That's stupid, it is as much a qualification as the licence it might
have been used to obtain. Are your GCSE's still valid?


Percy Picacity

bet he doesn't have any .......

Are you, then, withdrawing your accusation of dishonesty, and claiming
it was merely the ramblings of an idiot? Rather than maliciously and
with forethought spreading internationally a lie that could discredit
someone in their chosen hobby?


Percy Picacity

I think Steve should make that clear ......

In message , Stephen Thomas Cole
writes
Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Stephen Thomas Cole
writes
Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:
Wymsey wrote:
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:26:55 +0000, Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:

Someone please explain to the wally what provable lies about a person can
lead to. I can't be bothered!

You can't be bothered, yet you're firing off replies all over the shop?
Looks like you're gotten to.


Libel 1: "The pirate 2E0WYM here"

Libel 2: "masquerading as a full licensee"

Libel 3: "cashing in an allegedly 40 year old RAE pass certificate
to dodge the current, rigorous Full Licence exam."


Chaz, you admitted that you dodged the Full exam by cashing in an old pass
certificate.


Not only old, but also obsolete.

IIRC, the RAE pass certificate was valid for life. However, the morse
pass was only valid for 6 months, so if you didn't apply for a licence
within 6 months after passing the morse, you had to retake (and pass)
the test.

Obsolete insofar as it was a pass for a long defunct qualification. That
there existed some bizarre loophole that Charlie was able to exploit in
order to dodge sitting the Full exam is, frankly, outrageous.

Apart from having to go through the motions of obtaining Foundation and
Intermediate passes, an 'Advanced' pass isn't a higher qualification
than the RAE (or a HAREC) pass. Although OFCOM probably never foresaw
the possibility of some oddball coming forward after 40 years to claim
his prize - and so presumably wouldn't have made any provision for such,
I can see no real reason why an RAE pass should not be accepted.
--
Ian

On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 12:10:55 +0000 (UTC), Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:



Obsolete insofar as it was a pass for a long defunct qualification. That
there existed some bizarre loophole that Charlie was able to exploit in
order to dodge sitting the Full exam is, frankly, outrageous.
Rubbish, he passed the RAE and has the paperwork to prove it. You
obviously feel inferior to Charlie and are doing your best to
discredit him in order to pump your own low self esteem.

"Fred Roberts" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 12:10:55 +0000 (UTC), Stephen Thomas Cole
wrote:


Obsolete insofar as it was a pass for a long defunct qualification. That
there existed some bizarre loophole that Charlie was able to exploit in
order to dodge sitting the Full exam is, frankly, outrageous.

For bizarre loophole and the exploitation thereof have a word with the
thousands of Class B ****s - masonman included - who took out a
kiddies licence (like you) to get on HF.

that can't be denied .......

On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 13:26:58 +0100, Percy Picacity wrote:

That's stupid, it is as much a qualification as the licence it might
have been used to obtain. Are your GCSE's still valid?

Perhaps he's saying that old City & Guilds certificates are no longer
valid?! Tell that to the countless thousands of British technicians,
toolmakers, etc, who made have made his life so pleasant, his stays in
hospital(if any) safe and without whose work we would not have led to a
world where he would be able to spend his day fingering his iGadget.

This foot/mouth/brain stuff can lead a body up some very narrow creeks
with little room to turn around!



--
M0WYM
Sales @ radiowymsey
http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Sales-At-Radio-Wymsey/
http://sales-at-radio-wymsey.ebid.net/

On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 13:34:17 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:

lthough OFCOM probably never foresaw the possibility of some oddball
coming forward after 40 years to claim his prize - and so presumably
wouldn't have made any provision for such, I can see no real reason why
an RAE pass should not be accepted.

Not just this oddball! Lot's have people have come back to the hobby in
their 50s & 60s. Many of us are somewhat more qualified in radio and
electronics than just having passed the RAE and certainly more qualified
STC.



--
M0WYM
Sales @ radiowymsey
http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Sales-At-Radio-Wymsey/
http://sales-at-radio-wymsey.ebid.net/

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 8/26/2013 7:45 AM, Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 8/26/2013 5:26 AM, Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:
Wymsey wrote:
On Sun, 25 Aug 2013 10:57:47 -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:

ROFLMAO. I would have loved to see that!

