amateur radio, "hate" everything but morse
code communications...in amateur radio or any other radio service.
That's a lot of HATE, Dee. Be careful it doesn't fester and
make you outraged enough to write some paraphrased W. C. Fields
remarks. :-)

...or would you rather be in Philadelphia? :-)