Rubber Duckie

Is a stubby rubber covered antenna. with a fitting to go on your portable.
We use to have 3 ft pull out antennas.

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:33:33 GMT, "ergo" wrote:

It is seventy-thirds
70/3
Because 23.333333333333333333333333 is the value of pi times the square root
of the ohms plus the amps.

my handle is my wifes business not yours

Ha ha ha ha! GREAT response, and makes as much sense as
the message that STARTED this thread!

LOL!

wot massage??
wot thread?
wot iz amarture radio about?

"AF Four Kilo" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:33:33 GMT, "ergo" wrote:

It is seventy-thirds
70/3
Because 23.333333333333333333333333 is the value of pi times the square
root
of the ohms plus the amps.

my handle is my wifes business not yours

Ha ha ha ha! GREAT response, and makes as much sense as
the message that STARTED this thread!

LOL!

" wrote in message news:Q%lDb.121450$_M.630038@attbi_s54...
Marty:

73 or 73s .. the idea is the same and neither reduces intelligibility.

Not correct. "73" (singular) translates to "best wishes" (plural). 73s
would thus translate to "best wisheses", which definitely reduces
intelligibility.

Name or handle... the idea is the same and neither reduces intelligibility.
Personally, I usually say "I hight Paul." After all, this is more
classically than either Name or Handle. It does reduce intelligibility, of
course, but that seems to be a small price to pay in exchange for being
correct.

Whenever someone asks me for my "handle", I just say "My name is
Richard". That gets the point across pretty well.

73(s)

Paul AB0SI

"Richard Cranium" wrote in message
om...
" wrote in message
news:Q%lDb.121450$_M.630038@attbi_s54...
Marty:

73 or 73s .. the idea is the same and neither reduces intelligibility.

Not correct. "73" (singular) translates to "best wishes" (plural). 73s
would thus translate to "best wisheses", which definitely reduces
intelligibility.

Name or handle... the idea is the same and neither reduces
intelligibility.
Personally, I usually say "I hight Paul." After all, this is more
classically than either Name or Handle. It does reduce intelligibility,
of
course, but that seems to be a small price to pay in exchange for being
correct.

Whenever someone asks me for my "handle", I just say "My name is
Richard". That gets the point across pretty well.

73(s)

Paul AB0SI

"best wishes" is not a true plural. It is idiomatic. One can not parse a
language word by word.. Natural language does not work that way.

73s may grate on your ears, but the meaning is completely clear.

Paul

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 00:19:31 GMT, "
wrote:

"Richard Cranium" wrote in message
. com...
" wrote in message
news:Q%lDb.121450$_M.630038@attbi_s54...
Marty:

73 or 73s .. the idea is the same and neither reduces intelligibility.

Not correct. "73" (singular) translates to "best wishes" (plural). 73s
would thus translate to "best wisheses", which definitely reduces
intelligibility.

Name or handle... the idea is the same and neither reduces
intelligibility.
Personally, I usually say "I hight Paul." After all, this is more
classically than either Name or Handle. It does reduce intelligibility,
of
course, but that seems to be a small price to pay in exchange for being
correct.

Whenever someone asks me for my "handle", I just say "My name is
Richard". That gets the point across pretty well.

73(s)

Paul AB0SI

"best wishes" is not a true plural. It is idiomatic. One can not parse a
language word by word.. Natural language does not work that way.

73s may grate on your ears, but the meaning is completely clear.

Paul


Well, the word is "regards", not "wishes", and regards is a plural
word. Regard is singular.

Dick - W6CCD

On 15 Dec 2003 15:45:54 -0800, (Richard Cranium)
wrote:

Not correct. "73" (singular) translates to "best wishes" (plural). 73s
would thus translate to "best wisheses", which definitely reduces
intelligibility.

Same tired, erroneous argument that is trotted out by the wanna-be
pedants every year or so about this time when they have nothing better
to do than try to prove how "intelligent" they are! LOL!

You can send best wishes to more than one person at once.
And you can say it more than once to the same person.
Therefore it is prefectly fine to say 73s.

73s to all in this newsgroup!

In looking back at old ham publications from the early 60's, as well as
license guides with operating techniques explained, I have seen the
reference to "handle" as appropriate terminology, well before the CB influx.
The resistance to the use became evident (at least around here), when 2M got
populated by herds of former cb'ers, and I'm not talking no code, I'm
talking 1970-80 era, who did everything they could to distance themselves
from "Chicken Band" and pretend that they were never there. For a while, the
"name" was used on VHF, while oldtimers on HF, especially CW, would refer to
"handles". It has since died away.
And if 73 causes such consternation, imaging what someone who wished you
88's would bring!!

"Bill" wrote in message . ..
In looking back at old ham publications from the early 60's, as well as
license guides with operating techniques explained, I have seen the
reference to "handle" as appropriate terminology, well before the CB influx.
The resistance to the use became evident (at least around here), when 2M got
populated by herds of former cb'ers, and I'm not talking no code, I'm
talking 1970-80 era, who did everything they could to distance themselves
from "Chicken Band" and pretend that they were never there. For a while, the
"name" was used on VHF, while oldtimers on HF, especially CW, would refer to
"handles". It has since died away.
And if 73 causes such consternation, imaging what someone who wished you
88's would bring!!

bill is it necessary for you to rub salt in old wounds???? don't
confuse the issue with facts.....we all know that present day hams
were never into cb radio and that's a fact jack.....well got to go
take a 10-100 and give stevo a 42...be back in a minute.....

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:05:38 GMT, "Bill"
wrote:

In looking back at old ham publications from the early 60's, as well as
license guides with operating techniques explained, I have seen the
reference to "handle" as appropriate terminology, well before the CB influx.


Of course this is correct.
To suggest otherwise reveals the ignorance of the writer.
An innocent enough mistake, but just brought about by their lack of
experience in this grand ol' avocation!