wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 18, 6:11 pm


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


Basically, it comes down to the fact that Len thinks he's too good to
have to learn Morse Code - or anything else - for an amateur radio
license.
[inaccurate heilian imagination...]

Inaccurate is quite right. I didn't right the paragraph above your
one-liner, Windy.

"Right," Man of La Mancha...:-)

Yes, it is right.

But Jimmie's prose is in the finest heilian tradition
of Writing Rongs. :-)

Prose?

There you go. You can't be bothered. So what's with the amateur radio
fetish, Len? Were you beaten with a Lightning Bug as a child?

Sorry, Davie, you'll have to clean your own mirror above
your computer...too many bugs on it.

That doesn't make sense, Leonard. I'm fine with morse code testing and
morse code use *and* I'm a radio amateur. The fetish is yours.

"Fetish?" :-) All for wanting to toss out an old, out-dated
code test that isn't useful to anyone but some old farts like
yourself?

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

Oh, yes, I remember your EXCUSES for using "CW" on a TTY
circuit in Africa someplace...you had to "synchronize"
your TTY machines.

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I made no excuses and you weren't involved in my work any more than you
are involved in amateur radio. In other words, you're a non-factor in
either.

If you wish to make a mountain out of a molehill, you can
get some staffer at Newington to look into my correspondence
with the late Vic Clark, then President of ARRL.

I'm sure it is all neatly archived. They just need to grab the "Leonard
H. Anderson" accordian folder.

Tsk, I didn't bother to keep mine, went in recycling years
ago.

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

FCC 90-53 made it just the same. "One small step
for code test elimination, one giant leap for Technicians."

....and your correspondence with Vic Clark made that happen?

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.

So your ideas were dismissed and you've never gotten over it. I knew
Vic Clark. He was a fine person.

Of course he was.

You've met him?

You've met everyone of note.

I have?

They visit
you at one of your embassies? :-)

Vic Clark was a silent key before I entered the Foreign Service. 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. Your name didn't come up.

Vic Clark expired years ago, Davie.

Lots of people expired years ago. That didn't preclude their having
been fine people.

You say nice-nice about the long-ago dead? That's nice.

....only the ones whom I considered fine people. It is nice.


It isn't exactly a civil rights movement, is it, Len? Did you guys
stage a big march on Newington?

Ohm my, aren't you the nasty fella? :-)

How is my question nasty, old timer? :-) :-)

"Newington" isn't the center of the universe.

Who wrote that it was, Leonard?

It isn't even the
center of the hamiverse.

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

What comes out of there is poesy of
the good old days in hamme radddio...following in the nightly
yellow footsteps of the Great One, "T.O.M."

What is "hamme radddio"? What nightly footsteps are in evidence and why
would they be yellow?

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". Is that anything like "message
knuckles"? Of those filings, were all in support of your position?

The anti-code-test movement is gaining momentum.

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

The year
2005 isn't 1935 anymore and fewer and fewer people are
agreeing with the code-aholics.

....and the year 2017 won't be 1865. Who are the code-aholics?

Try to learn to live with it. It's for your own good.

Let me see if I have it straight: 2005 isn't 1935 anymore? Did it used
to be?

You think elimination of the code test is "undermining"
amateur radio? I don't think so.

I think so and I'm *in* amateur radio.

Then dig your barricades deep. When the bulldozers over-
run you, more of your body parts will stay attached to
your body.

You aren't wrapped very tight.


Roughly half the U.S.
amateur radio community doesn't think so (if the 0.6% of
all licensees is a good sampling).

Roughly half? It looks like under half of the sampling.

ROUGHLY HALF, lil Davie.

Roughly, but not quite half, old Lennie.

Of course you are going to ARGUE your lil pointy nose off
that Joe Speroni's BIASED (definitely pro-code)
interpretations are some kind of super accuracy and
"valid." They aren't, but he's a morseman extra and
he's okay. :-)

Of course you are going to ARGUE that YOUR BIASED (definitely anti-code)
inaccurate interpretations are valid.


Are you an organization, Len? I was paid for my job.

By the Department of State.

Yeah? Weren't you paid by the organization which employed you? Tell us
about the guilds and unions and how you're like them.

You WERE from the government
and were there to "help."

I was of the government and I was there to help the government.

Which may explain the bad image
of the USA outside of our borders.

Would you care to see your own special profile again?

I've been paid as a musician.

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

Were you an actor portraying a musician? :-)

I'm not paid as a radio amateur.

No? Awwwwww....

I'm not paid as an amateur astronomer.

Neither are you required to have ANY license to look at
frequencies higher than 300 GHz...such as way, way up
in light. :-)

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

Does Palomar know about you? Does Schmidt help you?


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.

Remember who used that Dizzy Dean misquote in here first?

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


You seem to do just fine the way things are.

Quite right, La Manchie...

You might want to brush up on
spelling if you want to include that in your "braq quotionent".

YESSIR, Mr. Herr Robust! I vill do as you kommand!

I vill WRIGHT all my RONGS! [just like you did]



The things you are unable to do--you're secure in them?

Absolutely.

Tsk, tsk, there are so many NEW things coming up, things
that weren't here before, that there's PLENTY of new
stuff to explore, to experiment with, to fool around with.

I didn't write about anything particularly new, Len. I asked about the
things you are unable to do.

Looks like your "braq quotionent" is doing fine.

HAY La Manchie, Ise doing lak ya said, tryin' ta WRITE mah
RONGS.

You gotsa prollem wid dat?

Some of your stuff defies response.

There's a nip in the air and the winter winds are gusting, Len.

Ooooo...you're RIGHT, OAT got down to mebbe 60 F tonight!

Stand here by the lodge hall window.

Good lord, WHY? I had lunch at Guild Headquarters today,
nice fellowship there. Food was okay.

I don't belong to any "lodge," sweetums. Haven't done that
drunken bit down at any VFW Lodge.

You often write as if you have great experience in doing so.

Use your tattered jacket sleeve to wipe
away some of the condensation.

Oh, oh...you've been cribbing your ill-literations from old
Reader's Digest magazines, haven't you?

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

Some of the fellows are standing by the fireplace. The flames dance and
the pleasant scent of burning oak lingers in the room. A couple of
fellows are discussing their DXCC totals on Top Band. Look--four of the
members are sipping their hot buttered rum and laughing. By golly, I
think one of them mentioned "Anderson". I think they mean *you*, Len.

Not me, sweetums, they tawkin 'bout Anderson PowerPole connectors
for their mo-bile rigs.

Judas H. Priest, you lay those ill-literations on so thick
that the lowest-grade Associate Editor at Boys' Life would
yank it out of the slushpile and toss it in the circular
file muy pronto.

Dinna wurra, laddie, Boys' Life magazine will send you a nice,
polite form-letter REJECTION. Forget the Digest. Enquirer
doesn't go for THAT kind of syrupy, sloppy prose; I know a
free-lancer who does sell to NE. Maybe you could try the
poetry journals...don't know much about them.

"Fireplace?" "Burning oak leaves?" Mid-afternoon OAT (that's
Outside Air Temperature to you ground-bound earthlings) got
to 82 F today. Be about the same tomorrow. Gotta cut the
lawn tomorrow but that will be easy with my cordless electric
Craftsman mower (made by Black & Decker).

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.

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.

HDTV and remote pickup
trucks and some new graphics imaging came up like the Oscars
show and other events to be done in wide-screen. Lookin'
good in the neighborhood.

Irrelevant.

You got any DTV-compatible TVs, lil Davie? Nice stuff there on
cable TV service. Comcast has two cable channels for nothing
but wide-screen TV, lovely imagery, looks wonderful on the
27" LCD flat-panel we just got. Saw "Alias" and "CSI" in
wide-screen last night (Thursday). Great stuff. Action and
drama. Recreation! Enjoyment!

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.

Nah...you don't want that "crap," do you? You and your rum-
sipping buddies gotta grin about "pioneering the airwaves"
with "CW" and making all those point scores.

I have it, have had it and find that it doesn't preclude me from doing
the other things I care to pursue. In the watching television vs.
amateur radio arena, you're 1 for 2.

Keep up the
wunnaful, wunnaful vurk on DX...I hope your Orion can reach
the Dakotas to pay amateur tribute to Law-rence the box-
squeezer. "Ay vun an a too..." :-)

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.

Watch out on too much rum-sipping, old-timer. Follow the
mathematician's warning: "Don't drink and derive!"

Your stuff died with Vaudeville.

Fork yourself, Dave. You're done.

