Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #901   Report Post  
Old September 17th 06, 06:11 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 417
Default trolling right along


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

Jonathan wrote:

'slow code stalker at large
http://www.marksspamblog.blogspot.com/



  #902   Report Post  
Old September 17th 06, 06:15 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,608
Default trolling right along

Not Lloyd wrote:


Len deserves no less.

why he at least gives his name you have no name and therfore no call
either and No standing to say antyhing
slow code stalker at large

  #903   Report Post  
Old September 17th 06, 07:00 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 417
Default trolling right along



Now be good and change your Habit.

Say goodnight...grazie.

Slap, slap,



There you have it. Len acts surprised when he is called on his actions.


I disagree. Where is the surprise?

I think Len expects that you'll attempt to denigrate him as you've
previously done.

Len deserves no less.


  #904   Report Post  
Old September 17th 06, 07:46 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 417
Default trolling right along


"an old friend" wrote in message
ups.com...
Not Lloyd wrote:


Len deserves no less.

why he at least gives his name you have no name and therfore no call
either and No standing to say antyhing
slow code stalker at large

//////////////////////////////////////////

Gee, Mark. I have all the standing I need to say "antyhing" I so desire.
Your opinion on the matter is meaningless...moot. Your input simply doesn't
count. You are a flaming nobody.
My call and name is withheld because, unlike you, I have the resources and
intellect to do so.




  #905   Report Post  
Old September 17th 06, 12:42 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 877
Default Service To The Country

wrote:
From: on Sat, Sep 16 2006 4:03 am
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:


Are you saying that amateur radio does not perform any service to the
country?


Encapsulated in the briefest meaning, YES.


You're just plain wrong about that, Len.


I disagree with Len on this point. Amateur Radio can be a service to
the country.


I say Amateur Radio does perform service to the country. Not just
"can", but "does".


Every amateur transmission is a service to the country?


Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh....

Seems like I shook the nitroglycerine bottle that is the mighty
macho morseman's ego with that entrapment. :-) KABLOOIE!!!


No, Len, you were just wrong.

---

Poor Jimmy, all flustered, thought he'd "gotten to me." Poor baby,
he doesn't check the Federal Register often enough.

On 7 July 2006 the Federal Register made available FR Doc 06-6013
[ET Docket 06-119; FCC 06-831 on the FCC website]. That was a
52 page report by the 27 member panel (1 chair, 26 members), written
single-spaced, narrow margins, members all identified by their
affiliations on pp 51-52. That was several weeks ago.

In FR Doc 06-6013 there is ONE short paragraph about "amateur
radio involvement" on page 29 (upper half of page). There is a
single statement on page 45 about "waiver of regulations" for
amateur radio AND other communications services. That's it.

Had FR Doc 06-6013 been formatted in conventional manuscript
style (double-spaced, wide margins) it would have been a bit
larger than 150 pages in length. :-)

Mr. professional-in-some-kind-of-electronics thinks "I should"
read that report. :-) I already did, weeks ago, when it was
available to the public.


How is that relevant to your mistake, Len?

What professional-in-some-kind-of-electronics Jimmy FAILED to
mention is thousands and thousands of pages of OTHER text in
both popular press and professional trade magazines on the
tremendous task of getting New Orleans somewhat functional
after a major disaster where the state, city of New Orleans
was INADEQUATELY PREPARED AT ALL LEVELS (including amateurs)
to provide ANY adequate service for its citizens.


You mean the professionals messed up? The professionals weren't
prepared?

The
surviving services did as best they could with work-arounds,
hampered by the city of New Orleans being built below sea
level with INADEQUATE protection against dike breaching (which
did happen, causing major, major flooding).


Isn't the Army Corps of Engineers responsible for the levees? And the
pumps?

Why weren't the professionals adequately prepared for the storm? It's
not like hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico are unusual.

Even if all Amateur Radio does is provide a back-up communications
system, that's a service.


