On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 16:48:36 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

Someday I may clue you in to just how a
psychological study of your posting habits was
included in someone I know's psychology
report on deviant behaviors.


That would be so rich, if you knew who the hell you were responding,

That'll never happen, since you have such a paranoia about remaining
anonymous. And such is the double edged sword of remaining anonymous.
If you really are someone of worthiness, and respect, well never know
it, and you remain a newsgroup punch-clown, who spreads lies about
other people only to provoke or continue controversy.

You are the "Anti" Doug.

especially in lieu of the fact that you have falsely presented yourself
as qualified to make the impressions you now cite of another.

It's all part of the fun for me. For the record, I never said that I
am a licensed practitioner. I said that I enjoy studying human
psychology from my own curiosity, as a hobby. But I do know others who
are in the process of obtaining their professional credentials.

All the more curious, is the fact you are asking educated individuals in
this group to believe such an alleged professional would dare make a
determination based only on a cartoon character and the very carefully
crafted information you were tossed. The "deviant", has never been more
clear, and for that, I thank you.

And that is your fall back. You respond in a predictable manner,
with anticipated responses to carefully presented stimuli. Yet, when
your picture is presented to you, you then make the claim that this is
all somehow a "facade", a cartoon character that doesn't exist in
reality. Well, if that's true, then you should be working in
Hollywood, because you'd be a shoe-in for the remake of "One flew over
the cookoo's nest".

You really are a piece of work. Your random chatter and convoluted
conclusions are both entertaining and enlightening to those of us who
actually enjoy observing people who fall outside the definitions of
normal.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

Dave Hall wrote:
On 07 Jan 2005 21:39:52 GMT, Steveo
wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:
Someone who didn't take crap from idiots? Yea, I'm guilty.

I used to like dropping a KW on them with my mark IV. Now it's not
worth the electricity.

Browning MK IV? Nice rig, although many people claimed that they had
"problems". From what I remember, it was only the first production run
that had the problems.

Yea, I've heard the same thing..mine's never given me any real trouble,
I've had it moth balled for a while now tho.

You know the people for whom I speak of. Maybe you could tell twist,
since he obviously doesn't seem to believe me.

If you're talking about the super bowl (6), I doubt one could do much
communicating on there without at least a KW..a lesson in Ebonics wouldn't
hurt either. g

BTW, I agree, tweaking idiots used to be fun "back then". But today,
it's hardly worth the time.

Yep, about the only time I use AM anymore is on a trip, ch 19 still comes
in handy for traffic reports.

Sometimes it's more fun tweaking the idiots here........

There's one I'd like to tweak in person..too bad he's too gutless to
stand up for himself in person. There will come a day when he won't
have any choice.

Dave Hall wrote:
-snippage-
You are the "Anti" Doug.

Why anyone would support that freak is beyond me. Doug has serious
mental problems.

Yet, when your picture is presented to you

Speaking of pictures, Crisco Kathy had to change dogies diaper after
I showed up and took these.

http://n8wwm.4t.com/photo.html

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 15:37:50 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:


The "DX" has nothing to do with the amount of
splatter and the distortion a signal may have.


It has everything to with it. For the amount of times you professed to
having talked skip on the freeband, followed by recent denials of you
talking skip, you should know that on MANY occasion, a signal can be
severely wavering from an S1 to an S9 (for but one of many
examples),,,when that signal is coming in at an S9, the splatter may be
intense if you changed the channel and went one up or down. When that
signal is coming in on a wavering S1, you will hear absolutely nothing
on your next channel. Once again, the wavering is a direct result
of...taa daaa....skip.

Uh... Nooooo. Splatter is the result of a dirty transmitter, and those
products show up as a "comb" of harmonics which decrease in amplitude
as you move farther away in frequency from the fundamental carrier. If
the fundamental signal is +10db over S9, then those distortion
products will be plainly heard if they are only 10 db or so down on an
adjacent channel. That same splattering station, when he fades down to
an S1 signal, is now so weak, that his adjacent channel splatter
products are now under the noise threshold of the receiver. THAT is
why you don't hear them.


This is quite simple, really....me: 100% correct..you: 100% wrong.

