Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#111
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Steve" wrote in message ... Perhaps what one regards as "listenable" is a function of how interesting the content is. When content is listened to when the signal exceeds a certain level and not listened to when it does not pretty conclusively shows the issue is signal, not content. |
#112
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "dxAce" wrote in message ... Can't you even fake a letter 'tard boy? Like all the DX you have apparently faked by listening on the Internet or stealing reports from online posts? I don't do that. Only you do, and then you swear, cuss and insult to obfuscate when anyone is close to figuring you out. |
#113
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
David Eduardo wrote:
I was interested several years ago in the recent antagonism towards broadcasting by DXers. That is certainly on-topic. And that's easily explained. Broadcasters stopped serving DXers. Ignored them. In some cases rebuked them for contacting them with reception reports. You're fans don't turn on you without cause. You have to run them off. If you're looking for reasons why DXers became antagonistic, take a look at the attitude shown them by broadcasters. It's no mystery. |
#114
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "dxAce" wrote in message ... And 'Eduardo' is going to come up with so many lies as to why I won't get any letter from his *daughter* it'll blow your mind! The answered is simple. An attorney employed by the government is not going to have a "law firm" letterhead. |
#115
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 28, 1:55*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message ... On Jan 27, 10:13 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: "Steve" wrote in message ... On Jan 27, 9:53 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message ... Hey, have the bitch send me a letter, on the firms letterhead. Like I said before, I expect to receive it in the next two weeks. Pretty easy, eh. 'Eduardo'? You ****ing drunk maniac, Aw, did dxAce huwt your wittle feewings? Poor wittle Edwawdo... There is no need to call somebody he does not know a "kunt" or a "bitch" and so on. He's just drunk, so I guess he was a nasty piece of work in the service... probably why he is not there any more. . Nor is there any need to troll newsgroups. But someone who chooses to troll newsgroups shouldn't act 'wronged and wounded' at the first hint of rough treatment. I can't think of a ng that has more off-topic posts. As a DXer with over 2200 veries and 87 countries, 45-year member of NRC, founding member of IRCA, and general member over the years of NASWA, NNRC, MWC, etc., as well as having held (and never activated) an actual SW license, I was interested several years ago in the recent antagonism towards broadcasting by DXers. That is certainly on-topic.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Actually, that's not even close to being on topic. |
#116
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 28, 1:58*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message ... On Jan 28, 2:59 am, "David Eduardo" wrote: "dxAce" wrote in message If you really think that, you are a miserable excuse for a human being and a disgrace for all those that wore uniforms before and after you. I gave you a half dozen links showing what my daughter does, when she passed the bar, a report that shows her as the director of the legal department of a very large Commonwealth government entity, and even indication of her scholarship awards. What reason do we have to believe that this person is your daughter? You've been caught in numerous lies in this group. Any presumption that you're telling the truth has consequently gone straight out the window. The fact that you found someone whose name includes "Gleason" and is an attorney does not impress. I'm sure there are many of these. No, I have been accused of lies, none of which accusations have borne fruit. |
#117
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 28, 1:59*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message ... Perhaps what one regards as "listenable" is a function of how interesting the content is. When content is listened to when the signal exceeds a certain level and not listened to when it does not pretty conclusively shows the issue is signal, not content. When listeners tolerate noise for access to quality content and do not tolerate it for access to crap, this pretty conclusively shows the issue is with content, not signal. |
#118
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 28, 2:01*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message ... Can't you even fake a letter 'tard boy? Like all the DX you have apparently faked by listening on the Internet or stealing reports from online posts? I don't do that. Only you do, and then you swear, cuss and insult to obfuscate when anyone is close to figuring you out. You fake all kinds of stuff, as established time and time again. Yawn. |
#119
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 28, 2:02*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message ... And 'Eduardo' is going to come up with so many lies as to why I won't get any letter from his *daughter* it'll blow your mind! The answered is simple. An attorney employed *by the government is not going to have a "law firm" letterhead. Has she got a phone? Does she know how to use it? |
#120
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Steve" wrote in message ... On Jan 28, 11:10 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote: "Telamon" wrote in message news:telamon_spamshield- As I said before, those who participate in the radio ratings, year after year, thousands after thousands just in your county, don't find what you consider to be listenable to be that, and they don't listen in droves. Those thousands and thousands of people don't exist. None listen of them listen to my radio. Now if you want to draw some false conclusions based on some marketing data about what is or is not listenable on my radio you go right ahead and continue to live in your fantasy world. The world of commercial radio is based on ratings, not "the ability to hear" a station. There is no fantasy involved. Each person in the sample represents a thousand or so non-participants, and the results are the basis for the revenue of each significant station. The fact is, there is pretty much no listening to stations as shown in the ratings all over the US when signals are not extremely strong and noise-free Perhaps results would be different if all those stations weren't broadcasting crap? we are talking of stations that get good ratings inside the good signal area. and this is true all over the country in every market. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Another Giveaway to iBiquity? | Shortwave | |||
AM is dead thanks to iBiquity and the HD Radio Alliance! | Shortwave | |||
Ibiquity/HD Radio going down the toilet? | Shortwave | |||
Restoring the status quo of Ham Radio | Homebrew | |||
Restoring the status quo of Ham Radio | Homebrew |