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

Dave K8MN

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.

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

From: Dave Heil on Mon 21 Nov 2005 09:41

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


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 don't do any RF transmission in amateur bands, with the
exception of those bands which are shared with other radio
services. Yet I am able to communicate worldwide without
an amateur radio license or using morse code! And 24/7
without worrying about the ionospheric conditions! :-)

Gosh, you sound awfully important and oh, so involved!

Good going, senior.


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.

"Dark ages?!?" At the beginning of the Cold War?

You were never employed by the U.S. Army or the DoD, were you?

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.

Of course not. It might hurt your rants about amateurism.

Why do you live in the past?

Tsk, I don't. Jimmy Noserve loves the past, always
bringing up little factoids of amateur radio history
that happened before his time.

"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.

If it "wasn't seen as practical," WHY did State buy it?

Actually 'buy them' since they bought two.

The GM "tank factory" in Michigan bought a half dozen,
got delivered before State's buy order.


How does that make you involved in my employment?

Were you in the Department of State purchasing department?

Did you approve budget purchases?

I don't think so. If you say they were "impractical,"
then you have defrauded the American taxpayer by
having State buy them! Why do you fleece taxpayers?

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?

Whoa! Now you are saying you were in some technical or
strategic planning at State? I thought you only worked
at embassies? [most confusing here trying to get a
straight answer]



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.

So, in your mind electronics does NOT equate with "radio?"

It does not equate with "amateur radio?"

You hams still using spark transmitters? Tsk, forbidden.

Do you consider U.S. amateur radio to be a HOBBY?

I don't think you do. You want enoblement into some kind
of "higher" service to the nation.

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=cachedsGm4-HerQJ:wurmbrand.uconn.edu/research/files/Leiden-1999.pdf+mersene+number&hl=en&client=firefox-a

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

Davie, that's WHY they are called "Mersene" numbers.

You didn't know that? Tsk. You had to look it up... :-(


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

Ha. Ha. Ha. Davie made a funny!


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.

Even if the Army gave birth to MARS? :-)

The amateur NTS could take some tips and pointers from the DCS.

But, that's digressing. Amateur radio is about amateurism.

Like the ARRL and their "radiogram" forms so that netties
can look so very "professional" in forwarding "telegrams." :-)


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

Hey, be happy! This gives you all the more space to tell
your tales about all that important national communications
you did from African countries like Guinea-Bisseau! :-)

You can regale the group with your military exploits in a
"country at war" (Vietnam, 30+ years ago). Did you go
far "in country," Davie?

How about all the space work you did when you said you were
"with NASA there"?


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. :-)

I didn't have any "clause." I asked a question. Pay attention.

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.

I was addressing - specifically - who I addressed, not
"radio telephonists." You are attempting to misdirect.
The word you should have used is 'radiotelephony.'

NPRM 05-143 is singularly about the telegraphy test. [that's
what this "english teacher" of the thread title was commenting
on] That NPRM has NOTHING to do with radiotelephony, radiodata,
teletypewriter over radio, slow or fast-scan television,
facsimile over radio. The amateur radio license tests have
NO test elements for physically OPERATING any radio, are not
required to have radio equipment AT a license exam site.

The sole manual test for anything at any amateur license exam
is about telegraphy, telegraphy as used on amateur radio (there
is NO landline telegraphy tested), more technically,
radiotelegraphy. As it is NOW, that is.

The written test elements are prepared, both questions and
multiple-choice question answers, by the VEC QPC. Those
cover "radio theory" (actually electronics in general since
there are no exclusive-to-amateur-radio circuits) and
Commission regulations. While some questions pertain to
"radio operating," there is no actual, hands-on, demonstratable
ability to OPERATE any radio, let alone amateur radio. Some in
here as well as in commentary on the NPRM misuse "operating"
to refer almost exclusively to RADIOTELEGRAPHY.

Am I saying that many radio amateurs don't know squat about
radio theory? ABSOLUTELY. I charge that based on MY life
experience in answering, as politely as possible, questions
of rather elementary level on radio theory. I was answering
questions, giving CORRECT answers, as a NON-amateur but also
as a very professional radio-knowledgeable person. All too
many of those questions from radio amateurs chronologically
older than I was were so simplistic, so indicative of a basic
understanding of radio and propagation principles that I
would lump them as less than Novice class amateurs. I could
care less that they might be able to do 40 WPM radiotelegraphy
with "perfect copy" any time. I could care less if they had
earned every possible "radiosport" contest as amateurs. They
were still deficient in a basic understanding of radio theory,
deficient at an elementary level. In a radio activity that
grants BOTH an operator and station license, it showed me
that they couldn't possibly meet the technical regulations
of amateur radio to match their lofty rank-status-privileges
they were granted.


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.

You told us - many times - you entered employment with the
Department of State. shrug

I have NO proof that the late Vic Clark ever actually saw
my correspondence; such was all typewritten and a "signature"
could have been done by a secretary.

If you wish to make an ISSUE out of that, feel free. I will
have to give in because I never kept that correspondence
and cannot prove it happened.

There! A WEAK POINT! Jump in and make the BIG ISSUE.



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.

I didn't bring up any "notables" until after you did...

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

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

"I brought it up?" I never worked at any embassy. You have
a time warp condition?



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

I'm FAR LESS likely to be an ARRL/NAAR member than a licensed
radio amateur...unless they do some drastic changes to their
public policy.

Every single licensed radio amateur in the United States was
NOT a ham until they passed their first amateur test. Why do
you keep harping on that?

You keep demanding that the only persons who can talk about
amateur radio regulations MUST be a licensed radio amateur?
Why is that? The FCC is NOT a club...it is a radio regulating
agency...for ALL civil radio. The FCC is NOT a fraternal
organization, was never chartered to be one.

The "National Association for Amateur Radio" (nee' ARRL) is
the "club." Even so, their membership is only one of every
five U.S. amateur radio licensees. Why aren't there more?
The percentages of membership have never become greater than
a quarter of all licensees.

Your blatant problem is some weird self-righteous elitism
wherein you claim that no one licensed can "know" anything
about amateur radio. That's just a plain, simple lie.
Were it true then there would be NO newcomers to amateur
radio licensing because they would not know enough to pass
any test!

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

Inquire of REAL USMC veterans about "yellow footsteps."

Why?

Refer to the message exchange between K4YZ and Frank Gilliland,
a REAL USMC veteran. It has been going on in here quite
recently. You haven't seen it? You are not paying attention,
are not aware and informed.

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.

If that is an insult, then it is MILD in comparison to the
insults he has hurled to many others over his years in here.

If you wish to elevate a fraudulent "veteran" to some lofty
status of "superiority," then you are no better, perhaps
lesser than that sorry excuse for a former military person.



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?

Elimination of the morse code test in amateur radio regulations
is NOWHERE NEAR THE humanitarian level of EQUAL rights for non-
whites.

Is a "march on Washington" ONLY about civil rights in your
mind? Try the "Bonus March" of 1933, April 29 starting
date. Participants even camped out on the Mall for days.
The U.S. Army was ordered to herd them.

Are you trying to "herd in" protesters? Do you fancy yourself
to be in authority? You aren't. You were NEVER in the
U.S. Army. You don't even know what I am referring to...
even though it is a shameful bit of history of the USA.

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?

Ask Joe Speroni. Rightsell calls him the "unofficial
statistician of amateur radio." What did Speroni do about
that "English department" filing wherein the English
teacher stated outright she had NO activity in amateur
radio and was NOT going to get an amateur license. Speroni
counted her for "support" of his "statistics." What of all
those law students filing, 18 in all. None of them are
licensees and none say they are going to get a license.

You love Rightsell, don't you? You get on my case because
I filed a Reply to Comments of his "two-year-olds" filing.



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.

Explain a colloquial quip as being "evident."

Explain why I am supposed to "accept" an insult which
demeans my intelligence and/or emotional stability.

Or is this the usual Morseman Extra Double Standard wherein
Morsemen can make insults and be acceptible, but others
may not?



"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?

PARODY is perfectly acceptible.

I've NEVER been guilty of plagiarism, nor did I engage in any.



What's it to you?

You really can't answer a plain, simple, direct question...


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

I do not.

Tsk, tsk, you DO! See little gems of an accusatory nature
such as I should have obtained an amateur radio license
before accepting professional radio employment!

There's more, but you will try to get out such charges. :-)

Your motivation is at question there.

Your understanding of logic is at question here.

No, MOTIVATION. You try to personalize all opinions, then
you generate false "reasons" why all must do as you
specify, including liking what you like.

