From: Dave Heil on Nov 19, 6:34 pm

wrote:
From: on Thurs 17 Nov 2005 02:45
wrote:
From: on Nov 16, 2:20 am
Dave Heil wrote:

In other words, if it didn't make money for you, it wasn't going to
get your time and effort.

You really can't understand anyone who doesn't have YOUR
immaculate set of "standards" can you?

I've met people like you, Len.

No you haven't, Heil. People like me would AVOID your kind.
Such avoidance allows you to continue living. Be greatful
for that.

They're all about what positions they've
held, how much they made, the cost of their home(s), the brand and year
of the car they drive.

Such as those who were "in the foreign service" now
living in a large residence with many antennas? That fancy,
expensive Orion transceiver? :-)

They miss a lot of life.

They do? Ohm my. Do you define "life" as only enjoying what
YOU enjoy?

I don't think that's right. Everyone ought to do what THEY
like...at least in my mind. You seem to think that is wrong.

What am I "missing?" I have many activities, all of which
I have selected based on what I enjoy.

I enjoy some luxuries in life and the freedom of retirement.
I enjoy the relationship I have renewed with my wife (after
a long absence since our days together in high school). I
enjoy a new car which is not a luxury vehicle and replaces
a 1992 model. I enjoy a number of friends both here and
around the country, just recently having a reunion with
family friends in the midwest plus good companionship with
my wife's classmates at their 50th Graduation Reunion.

They never seem to do anything for the love of it.

No? :-)

Have you ever considered that what YOU observe in others
might be flawed?

Nah. You are without flaw...you are an Extra Morseman!


It isn't just about baby steps (not baby shoes), is it? You don't care
to join an activity where you'd still be considered a beginner, do you?
I mean, you haven't achieved the neophyte level in amateur radio.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...more arrogant superiority manifest there, Heil.

Amateur radio is basically a HOBBY. It isn't a craft, guild,
or union that demands some kind of "apprentice-journeyman-
master" hierarchial order...except in the minds of some olde
fahrts who love to talk down to "lesser folk" (the ones THEY
think are "lesser").

Am I some kind of "beginner" in radio after a half century
of experience in more parts of the EM spectrum than any
amateur is allowed? Am I some kind of "beginner" because I've
operated transmitters with far higher power outputs than
amateurs are allowed to have? Am I some kind of "beginner"
because long ago I learned how to design radio circuits from
a blank pad with pen on to the finished hardware and gotten
them to perform as originally specifed?

You seem to think so. What it really boils down to is
manual telegraphy.

I would be an absolute beginner at telegraphy, no dispute,
if I were to take that up again. All I know is the pattern
of dots and dashes and their corresponding English language
characters. That's suffed into a good memory with lots and
lots and lots of other data, some useful, some not.

But - and this is very important in the NPRM 05-143 decision -
the FCC has ALREADY made ALL ALLOCATED MODES OPTIONAL TO USE.
There just isn't ANY mandate to exclusively use radiotelegraphy
except on two small slivers of the lower end of 6m and 2m.
But, getting the amateur license to use ANY amateur band
below 30 MHz still requires passing a telegraphy test!

I'm seeking to eliminate that telegraphy test. There's no
point in having it except as a vestige of pride still felt
by those long-timers who once considered themselves as
'compagnons de telegraphe' because the human-made regulations
gave them status-rank-privileges BECAUSE of that telegraphy
test. I and thousands upon thousands of others have operated
radio transmitters legally and competently at frequencies
below 30 MHz without being required to know or use any radio-
telegraphy skills. That "plain, simple fact" shows the
hypocrisy of the PCTA in demanding the retention of the
telegraphy test. That test regulations does NOT serve the
public, only the few already-licensed in amateur radio who
consider, self-righteously superior through passing a
telegraphy test.

Now, if you wish to start some program to teach real
beginners in radio the skills of telegraphy, I am not
against that. Feel free to use what allocations you've
been granted. So far. Beep your little Orion to outer
space if you want.

Remember, what YOU consider to be "necessary" is NOT
shared by the public, is NOT a physical requirement to
operate any RF emitter below 30 MHz. It is just your
personal desire. You are not yet a god of anything,
are not divine. You are simply inflexible and self-
righteous, seeking to retain federally-mandated testing
in skills which you passed some time ago.


What do your former employment, income, home and marital status have to
do with your getting an amateur radio license, Len?

If you wish to make some kind of game out taking words
and sentences out of context, then I can beat your game
any time for amount that you can count. That's wasted
effort and impolite.


You've told us how great things are for you many, many times, Len.
As if all that somehow explains your obsession.

"Obsession?!?" :-)
Trying to change federal law is an "obsession?"

In your case, yes, it is. You are obsessed.

Incorrect. It is PERSISTENCE. It is IDEALISM, a quest to
make things better for others who share some of my interests.
It is many things but it is definitely not some deviant
obsession.

On the other hand, those who have met old test regulations
and insist and insist that those should be kept for the
future are suspect. Their self-righteousness is suspect.
Their failure to change with a changing reality is suspect.
Their obstinancy on keeping the old ways forever in this
new millennium are suspect. Their perceived self-worth
is threatened by feared loss of status and privilege,
perhaps even rank in the pecking order of the "amateur
community."

I've just rounded up the usual suspects and shown some light
on them. You complain of the glare in your eyes. Too bad,
that makes it hard for you to admire yourself in the mirror.
Apologies to you for that. I may have to change to a more
intense light source...


You can write "YES it IS" all you want. Obtaining an amateur radio
license isn't about those things.

True, the U.S. amateur radio test regulations have nothing
about baby shoes or taking little baby steps.

RIGHT NOW the U.S. amateur test regulations require a
telegraphy test for any class privileges below 30 MHz.
THAT is what many are trying to change.

NPRM 05-143 is about ELIMINATING that code test. Change
for the future, for the public...the public in the
Commission's language is ALL OF US, not just the personal
desires of the few who have met and passed telegraphy
tests.

Then why are you so unfriendly here, Len?

Because both Miccolis and Heil are decidedly unfriendly to
all who disagree with them. They will not bend from their
self-righteous opinions, offer no real concessions on the
code test, act arrogant and superior (Heil becomes abusive)
on the subject of radiotelegraphy. They increase all that
on replies having opposite opinions. They continue attempts
at "pushing buttons" of those opposed to them.

They have sown what they now reap in return.


That's simply incorrect, Leonard. You insult anyone who favors
retention of morse testing in amateur radio.

Miccolis and Heil both PERCEIVE insults where there is only
strong, sharp responses to their overbearing self-images.

This venue is a debate forum, not a gathering around the
bar at a local fraternal order. It does not have to be
"friendly" in the sense that all "must" think alike, have
the same opinions. If you wish "hail fellow well met"
gatherings, seek fellowship among your own kind. This
venue is open to ALL who are able to access it.


Please explain how retention of morse testing is regression in any form.
After all, morse code is used daily by thousands of radio amateurs.

Those radio amateurs - if operating legally - below 30 MHz
using radiotelegraphy have ALREADY passed a federal
telegraphy test. If they have already passed it, removal
of the code test regulation will not affect their operating
privileges.

However, the code test retention WILL affect all those
uncountable in the future who MAY want to get an amateur
radio license having below-30-MHz privileges. They are
not invisible, only uncountable because there is no
accurate way to get their numbers. At best, the Commission
gets only a general impression of their numbers in the
filings on Docket 05-235. So far, those numbers of the
public against code testing are about even with those
for its retention.

Care to see your special profile, Leonard?

A "profile" by whom? Someone who dislikes me intensely in
public? By someone who has no claimed training/schooling
in psychology? By someone who is a staunch, stubborn,
steadfast pro-code-test-advocate?

Feel free to post any "profile" you wish. I will repeat
it for the benefit of all those who might miss one...as I
have before. Feel free to make a Big Issue of it. All that
does is show what a self-righteous little spiteful
sociopath you are in here when your personal opinions are
countered.

You continue to complain that others insult or denigrate you. You've
told Jim that he never had any "PRIDE" in his work.

Yes, I should be taken to task on that, considering that
Miccolis has NEVER TOLD ANYONE HERE *EXACTLY* WHAT HE DOES
AT HIS *UNNAMED* EMPLOYMENT PLACE.

You go on to call him "Brother of Dudly".

