On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 22:19:27 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

" wrote in
roups.com:

From: Slow Code on Thurs, Sep 7 2006 11:50 pm

" wrote in
From: Opus- on Wed, Sep 6 2006 11:05 pm
On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 23:43:31 GMT, Slow Code spake

There are two ways to communicate when all you have is a transceiver,
phone, & CW.

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG...

It is voice, radiotelegraphy, data, pulse, right off the bat,
plus a few others which you have NO idea they existed for
EMERGENCIES.

Blowcode, you are stuck on HF ham thinking.



And you are stuck on Lazy-ass appliance operator thinking. Why don't you
head on over to rec.radio.cb, they need help using their appliances and
you'll fit right in.

ALL radio operators are "appliance operators" as you so idiotically
put it. A radio is a radio, no matter who turns the switch on. Does
the range in your kitchen stop being a range if Martha Stewart
operates it?
--

(Jim, single dad to Lesleigh [Autistic] 04/20/94)

"What, Me Worry?" A. E. Newman

Please note: All unsolicited e-mail sent to me may, at
my discretion, be posted in this newsgroup verbatim.

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 13:44:50 +0900, "Brenda Ann"
spake thusly:

"Appliance Operator" is a term to distinguish from those who are able not
only to turn on and operate their equipment, but also understand how it
functions and can reproduce the circuitry therein. An appliance operator
knows little or nothing about how the equipment they use works, only how to
use it (not necessarily in a proper or legal manner).

Does this mean that only a fully qualified journeyman auto technician
really knows how to drive a car properly?

Does an executive chef at a 5 star restaurant need to know Ohms Law in
order to cook properly on an electric stovetop? Does he also need to
be a petro-chemist to operate a gas range?

The notion that only a person who knows the inner workings of a device
can operate it properly is downright insulting and worthy of utter
contempt.

Can you rebuild the transmission in your car in your back yard right
now? If not then you are a bad driver, according to the "appliance
operator" logic being spewed here.
--

(Jim, single dad to Lesleigh [Autistic] 04/20/94)

"What, Me Worry?" A. E. Newman

Please note: All unsolicited e-mail sent to me may, at
my discretion, be posted in this newsgroup verbatim.

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...





And you are stuck on Lazy-ass appliance operator thinking. Why don't you
head on over to rec.radio.cb, they need help using their appliances and
you'll fit right in.

ALL radio operators are "appliance operators" as you so idiotically
put it. A radio is a radio, no matter who turns the switch on. Does
the range in your kitchen stop being a range if Martha Stewart
operates it?


"Appliance Operator" is a term to distinguish from those who are able not
only to turn on and operate their equipment, but also understand how it
functions and can reproduce the circuitry therein. An appliance operator
knows little or nothing about how the equipment they use works, only how to
use it (not necessarily in a proper or legal manner).
/

Would this include a KB9 station from Michigan?

wrote:
From: on Thurs, Sep 7 2006 6:53 pm

wrote:

BUT...*ONLY* if they love, honor, and obey manual morse code
and the ultra-noble ARRL (which can do no wrong).

In other words, a "Val Germann" type. :-)

Sounds about right. I wonder if Val worked at Radio Shack, if he would
be ineligible for an ARRL elected office (i.e., a volunteer)???

No, not with his "company man" statements about loving
morse and willing to toe the line drawn by the wire-
pullers in Newington. The ARRL can do no wrong.

Besides, with Heil and Miccolis' endorsements, he would
be a shoe-in. No problem. Huzzah! :-)



That might be pretty close to the mark.

Now prepare for the male genitalia, homosexual inuendo, claims of
pedophilia, and the consumption of excrement remarks from Robesin,
while Dave and Jim stand by silently endorsing such behavior.

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
On 9 Sep 2006 17:53:23 -0700, wrote:

Funny thing is, he built it.