What MOTIVATES you to behave in such a manner?

What MOTIVATES you to get all hot and bothered about ONE
Reply to Comments of Robert Rightsell and NOT say anything
about my other, earlier Replies to Comments?

YOUR motivation is highly suspect.



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? :-)

Did Schmidt help you in amateur astronomy?

That's a plain, simple, direct question.



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

Precisely!

"Precisely" what? Is amateur radio a forbidden subject to anyone
without a federal license in amateur radio?!?

Why do you wish to forbid any discussion?

Why do you wish to heckle others who do not have opinions
equal to yours?

Your motivation in all that activity is suspect.



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?

a. It IS original.

b. The stand-up comic (who paid me to write material for him) found
it was funny to his audience.

c. I have more...but they are wasted on this audience.


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?

Tsk. Never said that. You've connected disparate parts
in an attempt to demean another. Not nice.

Around you one may have to wear a "full metal jacket."

:-)


You are not a member.

I am not a member of the FCC. Neither are you. shrug



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

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

United States amateur radio is NOT a "Lodge." That you think
so is not a definition nor a legality of existance.

The FCC is NOT a fraternal organization nor a fraternal order
governor.


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.

Joe Speroni thinks differently.


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.

Are you sure it isn't BILL Amidon? :-) Why no "correction?" :-)

Amidon is/was a licensed radio amateur; I don't know if
he is SK or not. Amidon ads have been in QST for over two
decades. Hams who actually build radio things should be
familiar with the name.

Does this mean you are dissing a fellow radio amateur? Tsk.



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

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

Then why do you keep trying to shut the door?

Your "motivation" seems one of self-righteous bigotry, allowing
that "door" open to only those you deem desireable.


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. :-)

Ohm my, there you go again. Nobody can talk in any venue
without YOUR approval?


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.

Why? I have no personal interest in morse code and no interest
in amateur radio contesting. Invitation denied.

One can listen OUTSIDE the amateur radio bands and NOT hear
much radiotelegraphy. Hardly a beep to be heard...still lots
of SSB and AM voice, data (TORs mostly), international
broadcasting, standard time signals. Not much morse code.

Let's see...your "stock answer" will be the imperative that
"this is an amateur radio forum and that's all that can be
talked about?"

... dwelling only in the musculeminds...

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

Ohm my, I made a typo, a Freudian slip confusing "miniscule"
with "muscle." :-)


You aren't wrapped too tight.

Now now, you are making an allusion to lack of intelligence
and/or emotional stability again, aren't you? :-)


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.

We'll see... :-)

The League
doesn't publish Silent Key notices in a newsletter. They're published
in QST.

Just today I peeked at the ARRL home page, the one obtained
by accessing www.arrl.org. Just below half of the items of
news is "Former ARRL HQ Staffer Paul R. Shafer, KB1BE, SK."

The ARRL web page is NOT the pages of QST.


I will think back on you then.

I guess you told me.

Right on, senior! :-)

wrote:


Do you consider U.S. amateur radio to be a HOBBY?

I don't think you do. You want enoblement into some kind
of "higher" service to the nation.

Sorry to break your brag bubble lennieboy, but ham radio has already
reached 'ennoblement' into 'higher' service to the nation. Many times in
the past and present, especially with the service that hams provided
during Katrina and Wilma. You just can't be a part of it and that really
gets up your nose.

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Mon 21 Nov 2005 09:41
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 20, 9:25 am

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 don't do any RF transmission in amateur bands, with the
exception of those bands which are shared with other radio
services.

That's a very good thing!

Yet I am able to communicate worldwide without
an amateur radio license or using morse code!

But not by direct radio contact.

And 24/7
without worrying about the ionospheric conditions! :-)

Telephone and internet. We can all do that, Len.

Why do you live in the past?

Tsk, I don't.

You sure talk about it a lot, though.

Jimmy Noserve loves the past, always
bringing up little factoids of amateur radio history
that happened before his time.

Gee, Len, you're always bringing up little factoids of
history that happened before *your* time. Are you the
only one allowed to do that?

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.

So, in your mind electronics does NOT equate with "radio?"

The two are not the same.

It does not equate with "amateur radio?"

No, they don't.

"Radio" is a subset of electrical engineering.

"Electronics" is a subset of electrical engineering.

Radio and electronics have some things in common, but they are not
identical, and one is not a subset of the other.

Do you consider U.S. amateur radio to be a HOBBY?

And much more.

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. :-)

Who would they be, Len?

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

I didn't have any "clause." I asked a question. Pay attention.

What question?

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.

I was addressing - specifically - who I addressed, not
"radio telephonists." You are attempting to misdirect.
The word you should have used is 'radiotelephony.'

Yet you know they exist.

NPRM 05-143 is singularly about the telegraphy test. [that's
what this "english teacher" of the thread title was commenting
on] That NPRM has NOTHING to do with radiotelephony, radiodata,
teletypewriter over radio, slow or fast-scan television,
facsimile over radio. The amateur radio license tests have
NO test elements for physically OPERATING any radio, are not
required to have radio equipment AT a license exam site.

So? Why is that significant?

The sole manual test for anything at any amateur license exam
is about telegraphy, telegraphy as used on amateur radio (there
is NO landline telegraphy tested), more technically,
radiotelegraphy. As it is NOW, that is.

And that's a good thing.

The written test elements are prepared, both questions and
multiple-choice question answers, by the VEC QPC.

And approved by the FCC

Those
cover "radio theory" (actually electronics in general since
there are no exclusive-to-amateur-radio circuits) and
Commission regulations. While some questions pertain to
"radio operating," there is no actual, hands-on, demonstratable
ability to OPERATE any radio, let alone amateur radio. Some in
here as well as in commentary on the NPRM misuse "operating"
to refer almost exclusively to RADIOTELEGRAPHY.

Who would they be, Len?

Am I saying that many radio amateurs don't know squat about
radio theory? ABSOLUTELY.

Your opinion only. And as you have demonstrated, you are not
exactly unbiased in your opinions.

Many radio amateurs know much more about radio theory than
you, Len.

I charge that based on MY life
experience in answering, as politely as possible, questions
of rather elementary level on radio theory.

Your politeness isn't exactly legendary, Len.

I was answering
questions, giving CORRECT answers, as a NON-amateur but also
as a very professional radio-knowledgeable person. All too
many of those questions from radio amateurs chronologically
older than I was were so simplistic, so indicative of a basic
understanding of radio and propagation principles that I
would lump them as less than Novice class amateurs.

By what standard?

How did they pass their written tests if they're so ignorant? Did
they get a look at a 1957 Extra test?

I could
care less that they might be able to do 40 WPM radiotelegraphy
with "perfect copy" any time. I could care less if they had
earned every possible "radiosport" contest as amateurs. They
were still deficient in a basic understanding of radio theory,
deficient at an elementary level. In a radio activity that
grants BOTH an operator and station license, it showed me
that they couldn't possibly meet the technical regulations
of amateur radio to match their lofty rank-status-privileges
they were granted.

Yet FCC disagrees with you, Len.

You see, amateur radio is mainly about operating radios. Sure, some
technical knowledge is needed, and some of us do things like design
and build our own amateur radio stations (something you've never
done, btw.) But the license isn't for building - it's for operating.

Operating is what amateur radio is really all about. All types of
operating, with all sorts of modes and equipment. Technical stuff
is just a means to that end.

You just don't seem to understand that.

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

I'm FAR LESS likely to be an ARRL/NAAR member than a licensed
radio amateur...unless they do some drastic changes to their
public policy.

It's very unlikely you'll ever be either, Len.

The "National Association for Amateur Radio" (nee' ARRL) is
the "club." Even so, their membership is only one of every
five U.S. amateur radio licensees. Why aren't there more?

Some disagree with League policies
Some think membership costs too much.
Some are inactive
Some don't understand why a national organization is needed.

The percentages of membership have never become greater than
a quarter of all licensees.

Not true, Len.

btw, No-Code International's membership is less than 1% of US amateurs
even though there are no dues and NCI membership never expires.

Your blatant problem is some weird self-righteous elitism
wherein you claim that no one licensed can "know" anything
about amateur radio.

Where is that claimed?


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

Ask Joe Speroni. Rightsell calls him the "unofficial
statistician of amateur radio." What did Speroni do about
that "English department" filing wherein the English
teacher stated outright she had NO activity in amateur
radio and was NOT going to get an amateur license. Speroni
counted her for "support" of his "statistics."