In some ways Miccolis *IS* like Dudly the Imposter, yielding
only vague generalities of what he does/did without giving
more specific descriptions. You fit that description in some
posts...such as your "being in a country at war" implying that
you were somehow personally engaged in warfare...and that
later your only description of military experiences of any
specific nature involved operating some MARS radios in a
"behind the front lines" location. You've then made repeated
denigrating statements about my assignment at a "rear area,"
something that I had no choice but to accept at the time.

Do you consider your behavior to be rude?

No. It is strong and confrontational...which has been quite
normal in computer-modem networks since the original ARPANET
spread out into the world. These networks are not for the
faint of heart or the easily disturbed one-sided inflexible
ideological bigots who refuse to compromise.

NPRM 05-143 is a direct affront to the perception of some in
what constitutes "ham radio" or "amateur radio." Some insist
that radiotelegraphy is "the heart and soul of ham radio,"
therefore a test for that skill must "always" be in the
regulations. Those are repeated phrases (although not
necessarily verbatim) from many of the Comments found in
Docket 05-235 written by those in opposition to the NPRM.
That is the "world" to them and, should the telegraphy test
be eliminated, will result in the END of that "world" to
them. Naturally those people will be disturbed, distraught,
angry, or outraged at the very idea that their "world" is
"threatened." They become surly and resentful in their
anxiety and thus perceive that loss of a telegraphy test is
a "threat" to them. They also perceive that anyone who is
for the elimination of the telegraphy test is, in some way,
"unacceptible" to their "world." They can think of only
Their "world" and show no consideration of the rest of the
public. In their perceptions they have become selfish,
self-centered and lose their capability of accepting that
others of the public do not share their internal "world"
image. They get ANGRY at the public desiring change and
try to quash any thought of change. That ANGER manifests
itself in attempts to denigrate the person who challenges
them. Quite a common syndrome not confined to amateur
radio matters but to all human endeavor.

Are the smileys supposed to excuse your churlish manner?

"Smileys" are just emoticons that represent my mood after
having made some statement. In-person, there would be
much more in the way of expressed emotion, tone of voice,
"body language" and so forth to indicate my mood at any
particular time. Given the limitations of allowed
character limitations in this particular medium, emoticons
are a minimal extension of what would be readily apparent
during in-person encounters.

Your use of "churlish" is inappropriate and a bit insulting.
"Churl" is a rather old descriptor of "1. a peasant, 2.
a surly, ill-bred person; a boor." You wish to place
yourself "above" others, to be "their superior." [that is
readily apparent in your many previous postings in here]
Your general attitude seems to be nothing more than
bullying with strong overtones of bravado, a "don't mess
with ME" sort of thing. That reveals much to all other
readers.

If I use "smileys" [ :-) ] that only indicates I am
actually physically smiling on having written something.
I rarely use other emoticons, such as a mild frown
or disagreement [ :-( ] because I am more amused at
the general commentary in here than disapproving. :-)


Talk about misdirection. You dodged the question, Leonard.

Tsk, tsk. There is NO imperative or mandate that all
"must" answer someone's question. You presume too much
authority. An infinite amount of presumptions since you
are not the moderator in here.

We readers will just put you down as either NOT WORKING or
at some place not associated with electronics at all.

We readers? You're now speaking for all other readers of this newsgroup?

Not at all. I read ALL postings in this public venue,
therefore reiterating that I am one of those readers.

I speak only for myself. For whom do you speak as your
"authority?"


You can't blame Jim for not wanting to talk shop with you. Look what
has happened to others who have revealed details of their work (and who
happen to favor retention of morse testing).

Miccolis has not revealed any details of what he does for
a living...other than he is a "professional" and is "proud
of his work." Miccolis has expressed a number of varying
opinions of alleged knowledge, even expertise in areas
where he has not claimed any experience (aerospace,
specifically on spacecraft; non-amateur communications
where he refused to give anything specific on where or what),
yet has been highly confrontational, even antagonistic to
those who HAVE had experience. Miccolis has admitted that
he has NEVER served in any military postion, yet he chides
veterans who have served by claiming expertise in military
matters and military life.

Look at Steven James Robeson who has woven a veritable,
virtual straw skyscraper of claims in here. He is exposed
constantly on his outright fraudulent claims, yet he
persists. I have drawn a parallel to his actions in here
to the "Dudley" description found in Ernest K. Gann's
auotbiographical book "Fate Is The Hunter." That Dudley
was an outrageous fraud in commercial aviation and
eventually killed himself and his passengers in a crash
caused by his incompetence. The "Major Dud" label he got
(and deserved) is a play on words, a contraction of my
comparison to Gann's presented example with the name
contracted...Frank Gilliland applied the "major" both
from Robeson's claim of rank of major in the CAP and the
former half-hour TV sitcom "Major Dad" about an active-
duty USMC officer. Marine veterans, indeed most veterans
of any branch with a pride in their military service, are
justifiably insulted both personally and as a group at
ANY poseur, any fake "veteran" who makes claims of
machismo and/or heroism when they have NO PROOF of such
claims.

YOU have made numerous denigratory personal insults about
my "rear area service" in my military experience, a
voluntary enlistment in the Army, a branch that had
selective service draftees during a definite war period.
If you are a REAL military veteran, then you should know
that no one in the military, especially in the enlisted
ranks, has much choice of where they are assigned. I went
where I was told, did my duties, got promotions because I
did my duties competently. That my assignment involved
HF radio communications on a large scale was an eye-
opening revelation into the much larger world of radio.
It was "the luck of the draw" and it resulted in a major
life career change for me that I never regretted. That
you were resentful of that fortuitous circumstance is
not my problem. The ACAN-STARCOM-DCS worldwide net was
and remains far larger than any Department of State
communications network; the military nets did carry State
communications then and both share the DSN now.

Brian Kelly, formerly a regular in here, vacillated on
his postings, taking several "sides." While NEVER having
served, he boasted of "more important work" for the
military than I, negatively criticized what I did as both
a military and a civilian person, yet made a number of
embarassing faux pas on his knowledge of the military,
including the activities of the now-closed NADC in
Pennsylvania. He might have changed his mind on NPRM
05-143, maybe not. He has stopped posting in here.

Hans Brakob, a proud morseman and USN veteran, a Master
Chief Petty Officer, has gone on the record as favoring
the elimination of the U.S. amateur radio code test. I
respect his military service and I think he respects mine.
My only "disagreement" with Hans is his penchant for
posting/forwarding so many stories/tales on USN life,
some of them of quite an emotional nature. While the
USN and the entire maritime world enthusiastically
boosted the use of early radio a century ago, there is
a sense of overkill in boosting morsemanship from an
emotional, visceral level a century later...especially
given the enormous improvements in all radio techniques
and technologies during that century.

Brian Burke is a USAF veteran and I do not discredit his
service nor insult his active-duty assignments. Robeson
does that for no reason. Brian is a meteorologist, not
one directly involved in the worldwide USAF radio network,
but he is conversant and knowledgeable about military
radio procedures on land. Burke favors the elimination
of the U.S. amateur radio license exam code test and is
a code-tested radio amateur licensee.

Frank Gilliland is a USMC veteran and works IN radio,
does not have an amateur radio license yet takes the
side against the NPRM. That's fine with me. Frank
does not insult me yet we have had some mild disagreements
in here. Frank is frank and believable. His postings
have an air of honesty. Frank takes no guff from Dudly
and speaks up on Dudly's fakery, misuse of what is
known jargon in the Corps, and Dudly's general weird
attitude.

You make up derogatory
names for those folks and you insult their jobs and military service.

I WILL endeavor to insult, demean, and generally despise
ANY military veteran FAKE that exists or shows up. That
is a PROMISE.

I WILL endeavor to insult, demean, and generally despise
anyone who attempts the same sort of insults, denigrations,
and personal insults on ME. They get back what they hurl.

I have digitized records of proof of my military service,
my civilian jobs, personal references (both mentioned in
here in specifics plus those not yet mentioned), plus
some additional verification documents from government
agencies on my ordinary life. While not an exceptional
life, it exists, has existed, and was real. Anyone who
challenges that, in any way, shape, or form had damn
well be able to PROVE their charges beyond any doubt.
If they cannot prove what they charge, they will get
much worse than they try to give.

In my life experience I've encountered a number of
"churlish" bullies who've attempted many things against
me, including physical violence. I learned to stand up
to them, face them down, and, in a few cases, had to
physically defeat them when they were not able to control
themselves. I'm not looking for trouble but if trouble
finds me, then woe is that trouble; such will not find
an easy adversary.