You should know that nearly everyone in ukra has a colourful past, some
more recent than others, some abusive, some not, as you will see if you
check out the postings of the person you are replying to.

More laughing guarranteed.


Indeed. The pirate 2E0WYM here, for example, is masquerading as a full
licensee, having avoided training to the correct standard by fortuitously
"finding" and cashing in an allegedly 40 year old RAE pass certificate to
dodge the current, rigorous Full Licence exam.


Hmmm, I don't know about over there, but here in the U.S., the tests were
MUCH harder 42 years ago when I passed my Amateur Extra exam. Tests were
administered by FCC personnel, not volunteer examiners. The question
pool was not published, and you had to actually know and understand
electronics and the laws to pass it. In fact, I found the Amateur Extra
to be harder than either the Second or First Class Radiotelephone
(commercial) test i had passed 9 months earlier (back then you had to
have General or above to test for the Amateur Extra).

Nowadays here you can sit in class, memorize the answers and pass all of
the tests before going home for dinner.


Hi Jerry. The short response is; I'm yanking Charlie's chain. And it was a
glorious success, which is no surprise as he's *very* sensitive about it!
Chaz's biggest problem is his pomposity, and it's a great wheeze giving him
a kick up the arse and sending him into a flying fit.


The short reply is you are an obnoxious troll who's life is so limited
you need to denigrate others to satisfy your own lack of self-esteem.

plonk

Another sensitive type.

--
If the above message is full of spelling mistakes or the snipping is duff,
it's probably because it was sent from my iPhone, likely whilst walking.
Apologies!

Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Stephen Thomas Cole
writes
Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Stephen Thomas Cole
writes
Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:
Wymsey wrote:
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:26:55 +0000, Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:

Someone please explain to the wally what provable lies about a person can
lead to. I can't be bothered!

You can't be bothered, yet you're firing off replies all over the shop?
Looks like you're gotten to.


Libel 1: "The pirate 2E0WYM here"

Libel 2: "masquerading as a full licensee"

Libel 3: "cashing in an allegedly 40 year old RAE pass certificate
to dodge the current, rigorous Full Licence exam."


Chaz, you admitted that you dodged the Full exam by cashing in an old pass
certificate.


Not only old, but also obsolete.

IIRC, the RAE pass certificate was valid for life. However, the morse
pass was only valid for 6 months, so if you didn't apply for a licence
within 6 months after passing the morse, you had to retake (and pass) the test.

Obsolete insofar as it was a pass for a long defunct qualification. That
there existed some bizarre loophole that Charlie was able to exploit in
order to dodge sitting the Full exam is, frankly, outrageous.

Apart from having to go through the motions of obtaining Foundation and
Intermediate passes, an 'Advanced' pass isn't a higher qualification than
the RAE (or a HAREC) pass.

No, they're the same, that I accept. What I don't accept is that Chaz has
been tested to any competency with regards to current licence conditions
and regulatory matters, as he dodged sitting the correct exam for his
callsign by cashing in a decades old bit of paper. Whilst the RAE may be a
perfectly thorough qualification, what relevance does a pass certificate
from a 40 year old RAE have on the current licence conditions that
competence must be demonstrated in?

Although OFCOM probably never foresaw the possibility of some oddball
coming forward after 40 years to claim his prize - and so presumably
wouldn't have made any provision for such, I can see no real reason why
an RAE pass should not be accepted.

I'm tempted to write to OFCOM and point out this loophole, truth be told.
This is a backdoor that needs to be locked shut, quick.

--
If the above message is full of spelling mistakes or the snipping is duff,
it's probably because it was sent from my iPhone, likely whilst walking.
Apologies!

Percy Picacity wrote:
In article ,
Stephen Thomas Cole wrote:
snip
Obsolete insofar as it was a pass for a long defunct qualification. That
there existed some bizarre loophole that Charlie was able to exploit in
order to dodge sitting the Full exam is, frankly, outrageous.

That's stupid, it is as much a qualification as the licence it might
have been used to obtain. Are your GCSE's still valid?

I do believe that the licence that the qualification would have earned in
the 60s was rendered defunct and transferred to the current version when
the tiered system was introduced. So yes, obsolete.

--
If the above message is full of spelling mistakes or the snipping is duff,
it's probably because it was sent from my iPhone, likely whilst walking.
Apologies!