Yes, I can remember the use of the word, "handle" long before the CB
days.

Dick - W6CCD

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 15:49:33 GMT, "Chas" wrote:

Actually Dick, I saw in one of the latest QST magazines a letter from
someone involved in the ARRL back in 1918 or so, having written "73s", plus
reading old CQ magazines from 1950, I have seen the use of "handle". Not to
say I like it or use these that way.

Chuck WG2A

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 18:29:09 GMT, AF Four Kilo
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 08:32:50 -0700, Dick
wrote:

It's all pretty simple when you look at the words. 73 is a CW
abbreviation for Best Regards. As no doubt hundreds before me have
pointed out, there is already an "s" at the end of regard. If you
write out 73's, it becomes Best Regards's. If you write that for a
while, instead of 73's, you will come to see how much it butchers the
English language. Regards is already a plural word. To add ('s) to
the end of regards is to pluralize a plural. My high school English
teacher would have a heart attack.

Clearly you didn't read the explanation for when 73s IS appropriate!

By the way it is 73s, NOT 73's

73's means - "The possession of the 73" which make's no sense at all.

Oh, I read it alright. I dismissed as something expressed by someone
who doesn't have a good command of the English language. Pick either
one you want - Regardss or Regards's. Neither are correct.

Dick - W6CCD

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 01:00:52 GMT, AF Four Kilo
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 01:13:15 GMT, "Marty B."
wrote:

Well to me 73`sss and "HANDLE" reminds me of CB`ers, on the ham bands
and I hate hearing it.

Wrong again. Hams have always said 73s. I have been hearing it on the
ham bands myself since 1963 when I started as an SWL, and you can read
it in the CQ and QST magazines from the 1940s and 50s so I don't know
when you strange campaigners got into this absurd obsession but you
are sadly mistaken.


There are always exceptions, but the question is, "what has been the
commonly accepted practice over the years?" Out of curiosity, I
picked a couple of QSTs off the shelf. One was from Nov 1968, and the
other from Aug 1947. I looked through every page and found the use of
73 once in each magazine. Nowhere did I see the use of 73s, and I
would challenge you to show common usage of the abbreviation 73s in
amateur magazines from the 40s and 50s. Of course I did see a note
from G6CL in the 1947 QST who suggested the use of 161 to shorten the
use of 73 and 88 together! :-)

Dick - W6CCD

You know Dean, the more I think about it, the more I think that is the
root of the disagreement. For those of us brought up on CW before we
could ever operate on phone, we would never, ever use 73s on CW. When
we graduated to phone, it was natural to continue the original meaning
of the abbreviation. Those who never used CW, or only had a casual
acquaintance with it, started *******izing the term by adding an S to
the end where it was never intended.

Dick - W6CCD

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 13:31:24 GMT,
(K5DH) wrote:

Funny how this is only a debate for 'phone ops. CW ops
just send "73", never "73s".


73,
Dean K5DH

hahahha
161's
iloveit

"Dick" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 01:00:52 GMT, AF Four Kilo
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 01:13:15 GMT, "Marty B."
wrote:

Well to me 73`sss and "HANDLE" reminds me of CB`ers, on the ham bands
and I hate hearing it.

Wrong again. Hams have always said 73s. I have been hearing it on the
ham bands myself since 1963 when I started as an SWL, and you can read
it in the CQ and QST magazines from the 1940s and 50s so I don't know
when you strange campaigners got into this absurd obsession but you
are sadly mistaken.


There are always exceptions, but the question is, "what has been the
commonly accepted practice over the years?" Out of curiosity, I
picked a couple of QSTs off the shelf. One was from Nov 1968, and the
other from Aug 1947. I looked through every page and found the use of
73 once in each magazine. Nowhere did I see the use of 73s, and I
would challenge you to show common usage of the abbreviation 73s in
amateur magazines from the 40s and 50s. Of course I did see a note
from G6CL in the 1947 QST who suggested the use of 161 to shorten the
use of 73 and 88 together! :-)

Dick - W6CCD

Bill Turner for President!!!!!!!


"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:33:21 GMT, Bob Allen LCT CO
wrote:

why do you insist on spouting them
here?
THIS IS A SWAP GROUP!!!!!!!!!!!

____________________

We're swapping ideas, aren't we? :-)

--
Bill W6WRT

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 18:41:08 -0800, Bill Turner
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:14:23 -0700, Dick wrote:

There are always exceptions, but the question is, "what has been the
commonly accepted practice over the years?" Out of curiosity, I
picked a couple of QSTs off the shelf.

____________________

When you wanted to find the "commonly accepted practice", why did you
quote QST instead of quoting actual over-the-air conversations?

Is the ARRL smarter than hams? :-)

I was just responding to an earlier comment by Brian that said,

"Wrong again. Hams have always said 73s. I have been hearing it on the
ham bands myself since 1963 when I started as an SWL, and you can read
it in the CQ and QST magazines from the 1940s and 50s so I don't know
when you strange campaigners got into this absurd obsession but you
are sadly mistaken."

So I looked at a couple of old QSTs to try and substantiate what he
was stating as fact. Couldn't find any reference to 73s. Of course
if I spent (wasted) enough time at it I could probably find a 73s
somewhere in those years, but it wouldn't prove that hams "have always
said 73s", which I strongly disagree with. Maybe in jolly old England
where he came from it was the norm, but it sure wasn't here in the
U.S. when I got licensed in 1951.

I'm going to crawl back in my hole now.

73, Dick - W6CCD

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:52:55 -0700, Dick
wrote:


It seems a little odd for people to get stuffy about 73 vs 73's, when
both are designed for Morse CW.

If you are speaking, neither is "correct".

- Mike KB3EIA -

When was the last time you heard 73's sent on CW? Of course I have
only been licensed for 52 years, so I will have defer to those more
senior than me.

Dick - W6CCD

It's OK - we didn't ask Mike anyway. He probably doesn't use CW or he
would realize that "73" is always used on CW, but on phone it is
quite commonly stated as "73s" whether the whiners like it or not!

Merry holidays!

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 18:42:44 -0800, Bill Turner
wrote:

The first intelligent, unemotional comment on the subject I've ever seen
in my 45+ years of hamming.

'Bout damn time.

--
Bill W6WRT

Bill, I have told you a MILLION TIMES not to exaggerate!