Gee, Lennie, you are constantly AGAINST the retention of morse code
testing in amateur radio. Imagine that.

TS.


...and, poor baby, you still wonder why you are insulted and denigrated?

Up yours.

You can continue to maintain the code test on your purely
personal level of your targeted insults to me specifically.
You have received responses. You apparently don't like
being countered on the personal level. Your problem. If
I have the time you will get replies as I choose.

Since you started this thread with an overt personal insult
as the title, you are in no position to claim yourself
either "civil" in this war of words or as the "neutral
judge" of What Should Be. You are neither "neutral" nor
"judge."

Or, it could shift to the broader perspective of actually
talking regulation policy and arguing on that plane. If
you choose to resort to the personal level again, you are
the one to have failed in the shift. You get NO points
for already being IN amateur radio through licensing since
the code test regulations affect only those who are either
not in amateur radio or those inside who wish to "upgrade."
You are in neither category. You are not in the FCC nor
do you control any licensing regulations. You have no
qualifications that make you "superior" for arguing policy
on the public level, can only resort to puerile personal
insults. QED.

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 19, 6:34 pm
wrote:
From: on Thurs 17 Nov 2005 02:45
wrote:
From: on Nov 16, 2:20 am
Dave Heil wrote:

In other words, if it didn't make money for you, it wasn't going to
get your time and effort.

You really can't understand anyone who doesn't have YOUR
immaculate set of "standards" can you?

I've met people like you, Len.

No you haven't, Heil. People like me would AVOID your kind.

Then why do you not avoid his "kind" here, Len?

Such avoidance allows you to continue living.

How?

Is that a threat? You seem to be saying that Dave would be
in some sort of danger if he were to meet you.

What danger would that be, Len?

Be greatful for that.

I'm *grateful* I don't have neighbors like you, Len.

Am I some kind of "beginner" in radio after a half century
of experience in more parts of the EM spectrum than any
amateur is allowed?

In some kinds of radio, you are a beginner, Len.

Am I some kind of "beginner" because I've
operated transmitters with far higher power outputs than
amateurs are allowed to have?

Yes - because you didn't "operate" those transmitters in the legal
sense of the word.

Am I some kind of "beginner"
because long ago I learned how to design radio circuits from
a blank pad with pen on to the finished hardware and gotten
them to perform as originally specifed?

Yet when a simple design problem was posed to you here,
you could not solve it.

You seem to think so. What it really boils down to is
manual telegraphy.

That's one thing you're a beginner at, Len. There's lots more.

I would be an absolute beginner at telegraphy, no dispute,
if I were to take that up again. All I know is the pattern
of dots and dashes and their corresponding English language
characters. That's suffed into a good memory with lots and
lots and lots of other data, some useful, some not.

"suffed"?

Seems to me that beginner status is what really bothers you.

But - and this is very important in the NPRM 05-143 decision -
the FCC has ALREADY made ALL ALLOCATED MODES OPTIONAL TO USE.

Always been that way, Len.

In fact, an amateur license does not have to be used at all. In many
services, if a license is not used, it is revoked by FCC.

There just isn't ANY mandate to exclusively use radiotelegraphy
except on two small slivers of the lower end of 6m and 2m.

No amateur has to use those segments.

But, getting the amateur license to use ANY amateur band
below 30 MHz still requires passing a telegraphy test!

And that's a very good thing.

I'm seeking to eliminate that telegraphy test.

Why? It has no effect on you.

There's no
point in having it except as a vestige of pride still felt
by those long-timers who once considered themselves as
'compagnons de telegraphe' because the human-made regulations
gave them status-rank-privileges BECAUSE of that telegraphy
test.

That's a real load of bull, Len.

One point in having the test is that Morse Code is a big part of
today's amateur radio.

I and thousands upon thousands of others have operated
radio transmitters legally and competently at frequencies
below 30 MHz without being required to know or use any radio-
telegraphy skills.

But not as radio amateurs. You were a transmitter technician in the
Army and a cber. Sorry, that experience does not qualify you to
operate an amateur radio station. FCC agrees.

That "plain, simple fact" shows the
hypocrisy of the PCTA in demanding the retention of the
telegraphy test.

No hypocrisy. Just an opinion that disagrees with yours.

That test regulations does NOT serve the
public,

Yes, they do.

only the few already-licensed in amateur radio who
consider, self-righteously superior through passing a
telegraphy test.

Nope.

Now, if you wish to start some program to teach real
beginners in radio the skills of telegraphy, I am not
against that. Feel free to use what allocations you've
been granted. So far. Beep your little Orion to outer
space if you want.

Remember, what YOU consider to be "necessary" is NOT
shared by the public,

Says who?

"The public" was invited to comment on this very issue. And the
majority (55%) of those who bothered to comment say that
at least some Morse Code testing *is* necessary for an amateur
radio license of at least Extra class.

is NOT a physical requirement to
operate any RF emitter below 30 MHz.

Neither is a written test, Len. Millions of people have used HF
transmitters without passing *any* test, you know.

It is just your
personal desire.

Getting rid of the test is just *your* personal desire.

You are not yet a god of anything,
are not divine.

Neither are you, Len.

You are simply inflexible and self-
righteous, seeking to retain federally-mandated testing
in skills which you passed some time ago.

You've told us how great things are for you many, many times, Len.
As if all that somehow explains your obsession.

"Obsession?!?" :-)
Trying to change federal law is an "obsession?"

In your case, yes, it is. You are obsessed.

Incorrect. It is PERSISTENCE.

No, in your case it's an obsession.

It is IDEALISM, a quest to
make things better for others who share some of my interests.

And who would those "others" be?

It is many things but it is definitely not some deviant
obsession.

It's clearly an obsession for you.

On the other hand, those who have met old test regulations
and insist and insist that those should be kept for the
future are suspect.

Why? Because they're persistent and idealistic?

Their self-righteousness is suspect.
Their failure to change with a changing reality is suspect.
Their obstinancy on keeping the old ways forever in this
new millennium are suspect. Their perceived self-worth
is threatened by feared loss of status and privilege,
perhaps even rank in the pecking order of the "amateur
community."

Man, you really can pile up the bullstuff, Len.

You can write "YES it IS" all you want. Obtaining an amateur radio
license isn't about those things.

True, the U.S. amateur radio test regulations have nothing
about baby shoes or taking little baby steps.

RIGHT NOW the U.S. amateur test regulations require a
telegraphy test for any class privileges below 30 MHz.
THAT is what many are trying to change.

NPRM 05-143 is about ELIMINATING that code test. Change
for the future, for the public...the public in the
Commission's language is ALL OF US, not just the personal
desires of the few who have met and passed telegraphy
tests.

Most of the public who bothered to comment do not agree with complete
code test elimination, Len.

Then why are you so unfriendly here, Len?

Because both Miccolis and Heil are decidedly unfriendly to
all who disagree with them.

Well, that's not true of me, anyway.

K2UNK and I disagree mightily on many things, including the Morse Code
test. Yet we are friendly. Same is true of myself and K0HB. And many
others.

In fact, Len, it seems that *you* are the unfriendly one.

From: Dave Heil on Nov 20, 9:25 am


wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 18, 6:11 pm
wrote:
From: K4YZ on Nov 17, 7:15 pm
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:


You're the oldest fart here, Len and you aren't involved in amateur
radio. Like I said, you have a fetish.

You mean LICENSED amateur radio...as in having an HF transceiver
and "working DX on HF with CW." :-)


I made no excuses and you weren't involved in my work any more than you
are involved in amateur radio.

"Not involved with your [Department of State] work?" Not in
the 1980s. I was involved in the 1950s. "State" had their
own TTY nodes in the ACAN-STARCOM-DCS worldwide in the 1950s
and 1960s. Would you like to know the node letters found on
all messages that were relayed by the Army? I have a nice
list. There's also one at the USAER website which covers
Army in Europe history extensively.

"State" never used an RCA Corporation RACES (Random Access
Card Extract System) archival memory storage machine? On
the contrary, "State" had two of them in Washingdon DC as
prime electronic back-up. Back in the late 1960s. I know
because I worked at the RCA division that made them and I
got in on some of their final testing. Department of State
used those to keep track of a months' worth of messages
into/out of DC. You told me they were of no consequence. :-)

I'm not involved in the operation of LICENSED amateur radio
on-the-air. I can and have helped other amateurs fix/align
their radio equipment. However, you want to dismiss a great
big hobby area involving not just radio but all of electronics
in the United States. Unpaid work. In a hobby. That's
were I am.

