View Single Post
  #16   Report Post  
Old June 5th 04, 09:09 PM
Len Over 21
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message
.com...
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article , "Jim Hampton"
writes:


The gentleman in question with the antenna may well have been

professional;
my point is that most inventors are doing something they enjoy. Come to
think of it, how many folks are continually involved in something they
*don't* like?

Irrelevant. Another stressed that the "invention" was because of his
being a radio amateur. Solely so, so much that nearly all of the
URI news release was omitted.


The rest of the post was irrelevent since the antenna itself was
not of importance.


Oh, my! There was no rant, and the invention/patent is not of
importance.


According to the University of Rhode Island, an academic
institution that includes paid, professional electronic engineers,
the whole topic of Small Antennas was the point of the news
release.

Nursie's interpretation went off into some personal dialect of
"ranting" (and raving) when there was no actual rant going on.

We know nothing yet on the details of this small antenna
with patent pending (?). Actual patent grants might not occur
until 1 to 3 years after submission of the application and the
patent search information (seprate from the patent application
itself). Once the patent is granted it becomes public
knowledge, available for a modest fee from the patent office.

But, patent applications aren't available for full disclosure so
we don't know the details of this "invention."

If the patent application is denied, then it is NOT a "new
invention." [there is lots of prior art in this field and may have
been done by others, therefore making it not patentable]

So what we have is is a lie wrapped up in a lack of judgement.


Well, I think of it more like a festering (perhaps gangrenous)
ego wound from long ago. :-) It must personally hurt a
great deal and thus cause a new "rant" to be done.

Exactly why did you post anything at all except to troll and flame?


That seems to be his reason for being in here. All the angries
on display for all to wonder and praise... :-)

What WAS of importance was that a non-Amateur Radio media source
felt compelled to mention, early on I might add, that the person
responsible for this project was a licensed Amateur.


People everywhere lack judgement, including those in media. Bless
your heart, you're not alone.


Thousands and thousands of "news releases" of new technologies
appear every year in many, many electronic industry publications.
The subscription-free "controlled circulation" periodicals have
regular columns containing nothing but them. Academic
institutions started on that trend years ago.

The POINT being that Sir Scummy of Lanark was once again proven
wrong...


Wrong?

I saw him make no "assertion of fact" for you to refute, and the only
ranting is your own.


It is...but that isn't the brake for the bulldozer driven levee-breaking.

It only adds more diesel to push the bull dozing harder into whatever
ground the bull thinks is fun to throw more mud.

OHSA needs to be informed about this. :-)

[it ought to be "Sir of Sun Valley" to complete the nastygram and
be correct with the USPS...very sibilant that way...good for the
nastygrammers to hiss between their teeth on reading newsgroups]

Amateurs ARE still involved in "advancement of the radio art",
and someone felt stongly enouhg about it to emphasize it in a news
release.


What are you doing in "state of the art?" Bandspanner?


Advancing the state of the art in insulting all those without amateur
radio licenses. :-)

Lennie often raves in this forum about how Amateurs don't do this
kind of thing.


They do it first as paid employees of someone else. They just happen
to be amateurs.


Licensed amateur radio operators DO advance some of the radio
communication arts. I named Dan Tayloe specifically, plus the
several authors of articles in QST on do-it-yourself crystal filter
theory-measurement-construction. There are others, such as the
various amateur-specific multi-band antennas on the market.

My point - lost on the very angry nursie - is that amateurs do NOT
get credit for ALL of the radio communications advancements and
those few (out of 710K total licensees) who DO innovate and
invent are a decided minority among the constantly-advancing
state of radio arts just in the HF region. The ARRL's claim of
"amateurs advancing the state of the radio arts" is specious in
light of ALL the radio advancements done in the last half century.

And of course he can't stand it and will spin this into the
ground.


You're doing a good enough job of that.


As usual. Old bitterness of losing newsgroup discussions
lingers on. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

The evidence is Out There...beyond the ARRL publication
dominance for radio amateur information.

Too late. The egg's already been cracked and he's wearing it.


Insanity. There was no rant, and then you claim the invention was of
no importance. You're wearing the egg.


He took a trip to Fantasy Island again...without "da blane."

Sorry Lennie. Proven wrong by example again.


Poor nursie. Tries to rant and rave, can't even copy enough of
the news release or give the link to the URL...then claims it
"refutes some (nonexistant) rant."

Insanity.

In another galaxy far, far away... "MARS IS Amateur Radio."


I don't think George Lucas has that planned for any future
Star Wars sequels-prequels. :-)