A back-up provides exactly the same kind of service as the service that
is being backed up.

Does amateur radio provide that?


Seldom. By law it CANNOT provide the SAME service as
broadcasting, multiplexed-circuit communications as in the
telephone infrastructure, and NOT in the high speed of
data transfer NOW COMMON to MOST communications services
on the OUTSIDE of amateur radio.

Yes, amateur radio does provide "health and welfare" message
relay and some 'phone patches' to the public...provided those
amateur radio services are ABLE TO SURVIVE a major
environmental disaster. The ARRL failed to "report" on all
the amateur radio facilities that did NOT SURVIVE Katrina
(wouldn't be good for their wish-fulfillment of members to
report that).


Amateur radio emergency communications can be more than health and
welfare, Len.

Yes, amateur radio DID provide SOME communications AFTER
Katrina had hit. "Health and welfare" messages and some
scattered 'phone patching on the OUTSKIRTS of New Orleans.
NONE of that amateur radio communications effort happened
DURING the height of a REAL emergency situation and the
start of the flooding immediately afterwards. [refer to
the stock video shots such as dozens of bright yellow
school busses sitting in a flooded bus park, empty, up
to their hubcaps in water...busses that could have been
driven by most drivers to help evacuate flood victims,
but were NOT, just ignored by almost everyone there]


Why weren't the professionals better prepared, Len?

"Health and welfare" messaging is emotional sustenance to
family and friends of disaster victims. But, let's face it,
it is NOT ESSENTIAL to saving lives of the victims, does
NOT help repair damange, does NOT evacuate any victims,
does NOT do any lasting service to victims other than to
provide copy for ARRL news pages.


Do you think that health and welfare traffic is all that amateur radio
ever does in an emergency?

Do you think that health and welfare traffic is not a service to the
country?

Did Mr. Professional-in-some-kind-of-electronics provide HIS
personal "service to the country" during or after Katrina?
He never said boo about it.


Boo.

He HAS jabbered about his
"service in 'other' ways" (to the nation) but has NEVER
explained those "other ways" in any sort of detail.


Where, exactly, did I ever write about *my* service "in other ways"?

Show us the exact quotes.

Hurricane Katrina was a severe disaster, unprecedented
in recent times (including time hurricanes had routinely
hit Florida).


So what? NOLA is definitely in a hurricane zone. It's been below sea
level for a very long time. There's no excuse for not being prepared.

The 'preparations for emergencies' in the
New Orleans area were later revealed to be miniscule (if
not abyssmal and poorly planned. That apparently
INCLUDED amateur radio 'preparations;' the ARRL is
strangely silent on that aspect.


Why weren't the professionals prepared?

Normally, the REAL emergency services and radio services
OTHER than amateur radio are available 24/7 all over the
nation.


"Normal" and "emergency" are opposites.

Here is what I wrote previously on those:

United States amateur radio could disappear at midnight and
the regular and emergency communications of the USA would
keep on functioning. Police would respond to radio calls,
fire engines would roll, ambulances would be dispatched,
Local governments would continue without pause, already
having lots and lots of radio equipment and operators.
Air traffic would continue, maritime traffic would continue,
trains would still be training, highways would continue to
function (and be repaired/renovated) as needed, all without
ham radio. Cellular telephony would continue (1 in 3
Americans having one), the Internet would continue, landline
telephony would continue. Mass Media (Broadcasting) would
continue unabated. The Forest Service would continue
spotting fires, reporting any via their own radios. River
and Inland Waterways would still have their VHF FM voice
communications. GPSS would continue functioning. NOAA
would still continue with weather information. Emergencies
at sea would still be handled by GMDSS. Emergencies in the
air would still be handled by VHF (over land) and HF voice
(over ocean). Emergencies on land would be handled by a
variety of Public Safety Radio Service facilities, all tied
together in large networks that operate nicely.


Except that when Katrina hit, that didn't happen.

