dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"Carter, K8VT" wrote in message
om...
David Eduardo wrote:


You are so quick to say something nasty about others, but when you
make an absolutely stupid error yourself, you accuse others of being
wrong.


Well, no surprise here...this has been his standard modus operandi for
years.

I hate to think of how many stations he has reported to that he has
offended.

Well I do write a pretty mean reception report if I say so myself! My
return
rate on QSL's is actually quite high.

There is a DX fake in Italy who also gets high QSL returns despite the fact
he never heard most of the stations he has reported. Your statement proves
nothing.

Here's a quote from your homepage, homeboy:

"The common goal of DXers was to receive letters or "QSL" cards verifying that
the reception did, in fact, occur."

http://www.davidgleason.com/

I guess whatever QSL's you may possess mean nothing as well.

What the heck, you might have just used that QSL printing press to print up a few
for yourself, eh?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

Here's a quote from your homepage, homeboy:

"The common goal of DXers was to receive letters or "QSL" cards verifying
that
the reception did, in fact, occur."

http://www.davidgleason.com/

I guess whatever QSL's you may possess mean nothing as well.

Note the keyword "was." I was referring to events of 45 years ago or so.
Today, the meaning of a QSL or verification has changed, due to the
internet, the decline of the hobby and other factors. Today, a QSL has lost
most of its value in proving reception, in fact.

dxAce wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:

dxAce wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
cut
What 'realy' makes you think I don't, 'tard boy?

Oh i see
you are just a liar
my apologies

I was taking you at your word

I will try to avoid that in future

BTW how does one tell when (or is it IF ) you are telling the truth
about something?

ever going to have the cojnes to address your lying ways?



and you dare to accuse other of being retartded

I rest my case!
what case?

a case of beer perhaps or perhaps something stronger

Get back to me when you're feeling a bit more lucid.

meaning you don't have a real reply

That WAS a real reply, 'tard boy.
no it wasn't

That you didn't happen to like it is not my
problemo.

It is just proof you are not honest or trustworthy which is of course
your right

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

(I used 'problemo' because I'm gearing up to be a fake Hispanic. I'm
trying out
the lingo + I had chile for lunch and I'm fixing to have some tamales
for
dinner)

That would make you a fake Mexican only.

Mexicans are not Hispanic? Please enlighten me oh fake one. I wish to walk
in
fake zapatos just like you.

Chile con carne is a Texan cowboy thing... so you are using the wrong
evidence to start with. You conveniently snipped the point I made about
that.... chile ocn carne, burritos, etc. are not Mexican... they are
American. even the spelling of "chile" is wrong (it's "chili" in Spanish).

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

Here's a quote from your homepage, homeboy:

"The common goal of DXers was to receive letters or "QSL" cards verifying
that
the reception did, in fact, occur."

http://www.davidgleason.com/

I guess whatever QSL's you may possess mean nothing as well.

Note the keyword "was." I was referring to events of 45 years ago or so.
Today, the meaning of a QSL or verification has changed, due to the
internet, the decline of the hobby and other factors. Today, a QSL has lost
most of its value in proving reception, in fact.

Your opinion of course.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

(I used 'problemo' because I'm gearing up to be a fake Hispanic. I'm
trying out
the lingo + I had chile for lunch and I'm fixing to have some tamales
for
dinner)

That would make you a fake Mexican only.

Mexicans are not Hispanic? Please enlighten me oh fake one. I wish to walk
in
fake zapatos just like you.

Chile con carne is a Texan cowboy thing... so you are using the wrong
evidence to start with. You conveniently snipped the point I made about
that.... chile ocn carne, burritos, etc. are not Mexican... they are
American. even the spelling of "chile" is wrong (it's "chili" in Spanish).

Well hey, I'm willing to learn the ropes. Teach me how to be a fake like you.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

an_old_friend wrote:

dxAce wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:

dxAce wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
cut
What 'realy' makes you think I don't, 'tard boy?