When it comes to radio theory, you haven't been correct about a single
thing.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 17:12:24 GMT, Lancer wrote:

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:26:49 -0600, itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote:

(Twistedhed) wrote in news:6852-41DEF31E-1066
:

It has everything to with it. For the amount of times you professed to
having talked skip on the freeband, followed by recent denials of you
talking skip, you should know that on MANY occasion, a signal can be
severely wavering from an S1 to an S9 (for but one of many
examples),,,when that signal is coming in at an S9, the splatter may be
intense if you changed the channel and went one up or down. When that
signal is coming in on a wavering S1, you will hear absolutely nothing
on your next channel. Once again, the wavering is a direct result
of...taa daaa....skip.


You hear them on the next channel because they are running an amplifier,
dick head

Not just an amp, a dirty amp, fed with a over mdulated radio.

Right!

Dave
"Sandbagger"

On 07 Jan 2005 21:19:25 GMT, Steveo
wrote:

(Twistedhed) wrote:
N3CVJ wrote:
The reverse can be applied to Nader. He

appeals to the hard core left,

You continue to reaffirm you haven't the foggiest.

How can you dispute Ralph's left wing appeal, Twist?

Be prepared for a string of nonsensical double speak.


Dave
"Sandbagger"

On 07 Jan 2005 21:22:30 GMT, Steveo
wrote:

(Twistedhed) wrote:
From: (Dave=A0Hall) wrote:
So, you're telling me that you can't listen to a

channel and pick out who the most blatant

illegal operators are simply by the sound of

their rigs, and by the splatter they produce?

When the dx is running strong,

Donut matter. No one can tell me my S-Line is over-driven..even on local
ground wave. That said, there -are- way yonder too many splatter-masters on
11 meters.


That depends on what you mean by "over-driven" Simply bumping up the
carrier power, will decrease your modulation, and will eventually
result in severe back swing. If it's excessive, the modulation will
also sound "fuzzy". At that point, it will be easy to see that it's
not a legal CB transmitter. But it may not be splattering all that
much.

If you bump up modulation to over 100%, then that will cause splatter,
which is also easily observed.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

Dave Hall wrote:
On 07 Jan 2005 21:22:30 GMT, Steveo
wrote:

(Twistedhed) wrote:
From: (Dave=A0Hall) wrote:
So, you're telling me that you can't listen to a

channel and pick out who the most blatant

illegal operators are simply by the sound of

their rigs, and by the splatter they produce?

When the dx is running strong,

Donut matter. No one can tell me my S-Line is over-driven..even on local
ground wave. That said, there -are- way yonder too many splatter-masters
on 11 meters.

That depends on what you mean by "over-driven" Simply bumping up the
carrier power, will decrease your modulation, and will eventually
result in severe back swing. If it's excessive, the modulation will
also sound "fuzzy". At that point, it will be easy to see that it's
not a legal CB transmitter. But it may not be splattering all that
much.

If you bump up modulation to over 100%, then that will cause splatter,
which is also easily observed.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

That's not going to happen with my rig. Tune it and forget about it.

From: 68.39.95.79
)
Frank Gilliland wrote in
: And until Dave can
provide an example where one of the allegedly illegal operators he
allegedly heard was found guilty, got an NAL, or even admitted his guilt
publically, then his allegations are nothing more than his opinions, not
facts.

Thats bull**** Frank and you know it, go to

web boards or even listen they admit thier

guilt.


I can say I shot Kennedy and watch gibbons like you run with it.


It is no different than people who speed

on the highway,


Not in feeble minds like yours, it isn't, despite being taught better
that one has the very real possibility to maim or kill.


I guess they are not doing

anything illegal until they get a speeding

ticket?? Even thought they are blowing by

cars doing the speedlimit.


You've proved your ignorance and incompetence concerning the law on
many occasion,,this is but another,.
Of course, since the mandatory speed in the US is a federally mandated
70 MPH limit, you hold anyone getting a speeding ticket over 70 is now a
guilty "federal criminal".
Consider yourself cleansed and baptized for the week.

I stated that there are illegal stations on

channel 6 based on my own empirical

observations.


No. That is what you added and REstated after your first claim was
proved bull****.

Twist claimed that my statement is "bull****".


And you proved it.

So if my statement that there are illegal

operators on channel 6 is invalid,


That was not your claim, although you are very desperate to try and sell
it that way.
Your claim, whcih you continue to snip, was that all the "evidence" you
needed was the reputation of channel as the "dregs of the society" to
know they are illegal. Move on, Dave. Your beck-pedal failed.