My wife and I were in the upper midwest when Katrina hit the Gulf
states' coastline last year. Outside of Katrina being the major
focus of the news, NOTHING affected our stay there. The remaining
weather disturbance reaching the upper midwest DID cause us to
change plans on the return trip. My wife handled all the
reservation changes via cell phone from inside the car while I
was driving through Iowa and on into Nevada. Excellent service
on that. No roadway or motel or restaurant services were
affected. On the 2000 mile return trip we saw only two incidents
of accidents of others, both attended to by existing
infrastructure public safety and towing services.


And your point is?

You seem to be saying that since you were hundreds of miles form NOLA
and Katrina didn't really affect you, that amateur radio performs no
service to the country.

That's all true. But it does not mean that Amateur Radio does not
perform any service to the country.


The problem is the amateurs that ramp up the actual service to the
country into a superman complex.


*Some* amateurs certainly overstate things about amateur radio.


Thus my posting last month quoting an ARRL VP.


Brian, that is anathema to the morseodist supermen of the ARRL
persuasion. A "no-no" in common speech. The ARRL is always
right, can never be wrong...


Gee, Len, you talk that way about yourself.

However, to say that Amateur Radio performs no service to the country
is incorrect.


Agreed.


In ANY emergency, ANY communications service facility is useful.
One uses whatever is there at the time. The FCC recognizes this
in Part 1 of Title 47 C.F.R. in regards to ALL radio services'
operations in the event of a REAL emergency.


So Amateur Radio *does* provide a service to the country.

Glad to see you've finally admitted your mistakes, Len.

Yet there are times when those communications services are inadequate
for the situation, and Amateur Radio meets the need. That's when
Amateur Radio performs a service to the country.


[that is so RARE that it is almost laughable]


It can be as simple as using Amateur Radio communication to report a
broken-down vehicle in a spot where cell phones don't work.


[that has become a rarity...in the "Big Dig" tunnel complex
of Boston there are internal RF repeaters for that...but
any radio is useless there when the roof pieces fall...]

No, you can't include this. I was laughed at when I suggested that
cellular telephones handle minor emergencies on a day in and day out
basis.


When was that?


Why would you care? You ignore Robesin's all caps, accusatory thread
jacking when it happens.


Jimmy has tunnel vision. He would be at home in Boston in the
tunnel complex...if it weren't so "violent." :-)

Oops! Jimmy allow no violence! I forgot. He would interpret
falling concrete roof slabs as "MY (violent) ERROR!" :-)


Cell phones are certainly useful for "minor emergencies". I've made a
few 911 calls from mine.


Where cell phones have a problem is when too many people in the same
area try to use them simultaneously, exceeding the system capacity.


Yet some calls still are still getting through. Some calls are
performing emergency comms. No?


Not in Jimmyworld. In emergencies ALL infrastructure comms
FAIL and ONLY amateur radio can save the day. Sigh...

Amateurs and amateur radio equipment SURVIVES the harshest
environments and is ready-and-able to SERVE 24/7 !

[gag, guffaw! :-) ]

Looks like Len is relapsing...

Another example was when the space shuttle disintegrated on reentry a
few years ago. There was an extensive search effort to find pieces of
the wreckage - which were spread over a wide area.


What was the emergency?


Public service isn't just about emergencies.


Fair enough.

Emergency communications
is just one part of how Amateur Radio provides service to the country.


It can be.


The "service" aspect is largely confined to refills of the
pipe that some smoke while dreaming in front of their radios.


I don't smoke, Len.

Apparently some feel guilt about enjoying a hobby - or just
inadequate - and try to pretend they are much more important
than just hobbyists. Some pretend to be professionals in an
amateur activity.


Why were the professionals so unprepared for Katrina, Len?

The crew were beyond saving. The property was beyond saving.


Finding as much wreckage as possible could help prevent another shuttle
disaster.


How many years were the shuttles grounded? Lots of time to collect the
wreckage.