In other words, you're a non-factor in either.

Tsk, tsk, I'm closer to a Mersene number insofar as factors
are concerned! BSEG


You've been recycling here too. You've certainly gotten mileage out of
your irrelevant military experiences of better than half a century ago.

1. The U.S. military gave up using morse code modes for
long-haul HF communications in 1948, longer than a
half century ago. Plain, simple fact. Bugs the hell
out of devout Believers in the Church of St. Hiram,
so I bring it up. :-)

2. I've mentioned a considerable amount of civilian
programs I've worked on in the last 49 years.
Interestingly, there's more "sensitivity" on that
than on old military activities due to Trade
Secrets, Corporate Confidential, and general Non-
Disclosure demands. Unless I have press release
or other public information on that, I don't even
mention them.

3. Before the advent of communications satellites,
wideband fiber optic cable, improved underwater
cable, the U.S. military depended primarily on HF
radio for their worldwide communications networks.
That HF network equipment operated by the very same
laws of physics which governed amateur radio then
and now. Technology transfer was directly applicable
between the military of that time and amateur radio
of that time. However, military radio then (and
still does) employ more modes and techniques than
are allowed by U.S.radio amateurs now.


Did you know that both Tech classes together constitute almost
HALF of all U.S. amateur radio license grants? True!

Yep, when something is simple enough, many folks will opt for it rather
than attempting that which is more difficult. Many never go beyond the
easiest license despite the limited privileges it offers.

Such as long-time amateur radiotelegraphers who've never
ventured behind the front panels of their radios in order
to understand how they worked. :-) Yes, I am familiar
with those. Their "radio skill" never goes beyond their
key, their ears, or the "official" jargon they've picked
up from older days, those used by older "radio experts."



Vic Clark was a silent key before I entered the Foreign Service.

Not my fault. shrug

I've met lots of notable people while in the Foreign Service--a U.S.
President, his wife, two Secretaries of State, a number of U.S.
Congressmen and Senators, former Finnish President Mauno Koivisto,
Forumula 1 driver Mika Salo and even trumpeter Clark Terry among others.
I got to see a number of other people of note--Secretary of State
George Schultz, Boris Yeltsin.

Wow! All because you worked for the Department of State?

Who wrote "I've met people like you, always bragging about..."

What has all that name-dropping to do with amateur radio? :-)

Hmmm...I could do the same schtick with some show business
folks, some high up, some not well known, lots of behind
the scenes guild people, plus a couple of big corporation
founders, three federal representatives (Barry Goldwater's
son, once on politics, the other on a visit to RCA EASD in
Van Nuys about the time his district was gerrymandered out
of my area). I was quite taken with meeting Stockard
Channing briefly during a party in the Hollywood Hills, she
is tinier in real life than in reel life and is charming
without needing a script. [Stockard was in "West Wing"
as a semi-regular, is now on another show about doctors]

I've not met any Heads of State. Few get involved in the
nittygritty of aerospace. Representative Goldwater did
but then he was bigger on flying and piloting than his
father. The late General Bernard Shriever, USAF Missle
Command (or whatever its final name was) attended a
briefing I gave and we had a chat afterwards. Impressed
me as having the "right stuff." John Young and Bob Crippen
were at Rocketdyne, meeting and greeting the folks there
who made the Space Shuttle Main Engines (shuttle space-
frame was made "over the hill" at the B-1 Division). That
right after the first space flight of the STS; they also
were the crew of the air-drop-only Enterprise test shuttle.

Your name didn't come up.

Tsk.



It [Newington] isn't even the center of the hamiverse.

Actually, in this country, it is the closest thing we've got.

Only in your perception.



What nightly footsteps are in evidence and why would they be yellow?

Inquire of REAL USMC veterans about "yellow footsteps."

You haven't been following the expose' of the self-renowned
Amateur Extra now dubbed Dudly the Imposter.


Sorry, lil Davie, but there was a "comment march" on Washington.
3,786 filings worth on WT Docket 05-235.

What, pray tell, is a "comment march".

On alliterations you seem illiterate.

There was no human parade march on Washington in regards to
amateur radio. There were (to date) 3,786 filings on WT
Docket 05-235, that Docket devoted to only one subject, the
elimination or retention of the morse code test in federal
amateur radio regulations. It's been only four months
since the release of NPRM 05-143 (on July 19, 2005) but in
the 11 month official period of WT Docket 98-143 on
Restructuring, that garnered only about 2200 filings.


The anti-code-test movement is gaining momentum.

Not to the tune of 3,786 filings on 05-235, it isn't.

See preceding.


You aren't wrapped very tight.

True, I am (at time of writing) sitting in shirtsleeves,
the office window open, temperature gauge at the corner
of the radio clock displaying 71.3 degrees F.

If you mean that remark as an insult, then it has fallen
flat before the message got here. Please do not litter.



Would you care to see your own special profile again?

Do whatever you like. The "profiles" generated by Miccolis
are not official, not accurate, are biased to an extreme
due to past differences in here and my not obliging him
with the respect and reverence he thinks is so richly
deserving.

"Profiles" work two ways, indeed in many ways. Yours
can, and has been done (in part) several times.


I've been paid as a musician.

Union or scab? [wanna see my AFTRA card? :-) ]

Were you an actor portraying a musician? :-)

American Federation of Television and Radio Artists.

Question reiterated: Were YOU ever in a musician's
guild, union, or craft?


What's your point? Amateurs at anything, aren't paid. They do things
for the love of doing them.

Then why do YOU insist that all radio amateurs "love" the
specific things YOU "love?"

Your motivation is at question there.


Does Palomar know about you? Does Schmidt help you?

I'll let you think some more about another question you
did not answer... :-)





No, I don't think you need anything additional to brag about, Len.

Davie, baby, "it ain't braggin' if ya DONE it. I done it."

Then you don't have a "braq quotionent", Len. You have an "I DONE it
quotionent", except that when it comes to amateur radio, you ain't done it.

I have not obtained any amateur radio license, true, but
to attempt semi-insult at claiming I've never been IN
radio would be a disasterous fabrication for you on the
order of Dudly the Imposter level.


Remember who used that Dizzy Dean misquote in here first?

The quote has been attributed to a number of people over the years.

The one who USED it first in here was James P. Miccolis,
license N2EY. ["Used," Davie, not 'attributed to']

Tsk, that misquote wound up blowing his words off...


I didn't write about anything particularly new, Len.

All readers here realize that...do not state the obvious.

I asked about the things you are unable to do.

For what reason? To attempt more denigrations?

I had been attempting to levitate. Then I tried to invent anti-
gravity. No success. Something is holding me down...


Some of your stuff defies response.

Try to stay with the program.

We all know you have difficulties with analogies, please
do not state the obvious.



You poor, ignored blighter. You're still standing out in the cold and
looking in. I guess you showed us.

Sorry, you're thinking of Val Germann. He's been an unmodified
Tech for over three years. [my micro-fiber jacket isn't
tattered, you've got the wrong guy...]

It couldn't have been Val, Leonard. He's a licensed ham. He is
permitted full voting membership in the old lodge.

In the NAAR, if he is a member there. The Commission doesn't
have "voting" or "membership" through license granting...it
just grants licenses and regulates all civil radio in the
United States. The NAAR (old name ARRL, but NAAR seems to be
the new name used by Imlay in Comments) membership is only
1 in 5 of all United States amateur radio licenses.

Just how big is that "lodge hall" you tried to write about?


I was hangin' with some NBC West Coast Hq types at lunch. We
weren't talking about hamme raddddio.

No doubt. They probably weren't even discussing ham radio.

You DO have such difficulty with the written word, don't
you? Tsk, tsk. Work on comprehension rather that strict,
obedient literalism. This isn't an English Composition
high school class.

Ever hear of Phil Amidon? He retired from NBC West Coast
Headquarters years ago. He'd already started a small
business selling iron powder toroid cores and other little
kits on sale in many radio-electronics parts stores
nationwide. Bigger corporation bought his company.

Irrelevant.

Only to your extreme literalism. Tsk, tsk. Relax, learn
to live with things. It will be better for you now that
you are over the middle aged hill.


