|
|
Michael 'I'm just so retarded today, will it ever stop?' Bryant wrote: From: N8KDV Why don't you advance our little argument along by stating exactly where you obtained a PhD from? You can't do it can you? Embarrassed? Waiting for you to agree to the financial bet. For as long as i've had to deal with you, I'm getting something out of this! You could get being honest out of it Fat Boy! |
On 06 May 2004 08:07:18 GMT, ocom (Michael Bryant)
wrote: From: Tracy Fort WOW! I amaze myself! I agree 100% with you. Mike, the fact that someone like Fort would agree with you should be an independent reason for you to re-think your advocacy! Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL Louisville, KY R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K, DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76 (remove "nojunk" to reply) I guess you want him to agree with you so that you will have at least one person that agrees with you? Tracy |
Duncan Ross wrote:
My limited experience of listening to HAM is that they have a fetish for discussing coax. By comparison CBers are positively rivetting. We must be near the end times. CBers *were* the dregs. Must be like entropy...everything sinks to the level from where there's no place left to go. mike |
m II wrote: Must be like entropy...everything sinks to the level from where there's no place left to go. Isn't that exactly what happened to Canada? |
|
|
The work required to get that ham ticket is the only thing keeping it
from turning into a repeat of the Citizens Band fiasco. There would be a huge increase in the number of retards on the airways. there's already a number of retards on the ham airwaves. I failed to get my ham radio liscence because of them, even though I know that most of my answers were correct. They just didn't want me to become a ham in order to keep their little ham club "exclusive" to theirselves. and so they abused their priveleges. I heard the local ham repeater frequency in the 144 to 148 mhz band, went to the place they said, paid the money they said ( at least 3 times higher than what it costs roday) and took my test (after studying of course). The questions were not completely the same as the material that the book taught. Most of them were completely different. One of the questions on the actual ham test I took was "What is ATV and what does it refer to" I answered that it stood for "amateur tv" which some ham operators transmit. After the test was over, the examiners (real hams. I had heaard them on my local ham repeater including call letters and lalso listed in the ham directory book) marked that question wrong and told me that that was the wrong answer and that there is not any such thing as "ham tv" or "amateur tv" and that tv is not allowed at all in any ham bands anywhere. They then told me that the correct answer to that question is that "ATV" refers only to ham radio sets that are installed in All-Terrain Vehicles". And that was only one of the questions. They did the same thing with most of the other questions also. marking wrong what was definitely right,. and then coming up with phoney answers that they claimed was the "correct answers" just to keep out people that they didn't want or were predudiced against for some reason or another. So now I say, bring back the days when the FCC gave the liscence exams instead of letting local hams who abuse their priveleges when doing it doing it. |
and besides me flunkijng that phonyt ham test given out by real hams at a real
ham exam, I was also out all of the money that I had to pay them to in order to take the ham test. Bring back the days when the FCC tested people to be eligible for ham liscenvces instead of lettuing current local hams abuse their examining privileges by wanting to keep their ham radio club exclusively to only the members that are already there, or keeping out people just because of the way they look ("they're not pretty nor handsome. I don't want them in this ham club. Make sure that they don't get a ham liscence even if all of their answers are 100 percent correct"). And yes, these were hams who had studied morse code to get their ham liscences. And no the reason they were against me suceeding did not have anything at all to do with me being a no-code applicant. Because at the time I took it, there was not yet such a thing as being able to get a no-code liscence. I had to study morse code also. so because of my experience with them, I am now all for the no-liscence required on the ham bands. I say either that (no liscence required att all to get on the ham bands) or let the FCC once again do the exams for te liscenes required to get on the ham band, but in no way let the local hams do the exams. They purposely abuse their privileges. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:53 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com