Mr. Professional-in-SOME-kind-of-work seems to have overlooked
both the NASA statements immediately after the fact, the many,
many pages of news and information about the shuttle disaster,
the probable cause of disintegration (number one suspect on day
one of the tragedy...by the pros involved). The "footprint" of
the breakup was spread over three states in a known path. The
bodies of all astronauts on board were recovered as well as
over 80 percent of the spaceframe. Pictures of the wreckage
laid out in order in a hangar in Florida were printed in
Aviation Week & Space Technology. The vast majority of the
wreckage pieces were found by ordinary citizens, ones who
have not been granted amateur radio licenses.


And yet at least some of the search efforts were aided by amateur radio
communication. That's proven by first-had accounts by amateurs who were
there, doing the job.

Some of the communications for the search efforts were conducted by
Amateur Radio, because other facilities were unavailable or did not
meet the needs of the searchers.


So?


So providing communications to the searchers was a service to the
country - even though it wasn't an emergency.


Fair enough.


The ACTUAL communications services were done by existing infra-
structure agencies...everyone from local PDs to the Forest
Service that could be spared from regular work.


Not all of them. Amateur Radio played a role.

CITIZENS,
most of whom had NO radio licenses, helped the wreckage
recovery efforts on their own, no ham license required.

Some of those efforts used Amateur Radio communications.

That's service to the country.


Not by the definition of saving life or property?


Service is about more than emergencies. The radio services listed by
Len include some which are not primarily about emergencies.


[Torquemada Jim did NOT identify which ones...he only wanted
to light a burning at the stake...:-) ]

Here's a first-person account of a radio amateur who helped with the
Columbia wreckage search:


http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r.../msg/5be7f564c...

[...a "vital service to the nation"...disregarding those
who've actually worked on STS components such as the SSME]

[heh heh heh heh heh heh...]


There are many more examples, from hurricane Katrina to providing
communications for a parade or similar event.


OK, you're finally getting to an emergency.


Public service isn't just about emergencies.


Not all communications surrounding Katrina were emcomms.


Tsk, the traditional New Year's Rose Parade uses non-amateur
comms to keep it organized and going, how about that? :-)

Your claim that Amateur Radio does not perform any service to the
country is simply not true, Len. It's an error on *your* part - I
didn't make it up.


Just don't overinflate our actual involvement.


Of course.


Here is what was originally written:

Torquemada Jim: "Are you saying that amateur radio does not
perform any service to the country?"

My reply: "Encapsulated in the briefest meaning, YES."

KABLOOIE! Jimmy HAD to explode in a torrent of "errors."
Gotta love it...push just one button and he detonates.
:-) [...this is more fun than a barrel of morseodists]


"Explode". Len? Not me. You're the one who goes off when someone
disagrees with you.

Read the report on Hurricane Katrina that details what worked and what
didn't. Amateur Radio provided an important service to the country -
according to the authors of the report.


Fair enough.


FIFTY TWO PAGES WORTH, released 7 Jul 06, got it fresh from the
GPO website when it was released. Interesting but wordy.

Re-skim-reading it, I did NOT see the "importance to the
country" in such glowing, endearing, patriotic terms. That's
probably due to being just an ordinary citizen, having served
my country in the military during a time of war, working as
a professional in radio-electronics...not in the "transport
industry" or busy, busy with manual telegraphy. :-)

US amateur radio is an interesting avocational aspect of the
entire radio world. It can be fun to most of the hobbyists.
But, a few, like Mr. Professional-in-some-kind-of-whatever,
wrap themselves in too much patriotic bunting...they can't
see through that or the many flags they wave about them-
selves. Pity that, only saplings pretending to be mature
trees, unable to see the forest.

[watch the outrageous vituperation flow in now... :-) ]

From you, Len.


Try reading the account of the Shuttle debris search - from someone who
was there.