As a matter of fact, Leonard, I've been watching HDTV for better than
the past two years. Get your enjoyment where you can. For watching TV,
you're an insider. For amateur radio, you're an outsider.

Yep, extreme literalism. "Back of the bus" kind of bigotry.

Were you born with that elitist attitude? Or was it
acquired in "the foreign service?" :-)

Tell me, do you hang around VE exam sessions, questioning
those who enter the door whether they are "upgrading" or
are newbies? Do you act like a Dill sergeant with the
newbies? Chew them out, don't permit them to speak until
spoken to? I get the distinct feeling you do that. :-)

By the way, I've actually been watching HDTV, the present
system in the regulations, since SIX years ago. Since a
demonstration by the "Grand Alliance" group on the west
coast. I've seen "HD" systems demonstrated much earlier,
but those were not picked up in the FCC regulations.



I worked a few Europeans and some South Americans last night on 160m CW,
Len. I did some testing of a 6m FM link to an area 70cm repeater last
evening with W8MSD and I squeezed in some HDTV viewing of college
football. You do as you can and I'll do as I choose.

Ohm my! I now get to actually CHOOSE FOR MYSELF?!?

Oh heavenly day, the "Godfather" has allowed me a choice!
I cannot refuse it! :-)


Your stuff died with Vaudeville.

Vaudeville isn't "dead," Godfather. It isn't healthy but
you can find it still going strong in the Catskills. Nu?

Vaudeville is alive and well but musclebound in the World
Wrestling Federation.

Morse code is alive but unwell, dwelling only in the
musculeminds of stubborn, hidebound, self-righteous
old and middle-aged morsemen bound and determined to
force the code test down newcomer's throats until their
code keys are pried out of cold, dead fingers.



Actually, Len, statistics say that I should be at least a couple of
decades from being done.

Let's say this: You sure as hell aren't rare or medium!
But you sure aren't well done either. "Steak tartare." :-)

Reflect on the old saying, "there are lies, damn lies, and
statistics." All are connected as equals. :-)

I will be reading your SK notice in the ARRL/NAAR newsletter.

I will think back on you then.

Buy.

You exhibit a lack of class, Len.

Incorrect. I have several FIRST CLASS Radiotelephone (Commercial)
license certificates. Want to see them? :-)

Buy,

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 19, 8:08 pm

wrote:
From: on Nov 17, 4:47 pm
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:


It should come as no surprise that Len Anderson's eight pages of
pontificating, self-important reply to the comments of Robert G.
Rightsell read almost exactly like his frequent pontificating,
self-important rants in r.r.a.p.
It should come as no suprise that Dave/K8MN has just posted his longest
post ever not providing the details or tips for aspiring DXers, but in
rediculing someone who has had an -almost- lifelong interest in radio.
"Rediculing"? You've spent so much time conversing with Mark that
you're starting to write like him.
Dave is trying to insult me.
Yep, I'm responding in kind to your usual red-hatted monkey routine.
No. You're responding in your usual smug way.
Hello? Can we say Davie is also pompous and arrogant?
You could, but you'd come off as insincere. After all, you're the guy
who used a reply to comments to slam another individual, Windy.

Heil started this thread with an overt personal insult against
me. QED ("it is as demonstrated")

You're absolutely right, Leonard, except that was posted in usenet (not
from "University Network"), not in comments or replies to comments filed
with the FCC.

Did Mr. Rightsell single you out for some personal criticism?

No, but you do not understand the procedings of public
commentary on Notices of Proposed Rulemaking.

"proceedings". I think I understand them fine. One can dismiss or
argue against the views of another. It is not necessary to attack an
individual.

Think of
it as a form of politics. In politics the "gloves come
off" many times and that is acceptible.

You aren't in politics any more than you are in amateur radio.

Do you have OnStar, Len? It seems geared to mothers with small children
and geezers. I don't use it. After all, I've got a 160m-70cm rig in my
car. I can use SSB/FM/CW with it. Maybe after I'm older I'll look into
the security and peace of mind offered by OnStar.

I do not have OnStar.

Then why are you recommending something to me with which you have no
ex... Ohhhhhhh! Never mind. I guess it sort of like your advice on
amateur radio.

I do not need any GPS device.

C'mon, Len. After reading some of your output here, I'd be surprised if
you could find your way to the bathroom on a foggy night.

AAA membership and a cellular telephone... snip travelogue

Whichever one of us is at the wheel during those trips
knows to pay primary attention to driving, not playing with
hobby radios.

I don't carry any purely hobby radio equipment, Len. There's just the
Amateur Radio Service equipment. I can drive and operate the radio
equipment simultaneously. I've not had a chargeable accident in years
and I've never had any accident while using a radio.

Abrogate your citizenship rights? That's blarney.

"Plain, simple fact:" WT Docket 98-143, 25 January 1999,
Comment by Robeson. Clear attempt by him to deny my
exercising First Amendment rights.

If that is indeed your view, you've made a clear attempt to deny Mr.
Rightsell's First Amendment rights.

If it wasn't for the
impolite methods you used toward Mr. Rightsell, I wouldn't mind seeing
you submit more material in your inimitable style, Leonard. You're your
own worst enemy.

"Impolite?" :-)

....at the very least, impolite.

Heil is terribly upset by ONE Reply to Comments. I have filed
SEVEN Replies to Comments plus one Comment on Docket 05-235.

So?

Heil has had ample time to file his own Reply to Comments
on my Replies to Comments. Heil has not. Heil wishes to
vent his bile, spite and anger in here. shrug

I'd never, never stoop to being that low in any documents submitted to
the U.S. Government. Yes, if I have anything to vent in the arena of
amateur radio policy, I'm likely to post it here. You don't seem to
know where to vent and where not to vent.

Your organ grinder pal

Organ grinder pal?

Yep, as Hans Brakob has pointed out on a number of occasions, Len is the
organ grinder; you are the red-hatted monkey.

Hans the Dump Huck caller?

Once more, Extra Morsemen think they have civility immunity.

All note the title of this thread containing an overt personal
insult directed at myself. :-)

It most assuredly does. All of the material posted is, to the best of
my knowledge, completely factual.

"Go fork yourself, Dudly. [he's done]"
"Go fork yourself, Jimmie. [he's done]"
"Go fork yourself, Davie. [he's done]"

A common cook's technique to ascertain the condition of meat
or fowl being cooked in an oven, grill, or barbeque.

Other than Super Chicken, do you know of any meat or fowl posting to
this newsgroup? Oh, it is "barbecue"

Dave K8MN

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 19, 6:34 pm
wrote:
From: on Thurs 17 Nov 2005 02:45
wrote:
From: on Nov 16, 2:20 am
Dave Heil wrote:

That's simply incorrect, Leonard. You insult anyone who favors
retention of morse testing in amateur radio.

Miccolis and Heil both PERCEIVE insults where there is only
strong, sharp responses to their overbearing self-images.

No, you write lots of insults, Len. Anybody who disagrees with
you here becomes the target of your personal attacks. In fact,
you're no longer satisfied with such insults on Usenet, and have
added ECFS as one of your venues.

This venue is a debate forum, not a gathering around the
bar at a local fraternal order.

Then go ahead and "debate", rather than calling names.

Please explain how retention of morse testing is regression in any form.
After all, morse code is used daily by thousands of radio amateurs.

Those radio amateurs - if operating legally - below 30 MHz
using radiotelegraphy have ALREADY passed a federal
telegraphy test. If they have already passed it, removal
of the code test regulation will not affect their operating
privileges.

However, the code test retention WILL affect all those
uncountable in the future who MAY want to get an amateur
radio license having below-30-MHz privileges.

Apply that logic to the written test, too.

They are
not invisible, only uncountable because there is no
accurate way to get their numbers.

So you have no idea how many there really are.

At best, the Commission
gets only a general impression of their numbers in the
filings on Docket 05-235. So far, those numbers of the
public against code testing are about even with those
for its retention.

55% for retention of some code testing, 45% for complete
removal - when you count those individuals who bothered
to file an opinion with FCC.

You continue to complain that others insult or denigrate you. You've
told Jim that he never had any "PRIDE" in his work.

Yes, I should be taken to task on that, considering that
Miccolis has NEVER TOLD ANYONE HERE *EXACTLY* WHAT HE DOES
AT HIS *UNNAMED* EMPLOYMENT PLACE.

Why does that matter, Len? What difference does my job make
to what you describe as "hobby radio"?

