Why don't you just not worry about it & answer the question of you can, and
if not just let me do what I want to do?

"John S." wrote in message
oups.com...

I'm at a loss as to why in the age of digital radios one would buy an
analog radio only to go to the added expense of a digital display. Why
don't you enjoy the 160 for what it is and not try to make it something
that it can never become. We all enjoy the point and click accuracy
and speed of keypads and up/down tuning keys on digital radios. The
160 will never be able to come close to competing with that. Just use
the 160 radio in the way it was designed: Scanning the bands by
listening as much as glancing at the analog scales.

This long winded exercise of reading about "Lisa" finding a radio on
Ebay, gushing about it having bandspread tuning, then whining about it
having bandspread tuning, then wanting to sell it because "she" has
enough digital radios, then deciding to keep it because she wants to
make it like all the other digital radios is beyond silly and wearing
thin.




Lisa Simpson wrote:
Why don't you just not worry about it & answer the question of you can, and
if not just let me do what I want to do?

"John S." wrote in message
oups.com...

I'm at a loss as to why in the age of digital radios one would buy an
analog radio only to go to the added expense of a digital display. Why
don't you enjoy the 160 for what it is and not try to make it something
that it can never become. We all enjoy the point and click accuracy
and speed of keypads and up/down tuning keys on digital radios. The
160 will never be able to come close to competing with that. Just use
the 160 radio in the way it was designed: Scanning the bands by
listening as much as glancing at the analog scales.

No one,,, I repete,,, No one has enough Radios.
cuhulin

John S. wrote:
This long winded exercise of reading about "Lisa" finding a radio on
Ebay, gushing about it having bandspread tuning, then whining about it
having bandspread tuning, then wanting to sell it because "she" has
enough digital radios, then deciding to keep it because she wants to
make it like all the other digital radios is beyond silly and wearing
thin.
really it just seems like the guy (a bit different that is seems to be
a gal inthis case) that always has to the latest wizzbag radio (and
that can be be nice to be around if they also have the budget to keep
buying them) and then fools with awhile then more or discards them
(glaning around the shack at a few radios that were the very latest in
wizzband)

in that lisa hardly seem anything but slightly novel

On 21 May 2006 19:39:41 -0700, "an_old_friend"
wrote:


Lisa Simpson wrote:
About time; perhaps now everyone will answer the questions they can and
remain silent if they cannot.
lisa if that will ever happen you are a in serious need of mental help

that isn't flaming or attacksing you it is stating the harsh reality

Harsh reality? We're talking about a friggin' hobby here.

David wrote:
On 21 May 2006 19:39:41 -0700, "an_old_friend"
wrote:


Lisa Simpson wrote:
About time; perhaps now everyone will answer the questions they can and
remain silent if they cannot.
lisa if that will ever happen you are a in serious need of mental help

that isn't flaming or attacksing you it is stating the harsh reality

Harsh reality?
yes
We're talking about a friggin' hobby here.

so we are

did you have a point to make?

On 22 May 2006 09:48:44 -0700, "
wrote:


David wrote:
On 21 May 2006 19:39:41 -0700, "an_old_friend"
wrote:


Lisa Simpson wrote:
About time; perhaps now everyone will answer the questions they can and
remain silent if they cannot.
lisa if that will ever happen you are a in serious need of mental help

that isn't flaming or attacksing you it is stating the harsh reality

Harsh reality?
yes
We're talking about a friggin' hobby here.

so we are

did you have a point to make?

Yes. When we use terms like ''harsh reality'' describe someone's
relationship to a toy radio how then can we describe stuff that is
truly severe and real like impending global climate catastrophe?

On 22 May 2006 13:30:15 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:


David wrote:
On 22 May 2006 09:48:44 -0700, "
wrote:


David wrote:
On 21 May 2006 19:39:41 -0700, "an_old_friend"
wrote:

did you have a point to make?

Yes. When we use terms like ''harsh reality'' describe someone's
relationship to a toy radio how then can we describe stuff that is
truly severe and real like impending global climate catastrophe?
we did not use the term harsh realoity as you describe
I used the the term harsh reality to describe the nature of USENET

given you can't accurately describe other postsing I question the rest
of your "logic"

You have very limited verbal skills.
ESL?

David wrote:
On 22 May 2006 13:30:15 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:


David wrote:
On 22 May 2006 09:48:44 -0700, "
wrote:


David wrote:
On 21 May 2006 19:39:41 -0700, "an_old_friend"
wrote:

did you have a point to make?

Yes. When we use terms like ''harsh reality'' describe someone's
relationship to a toy radio how then can we describe stuff that is
truly severe and real like impending global climate catastrophe?
we did not use the term harsh realoity as you describe
I used the the term harsh reality to describe the nature of USENET

given you can't accurately describe other postsing I question the rest
of your "logic"

You have very limited verbal skills.
not at all dyslexic as point of fact

ESL?
I don't know what you need, a brain that you used would help