  #906   Report Post  
Old September 17th 06, 02:18 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 877
Default "Guts" and Subsidies

wrote:
From: on Thurs, Sep 14 2006 3:36 pm
wrote:
From: on Thurs, Sep 14 2006 4:31 am
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Mon, Sep 11 2006 9:45 pm
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Mon, Sep 11 2006 2:46 pm
wrote:
From: Dave Heil 940 on Sun, Sep 10 2006 3:26 pm
wrote:
From: on Sun, Sep 10 2006 7:55 am
wrote:
From: on Thurs, Sep 7 2006 6:53 pm
wrote:


YOU are not of the FCC, not an official thereof...


Sometimes there's no other recourse but to use a 2x4
to bang on the heads of 1x2s. :-)


Ah yes - threats of physical violence. Shows how superior your
arguments aren't, Len.


Bad sentence structure, Jimmy Noserve. :-)


Tsk. Sissy-prissy horrifications about "threats of physical
violence?" :-) About some WORD PLAY?!? Poor baby...


You've tried those kinds of threats of violence here before, Len.


Oh, dear, the Mighty Macho Morseman is AFRAID?!?

Such threats, even with smileys, are the mark of someone who can't make
their point verbally.


Oh, oh, her holiness Mother Superior is on duty!

Fearless Leader wannabes ought to look around inside the
newsgroup for REAL "threats of violence." Go make your
horrified revelations about "threats of violence" to
that other radio amateur "Not Cocksucker Lloyd." He wants
to KILL Mark. Stated that in message(s).


What does that have to do with me? I do not know who "Lloyd" is, where
s/he is, or what the disagreement between "Lloyd" and "Mark" is. He has
not threatened to "use a 2x4 to bang on the heads of 1x2s."


Awwww..."you don't know...." Poor thing isn't aware or
informed. [David Horowitz would be horrified]


I don't read everything that is posted to rrap, Len. I don't even read
most of it. Too much noise.

Tsk, I post a cute saying (actually thought up by another
amateur extra who did pass a 20 WPM code test) and you
come all UNGLUED! Quick, call Eastman for more
cyanoacrylic adhesive!


I'm not unglued at all, Len.

In fact I don't read much of rrap at all anymore. Too much noise and
too little signal. You replied to my posting so I read what you wrote.
Now you're all upset, shouting and carrying on like an overtired
two-year-old because I disagree with you and point out your mistakes.


Me, "upset?"


Yes. You're shouting and name-calling and carrying on like an overtired
two-year-old.

I pushed your buttons, mighty morseman
and you come back in TYPICAL fashion, all prissy-sissy.


I guess you would rather I behaved like you...

Makes it very easy to walk all over your posting!

But...you only target the no-code-test advocates for your
whining no-violence "complaints." You say you "can't control
them (other morsemen)."


The only person I can "control" is myself, Len.


Nope. You've lost control after hitting the spike strip
of reality on the morse highway.


Not so

For some reason you assign group blame - if one Morse Code test
advocate does something you dislike, you hold *all* Morse Code test
advocates responsible.


Absolutely! :-)


Well, there you have it.

Assigning blame to all in a group because of the behavior of some in
the group is a form of bigotry, Len.

Devout morsemen can either hang together or hang separately.
No problem to me. [got enough rope for either]

Oh! Oh! Tremble, Jimmy, "more violence!" "more violence!"


Threat of violence.

H Y P O C R I T E


You can't be talking about me when you use that word, Len.


Absolutely AM! :-)


It doesn't fit me.

Lowering the requirement may do more harm than benefit.


You mean ELIMINATION OF THE CODE TEST FOR AN AMATEUR LICENSE.


Not just that. Lowering the written test requirements as well.


WHICH no-code-test advocate said that?

[Answer: NONE...that was a fabrication by morsemen]


Incorrect.

Both NCVEC and NCI have proposed schemes that would reduce the written
test requirements.

