Dee Flint wrote:
BEGIN QUOTE
"an old friend" wrote in message
ups.com...
Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
John Kasupski wrote:
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:35:06 GMT, "KØHB"
wrote:
Comments to 05-235 attached.
--
73, de Hans, K0HB
Very good, Hans.
We're in agreement on the first part, anyway.
But I doubt it will make any difference. Many of the 18 petitions
included
various changes to entry-level license privileges, including the very
obvious one of giving Novice/Tech Plus HF privileges to all Techs. Yet
FCC
repeatedly denied all of them.
In the NPRM, FCC makes it clear that their vision of the future looks
like this:
wrong again
How is it wrong, Mark?
one so much your honesty
two,the rest I have adressed with jim
flush
END QUOTE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I must momentarily put aside my choice to not respond.
no you don't have to you choose to do so as is your right but it makes
your stament you shun my posts etc a lie plain and simple
You are attributing
Jim's statements as if I had written them. This is incorrect. You have cut
all my statements. If you will READ Jim's post, you will find that the
sentence with the single "" is his. For whatever reason, some postings
don't end up marked correctly and that is why I set my comments off with a
LINE marking the difference between my comments and Jim's.
If you are going to use a non standard sysem for attributions then you
NEED to make that clear, esp after your coments/demands/insistance that
I need to make that clear
Please be more
careful with your attributions.
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE