|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message ups.com... [snip] Dee, place all presently licensed USA amateurs in front of stations equipped with a manual key AND CWGET. Have them operate operate any CW Only Contest with whichever is more comfortable for them to use. Total the scores... I think you get the point. Can't tell what your point is. Those experienced with code and using only their ears and brain will beat CWGet in any contest you care to name. I didn't say, "those experienced..." I said all presently licensed USA amateur radio operators... It doesn't do the job when there are a multitude of operators calling at the same time. Also CWGet cannot copy the average manually keyed Morse code. So whatever your point is, you didn't prove anything. Even you have claimed to be a user of CWGet. I do NOT and never have believed in the arguments about "keeping out the riffraff", maintaining tradition, or the "I had to so you should to". The "dumbing down" argument is just an extension of the "keeping out the riff-raff" argument. I've never mentioned the "dumbing down" argument. My point is that there is a body of basic knowledge that all should know. The difficulty arises in determining what that basic knowledge should be. Generally, the experienced people should be the ones to define what constitutes basic knowledge. The beginners are too inexperienced to do so. You couldn't be more wrong. The FCC should get to define what "basic knowledge" is, and those that do the defining don't have a clue what Morse Code is. But they've been buffaloed into believing that it tis something magical. It's basic knowledge, pure and simple. Most of the people I know don't use any of the theory either but it is part of the basic knowledge set. I've used ohm's law only a couple of times in the 14 years I've been licensed. I've used the dipole equation half a dozen times. I've never used smith charts. One could get by without the theory but having learned it, I can choose where I want to focus my attention in amateur ration. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, you have a Ham Husband to take care of the Ohm's Law and Theory end of your station, so it's no wonder you have no real use for it.. Please do not insult me by stereotyping like that. You do not have a Ham Husband? I happen to be a degreed engineer (B.S. in Aerospace Engineering) with 20 years of applied experience in engineering (aerospace, nuclear, mechanical and automotive fields). I can't help but think that all engineers, aerospace or civil or otherwise, had to learn Ohm's Law as part of "thier" professional certification. If I am wrong, then shame on the state of American Engineerism, and shame on America. No wonder we're overrun with engineers from India, Pakistan, China and Russia. Learning Oh,'s Law for a hobby is one thing, but a professional engineer........ Should I happen to run into a need to use Ohms law and so on, I am perfectly capable of doing so. In addition, I was the one who taught the class for our club members who wished to upgrade to Extra, a class which my husband attended so that he could upgrade from General to Extra. You have ASSumed and made a donkey of yourself. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Be kind enough to show where. Merely claiming to be an engineer without a use for Ohm's Law or Radio Theory is not enough. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in message ... On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 18:28:15 -0400, "Dee Flint" wrote: wrote in message groups.com... wrote: On 28 Oct 2006 14:01:31 -0700, wrote: I mean Dee equates being able to do Morse Code (which she flasely claims based on the lies she was taught is somehow related to basis of Radio Maxwells equations to data that wtries to keep someone from hurting themselves, shows poor thinking process Dee's doing the best she can with her self-imposed handicaps. Well if you understood that garbled mess of a sentence, then my hat is off to you. Perhaps you should get a job as his interpreter. obviously moirse fails to improve your abilitesi as an all round comicator Mork, you should make that last...um, sentence your sig. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Slow Code wrote: Larry, Dee and Me are the only pro 'Keep the code test' people in the group anymore. SC Then the presentation of sound reasoning has been successful. No most of them have left due to the spam created by Mark Morgan, I see Mark Morgan as the necessary balance in the vicious postings by Robesin. He doesn't need to create dozens of posts to refute each one. You don't get to decide that. Has Robesin accused you of lesbian encounters or pedophilia? When he does, I'll be sure to keep track of the ratio of Robesin postings to Dee postings. Many of Mark's posts are and were quite vicious. Um, yeh. It's really awful, isn't it? Almost as bad as accusing people of rape. I killfiled Morgan the day he made unacceptable comments about Steve's deceased daughter. Did you know that his daughter was severly retarded, and he makes jokes about "the short bus" on RRAP? I doubt that his daughter was well off enough to ride the short bus that Robesin pokes fun at.. We actually have very little in common. We both claim to be amateur radio operator and military veterans. I got chopped to the US Army twice, so I know a little bit about the Army. I also got chopped to the US Navy once, and there and at service schools, and in Somalia, was fairly close to the USMC. As far as amateur radio goes, the only one of these bozos I've ever QSO'd was Heil when I was DX on Guam. the interminable pontification of Len Anderson, Yeh, well, we have Jim who served in other ways. I'm sure he has something to be proud of, too, but so far he hasn't mentioned it in other ways. I happen to remember the post. He said that one can serve in other ways. He did not say whether he himself served