Your behavior here has demonstrated that it doesn't matter what
someone's job involves. If that person disagrees with you, their
employment is ridiculed and denigrated by you.

yielding
only vague generalities of what he does/did without giving
more specific descriptions.

See above. Only a fool would give you more information when
your previous behavior shows what you will do with that information.

Do you consider your behavior to be rude?

No.

Well, it is. Very rude.


It is strong and confrontational...which has been quite
normal in computer-modem networks since the original ARPANET
spread out into the world. These networks are not for the
faint of heart or the easily disturbed one-sided inflexible
ideological bigots who refuse to compromise.

That last phrase describes you pretty well, Len.

NPRM 05-143 is a direct affront to the perception of some in
what constitutes "ham radio" or "amateur radio."

Yeah, well, different strokes for different folks.

Some insist
that radiotelegraphy is "the heart and soul of ham radio,"
therefore a test for that skill must "always" be in the
regulations.

Opinions vary all over the place on that.

We readers will just put you down as either NOT WORKING or
at some place not associated with electronics at all.

We readers? You're now speaking for all other readers of this newsgroup?

Not at all. I read ALL postings in this public venue,
therefore reiterating that I am one of those readers.

Yet you use the plural.

You can't blame Jim for not wanting to talk shop with you. Look what
has happened to others who have revealed details of their work (and who
happen to favor retention of morse testing).

Miccolis has not revealed any details of what he does for
a living...other than he is a "professional" and is "proud
of his work."

Here we go again....

Miccolis has expressed a number of varying
opinions of alleged knowledge, even expertise in areas
where he has not claimed any experience (aerospace,
specifically on spacecraft; non-amateur communications
where he refused to give anything specific on where or what),
yet has been highly confrontational, even antagonistic to
those who HAVE had experience.

Well, Len, you've never been a radio amateur, and have no real
experience with radiotelegraphy, yet you are "highly confrontational,
even antagonistic to those who HAVE had experience."

More important, you find it necessary to attack me personally, rather
than deal with facts.

Miccolis has admitted that
he has NEVER served in any military postion, yet he chides
veterans who have served by claiming expertise in military
matters and military life.

Where have I claimed "expertise" in anything, Len? If you think
my postings are those of an expert, that's your opinion, not
anything I posted.

Hans Brakob, a proud morseman and USN veteran, a Master
Chief Petty Officer, has gone on the record as favoring
the elimination of the U.S. amateur radio code test. I
respect his military service and I think he respects mine.
My only "disagreement" with Hans is his penchant for
posting/forwarding so many stories/tales on USN life,
some of them of quite an emotional nature.

Why is that a problem for you? Is it becase Hans' stories,
and his storytelling, are better than yours?

While the
USN and the entire maritime world enthusiastically
boosted the use of early radio a century ago, there is
a sense of overkill in boosting morsemanship from an
emotional, visceral level a century later...especially
given the enormous improvements in all radio techniques
and technologies during that century.

Whoa! "there is a sense of overkill in boosting morsemanship
from an emotional, visceral level a century later."

What the heck is that supposed to mean - that Hans isn't even
supposed to like Morse Code?

Brian Burke is a USAF veteran and I do not discredit his
service nor insult his active-duty assignments.

Because he agrees with you.

You make up derogatory
names for those folks and you insult their jobs and military service.

I WILL endeavor to insult, demean, and generally despise
ANY military veteran FAKE that exists or shows up. That
is a PROMISE.

Also real ones who disagree with you. Like a USCG radio
operator whom you dissed in your classic "sphincters post".

I WILL endeavor to insult, demean, and generally despise
anyone who attempts the same sort of insults, denigrations,
and personal insults on ME. They get back what they hurl.

You'll also do the same to those who simply disagree with you,
or point out your mistakes. You consider disagreement with
your ideas or information to be a personal insult.

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

The purpose of the whole drill was to get you to find out from
uncontestable sources that my information was accurate.

No need. Given your propensity for lying, it's a safe bet that you
were wrong again.

Bad logic, Brian.

Why would I direct you to a source that was uncorruptable?

If I HAD been 'wrong', I would have given you eternal bragging
right, now wouldn't I...?!?!

Steve, I guess that's the main difference between you and me. I need
no bragging rights.

Hans'
presenting of the order, howevr well intentioned, harpooned that.

None-the-less, Frankie's rant was shot all to be-jeebers.

Only Hans was suckered into playing your "drill," harpoon and all.
Reminds me of the GNR episode in "The Dead Pool."

Hans wasn't "suckered" into anything.

His information was dead on accurate.

"Back to the Future" accurate.

Unfortunately, you don't have a time machine.

And you now have the resources with which to finish the job,
Brian...It's just up to you whether you're going to do it or not...

You can do it, which will only serve to verify what I've been
saying all along...GOD FORBID it would deprive you of the opportunities
to call me a liar.

Or you can NOT do it, and then waffle along with all sorts of
"It's not my job" or "I bet you're lying anyway" excuses and the rant
wars go on.

Steve, K4YZ

It's not my job to prove you right. Hans tried, bless his heart.

But you want your internet arguments to go on and on and on. All you
had to do was give up some information about your claims of seven
hostile actions five years ago, but no. Now after years of bad
information about everything else, you want someone else to prove you
right about uniform issue?

Good luck.

wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

The purpose of the whole drill was to get you to find out from
uncontestable sources that my information was accurate.

No need. Given your propensity for lying, it's a safe bet that you
were wrong again.

Bad logic, Brian.

Why would I direct you to a source that was uncorruptable?

If I HAD been 'wrong', I would have given you eternal bragging
right, now wouldn't I...?!?!

Steve, I guess that's the main difference between you and me. I need
no bragging rights.

Sure you do.

Otherwise why manufacture the Somalia tale?

Hans'
presenting of the order, howevr well intentioned, harpooned that.

None-the-less, Frankie's rant was shot all to be-jeebers.

Only Hans was suckered into playing your "drill," harpoon and all.
Reminds me of the GNR episode in "The Dead Pool."

Hans wasn't "suckered" into anything.

His information was dead on accurate.

"Back to the Future" accurate.

Unfortunately, you don't have a time machine.

I don't need one.

YOU have a phone and Internet access. Drop a dime.

And you now have the resources with which to finish the job,
Brian...It's just up to you whether you're going to do it or not...

You can do it, which will only serve to verify what I've been
saying all along...GOD FORBID it would deprive you of the opportunities
to call me a liar.

Or you can NOT do it, and then waffle along with all sorts of
"It's not my job" or "I bet you're lying anyway" excuses and the rant
wars go on.

Steve, K4YZ

It's not my job to prove you right.

But you demand answers and "proof".

When I provide verifiable resources you "pooh-pooh" it away with
these lame "...it's not my job..." excuses.

You asked for proof, I provided answers and resources to verify
those answers.

Hans tried, bless his heart.

Yes, he did...And the basic order number is the same. Follow-up on
it. Take a chance.

But you want your internet arguments to go on and on and on. All you
had to do was give up some information about your claims of seven
hostile actions five years ago, but no. Now after years of bad
information about everything else, you want someone else to prove you
right about uniform issue?

Nope.

You asked for proof. I provided resources of uncorruptable
verification of my assertions.

You refuse to follow the Yellow Brick Road, so don't complain
about not getting to Oz.

Good luck.

For what? Poking holes in your lame excuse, Brian? I didn't need
luck for that...You provided all the footwork.

Thanks.

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
K4YZ wrote:

The purpose of the whole drill was to get you to find out from
uncontestable sources that my information was accurate.

No need. Given your propensity for lying, it's a safe bet that you
were wrong again.

Bad logic, Brian.

Why would I direct you to a source that was uncorruptable?

because it is an uncoporatble source that is neded to make your case

If I HAD been 'wrong', I would have given you eternal bragging
right, now wouldn't I...?!?!

meaning you don't have access to any such source

Hans'
presenting of the order, howevr well intentioned, harpooned that.

None-the-less, Frankie's rant was shot all to be-jeebers.

Only Hans was suckered into playing your "drill," harpoon and all.
Reminds me of the GNR episode in "The Dead Pool."

Hans wasn't "suckered" into anything.

His information was dead on accurate.

And you now have the resources with which to finish the job,
Brian...It's just up to you whether you're going to do it or not...

You can do it, which will only serve to verify what I've been
saying all along...GOD FORBID it would deprive you of the opportunities
to call me a liar.