There is NO UPPER LIMIT on the written test elements
in the Question Pool, Jimmy...leastways NOT from the
FCC. The legal minimum is TEN pool questions for EACH
required pool question. The QPC could generate 10, 20,
maybe 30 times the legal minimum and be lawful...but
eventually the question pool and answers could be
greater than the best eidetic's abilities.


The number of questions in the pool isn't the only issue.

Also the
imposition of age requirements for an amateur radio license.


Poor baby, still FIXATED on 7 years ago!


Not me. Just recalling some facts.

I STOPPED pursuing that suggestion to the FCC (on the
last page of my Comment on NPRM 98-143) SEVEN YEARS AGO!
Since FCC 99-412 (the Report and Order on Restructuring)
nullified all those Comments in regards to the FCC
decision and did not pick up on my suggestion, I didn't
continue after that.


But you still think it's a good idea.

BUT...all the angry pro-code-test morsemen seem to LIKE
necro-equine flagellation ('beating a dead horse') and
a few beaters (like yourself) are intent on trying to
breathe life in to the creature no matter what.


You've not given one single bit of evidence of problems in the Amateur
Radio Service caused by the licensing of young people.

We can all guess WHY you are doing it, Jimmy. You are
obsessed with trying to prove ME 'doing wrong' and have
MANUFACTURED things that haven't existed for a long time.


Nope.

I'm just pointing out the fact that your behavior goes far beyond
trying to eliminate the Morse Code test.

DROP it, Jimmy. I did, long ago.


Then why do you keep arguing about it?

All you are doing is
beating off, er beating that very dead horse.

Stop with your necrophilia.


YES, that would do "harm" to all the 20 WPM tested US amateur
extra class who got their status, rank, title, and privileges
through testing for morsemanship. It would strip their
BRAGGING RIGHTS in amateur radio.


How?


Your "friends and neighbors" might not come over to "admire
your work!"


Why not?

btw, I am not in control of what Fred posts here.


Riiiight...but you love to attempt controlling what I
write! :-)


You're obvioulsy out of control here, Len.

Gee, Len, you spend much of your verbiage here telling us how superior
*you* are.


Mais non, mon petit. I just stated what I did and where
at what time.


Over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and
over again.

If you think that was 'better than you'
then you have an odd insecurity problem.


You're the one claiming superiority.

Some of your statements are wrong, Len. In fact many of the statements
you make here are wrong.


ONLY by self-righteous amateur morsemen standards.


By any objective standards. For example, the ARRL has, in the past, had
more than 25% of US licensed radio amateurs as members.


When? In 1952? In 1939? :-)


Why does it matter? If it happened once, your "never" statement is
wrong.

Look it up.

It was in a statement by an FCC official. You missed it - I didn't.


I check the Federal Register daily...the FCC website weekly.

When and by whom was this "statement" made?


Look it up.

But, YOU are NOT a regulator of US amateur radio, then,
now, future, or anyplace but your warped imagination.


Neither are you, Len. You're just on the sidelines yelling.


Tsk, tsk, then all YOU are is ON THE SIDELINES YELLING
at no-code-test advocates. :-)


I'm not yelling and I'm not on the sidelines. You are.

I've had my say with the FCC - that really seems to bother you.


None at all. :-) If you were worth the effort you'd have
been Replied to. No problem.


Actually, the FCC did agree with me on some things.

It's a radio *service*, Len. And like it or not, I'm part of it and
you're not.


All throughout Title 47 C.F.R., the word "service" is a
regulatory term denoting a type and kind of radio activity
being regulated.

See Citizens Band Radio SERVICE or Radio Control Radio SERVICE.

Are you my waiter tonight? Good, then you can serve us
something palatable instead of long-dead, severly beaten
horsemeat.


OH! You must mean FEDERALLY LICENSED "amateur" radio!


That's what the term "amateur radio" means. You're not a part of it.


Do you REALLY understand the definition of "amateur?"


Yes.


Insufficient answer. You already said you were a "SERVICE."

Try to get your act together. And be quick with that
horsemeat.


Hold your breath while waiting...;-)

Are you saying that amateur radio does not perform any service to the
country?


Encapsulated in the briefest meaning, YES.


Well, that's another Len mistake.

The fact remains that the training and experience you received in
military service were
subsidized by the taxpayers. So was any work on "government funded"
projects.


Tsk, tsk, tsk...all of Heil's 'foreign service' adventures,
salary, expenses, et al, came DIRECTLY out of government.
No "subsidy" there.

I have NEVER worked for any business, company, corporation
that was "subsidized" by the government. NONE.

You are confused on the use of the word "subsidy."


Nope.

Who is "we", Len? I know where I work and what I do, as do some of the
folks who read rrap.


And the REST of us are kept in the dark.


You used the word "we" as if you were the pope.

Is this a mystery
game you made up? :-) Something to take the place of
playing "old maid?"

Are you ASHAMED of your job?


Oh, no. I'm proud of it.

AFRAID someone will POKE FUN at it?


Not at all.

Why? You aren't hesitant about poking fun at whatever
job a no-code-test-advocate has...you've done that repeatedly.


When was that? Show your work.

There are plenty of people who are not in the military who put their
lives on the line, too. For example, firemen, law enforcement officers,
emergency response people, many health care workers are at risk of
death in their line of work.


Save all your homily grits for the next 9/11 anniversary.

Don't try to weasel out of what I said.


What did you say, Len?

They *all* deserve respect for what they do.


Then start SHOWING that "respect" to some of us you've
made fun of...HYPOCRITE.


Who have I made fun of, Len? Show us the exact quotes.

Why should I respect you, considering the way you behave here?

Yet you worked on projects that were funded by the government, right?
If so, you were subsidized by the taxpayers.


NOT "subsidies."


Yes, subsidies. The projects could not pay for themselves, so they were
subsidized. Without taxpayer money, the projects - and your jobs -
would not have existed.

... If your employer was paid by the govt. for work you did, then
your paycheck came from the taxpayers.


INCORRECT AGAIN! [don't you ever learn]


My salary checks came from private businesses/corporations.


So what?

The money came from the taxpayers.

The projects could not pay for themselves in the free market, so they
were subsidized. Without taxpayer money, the projects - and your jobs,
and your paychecks - would not have existed.

If you insist on going into some strange financial trail
excursion where you need a CPA with superskills. :-)


It's simple finances, Len.

But, you still don't have the GUTS to tell "the rest of us"
in this newsgroup what, where of your employment, do you?


It's not about "guts", Len.

No, you want to negatively criticize those of us who are
proud and enthusiastic about what we do, have done.


It seems you cannot tolerate any criticism or dissent, Len. Even though
you criticize the work of others, no one must say boo about your work.

Boo.

When you dismount from your high hobby horse you can
- if you have the courage - tell what YOU do for a
living?


Why should I tell you, Len? I already know how you will react.


WE already know, Jimmy...you ain't got the GUTS to do so.


Sure I have the guts to do so. I also have the common sense not to.

You haven't got the GUTS to explain, do you?


It's not about guts, Len.


Sigh...let me rephrase: You haven't got the COURAGE.


It's not about courage, either.

"Guts" is too visceral for sissy-prissies.


All it means is that you aren't a participant. You're all talk and no
action. All hat and no cattle. All theory and no practice.


And here you were, rushing home from "work in transportation"
to answer without much "civility" and with lots of semantic
juggling to attempt defending your previous statements. :-)

I don't HEAR you on the radio! :-)


You didn't listen.

Tsk. You will quibble semantics forever just to appear
YOU are "right." :-)


No. Because I *am* right.


You "*are* superior" because you are a morseman. :-)

Morsemen are "always right" in your view, aren't they?


Selling something does not make one "right".


