Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil
writes:
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil
writes:
In article ,
(N2EY) writes:
Tsk. I lost interest in DXing in "radio sports" and the wallpaper
collection of QSLs after working at station ADA long ago.
Really? Did you do lots of contesting and DXing from ADA? Still have
the QSLs?
Tsk. Poor Davie doesn't understand that 24/7 REAL communications
in the military wasn't any "contest" and no "QSLs" were exchanged.
You can understand my confusion when you wrote about losing "interest in
DXing in 'radio sports' and the wallpaper collection of QSLs after
working at station ADA long ago". You made it sound as if you got a
belly full of those things at ADA.
Tsk. I admit to not understanding Davies' total confusion or lack
of understanding of the written word.
....at least as written by you.
Tsk, tsk. If Davie had actually worked in USAF communications
he would have KNOWN that military communications does not
engage in "radiosport contests" nor does it "QSL."
Tsk, tsk. I did actually work in USAF communications. Since you were
in the Army and since you wrote the confusing piece above, I thought
perhaps you Army types did things differently. Nothing I encountered in
Air Force communications caused me to lose interest in DXing, contesting
or QSLing.
24/7 radio communications on HF (or any other EM spectrum) is
professional-quality work for the military.
So the guys who work in stations which aren't open twenty-four hours per
day, seven days per week aren't doing professional quality work in the
military? If you worked in a station which was open around the clock and
you worked for eight to ten hours per day and got a day or two off from
time to time, was your work less than professional quality?
So am I to understand that you have
no actual experience in DXing, contesting or QSLing?
Define "DXing." If that means listening to radio broadcasting stations
in other parts of the world, yes, I have and continue to listen to them.
Nope, that isn't it.
If that means working distant HF stations on a two-way, full duplex
basis over 8000 miles away 24/7, yes, I have experience in that.
Nope, that isn't it.
If that means "only" having an amateur license and making out like
the world's greatest amateur (windbag), no, definitely no experience
in that.
Don't sell yourself short. All you need now is the amateur radio
license.
I fail to see what difference that makes. Why should we, as radio
amateurs, posting in an amateur radio newsgroup, be concerned about what
qualifications are required for other services? Is is your aspiration
to participate in other radio service? Please, go forth and do so.
Tsk. Why does Davie want to abrogate the First Amendment and
deny citizens the right to petition their government for change in
federal regulations?
Have you petitioned your government? Have you posted here? End of
story.
Don't you understand that neither FCC commissioners nor FCC
staff are NOT required to have amateur radio licenses...and they
regulate ALL U.S. amateur radio.
I seem to understand it far better than you do. They are paid to
administer amateur radio. We radio amateurs are participants. You are
not a paid administrator nor are you a participant. You are a
bystander.
Tsk. You should really drop the arrogant "show your papers!"
and elitist demand-by-intimidation-attempt that this newsgroup
"belongs only to already-licensed hams."
You have had no amateur radio license. You currently have no amateur
radio license. You've told us that you have no intention of obtaining
an amateur radio license in the future. You don't look good as a
potential licensee, Leonard.
YOU don't, nor ever have, regulated or controlled U.S. amateur
radio. You are only a participant.
Only? Without the participants, there'd be no amateur radio to
regulate.
The participants ARE amateur radio, "William".
You aren't gang boss, aren't
a government official, aren't even a 'hood chieftan. All you are
is a participant.
Let's see....I'm one of the items from your list. You are which one?
What is at stake is a possible restructuring of U.S. regulations
on amateur radio to eliminate or retain the morse code test for an
amateur license having below-30-MHz privileges.
Really? That'll effect you how?
YOUR ranting and raving is confined to nastygramming anyone
who wishes to eliminate that code test. It isn't "civil discourse"
much less discussion. YOUR ranting and raving is about
control over who can post and who cannot. Clue: This newsgroup
is unmoderated and open to anyone with Internet access.
You're still posting aren't you?
Try, oh TRY to get used to the fact that neither you nor Jimmie
are the Supreme Arbiter of Ham things. No one MUST do as you
say.
I'd think you'd want to remember those words of yours. You, especially
as one who has no stake in amateur radio, are not the Supreme Arbiter of
Ham things. Neither the regulators nor the participants in amateur
radio are compelled to do as you say.
There is still some freedom left in the world and considerable
independent thought.
Your thought is....well....really, really, really independent.
Your long tenure in hamdom does not give
you any "position" of control over others. Not here, not anywhere.
Thous sayest.
Try to adjust to that, big Arbiter. Bite me.
Is this more of the civil discoarse course (coarse)?
Dave K8MN
|