I used to wonder what kind of help he had with buiding it, but no
longer

Can Robesin with a God-Complex build a maize so large that even he
can't get out of it?

honestly I think so if he ever had to deal with own actions hed surely
colapse under the weight

His Extra peer group on RRAP have never expressed a discouraging word
about his on-line activities.

Next of kin won't bother. They probably have every exploit Robesin has
ever told etched in "thier" brains, and a shoebox full of medals to go
along with it.

if he rely hsas any kin left they may all be fictional by now like the
Navy Father doing Army recruiting in OhIo as I recall

Yeh, I hear that the Navy does a lot of Army recruiting....

as I said last year that sure reads like a bad job of makigng something
up

i.e., a lie.

maybe Amy is just Steve in drag

I never considered that until now.

well considering steve attitude by the standards he uses Amy is at
least a a shemale or cross dresser after he denies that my wife can be
female becuase of my sexual interests, and has conceeded to have the
same sort of interests himself, and he has never posted a pic of Amy
there for by the standards he uses to insist m wife is male his own
wife must be (which obviously does not prelude her from just Robeson in
drag)

now to make it clear I am not saying amy is male merely that Amy is
likely to be male by Robeson own "logic" indeed much more so since
Robeson could easily be trying to generalize from the expernce he
claims to have had, and posible observation of his own situation to
come to his "conclusion"

I have no idea what goes on in the Robesin household, but whateever it
is, I really don't want to know. Maybe one day they'll be on
Springer... and I won't be watching.

wrote:
wrote:

From: on Thurs, Sep 7 2006 6:53 pm


wrote:


Sounds about right. I wonder if Val worked at Radio Shack, if he would
be ineligible for an ARRL elected office (i.e., a volunteer)???

No, not with his "company man" statements about loving
morse and willing to toe the line drawn by the wire-
pullers in Newington. The ARRL can do no wrong.

Besides, with Heil and Miccolis' endorsements, he would
be a shoe-in. No problem. Huzzah! :-)




That might be pretty close to the mark.

You, on the other hand, are close to *The Mark*.

Now prepare for the male genitalia, homosexual inuendo, claims of
pedophilia, and the consumption of excrement remarks from Robesin,
while Dave and Jim stand by silently endorsing such behavior.

How does "silent endorsement" work out in practice?

Dave K8MN

From: on Sun, Sep 10 2006 7:55 am

wrote:
From: on Thurs, Sep 7 2006 6:53 pm

wrote:

BUT...*ONLY* if they love, honor, and obey manual morse code
and the ultra-noble ARRL (which can do no wrong).

In other words, a "Val Germann" type. :-)

Sounds about right. I wonder if Val worked at Radio Shack, if he would
be ineligible for an ARRL elected office (i.e., a volunteer)???

No, not with his "company man" statements about loving
morse and willing to toe the line drawn by the wire-
pullers in Newington. The ARRL can do no wrong.

Besides, with Heil and Miccolis' endorsements, he would
be a shoe-in. No problem. Huzzah! :-)



That might be pretty close to the mark.

Now prepare for the male genitalia, homosexual inuendo, claims of
pedophilia, and the consumption of excrement remarks from Robesin,
while Dave and Jim stand by silently endorsing such behavior.

Don't forget Robesin's "threats" to contact our wives.
Or his attempts at being "another" poster (anonymous,
of course) to misdirect our time. :-)

I'd say that Herr Robust and Mother Superior secretly
WANT to say what Major Dud does but are afraid to do the
same. Herr Robust seems ready to break out and reveal his
REAL hate, though, he thinks he's a PARTICIPANT. :-)

Okay, let's all hear it for the ARRL as part and parcel
of the US Judicial System (as the Believers intone here)!
ARRL and morsemanship are noble, good, and true, can
never be wrong! :-)

wrote:
From: on Sun, Sep 10 2006 7:55 am


wrote:

From: on Thurs, Sep 7 2006 6:53 pm


wrote:


BUT...*ONLY* if they love, honor, and obey manual morse code
and the ultra-noble ARRL (which can do no wrong).