That's because she was in support of continued Morse Code testing.

You have no activity in amateur radio and except for one outburst
almost
six years ago, there's no indication you'll ever get an amateur
license.

So you and the English teacher have the same level of involvement.

What of all
those law students filing, 18 in all. None of them are
licensees and none say they are going to get a license.

You're not a licensee and and except for one outburst almost
six years ago, there's no indication you'll ever get an amateur
license.

You love Rightsell, don't you? You get on my case because
I filed a Reply to Comments of his "two-year-olds" filing.

Perhaps the FCC chuckles over your comments, Len.



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.

"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?

PARODY is perfectly acceptible.

You're spelling isn't.

Tsk, tsk, you DO! See little gems of an accusatory nature
such as I should have obtained an amateur radio license
before accepting professional radio employment!

Who wrote that?

Morse code is alive but unwell...

Actually it's quite well.

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.

Why? I have no personal interest in morse code and no interest
in amateur radio contesting. Invitation denied.

Afraid you'll be proven wrong?

One can listen OUTSIDE the amateur radio bands and NOT hear
much radiotelegraphy.

An amateur license permits the licensee to operate INSIDE the
amateur bands, not OUTSIDE.

Hardly a beep to be heard...still lots
of SSB and AM voice, data (TORs mostly), international
broadcasting, standard time signals. Not much morse code.

Why is that important to what happens inside the amateur bands?

wrote:
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Mon 21 Nov 2005 09:41
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 20, 9:25 am

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 don't do any RF transmission in amateur bands, with the
exception of those bands which are shared with other radio
services.

That's a very good thing!

....and it is the only legal option available to Len at the moment.

Yet I am able to communicate worldwide without
an amateur radio license or using morse code!

But not by direct radio contact.

He doesn't have to be "bothered" with direct radio contact.

And 24/7
without worrying about the ionospheric conditions! :-)

Telephone and internet. We can all do that, Len.

Anybody with enough money to pay his monthly ISP or telephone bill can
get in on that action.

Why do you live in the past?
Tsk, I don't.

You sure talk about it a lot, though.

Jimmy Noserve loves the past, always
bringing up little factoids of amateur radio history
that happened before his time.

Gee, Len, you're always bringing up little factoids of
history that happened before *your* time. Are you the
only one allowed to do that?

That's the way it works with Len. He does it but neither you nor I
should do it.

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.
So, in your mind electronics does NOT equate with "radio?"

The two are not the same.

It does not equate with "amateur radio?"

No, they don't.

"Radio" is a subset of electrical engineering.

"Electronics" is a subset of electrical engineering.

Radio and electronics have some things in common, but they are not
identical, and one is not a subset of the other.

Thanks for clearing that up for Len. I think he may have been confused.

Do you consider U.S. amateur radio to be a HOBBY?

And much more.

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. :-)

Who would they be, Len?

Why, *any* long-time amateur radiotelegraphers, Jim. It doesn't apply
to radiotelephonists.

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

I didn't have any "clause." I asked a question. Pay attention.

What question?

....and what sentence?

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.

I was addressing - specifically - who I addressed, not
"radio telephonists." You are attempting to misdirect.
The word you should have used is 'radiotelephony.'

Len was talking about radiotelegraphers. An operator who uses SSB or FM
or AM is a radiotelephonist. A radiotelegrapher uses radiotelegraphy.
A radiotelephonist uses radiotelephony. You'd think a PROFESSIONAL
writer would have figured that out.

Yet you know they exist.

Sure, he knew.

NPRM 05-143 is singularly about the telegraphy test. [that's
what this "english teacher" of the thread title was commenting
on] That NPRM has NOTHING to do with radiotelephony, radiodata,
teletypewriter over radio, slow or fast-scan television,
facsimile over radio. The amateur radio license tests have
NO test elements for physically OPERATING any radio, are not
required to have radio equipment AT a license exam site.

So? Why is that significant?

The sole manual test for anything at any amateur license exam
is about telegraphy, telegraphy as used on amateur radio (there
is NO landline telegraphy tested), more technically,
radiotelegraphy. As it is NOW, that is.

And that's a good thing.

The written test elements are prepared, both questions and
multiple-choice question answers, by the VEC QPC.

And approved by the FCC

Those
cover "radio theory" (actually electronics in general since
there are no exclusive-to-amateur-radio circuits) and
Commission regulations. While some questions pertain to
"radio operating," there is no actual, hands-on, demonstratable
ability to OPERATE any radio, let alone amateur radio. Some in
here as well as in commentary on the NPRM misuse "operating"
to refer almost exclusively to RADIOTELEGRAPHY.

Who would they be, Len?

Len seems to pick his "facts" from thin air.

Am I saying that many radio amateurs don't know squat about
radio theory? ABSOLUTELY.

Your opinion only. And as you have demonstrated, you are not
exactly unbiased in your opinions.

....nor is he necessarily factually accurate.

Many radio amateurs know much more about radio theory than
you, Len.

Thousands of them have much more HF radio experience than Len.

I charge that based on MY life
experience in answering, as politely as possible, questions
of rather elementary level on radio theory.

Your politeness isn't exactly legendary, Len.

I was answering
questions, giving CORRECT answers, as a NON-amateur but also
as a very professional radio-knowledgeable person. All too
many of those questions from radio amateurs chronologically
older than I was were so simplistic, so indicative of a basic
understanding of radio and propagation principles that I
would lump them as less than Novice class amateurs.

By what standard?

....and how do we know that Len provided CORRECT answers.

How did they pass their written tests if they're so ignorant? Did
they get a look at a 1957 Extra test?

I could
care less that they might be able to do 40 WPM radiotelegraphy
with "perfect copy" any time. I could care less if they had
earned every possible "radiosport" contest as amateurs. They
were still deficient in a basic understanding of radio theory,
deficient at an elementary level. In a radio activity that
grants BOTH an operator and station license, it showed me
that they couldn't possibly meet the technical regulations
of amateur radio to match their lofty rank-status-privileges
they were granted.

Yet FCC disagrees with you, Len.

You see, amateur radio is mainly about operating radios. Sure, some
technical knowledge is needed, and some of us do things like design
and build our own amateur radio stations (something you've never
done, btw.) But the license isn't for building - it's for operating.

Operating is what amateur radio is really all about. All types of
operating, with all sorts of modes and equipment. Technical stuff
is just a means to that end.

You just don't seem to understand that.

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

I'm FAR LESS likely to be an ARRL/NAAR member than a licensed
radio amateur...unless they do some drastic changes to their
public policy.

It's very unlikely you'll ever be either, Len.

That saves him both effort and money.

The "National Association for Amateur Radio" (nee' ARRL) is
the "club." Even so, their membership is only one of every
five U.S. amateur radio licensees. Why aren't there more?

Some disagree with League policies
Some think membership costs too much.
Some are inactive
Some don't understand why a national organization is needed.

The percentages of membership have never become greater than
a quarter of all licensees.

Not true, Len.

Len doesn't like to have his factual errors pointed out, Jim.

btw, No-Code International's membership is less than 1% of US amateurs
even though there are no dues and NCI membership never expires.

But NCI is supposedly a one issue organization. I've asked Len to point
to one general interest amateur radio organization in this country which
has more than a tiny fraction of the ARRL membership.

Your blatant problem is some weird self-righteous elitism
wherein you claim that no one licensed can "know" anything
about amateur radio.

Where is that claimed?

I haver certainly never claimed that.


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

Ask Joe Speroni. Rightsell calls him the "unofficial
statistician of amateur radio." What did Speroni do about
that "English department" filing wherein the English
teacher stated outright she had NO activity in amateur
radio and was NOT going to get an amateur license. Speroni
counted her for "support" of his "statistics."

That's because she was in support of continued Morse Code testing.

You have no activity in amateur radio and except for one outburst
almost
six years ago, there's no indication you'll ever get an amateur
license.

So you and the English teacher have the same level of involvement.

Len was quick to point out the percentage of licensed radio amateurs who
participated in comments and replies. I asked him a simple question
about the perentage of U.S. citizens who participated and he tells me to
ask Joe Speroni. That's very peculiar.

What of all
those law students filing, 18 in all. None of them are
licensees and none say they are going to get a license.

You're not a licensee and and except for one outburst almost
six years ago, there's no indication you'll ever get an amateur
license.

You love Rightsell, don't you? You get on my case because
I filed a Reply to Comments of his "two-year-olds" filing.

Perhaps the FCC chuckles over your comments, Len.

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.

"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?

PARODY is perfectly acceptible.

You're spelling isn't.

Shhhhh. PROFESSIONAL writers are very sensitive.

Tsk, tsk, you DO! See little gems of an accusatory nature
such as I should have obtained an amateur radio license
before accepting professional radio employment!

Who wrote that?

There is what is written and there is what Len thinks has been written.

Morse code is alive but unwell...

Actually it's quite well.

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.

Why? I have no personal interest in morse code and no interest
in amateur radio contesting. Invitation denied.

Afraid you'll be proven wrong?

He *knows* he'd be proven wrong, if the Icom receiver is within its
specs as manufactured and he has more than a rain gutter to attach to
its antenna port. There's enough RF floating around Los Angeles County
this weekend to lift Len's receiver off the table.

One can listen OUTSIDE the amateur radio bands and NOT hear
much radiotelegraphy.

An amateur license permits the licensee to operate INSIDE the
amateur bands, not OUTSIDE.

Hardly a beep to be heard...still lots
of SSB and AM voice, data (TORs mostly), international
broadcasting, standard time signals. Not much morse code.

Why is that important to what happens inside the amateur bands?

Len is driven by such things. He desperately needs to prove that morse
has no place in "modern" communications.

Dave K8MN

From: on Nov 26, 8:02 pm


wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Mon 21 Nov 2005 09:41
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 20, 9:25 am

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 don't do any RF transmission in amateur bands, with the
exception of those bands which are shared with other radio
services.

That's a very good thing!

Why? Are you morsemen so elitist you can't get along with others?


Yet I am able to communicate worldwide without
an amateur radio license or using morse code!

But not by direct radio contact.

Most absolutely INCORRECT, Jim-Jim.

DIRECT from a maritime transceiver as a civilian. DIRECT from a
government radio transmitter. DIRECT as in laying on of hands,
moving controls, operating, all that stuff.


And 24/7
without worrying about the ionospheric conditions! :-)

Telephone and internet. We can all do that, Len.

Then why do you fuss with morse and standards that are over
70 years old?


Why do you live in the past?

Tsk, I don't.

You sure talk about it a lot, though.

You were born before 1951? YOU talked much of it in previous post.

YOU have talked much about Reggie Fessenden and his carbon-mike-in-
the-antenna "AM voice transmission" of 1906 and (allegedly) 1900.
Are you 105 years old?!?

Jimmy Noserve loves the past, always
bringing up little factoids of amateur radio history
that happened before his time.

Gee, Len, you're always bringing up little factoids of
history that happened before *your* time.

When did MY "time" begin, Jimmy? My "first radio job" in HF comms
began in 1953. I was there then, did it, came back. Never used
any morse code then on three dozen transmitters, never had to.

Are you the only one allowed to do that?

Tsk, you are getting disturbed. Calm down, just keep on bringing
up all those tidbits of "radio history" as you need to. Be mindful
of some critics, though. Not all of those are me. :-)


"Radio" is a subset of electrical engineering.

Incorrect. It is a part of electronics, a technology discipline.


"Electronics" is a subset of electrical engineering.

INCORRECT.

Electronics is one TECHNOLOGY DISCIPLINE of physics.

Didn't Dexter teach you the correct way to look at
physics...like everyone else does?


Radio and electronics have some things in common, but they are not
identical, and one is not a subset of the other.

Amateur radio definitions seldom jibe with the rest of the
world of electronics...and radio. :-)


Do you consider U.S. amateur radio to be a HOBBY?

And much more.

And, of course, YOU do so much more... :-)

Have you defeated any enemies of Homeland Security with your
amateur morsemanship?

Have you saved any lives in the Gulf States with your amateur
morsemanship?



NPRM 05-143 is singularly about the telegraphy test. [that's
what this "english teacher" of the thread title was commenting
on] That NPRM has NOTHING to do with radiotelephony, radiodata,
teletypewriter over radio, slow or fast-scan television,
facsimile over radio. The amateur radio license tests have
NO test elements for physically OPERATING any radio, are not
required to have radio equipment AT a license exam site.

So? Why is that significant?

Why do you consider yourself so "significant?" :-)


The sole manual test for anything at any amateur license exam
is about telegraphy, telegraphy as used on amateur radio (there
is NO landline telegraphy tested), more technically,
radiotelegraphy. As it is NOW, that is.

And that's a good thing.

It is a "good thing" only to those that took that test and
passed it, thus fulfilling the "proper jump through hoops"
of "tradition." :-)


The written test elements are prepared, both questions and
multiple-choice question answers, by the VEC QPC.

And approved by the FCC

Who else? :-)

YOU are NOT in the FCC.


Am I saying that many radio amateurs don't know squat about
radio theory? ABSOLUTELY.

Your opinion only. And as you have demonstrated, you are not
exactly unbiased in your opinions.

Yes, MY OPINION! :-) Do you think someone else is writing
all this? :-)

Many radio amateurs know much more about radio theory than
you, Len.

Why is that a factor in AMATEUR radio?

Other than your puerile little nyah-nyah, that is...


I charge that based on MY life
experience in answering, as politely as possible, questions
of rather elementary level on radio theory.

Your politeness isn't exactly legendary, Len.

Tsk, your definition of "polite" seems to be everyone agreeing
with you and giving your gratuitous praise for whatever you do.

shrug


How did they pass their written tests if they're so ignorant? Did
they get a look at a 1957 Extra test?

Why is that important here...other than satisfying your nasty
little nyah-nyahs?


Yet FCC disagrees with you, Len.

No, sweetums, YOU disagree with me. YOU are NOT the FCC.


Operating is what amateur radio is really all about. All types of
operating, with all sorts of modes and equipment.

INCORRECT. Modes and frequencies are specifically allocated
and given in Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R. NOT "all types" as you
state. [tsk, tsk] NOT "all sorts of modes" since those are
limited. NOT "all sorts of equipment" either since there are
exceptions stated in Part 97. Look those up.

Technical stuff is just a means to that end.

Unimportant? Hardly important? Irrelevant?

Then why do you permit the FCC to keep all those TECHNICAL
regulations?

You just don't seem to understand that.

I just don't understand YOU, Jimmy.


The "National Association for Amateur Radio" (nee' ARRL) is
the "club." Even so, their membership is only one of every
five U.S. amateur radio licensees. Why aren't there more?

Some disagree with League policies
Some think membership costs too much.
Some are inactive
Some don't understand why a national organization is needed.

You have taken a Poll to confirm this? :-)

Jimmy boy, YOU are a League BELIEVER. You are so far into
bias on that that all you generate are square waves.


btw, No-Code International's membership is less than 1% of US amateurs
even though there are no dues and NCI membership never expires.

Highly irrelevant. NCI is NOT a "national association for amateur
radio." It exists for ONE purpose: Elimination of the code test
from amateur radio license examinations worldwide. That's it.



You have no activity in amateur radio and except for one outburst almost
six years ago, there's no indication you'll ever get an amateur license.

"Outburst?!?" BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why, oh WHY must I show "an indication of interest?!?"

Who the fork are you to presume *I* MUST demonstrate to YOU
some kind of committment and dedication?!?!?

If your ego is THAT big, then you should go over to Coslo's BBS
since you will "reach the threashold of space" long before his
big balloon will...


So you and the English teacher have the same level of involvement.

Nope. I am as involved as can be with my wife. None other.

As a bachelor I had an "involvement" with an English teacher,
a very nice one, in fact.

Try to think about marriage for YOU, Jimmy. It would make you
less of a one-track Believer.


You're not a licensee and and except for one outburst almost
six years ago, there's no indication you'll ever get an amateur
license.

Oh, oh, there goes that control-freak EGO again, Jimmy.

Work on that. It's bad socially.


Perhaps the FCC chuckles over your comments, Len.

Irrelevant. Chances are they will take my comments seriously.

Doesn't matter, the PUBLIC has spoken to the FCC 3,794 times
through WT Docket 05-235.


Tsk, tsk, you DO! See little gems of an accusatory nature
such as I should have obtained an amateur radio license
before accepting professional radio employment!

Who wrote that?

Dave Heil. Why aren't you paying ATTENTION to the flow? :-(


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.

Why? I have no personal interest in morse code and no interest
in amateur radio contesting. Invitation denied.

Afraid you'll be proven wrong?

Tsk, there you go again with nasty attitude. An evangelical
Believer,
wet proselyte for a battery of morse gods, an acidic base.

