On Feb 20, 12:37�am, "
wrote:
* *Oh, my, some SPITE was carried over to homebrew on
* *Presidents Day just because "CW" was discussed. *I am
* *bringing it back to policy where it should go until
* *the moderated newsgroup is open.

Len wants to be the moderator, IOW,

* *Be aware that this thread in RRAH started with a simple
* *question by another asking if FCC 06-178 would "eliminate
* *the CW bands" [in amateur radio operation] *That was
* *answered.

Buit it didn't end there.

*After that it segued into discussion of early
* *(pre-1900) use of morse code then it was triggered into
* *modern times by those who feel that "CW" MUST be given
* *ten kinds of attention than anything else.

No, that's not true. Len just can't stand to see nice things
written about Morse Code.

Here's what *really* happened:

Len made a lengthy post that contained comments
on the US railroad system, landline telegraph communications,
Knott's Berry Farm and other tourist attractions, stagecoaches,
wives-and-families, Len's lack of use of Morse Code in military
communications, 50plus years ago, Len's parents watching the
lunar landings on TV, keyless auto security systems and more.

I didn't see a single word from Len in his long posting
about amateur radio homebrew.

It also contained this personal policy statement from Len:

"I have nothing against telegraphic skills nor anyone using
those for personal pleasure. However, in the light of
advancement of the electronic arts, communications,
radio, methods that ALL of us can share, I think there
is an over-much emphasis by radio hobbyists on
telegraphic arts. Manual telegraphy IS a historic first
but it has been supplanted in practical communications
means at our disposal...on land, in the air, on the sea,
and in space.

I think we should be looking FORWARD to the future, not
back to the past. Others disagree. I leave it at that."

Sure sounds like a policy discussion to me!

Now there's nothing really wrong with a little thread
drift and getting a bit off topic.

So I replied with a post of my own, commenting on some
of what Len wrote. Free speech and all that:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...e=source&hl=en

But then Len got all upset and acted like a moderator:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...e=source&hl=en

Sure looks like Len has a double standard about who can post to
rrah and what they can post. It's OK for *him* to wander off topic
and make policy and opinion statements there, but when someone
rebuts his commentary, that's *not* OK with him.

Textbook case of Len's double standard.

Jim, N2EY