In other words, a "Val Germann" type. :-)

Sounds about right. I wonder if Val worked at Radio Shack, if he would
be ineligible for an ARRL elected office (i.e., a volunteer)???

No, not with his "company man" statements about loving
morse and willing to toe the line drawn by the wire-
pullers in Newington. The ARRL can do no wrong.

Besides, with Heil and Miccolis' endorsements, he would
be a shoe-in. No problem. Huzzah! :-)



That might be pretty close to the mark.

Now prepare for the male genitalia, homosexual inuendo, claims of
pedophilia, and the consumption of excrement remarks from Robesin,
while Dave and Jim stand by silently endorsing such behavior.


Don't forget Robesin's "threats" to contact our wives.
Or his attempts at being "another" poster (anonymous,
of course) to misdirect our time. :-)

I'd say that Herr Robust and Mother Superior secretly
WANT to say what Major Dud does but are afraid to do the
same.

If you'd say that, you'd certainly be wrong in my case. I'd say that
you accuse others of doing things and then you break out in the
"Robesin-Herr Robust-Mother Superior" mode and destroy any credibility
you had.

Herr Robust seems ready to break out and reveal his
REAL hate, though, he thinks he's a PARTICIPANT. :-)

What "REAL hate" is that, Leonard?

I'm an active participant in amateur radio. You are irrelevant to
amateur radio.

Okay, let's all hear it for the ARRL as part and parcel
of the US Judicial System (as the Believers intone here)!
ARRL and morsemanship are noble, good, and true, can
never be wrong! :-)

I recall pointing out to Brian Burke that we were discussing ARRL
elections and *not* the U.S. Judicial System. Your statement is
diversionary bafflegab.


Dave

wrote:
From: on Thurs, Sep 7 2006 6:42 pm
wrote:
From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 5:30 pm
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: an old friend on Sun, Sep 3 2006 10:09 am
It's not a manufactured dispute, Len. You brought it up, now you don't
want to hear about it.

Let's review that one:

You and some of your neighbors tried to keep the zoning ordinances in
your neighborhood stuck in the past.

Okay, so this is retro on not on amateur radio, but let's
review how Jimmy MANUFACTURES something out of nothing.

When the original part of my "neighborhood" was zoned,
it was all Residential, Single Family homes. Normally
such residential zones remain as-is for many decades.
They aren't whim-changed to the "latest model" in zoning
codes...especially residential zones.

Radio regulations aren't usually changed on a whim, either.

Those who live IN
those residences aren't "stuck in the past." A house is
a house is a HOME.

??

"A house is a house is a HOME"?

A house is just a building.

People make it a home.

Despite all the changes that have
occured since the early 1960s, you did not want the zoning changed.

What were "all the changes that have[sic] occured since
the early 1960s" in my neighborhood,

Well, for one, there was a developer who was willing to take on
developing a piece of vacant land.

But the point is that a lot of changes have occurred in the real-estate
and construction industries in 40+ years. New technologies - new
methods - new financial and tax environments.

People also live differently. There are more blended families, more
divorced people, more two-career-with children families, etc.

More diversity, IOW.

But you wanted to keep your neighborhood stuck in the past, with the
"little boxes on the hillside'...

You really
don't know, do you? Several hundred houses were
completed in my 'neighborhood,' all to R zoning code
(single family, residential).

Sure - 40 years ago, Does that mean the zoning should never ever
change?

About 15 acres were
never developed in the middle of that due to too much
earthmoving necessary. That remained undeveloped for
about 38 years, ownership of that land passing through
several companies. The next-to-the-last land owner
wanted to change the zoning laws to "R1" which meant
multi-family residences...read APARTMENTS.

Oh no! APARTMENTS! What a horror!

Did they mean high-rises? Low rises?

Or did they mean homes with apartments attached, as for relatives
(sometimes called "mother-in-law suites"?