Jimmy boy, I'm quite aware of the EM spectrum and who occupies what
"bands." Have been for a very long time...ever since getting my
"first job in radio." I know spectrum occupany OUTSIDE of the ham
bands on HF, on MF, on VHF, on UHF, and on up to 2.4 GHz. WHAT are
YOU going to tell ME? That contests are "popular?" I could find
that out by seeing the boosterism for that in print in CQ or QST.

Is contesting "operation" your main interest in amateur radio?
Are you more interested in awards, trophies, pretty certificates
than radio for radio's sake? It sure sounds like it since you
love getting praise, even from friends and neighbors. :-)

This Thursday and Friday I was involved in Thanksgiving in the
literal sense. Good friends got together, didn't talk at all
about amateur radio or morse code. Sunday is another nice
get-together with good people, and I don't expect any of the
talk will be about amateur radio or morse code or contests or
the beeping state of the radio art. No "contests" of any real
kind. Sunnuvagun!

Have fun in your amateur beeping contests. Those sound very,
Very, VERY important to you. Enjoy.

wrote:
From: on Nov 26, 8:02 pm


wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Mon 21 Nov 2005 09:41
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 20, 9:25 am

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 don't do any RF transmission in amateur bands, with the
exception of those bands which are shared with other radio
services.
That's a very good thing!

Why? Are you morsemen so elitist you can't get along with others?

Where's my obligation to get along with you? You seemingly don't feel
any need to get along with me.

Yet I am able to communicate worldwide without
an amateur radio license or using morse code!

But not by direct radio contact.

Most absolutely INCORRECT, Jim-Jim.

Naw, he's CORRECT, Len-Len.

DIRECT from a maritime transceiver as a civilian.

You really need to work on sentence structure.

You can communicate worldwide from a maritime transceiver, Len?

DIRECT from a
government radio transmitter.

That's just a clause, Santa. Do you know where you can lay your mitts
on a government transmitter?

DIRECT as in laying on of hands,
moving controls, operating, all that stuff.

I get the feeling that your knowledge of radio operating might be a
little light. Are you of the opinion that operating a radio falls under
"all that stuff"?

And 24/7
without worrying about the ionospheric conditions! :-)

Telephone and internet. We can all do that, Len.

Then why do you fuss with morse and standards that are over
70 years old?

Do you remember that amateur radio is done for the love of radio? The
internet isn't amateur radio. A cellular telephone isn't amateur radio.
If you'd like to spend your days on the internet, that's fine. If your
thing is spending money to telephone folks via cellular phone, then have
at it.


Why do you live in the past?

Tsk, I don't.

You sure talk about it a lot, though.

You were born before 1951? YOU talked much of it in previous post.

YOU have talked much about Reggie Fessenden and his carbon-mike-in-
the-antenna "AM voice transmission" of 1906 and (allegedly) 1900.
Are you 105 years old?!?

You've written about Fessenden a number of times. Aren't you nearly
thirty-five years shy of 105?

Jimmy Noserve loves the past, always
bringing up little factoids of amateur radio history
that happened before his time.

Gee, Len, you're always bringing up little factoids of
history that happened before *your* time.

When did MY "time" begin, Jimmy? My "first radio job" in HF comms
began in 1953. I was there then, did it, came back. Never used
any morse code then on three dozen transmitters, never had to.

....and because you never had to (in your time), no one should be using
morse code in this enlightened day and age?

Are you the only one allowed to do that?

Tsk, you are getting disturbed. Calm down, just keep on bringing
up all those tidbits of "radio history" as you need to. Be mindful
of some critics, though. Not all of those are me. :-)

You've brought up numerous bits of radio history, Len. Some of them
were even correct.

"Radio" is a subset of electrical engineering.

Incorrect. It is a part of electronics, a technology discipline.


"Electronics" is a subset of electrical engineering.

INCORRECT.

Electronics is one TECHNOLOGY DISCIPLINE of physics.

Didn't Dexter teach you the correct way to look at
physics...like everyone else does?


Radio and electronics have some things in common, but they are not
identical, and one is not a subset of the other.

Amateur radio definitions seldom jibe with the rest of the
world of electronics...and radio. :-)

They seem to track pretty well, Len. You, on the other hand, haven't
done very well in here with definitions.


Do you consider U.S. amateur radio to be a HOBBY?

And much more.

And, of course, YOU do so much more... :-)

Jim does much more in amateur radio than you do. I do much more in
amateur radio than you do. The guy who received his amateur radio
license last week does so much more in amateur radio than you do.

Have you defeated any enemies of Homeland Security with your
amateur morsemanship?

Has an opportunity arisen, Len?

Have you saved any lives in the Gulf States with your amateur
morsemanship?

Many radio amateurs did so. Jim is quite some distance from the scenes
of the recent hurricanes.

NPRM 05-143 is singularly about the telegraphy test. [that's
what this "english teacher" of the thread title was commenting
on] That NPRM has NOTHING to do with radiotelephony, radiodata,
teletypewriter over radio, slow or fast-scan television,
facsimile over radio. The amateur radio license tests have
NO test elements for physically OPERATING any radio, are not
required to have radio equipment AT a license exam site.

So? Why is that significant?

Why do you consider yourself so "significant?" :-)

That wasn't a good answer, Len. Can you attach any significance to what
you've offered? Is it supposed to have meaning for us?

The sole manual test for anything at any amateur license exam
is about telegraphy, telegraphy as used on amateur radio (there
is NO landline telegraphy tested), more technically,
radiotelegraphy. As it is NOW, that is.

And that's a good thing.

It is a "good thing" only to those that took that test and
passed it, thus fulfilling the "proper jump through hoops"
of "tradition." :-)

That sounds like sour grapes on your part, Leonard. Those of us who
took and passed such an exam demonstrated that we'd reached a certain
level of competence in what is a useful skill in amateur radio.

The written test elements are prepared, both questions and
multiple-choice question answers, by the VEC QPC.

And approved by the FCC

Who else? :-)

YOU are NOT in the FCC.

I didn't see any statement by Jim that he's the FCC.

Am I saying that many radio amateurs don't know squat about
radio theory? ABSOLUTELY.

Your opinion only. And as you have demonstrated, you are not
exactly unbiased in your opinions.

Yes, MY OPINION! :-) Do you think someone else is writing
all this? :-)

It would seem to be that you've not bothered to substantiate your
opinion with fact. How many is many? How many radio amateurs have you
encountered who are deficient. What percentage of all licensed radio
amateurs do they represent?

Many radio amateurs know much more about radio theory than
you, Len.

Why is that a factor in AMATEUR radio?

I'd think it'd be something to crow about. I think many folks would be
pleased to know more about radio theory than a PROFESSIONAL.


The "National Association for Amateur Radio" (nee' ARRL) is
the "club." Even so, their membership is only one of every
five U.S. amateur radio licensees. Why aren't there more?

Some disagree with League policies
Some think membership costs too much.
Some are inactive
Some don't understand why a national organization is needed.

You have taken a Poll to confirm this? :-)

You can take it upon yourself to conduct one, Len. If you weren't
prepared to accept Jim's answers, why'd you pose the question?

Jimmy boy, YOU are a League BELIEVER. You are so far into
bias on that that all you generate are square waves.

Well, Lennie boy, what is it that you believe in? Do you believe that
the ARRL is an evil organization? You've leveled charges of dishonesty
toward the League, but you never substantiated them.

btw, No-Code International's membership is less than 1% of US amateurs
even though there are no dues and NCI membership never expires.

Highly irrelevant. NCI is NOT a "national association for amateur
radio."

No, it isn't. Can you name any such organization except for the ARRL?

It exists for ONE purpose: Elimination of the code test
from amateur radio license examinations worldwide. That's it.

There seems to have been at least one exception to that stated purpose
already.

You have no activity in amateur radio and except for one outburst almost
six years ago, there's no indication you'll ever get an amateur license.

"Outburst?!?" BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I prefer to call it an episode of braggadocio. It has come back to
haunt you repeatedly.

Why, oh WHY must I show "an indication of interest?!?"

One reason could be that you'd be seen as something other than a
sidewalk superintendent in amateur radio. If you have no interest, as
you've alternately claimed, you are irrelevant to amateur radio and you
become a kook who haunts an amateur radio newsgroup.

Who the fork are you to presume *I* MUST demonstrate to YOU
some kind of committment and dedication?!?!?

"Commitment", Len. Nobody forces you to show commitment or dedication.
You needn't obtain or even attempt to obtain an amateur radio license.
If you don't, you won't appear to be very credible. Your extensive
rants will be marginalized. You'll be in the same boat as a certain
English teacher.