Oh i see
you are just a liar
my apologies

I was taking you at your word

I will try to avoid that in future

BTW how does one tell when (or is it IF ) you are telling the truth
about something?

ever going to have the cojnes to address your lying ways?



and you dare to accuse other of being retartded

I rest my case!
what case?

a case of beer perhaps or perhaps something stronger

Get back to me when you're feeling a bit more lucid.

meaning you don't have a real reply

That WAS a real reply, 'tard boy.
no it wasn't

That you didn't happen to like it is not my
problemo.

It is just proof you are not honest or trustworthy which is of course
your right

And of course it is your right to be a totally ****ed up 'tard boy.

God bless America.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

Here's a quote from your homepage, homeboy:

"The common goal of DXers was to receive letters or "QSL" cards
verifying
that
the reception did, in fact, occur."

http://www.davidgleason.com/

I guess whatever QSL's you may possess mean nothing as well.

Note the keyword "was." I was referring to events of 45 years ago or so.
Today, the meaning of a QSL or verification has changed, due to the
internet, the decline of the hobby and other factors. Today, a QSL has
lost
most of its value in proving reception, in fact.

Your opinion of course.

No, not an opinion. More like a consensus.

The value of a QSL is related to the value of a reception report. In the
past, a report could not be generated and send in a timely form without
actually hearing a stations. Today, web pages with streaming, tunable remote
web receivers, and easy and cheap telephone connections make a reception
report easy to make without ever having to hear a radio station on (one of)
its frequency (ies). In the 60's, the only doubt involved MW DX reports
that could be faked by listening to the same station on SW. Today, nearly
every report on every station could be suspect as there are more and easy
ways to hear stations that do not involve the use of a radio and aerial.

For this reason, many DXers have ceased to report DX (in part, of course,
due to cost, low response, etc., also). Many of us prefer recordings to QSLs
and find it more entertaining to listen to a CD of catches than to look at
slips of cardboard called QSLs.

In the days when I was most active in reporting, I got above 2300
verifications from 87 countries, on MW. Today, I do not report at all.

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

(I used 'problemo' because I'm gearing up to be a fake Hispanic. I'm
trying out
the lingo + I had chile for lunch and I'm fixing to have some
tamales
for
dinner)

That would make you a fake Mexican only.

Mexicans are not Hispanic? Please enlighten me oh fake one. I wish to
walk
in
fake zapatos just like you.

Chile con carne is a Texan cowboy thing... so you are using the wrong
evidence to start with. You conveniently snipped the point I made about
that.... chile ocn carne, burritos, etc. are not Mexican... they are
American. even the spelling of "chile" is wrong (it's "chili" in
Spanish).

Well hey, I'm willing to learn the ropes. Teach me how to be a fake like
you.

Start in front of a mirror.

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:54:02 -0500, dxAce
wrote:



an_old_friend wrote:

dxAce wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
cut
What 'realy' makes you think I don't, 'tard boy?

Oh i see
you are just a liar
my apologies

I was taking you at your word

I will try to avoid that in future

BTW how does one tell when (or is it IF ) you are telling the truth
about something?



and you dare to accuse other of being retartded

I rest my case!
what case?

a case of beer perhaps or perhaps something stronger

Get back to me when you're feeling a bit more lucid.

meaning you don't have a real reply

That WAS a real reply, 'tard boy. That you didn't happen to like it is not my
problemo.

(I used 'problemo' because I'm gearing up to be a fake Hispanic. I'm trying out
the lingo + I had chile for lunch and I'm fixing to have some tamales for
dinner)

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Well I hope you had 'real chile' ........ you know, the stuff made
with chunks of meat and no beans (as I recall from when I lived in
Michigan the 'chile' used kidney beans and was more akin to goulash).
If you have the stuff like you get at Wendy's you would have to be a
fake fake Hispanic.