Here's a clue, Len: An apartment can be a home, same as a 'house' can
be a home.

That owner
managed to get the zoning code changed over the protests
of several of us and the neighborhood association at
a city zoning board meeting in the middle of the 1990s.

"Several of you". Interesting. Hundreds of homes in your neighborhood
but only "several of you" protested.

Those of us who LIVED adjacent to that undeveloped
property had to accept it. Several years went by and
nothing came of the plans presented to the neighborhood
at the local church meeting hall. Land values were
rising.

The point is you opposed the change.

And you thought those who were already *in* the neighborhood should
overrule those who were trying to "get into" the neighhborhood.

The next-to-the-last land owner went bankrupt and the
15 acre parcel was sold to a developer who requested
a neighborhood association public review of what they
wanted. We met, three meetings in all. This developer
planned for 44 homes, all single-family residences,
all meeting the ORIGINAL zoning code requirements.

IOW, he went through the hazing ritual of meeting *your* concept of the
neighborhood. More little boxes on the hillside....

That
developer needed 9 months of earth moving about a quarter
million cubic yards of soil to make those lots; it was
a VERY rough terrain to begin with.

And you complained about the noise, too...

The 44 houses were
built (sold before completion, despite the rising cost
of homes) in a gated community called "Montelena."
Very upscale. The neighborhood association did not
fight that. We were back to the original zoning code,
all single family residences.

Right - you kept the status quo. They had to do it the way you did it -
single family detached homes on a particular size of lot (1/3 to 1/4
acre). No twins, no duplexes, no triplexes, no townhomes, and most of
all no (shudder) APARTMENTS!

You
wanted a piece of undeveloped land near your house developed only in
ways you approved of.

Absolutely,

IOW, "YES"

but as the neighborhood association as a group
wanted it (over 400 residence members). Those of us who
OWN residences and LIVE in them understand that a residence
area should change zoning laws as little as possible.

How is that any different from those of us *in* amateur radio and who
participate in it. who understand that a some regulations should change
as little as possible?

Anyone who wanted to live or build in your
neighborhood should have to do it the way you did it, and no other way.

Bad repetition in addition to being highly inaccurate.

No, very accurate. "Your Way" was single-family-detached residences. No
twins, no duplexes, no triplexes, no townhomes, and most of all, no
APARTMENTS.

The
neighborhood association wanted the original single-family
residence zoning kept. Not just me, several hundred others
all were of the same opinion about our homes and adjacent
areas.

How many others did not oppose the zoning changes?

What about the people who wanted to live in the residences the first
developer wanted to build? What did they want? Did anyone ask *them*?

Oh, and there are dozens of basic house plans
in several hundred acres of "my" neighborhood and only 2
others are of the same plan as mine.

But they're all basically the same - single-family-detached residences
of a certain age, size and construction.

Why should radio amateurs not oppose the changes an outsider like you
wants to force on us, when you opposed the changes an outsider tried to
force on your neighborhood?

The amateur bands are a sort of home to us, not you.

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Thurs, Sep 7 2006 6:53 pm

Sounds about right. I wonder if Val worked at Radio Shack, if he would
be ineligible for an ARRL elected office (i.e., a volunteer)???

No, not with his "company man" statements about loving
morse and willing to toe the line drawn by the wire-
pullers in Newington. The ARRL can do no wrong.

Besides, with Heil and Miccolis' endorsements, he would
be a shoe-in. No problem. Huzzah! :-)



That might be pretty close to the mark.

You, on the other hand, are close to *The Mark*.

Now Heil starts in with the Robesin-like inuendo. Swell guys, these
Extras.

Now prepare for the male genitalia, homosexual inuendo, claims of
pedophilia, and the consumption of excrement remarks from Robesin,
while Dave and Jim stand by silently endorsing such behavior.

How does "silent endorsement" work out in practice?

Silent? You now participate in Robesin-like behavior.