If your ego is THAT big, then you should go over to Coslo's BBS
since you will "reach the threashold of space" long before his
big balloon will...

Are you telling him to leave, Len?

So you and the English teacher have the same level of involvement.

Nope. I am as involved as can be with my wife. None other.

....and you wife isn't amateur radio. ZIC/ZID.

As a bachelor I had an "involvement" with an English teacher,
a very nice one, in fact.

Sure, Leonard, and you're getting an "Extra right out of the box".

Try to think about marriage for YOU, Jimmy. It would make you
less of a one-track Believer.

When it was said that you have the same level of involvement as the
English teacher, you said, "I am as involved as can be with my wife.
None other". Here you seem to indicate that marriage makes one "less of
a one-track Believer". You can't even agree with you.

You're not a licensee and and except for one outburst almost
six years ago, there's no indication you'll ever get an amateur
license.

Oh, oh, there goes that control-freak EGO again, Jimmy.

Nobody is controlling you, including yourself. You shot off your mouth
when you made your boast six years ago. You haven't lived up to that
billing.

Work on that. It's bad socially.

If you think that's bad socially, you should be in the shoes of one who
shoots off his yap, saying he's going to do something, but who doesn't
follow through.

Perhaps the FCC chuckles over your comments, Len.

Irrelevant. Chances are they will take my comments seriously.

I don't think you should make that assumption, Len.

Doesn't matter, the PUBLIC has spoken to the FCC 3,794 times
through WT Docket 05-235.

It matters. How many times were you "the public" in regard to 05-235?
Of the members of the PUBLIC who spoke, how many (excluding you) didn't
share your view?


Tsk, tsk, you DO! See little gems of an accusatory nature
such as I should have obtained an amateur radio license
before accepting professional radio employment!
Who wrote that?

Dave Heil. Why aren't you paying ATTENTION to the flow? :-(

You've made another factual error, Leonard. You seem to be the person
who needs to pay ATTENTION.


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.

Why? I have no personal interest in morse code and no interest
in amateur radio contesting. Invitation denied.

Afraid you'll be proven wrong?

Tsk, there you go again with nasty attitude. An evangelical
Believer,
wet proselyte for a battery of morse gods, an acidic base.

I offered a simple experiment. You declined. You shrunk from the
challenge.

Jimmy boy, I'm quite aware of the EM spectrum and who occupies what
"bands."

Well, Lennie boy, you'll find those radio amateur morse signals at the
low end of the bands marked "160, 80, 40, 20, 15 and 10 meters" this
weekend. They're there all the time but you'll find them in profusion
this weekend.

Have been for a very long time...ever since getting my
"first job in radio." I know spectrum occupany OUTSIDE of the ham
bands on HF, on MF, on VHF, on UHF, and on up to 2.4 GHz. WHAT are
YOU going to tell ME?

It'd be tough to reach you. You spend too much time with your
transmitter on and not enough time using the receiver.

That contests are "popular?" I could find
that out by seeing the boosterism for that in print in CQ or QST.

Was the intent to prove that contests are popular or was it to show that
morse code is alive and well in amateur radio?

Is contesting "operation" your main interest in amateur radio?
Are you more interested in awards, trophies, pretty certificates
than radio for radio's sake? It sure sounds like it since you
love getting praise, even from friends and neighbors. :-)

What would any of that be to you, Len? You aren't in amateur radio and
you wouldn't even turn on your receiver to find if the morse code is
alive and well.

This Thursday and Friday I was involved in Thanksgiving in the
literal sense. Good friends got together, didn't talk at all
about amateur radio or morse code. Sunday is another nice
get-together with good people, and I don't expect any of the
talk will be about amateur radio or morse code or contests or
the beeping state of the radio art. No "contests" of any real
kind. Sunnuvagun!

I went to an apple festival this fall. No one there talked about
amateur radio or morse code. Is that supposed to prove that morse code
is dead? I didn't hear a single person there discussing NASA, Darwin or
jazz either.

Have fun in your amateur beeping contests. Those sound very,
Very, VERY important to you. Enjoy.

Thanks for your good wishes. Those things are far more important to me
than obtaining an amateur radio license seems to be for you. Your
participation is not required.

Dave K8MN

wrote:
From: on Nov 26, 8:02 pm
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Mon 21 Nov 2005 09:41
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 20, 9:25 am

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 don't do any RF transmission in amateur bands, with the
exception of those bands which are shared with other radio
services.

That's a very good thing!

Why?

Because if you did "RF transmission in amateur bands" without the
proper
license, you could be breaking the law, Len. That would be a very bad
thing.

Are you morsemen so elitist you can't get along with others?

I get along with all sorts of people, Len. Including many who disagree
with
me. You're the one that has the problem getting along with others if
they
don't agree with everything you say.

Yet I am able to communicate worldwide without
an amateur radio license or using morse code!

But not by direct radio contact.

Most absolutely INCORRECT, Jim-Jim.

DIRECT from a maritime transceiver as a civilian.

Worldwide? I don't think so.

DIRECT from a government radio transmitter.

Are you authorized to do so?

DIRECT as in laying on of hands,
moving controls, operating, all that stuff.

Neither of those are *your* equipment, licensed to *you*, are they?

And 24/7
without worrying about the ionospheric conditions! :-)

Telephone and internet. We can all do that, Len.

Then why do you fuss with morse and standards that are over
70 years old?

The standards are a lot newer than "70 years old", Len.

As to why anyone would fuss with Morse Code in 2005, the
reasons are the same as why anyone would fuss with:

- cars that have manual transmissions instead of automatics
- sailboats instead of power boats
- Drawing and painting instead of photography
- Performing music instead of playing recordings
- Bicycles, running and walking for transport instead of motor vehicles
- Stairs instead of elevators
- Homemade food instead of packaged

And many more.

Why do you live in the past?

Tsk, I don't.

You sure talk about it a lot, though.

You were born before 1951?

No. Were you born before 1932? You sure talk about it a lot.

YOU talked much of it in previous post.

Because I know something of those times and the creation of the
Extra class license.

YOU have talked much about Reggie Fessenden and his carbon-mike-in-
the-antenna "AM voice transmission" of 1906 and (allegedly) 1900.

That's right. Was any of my information incorrect?

Are you 105 years old?!?

No - are you? Because you sure take issue about Fessenden's
accomplishments
even though they are before you were born.

Jimmy Noserve loves the past, always
bringing up little factoids of amateur radio history
that happened before his time.

Gee, Len, you're always bringing up little factoids of
history that happened before *your* time.

When did MY "time" begin, Jimmy? My "first radio job" in HF comms
began in 1953.

Yet you talk about 1951 and amateur radio, even though you had nothing
to do with amateur radio then.

I was there then, did it, came back. Never used
any morse code then on three dozen transmitters, never had to.

Because you were a transmitter technician, not a radio operator.

It's odd that you take pride in what you did *not* do...

Are you the only one allowed to do that?

Tsk, you are getting disturbed.

Not me.

It sure does seem that you talk about things that happened long
before you were born, but get mad when others talk about things
that happened long before *they* were born. As if it's OK for
you to do but not others.

Calm down, just keep on bringing
up all those tidbits of "radio history" as you need to. Be mindful
of some critics, though. Not all of those are me. :-)

Like who?

"Radio" is a subset of electrical engineering.

Incorrect. It is a part of electronics, a technology discipline.

Nope. It's a separate subset. Electronics does not include things
like antennas. Radio does.

"Electronics" is a subset of electrical engineering.

INCORRECT.

What parts of electronics are not covered by electrical engineering,
Len?

Electronics is one TECHNOLOGY DISCIPLINE of physics.

No, it isn't.

Physics is a science. Electrical engineering is a form of engineering,
and electronics is a subset of that.

Do try to keep up, Len. Your mistakes (like the ones Hans pointed out
about DD-214s) are embarrassing.

Didn't Dexter teach you the correct way to look at
physics...like everyone else does?

Who is "Dexter", Len?

Radio and electronics have some things in common, but they are not
identical, and one is not a subset of the other.

Amateur radio definitions seldom jibe with the rest of the
world of electronics...and radio. :-)

Yours don't jive with anything - like your spelling. Shall we call you
"Vshah101"?

Do you consider U.S. amateur radio to be a HOBBY?

And much more.

And, of course, YOU do so much more... :-)

Yes, I do. You don't.

