wrote in message
...
On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 15:26:50 GMT, "Frank Dresser"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 17:34:46 -0500, clifto wrote:



So just change the meaning of the acronym to suit your
purposes, right?

If someone is transmitting from a humdred feet away with a
microwatt power, it's DX? Wake up.

That's it! Stand up for literalism!! I mean that literally. Get on
your
feet and stand up!! Don't back down! Give 'em an inch and they'll take
a
mile. And in inch terms, a mile is certainly DX.

Beats the hell out of standing up for sloppy thought. DX is
an explicit reference to reception of distant stations and has been
ubnderstood that way for decades. If they're nearby, it's not DX. If
you don't like it, think up a different acronym and pervert it to
whatever your taste is at the moment.


I think you misunderstand. Which words did I use to suggest I don't like
the term DX?

And I'm supporting your standing up for literalism! But I'm not literally
supporting you. I hope you know what I mean, this time.



Why not call it radar? What the hell, it's all electromagnetic
waves anyway.


Or particles. Or something that's not really a wave or a particle. But I'm
damn sure it's something, anyway.



Oh, I didn't catch your rant in the last "This is a SHORTWAVE RADIO
group"
subthread. If you missed your chance, don't worry.

**** off, lunatic. If you can't recognize your own spew as a
rant, you have no standing to criticize anyone else.


Another misunderstanding. I frequently rant on rrs, and I'm quite aware of
it!! Just look at all these exclamation points!!!!!



If you miss one off
topic thread, they'll be another one.

If going off-topic so offends you, what are you doing in this
part of the thread. Go home and be happy. Droolingly happy.


Didn't you know? I'm not offended and I am droolingly happy!! Have you
considered taking one of those psychic courses from Maj. Ed Dames or Sean
David Morton? It might cut down on these out-of-context imaginings of
yours!!!

Frank Dresser