Or you can NOT do it, and then waffle along with all sorts of
"It's not my job" or "I bet you're lying anyway" excuses and the rant
wars go on.

Steve, K4YZ

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 20, 9:25 am


wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 18, 6:11 pm
wrote:
From: K4YZ on Nov 17, 7:15 pm
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:


You're the oldest fart here, Len and you aren't involved in amateur
radio. Like I said, you have a fetish.

You mean LICENSED amateur radio...as in having an HF transceiver
and "working DX on HF with CW." :-)

Amateur radio might be operating weak signal UHF SSB with a multi-mode,
multi-band rig. It might be operating 2m FM through a local repeater.
It might be ragchewing on 40m CW. One constant is that you aren't involved.


I made no excuses and you weren't involved in my work any more than you
are involved in amateur radio.

"Not involved with your [Department of State] work?" Not in
the 1980s.

Not in the 1980's, not in the 1990's and not in 2000. You weren't
involved in any fashion.

I was involved in the 1950s. "State" had their
own TTY nodes in the ACAN-STARCOM-DCS worldwide in the 1950s
and 1960s.

Dark ages, Leonard. You were never employed by the U.S. Department of
State, just as you were never in amateur radio.

Would you like to know the node letters found on
all messages that were relayed by the Army? I have a nice
list. There's also one at the USAER website which covers
Army in Europe history extensively.

I'm not particularly interested. Why do you live in the past?

"State" never used an RCA Corporation RACES (Random Access
Card Extract System) archival memory storage machine?

It was not used for long. It wasn't seen as practical. Back to my
employment: You were never involved.

On
the contrary, "State" had two of them in Washingdon DC as
prime electronic back-up. Back in the late 1960s. I know
because I worked at the RCA division that made them and I
got in on some of their final testing.

How does that make you involved in my employment?

Department of State
used those to keep track of a months' worth of messages
into/out of DC. You told me they were of no consequence. :-)

They weren't. Their demise was quick. They were supplanted by state of
the art (for the time) Teletype Model 40 gear. That equipement was used
long past its obsolescence. It was phased out in the late 1980's and
early 1990's. How were you involved in my job?

I'm not involved in the operation of LICENSED amateur radio
on-the-air.

Precisely. ZIC/ZID.

I can and have helped other amateurs fix/align
their radio equipment.

Bully for you. No license is required as long as you don't put it on
the air.

However, you want to dismiss a great
big hobby area involving not just radio but all of electronics
in the United States. Unpaid work. In a hobby. That's
were I am.

I'm not dismissing a great big hobby area involving all of electronics.
I'm stating quite accurately that you aren't involved in amateur radio.

In other words, you're a non-factor in either.

Tsk, tsk, I'm closer to a Mersene number insofar as factors
are concerned! BSEG

from:
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache...ient=firefox-a

"No large Mersene number was proven to be prime".

You must be past your prime, Len. :-)


You've been recycling here too. You've certainly gotten mileage out of
your irrelevant military experiences of better than half a century ago.

1. The U.S. military gave up using morse code modes for
long-haul HF communications in 1948, longer than a
half century ago. Plain, simple fact. Bugs the hell
out of devout Believers in the Church of St. Hiram,
so I bring it up. :-)

I don't know why it'd bother radio amateurs. I'm sure that you meant
that the Army gave up the use of morse for long haul, point-to-point
bulk relayed message traffic. Otherwise your statement could be seem as
incorrect. Amateur radio isn't about the Army.


2. I've mentioned a considerable amount of civilian
programs I've worked on in the last 49 years.
Interestingly, there's more "sensitivity" on that
than on old military activities due to Trade
Secrets, Corporate Confidential, and general Non-
Disclosure demands. Unless I have press release
or other public information on that, I don't even
mention them.

That's lucky for us. Otherwise your already long and irrelevant posts
would just grow longer.

3. Before the advent of communications satellites,
wideband fiber optic cable, improved underwater
cable, the U.S. military depended primarily on HF
radio for their worldwide communications networks.
That HF network equipment operated by the very same
laws of physics which governed amateur radio then
and now. Technology transfer was directly applicable
between the military of that time and amateur radio
of that time. However, military radio then (and
still does) employ more modes and techniques than
are allowed by U.S.radio amateurs now.

That's nice, but not really relevant.


Did you know that both Tech classes together constitute almost
HALF of all U.S. amateur radio license grants? True!

Yep, when something is simple enough, many folks will opt for it rather
than attempting that which is more difficult. Many never go beyond the
easiest license despite the limited privileges it offers.

Such as long-time amateur radiotelegraphers who've never
ventured behind the front panels of their radios in order
to understand how they worked. :-)

Your clause doesn't address limited privileges. :-)

Yes, I am familiar
with those. Their "radio skill" never goes beyond their
key, their ears, or the "official" jargon they've picked
up from older days, those used by older "radio experts."

Do you know any radio telephonists who've never ventured beyond the
front panels of their equipment? Does their skill extend beyond their
microphones? Have they picked up any "official" jargon from older days?
Perhaps your rant was intended only as a slam against anyone who is both
a telegrapher and a radio amateur.



Vic Clark was a silent key before I entered the Foreign Service.

Not my fault. shrug

You told us that you exchanged letters with him.

I've met lots of notable people while in the Foreign Service--a U.S.
President, his wife, two Secretaries of State, a number of U.S.
Congressmen and Senators, former Finnish President Mauno Koivisto,
Forumula 1 driver Mika Salo and even trumpeter Clark Terry among others.
I got to see a number of other people of note--Secretary of State
George Schultz, Boris Yeltsin.

Wow! All because you worked for the Department of State?

That's absolutely correct.

Who wrote "I've met people like you, always bragging about..."

It wasn't a brag, Len. After all, you were the one who wrote about
notables coming to my embassy. Oh, that's right--you snipped that part.

What has all that name-dropping to do with amateur radio? :-)

That's what I thought when *you* brought it up.

Hmmm...I could do the same schtick with some show business
folks, some high up, some not well known, lots of behind
the scenes guild people, plus a couple of big corporation
founders, three federal representatives (Barry Goldwater's
son...

Barry Goldwater's son? Wow! I met the Duchess of Windsor's waiter in
Palm Beach when I was a kid. I saw Fred Astaire's dancing shoes at a
well known English manor house where Eisenhower planned the Normandy
Invasion. Imagine! Goldwater's son!

once on politics, the other on a visit to RCA EASD in
Van Nuys about the time his district was gerrymandered out
of my area). I was quite taken with meeting Stockard
Channing briefly during a party in the Hollywood Hills, she
is tinier in real life than in reel life and is charming
without needing a script. [Stockard was in "West Wing"
as a semi-regular, is now on another show about doctors]

I've not met any Heads of State. Few get involved in the
nittygritty of aerospace. Representative Goldwater did
but then he was bigger on flying and piloting than his
father. The late General Bernard Shriever, USAF Missle
Command (or whatever its final name was)...

I'm pretty sure that it wasn't "Missle Command". :-)

It [Newington] isn't even the center of the hamiverse.

Actually, in this country, it is the closest thing we've got.

Only in your perception.

Then again, you aren't likely to know. You aren't a ham and you aren't
an ARRL member.


What nightly footsteps are in evidence and why would they be yellow?

Inquire of REAL USMC veterans about "yellow footsteps."

Why?

You haven't been following the expose' of the self-renowned
Amateur Extra now dubbed Dudly the Imposter.

Oh, I know that you've found another insulting name for someone.


Sorry, lil Davie, but there was a "comment march" on Washington.
3,786 filings worth on WT Docket 05-235.

What, pray tell, is a "comment march".

On alliterations you seem illiterate.

Off hand, I'd say the guy who penned "comment march" seems lacking in
literary skills.

There was no human parade march on Washington in regards to
amateur radio.

I knew that.


There were (to date) 3,786 filings on WT
Docket 05-235, that Docket devoted to only one subject, the
elimination or retention of the morse code test in federal
amateur radio regulations.

So that'd be unlike any real march on Washington, where all were united
in a common goal. In the Civil Rights march, were more than half of the
marchers *against* civil rights for blacks?

It's been only four months
since the release of NPRM 05-143 (on July 19, 2005) but in
the 11 month official period of WT Docket 98-143 on
Restructuring, that garnered only about 2200 filings.