NPRM 05-143 is singularly about the telegraphy test. [that's
what this "english teacher" of the thread title was commenting
on] That NPRM has NOTHING to do with radiotelephony, radiodata,
teletypewriter over radio, slow or fast-scan television,
facsimile over radio. The amateur radio license tests have
NO test elements for physically OPERATING any radio, are not
required to have radio equipment AT a license exam site.

So? Why is that significant?

Why do you consider yourself so "significant?" :-)

It's not about me, Len.

The sole manual test for anything at any amateur license exam
is about telegraphy, telegraphy as used on amateur radio (there
is NO landline telegraphy tested), more technically,
radiotelegraphy. As it is NOW, that is.

And that's a good thing.

It is a "good thing" only to those that took that test and
passed it, thus fulfilling the "proper jump through hoops"
of "tradition." :-)

Incorrect. There were comments to the FCC by people who had
not passed the Morse Code test which said it was a good thing
and should be retained. The English Teacher is one of them,
but not the only one.

If you actually read all of the comments, you'd know that.

When you make a sweeping general statement, and someone
proves an exception, the statement is shown to be false. That's
basic logic.

So your sweeping general statement:

"It is a "good thing" only to those that took that test and passed it"

has been proven to be untrue and invalid.

The written test elements are prepared, both questions and
multiple-choice question answers, by the VEC QPC.

And approved by the FCC

Who else? :-)

YOU are NOT in the FCC.

Neither are you, Len.

Am I saying that many radio amateurs don't know squat about
radio theory? ABSOLUTELY.

Your opinion only. And as you have demonstrated, you are not
exactly unbiased in your opinions.

Yes, MY OPINION! :-) Do you think someone else is writing
all this? :-)

Your bloviating is so voluminuous that there could be more than one
of you....;-)

Many radio amateurs know much more about radio theory than
you, Len.

I charge that based on MY life
experience in answering, as politely as possible, questions
of rather elementary level on radio theory.

Your politeness isn't exactly legendary, Len.

Tsk, your definition of "polite" seems to be everyone agreeing
with you and giving your gratuitous praise for whatever you do.

Nope. That's *your* definition.

How did they pass their written tests if they're so ignorant? Did
they get a look at a 1957 Extra test?

Why is that important here...other than satisfying your nasty
little nyah-nyahs?

Yet FCC disagrees with you, Len.

No, sweetums, YOU disagree with me. YOU are NOT the FCC.

FCC hasn't revoked their licenses. Nor has FCC required widespread
retesting of amateurs. FCC considers those folks you disdain to be
qualified to operate amateur radio stations. FCC does not consider
*you* to be qualified to operate an amateur radio station, though.

Operating is what amateur radio is really all about. All types of
operating, with all sorts of modes and equipment.

INCORRECT.

No, correct. The license is for operating, not for building.

Modes and frequencies are specifically allocated
and given in Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R. NOT "all types" as you
state. [tsk, tsk] NOT "all sorts of modes" since those are
limited. NOT "all sorts of equipment" either since there are
exceptions stated in Part 97. Look those up.

Don't have to look them up, I know them.

Technical stuff is just a means to that end.

Unimportant? Hardly important? Irrelevant?

No, just not of primary importance. A means to an end,
not the end in itself.

Then why do you permit the FCC to keep all those TECHNICAL
regulations?

Which ones? The technical regulations for amateur radio are very few,
very basic, and offer radio amateurs a lot of variety and freedom.

You just don't seem to understand that.

I just don't understand YOU, Jimmy.

It's understandable that you'd not understand a superior intellect, Len
;-) ;-)

OTOH I understand you all too well. That's why you're so hostile to me.

The "National Association for Amateur Radio" (nee' ARRL) is
the "club." Even so, their membership is only one of every
five U.S. amateur radio licensees. Why aren't there more?

Some disagree with League policies
Some think membership costs too much.
Some are inactive
Some don't understand why a national organization is needed.

You have taken a Poll to confirm this? :-)

Yes ;-)

btw, No-Code International's membership is less than 1% of US amateurs
even though there are no dues and NCI membership never expires.

Highly irrelevant.

Completely relevant. Proves the point.

NCI is NOT a "national association for amateur
radio."

That's true - it's "International". Or perhaps "Internationale"?

It exists for ONE purpose: Elimination of the code test
from amateur radio license examinations worldwide. That's it.

Len, you're and NCI BELIEVER. You're so biased that you cannot
conduct enough to see what really happens.

At least twice, NCI has gotten involved in proposed FCC rules
changes that have *nothing* to do with Morse Code testing. Of
course they have every right to comment on such changes, but
doing so disproves the claim that NCI exists for ONE purpose.

You have no activity in amateur radio and except for one outburst almost
six years ago, there's no indication you'll ever get an amateur license.

"Outburst?!?" BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes. Back in January of 2000, with your 'Extra out of the box' claim.

But it's still in the box.

Why, oh WHY must I show "an indication of interest?!?"

You don't. Neither does the English Teacher you criticize so much.

Who the fork are you to presume *I* MUST demonstrate to YOU
some kind of committment and dedication?!?!?

Who do I have to be?

If your ego is THAT big, then you should go over to Coslo's BBS
since you will "reach the threashold of space" long before his
big balloon will...

So you and the English teacher have the same level of involvement.

Nope. I am as involved as can be with my wife. None other.

As a bachelor I had an "involvement" with an English teacher,
a very nice one, in fact.

Try to think about marriage for YOU, Jimmy. It would make you
less of a one-track Believer.

Len, for all you know, I could have more marriage experience than
you have.

Really burns you not to know more about my personal life, huh?

You're not a licensee and and except for one outburst almost
six years ago, there's no indication you'll ever get an amateur
license.

Oh, oh, there goes that control-freak EGO again, Jimmy.

Yes, Len, your control-freak ego sure does go off at times.
Telling everyone How It Should Be.

Work on that. It's bad socially.

Perhaps the FCC chuckles over your comments, Len.

Irrelevant. Chances are they will take my comments seriously.

Odds are they chuckle, if not guffaw.

Doesn't matter, the PUBLIC has spoken to the FCC 3,794 times
through WT Docket 05-235.

And most of the PUBLIC wants at least some Morse Code testing
to be retained.

Tsk, tsk, you DO! See little gems of an accusatory nature
such as I should have obtained an amateur radio license
before accepting professional radio employment!

Who wrote that?

Dave Heil.

Where?

Show us the exact quote where he said you should have obtained
an amateur radio license before accepting professional radio
employment!

C'mon, show us the quote. Or maybe you can't, because it doesn't exist.

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.

Why? I have no personal interest in morse code and no interest
in amateur radio contesting. Invitation denied.

Afraid you'll be proven wrong?

Tsk, there you go again with nasty attitude.

IOW, yes, you're afraid.

Jimmy boy, I'm quite aware of the EM spectrum and who occupies what
"bands."

But obviously not what goes on in the amateur radio bands.

Have been for a very long time...ever since getting my
"first job in radio."

So you're old. Big deal. You want a merit badge?

I know spectrum occupany OUTSIDE of the ham
bands on HF, on MF, on VHF, on UHF, and on up to 2.4 GHz.

Obviously not.

WHAT are YOU going to tell ME?

That Morse Code is alive and well in the amateur bands. As much
as that may bother you, it's true.

That contests are "popular?" I could find
that out by seeing the boosterism for that in print in CQ or QST.

Is contesting "operation" your main interest in amateur radio?

One of my main interests in amateur radio. I have several. You don't
seem
to have any.

Are you more interested in awards, trophies, pretty certificates
than radio for radio's sake? It sure sounds like it since you
love getting praise, even from friends and neighbors. :-)

Actually, I enjoy the competition, the operating, testing my skill and
equipment against others and my previous efforts. Awards, trophies
and certificates aren't why I contest.

This Thursday and Friday I was involved in Thanksgiving in the
literal sense.

ï‚· That's nice. What has it got to do with amateur radio?
ï‚·
ï‚· Good friends got together, didn't talk at all about amateur
radio
ï‚· or morse code.
ï‚·
Considering your near-complete ignorance of Morse Code and
amateur radio, it's a good thing you didn't talk about those
subjects.

Sunday is another nice
get-together with good people, and I don't expect any of the
talk will be about amateur radio or morse code or contests or
the beeping state of the radio art.

That's good, considering that you're hardly a good role model.

No "contests" of any real kind. Sunnuvagun!

Can't take the competition, huh?

This past weekend I hosted Thanksgiving for 12 people –
friends and family. I cooked a 21 pound turkey with homemade
stuffing, made homemade bread, did it up right. Others did the
vegetables and desserts.

Can you cook, Len?