YOU are always "selling a bill of goods." :-)

We see your "hat" but we can't hear any hoofbeats of
all that "cattle." :-)

Is your Hide Raw?


Quick, Jimmy...go to Chicago so you can appear as a
guest replacement for Roger Ebert on "Ebert and Roeper!"
There's still a chance for you to get famous. If you
are clever, you can slip in some biased PR for morse
code and reach MILLIONS in the audience! :-)


[that would be one helluva lot better than what the
ARRL has done so far...]


Poor baby...got TWO "thumbs down," did you?


Sweetums, you MANUFACTURE "errors" (that aren't really
errors per se, only some semantic quibbles and bits
that only satisfy your image hunger). Bone apetite,
doggy boy.


Your errors are of all kinds, Len. You make them, not me.


No, sweetums, YOU MAKE THEM UP...then say "I" made them.


How can I make up what you actually wrote?

For an alleged professional writer you sure don't proofread or check
facts very well.


You want what you paid me for professional work in here
refunded? Okay, attached to this message is a refund. :-)

However, your intolerance of disagreement with your opinions is
demonstrated in practically everything you post here.


Call the ACLU, call the Attorney General, call for
Philip and call for Morris. Poor baby, wanna act
smug and arrogant and superior and hope to get LIKED?!?

Only by some masochist, sweetums. :-)


I'm a judge of what's true and what isn't, Len.


You are a morseman and you're okay... :-)

You are naturally superior in all aspects. Except
your aspect is in a sling.


It's your uncivil and childish behavior that's intolerant, Len.


Oh, you expect ALL your "inferiors" to be masochists?

Tsk, tsk, the FCC has NO age limit on amateur radio.
Now YOU don't like childish behavior? Too bad, the
FCC would allow a 2-year-old to hold a ham license. :-)


Where did I make fun of anyone's military service, Len? Show us.


Drop this "show us" ploy, Jimmy Noserve.


Is that an order, Len?

The answer is no.

That's an OLD
trick, trying to make the challenged go through all those
(if available) archives, cut-and-paste, only to have you
rationalize YOU are "right" because you're a morseman, etc.
:-)


It's a simple request for you to back up your claims.

That "show us" response of actually showing where and when
you did it is negative ROI. As I said, you, when
confronted, will DENY it, rationalize some "reasons" that
you are "right" and then ignore it. :-)


IOW, you cannot provide anything to back up your claims. You just want
to make all kinds of baseless assertions and never have to back them
up.

Besides, OLD POSTS are in the past...they've already been
argued over. You are NOT going to "win" any such OLD
argument by repetition of the SAME posts from archives!
But...you keep on trying and trying and trying. You got
very trying a long time ago.


IOW, you know I'm right and are trying to weasel out of backing up what
you claim I said.

You're proving that you are "all talk no action" by doing so.

What someone else posts here is their business, Len.


Ah! The no-guts rationalization hard at work! :-)

So..."someone else" isn't bothered with, but you DO
try to bring me down every chance you get! :-)


How is correcting your mistakes (actually, just some of your mistakes)
"bringing you down", Len?

What do you FEAR from me, Jimmy? C'mon, you can level
with the group...


Seems to me that you are the one in fear of me, Len. You keep telling
me to shut up in various ways, trying unsuccessfully to bring me down
to your level, and getting all upset when I point out mistakes you
made.

Now do try to work on your people skills - and your Morse Code
skills....;-)

  #907   Report Post  
Old September 17th 06, 02:31 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 751
Default Service To The Country

wrote:

[watch the outrageous vituperation flow in now... :-) ]

Beep, beep,


I read your post, Len, so I've already seen it.

You are to amateur radio what a chain saw is to astronomy.

Dave K8MN
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Persuing a Career in Electronics, HELP! Justin Homebrew 18 August 1st 03 07:02 AM
Bonafied Proof of LIFE AFTER DEATH -- Coal Mine Rescue Ed Conrad Shortwave 0 July 6th 03 12:33 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017