And? What percentage of radio amateurs filed? What percentage of the
general public filed?


The anti-code-test movement is gaining momentum.

Not to the tune of 3,786 filings on 05-235, it isn't.

See preceding.

I read the "preceding". It said, "Not to the tune of 3,786 filings on
05-235, it isn't".

You aren't wrapped very tight.

True, I am (at time of writing) sitting in shirtsleeves,
the office window open, temperature gauge at the corner
of the radio clock displaying 71.3 degrees F.
If you mean that remark as an insult, then it has fallen
flat before the message got here. Please do not litter.

I meant it as a statement of that which is evident, but I don't blame
you for wanting to snip that which illustrated my point.

Would you care to see your own special profile again?

Do whatever you like. The "profiles" generated by Miccolis
are not official, not accurate, are biased to an extreme
due to past differences in here and my not obliging him
with the respect and reverence he thinks is so richly
deserving.

While not official, that profile is based upon long experience in
reading your posted material. It appears to be quite accurate in that
you live up to it time and again.

"Profiles" work two ways, indeed in many ways. Yours
can, and has been done (in part) several times.

Was that the one you plagiarized from Jim's work?

I've been paid as a musician.

Union or scab? [wanna see my AFTRA card? :-) ]

Were you an actor portraying a musician? :-)

American Federation of Television and Radio Artists.

That isn't a musician's union at all. The AFofM is the musician's union.

Question reiterated: Were YOU ever in a musician's
guild, union, or craft?

What's it to you?


What's your point? Amateurs at anything, aren't paid. They do things
for the love of doing them.

Then why do YOU insist that all radio amateurs "love" the
specific things YOU "love?"

I do not.

Your motivation is at question there.

Your understanding of logic is at question here.


Does Palomar know about you? Does Schmidt help you?

I'll let you think some more about another question you
did not answer... :-)

What were you telling me about your not having to respond to questions? :-)

No, I don't think you need anything additional to brag about, Len.

Davie, baby, "it ain't braggin' if ya DONE it. I done it."

Then you don't have a "braq quotionent", Len. You have an "I DONE it
quotionent", except that when it comes to amateur radio, you ain't done it.

I have not obtained any amateur radio license, true...

Precisely!


...but
to attempt semi-insult at claiming I've never been IN
radio would be a disasterous fabrication for you on the
order of Dudly the Imposter level.

Then it is probably a good thing that I've never done any such thing.

Remember who used that Dizzy Dean misquote in here first?

The quote has been attributed to a number of people over the years.

The one who USED it first in here was James P. Miccolis,
license N2EY. ["Used," Davie, not 'attributed to']

"Attributed to", Leonard, not "used". The quote has been attributed to
Babe Ruth, Dizzy Dean and others.

Tsk, that misquote wound up blowing his words off...

Did it, Lennie?

I didn't write about anything particularly new, Len.

All readers here realize that...do not state the obvious.

I asked about the things you are unable to do.

For what reason? To attempt more denigrations?

There's no need for more ammunition there.

I had been attempting to levitate. Then I tried to invent anti-
gravity. No success. Something is holding me down...

Have you decided to use that line over and over until someone thinks it
is a) original to you or b) funny?

You poor, ignored blighter. You're still standing out in the cold and
looking in. I guess you showed us.

Sorry, you're thinking of Val Germann. He's been an unmodified
Tech for over three years. [my micro-fiber jacket isn't
tattered, you've got the wrong guy...]

You're wearing a jacket in 73 degree temperatures?

It couldn't have been Val, Leonard. He's a licensed ham. He is
permitted full voting membership in the old lodge.

In the NAAR, if he is a member there.

Do you mean the ARRL? Yes, if he is a member. Even if he isn't an ARRL
member, he's a member of the cozy lodge made up of all licensed radio
amateurs. The guy who passed his Tech last week is a member. The guy
who has been licensed since 1928 is a member. Kids of eight or nine
years of age are members. You are not a member.

The Commission doesn't
have "voting" or "membership" through license granting...it
just grants licenses and regulates all civil radio in the
United States. The NAAR (old name ARRL, but NAAR seems to be
the new name used by Imlay in Comments) membership is only
1 in 5 of all United States amateur radio licenses.

Can you name any single U.S. amateur radio organization with as much as
1/10th the membership of the ARRL? How about 1/5th?

Just how big is that "lodge hall" you tried to write about?

It is big enough to hold well over 600,000 members.

I was hangin' with some NBC West Coast Hq types at lunch. We
weren't talking about hamme raddddio.

No doubt. They probably weren't even discussing ham radio.

You DO have such difficulty with the written word, don't
you? Tsk, tsk. Work on comprehension rather that strict,
obedient literalism. This isn't an English Composition
high school class.

I realized that when I found that there isn't a competent instructor on
hand.

Ever hear of Phil Amidon? He retired from NBC West Coast
Headquarters years ago. He'd already started a small
business selling iron powder toroid cores and other little
kits on sale in many radio-electronics parts stores
nationwide. Bigger corporation bought his company.

Yep. They don't make anything. They re-package and sell products made
by another firm.

Irrelevant.

Only to your extreme literalism. Tsk, tsk. Relax, learn
to live with things. It will be better for you now that
you are over the middle aged hill.


As a matter of fact, Leonard, I've been watching HDTV for better than
the past two years. Get your enjoyment where you can. For watching TV,
you're an insider. For amateur radio, you're an outsider.

Yep, extreme literalism. "Back of the bus" kind of bigotry.

That's incorrect. The seating on the bus is open. You haven't boarded.

Were you born with that elitist attitude? Or was it
acquired in "the foreign service?" :-)

"Foreign Service". Were you in "the army"? :-)


Tell me, do you hang around VE exam sessions, questioning
those who enter the door whether they are "upgrading" or
are newbies? Do you act like a Dill sergeant with the
newbies? Chew them out, don't permit them to speak until
spoken to? I get the distinct feeling you do that. :-)

You aren't yet a newbie. :-)

By the way, I've actually been watching HDTV, the present
system in the regulations, since SIX years ago. Since a
demonstration by the "Grand Alliance" group on the west
coast. I've seen "HD" systems demonstrated much earlier,
but those were not picked up in the FCC regulations.

There would have been no point in my obtaining anything for HDTV
SIX years ago. I've been back in the U.S. for five years. Large
amounts of programming wasn't available nationally and regional and
local stations weren't transmitting it. While Dish Network offered
digital television, it did not offer HD at that time.

I worked a few Europeans and some South Americans last night on 160m CW,
Len. I did some testing of a 6m FM link to an area 70cm repeater last
evening with W8MSD and I squeezed in some HDTV viewing of college
football. You do as you can and I'll do as I choose.

Ohm my! I now get to actually CHOOSE FOR MYSELF?!?

Yes, within the limited options open to you.

Oh heavenly day, the "Godfather" has allowed me a choice!
I cannot refuse it! :-)

Your stuff died with Vaudeville.

Vaudeville isn't "dead," Godfather. It isn't healthy but
you can find it still going strong in the Catskills. Nu?

Vaudeville is deader than Burns and Allen.

Vaudeville is alive and well but musclebound in the World
Wrestling Federation.

Do you watch the World Wrestling Federation, Len? Who are some of the
song and dance men?

Morse code is alive but unwell...

See, this is what I mean when I say that you make frequent factual
errors. I invite you to tune your Icom receiver to the low ends of the
bands 160-10m this coming weekend.

... dwelling only in the musculeminds...

Musculeminds? What's a muscule? Is that like your miscue on "missle"?
Your noggin must be "musculebound".


...of stubborn, hidebound, self-righteous
old and middle-aged morsemen bound and determined to
force the code test down newcomer's throats until their
code keys are pried out of cold, dead fingers.

You aren't wrapped too tight.

Actually, Len, statistics say that I should be at least a couple of
decades from being done.

Let's say this: You sure as hell aren't rare or medium!

I was rare from Sierra Leone, but not as rare as from Guinea-Bissau.

But you sure aren't well done either. "Steak tartare." :-)

Reflect on the old saying, "there are lies, damn lies, and
statistics." All are connected as equals. :-)

I will be reading your SK notice in the ARRL/NAAR newsletter.

The actuarial tables say that you're likely to be wrong. The League
doesn't publish Silent Key notices in a newsletter. They're published
in QST. I'll likely not see any notice of your passing there.

I will think back on you then.

I guess you told me.

Dave K8MN