in the military or in other ways. Even worse. Yet based on that comment, Len Anderson and others have made ASSumptions. Jim's had YEARS to clarify, and he's been questioned SPECIFICALLY about that comment. the compulsive responses that some seem to feel that they must post to the spam, the vulgarity of people like Opus, I guess you conveniently forgot Dan and Bruce's postings to Kim.... Long time ago, but I think I mentioned it was stupid of them. Stupid? It was sexual harassment. That's illegal isn't it? However, she's an adult and is capable of dealing with these people on her own. Yeh, right. You didn't like her politics, so she's on her own. Talk about not just sexist, but bonifide sexual harassment (and Jim never once chimed in to say boo).... She chose the call sign. I believe she did. It's not up to him or me or any one else to defend her other than to say it was her right. I believe that I commented that I thought it was a poor choice but it was up to her. I believe you did just that. So when a YL wearing a slit skirt and a push-up bra gets raped...? Was she asking for it and is she on her own? the slamming that people like Slow Code do to those who licensed or will license under the current system and so on. He's only saying what the PCTA Extras would like to say without their callsigns attached to it. I'm a pro code test advocate and an Extra. I would never have guessed. I would never hide behind anonymity. Jim does. And I do not hold the candidates responsible for the quality or extent of the tests. They have no choice in the matter. What the new ham does have a choice in is to either stagnate or progress. He can gain the experience to then join in discussions and contribute or he can put his foot in his mouth with such inexperienced statements as "you need an amplifier to work DX" or "you can't work Texas from Michigan on VHF". However even then, I try to avoid anything that could be taken as a put down because I want them to stay in ham radio and grow and develop. I'll invite them over to work a contest with my measly 100 watts or I'll introduce them to one of the QRP enthusiasts. I'll invite them to work the VHF station at Field Day and pair them up with one of our VHF experts. It's called being a good ham and an Elmer. No "shack on a belt" quips? i.e. They left because it was impossible to have a good, spirited debate without things getting out of hand. I like spirited, and I like the dignity that you lend when things get spirited... I only drop in occasionally to see what's happening. Mostly I don't bother to respond as it has proven to be pointless with all the bad eggs on line. Dee, N8UZE Is an egg that's come to room temp and incubating a little bit of salmonella really all that bad? Not if you enjoy being sick. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I'll pass that one along to Robesin, then. He relishes spoiled eggs. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in message ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message ups.com... [snip] Dee, place all presently licensed USA amateurs in front of stations equipped with a manual key AND CWGET. Have them operate operate any CW Only Contest with whichever is more comfortable for them to use. Total the scores... I think you get the point. Can't tell what your point is. Those experienced with code and using only their ears and brain will beat CWGet in any contest you care to name. I didn't say, "those experienced..." I said all presently licensed USA amateur radio operators... Those who learn code will beat those who try to make CWGet do a job (contesting) for which it is ill-suited. It doesn't do the job when there are a multitude of operators calling at the same time. Also CWGet cannot copy the average manually keyed Morse code. So whatever your point is, you didn't prove anything. Even you have claimed to be a user of CWGet. So what? When I'm in a contest, I use the best computer ever developed (the human brain). When the person on the other end is sending manually keyed code, again I use the good old brain. That I sometimes use CWGet is no particular endorsement of it. It's a tool that I use when I'm tired and still want to operate code. However unless the signal is of good quality and volume, it ends up being necessary to go back to the good old human brain. My decision then is to either put in the extra effort to focus or just call it a night and go to bed. I do NOT and never have believed in the arguments about "keeping out the riffraff", maintaining tradition, or the "I had to so you should to". The "dumbing down" argument is just an extension of the "keeping out the riff-raff" argument. I've never mentioned the "dumbing down" argument. My point is that there is a body of basic knowledge that all should know. The difficulty arises in determining what that basic knowledge should be. Generally, the experienced people should be the ones to define what constitutes basic knowledge. The beginners are too inexperienced to do so. You couldn't be more wrong. The FCC should get to define what "basic knowledge" is, and those that do the defining don't have a clue what Morse Code is. But they've been buffaloed into believing that it tis something magical. Yes the FCC has the task of defining what that should be. However there is NOTHING that prohibits them from consulting with people who have operating experience. It's basic knowledge, pure and simple. Most of the people I know don't use any of the theory either but it is part of the basic knowledge set. I've used ohm's law only a couple of times in the 14 years I've been licensed. I've used the dipole equation half a dozen times. I've never used smith charts. One could get by without the theory but having learned it, I can choose where I want to focus my attention in amateur ration. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, you have a Ham Husband to take care of the Ohm's Law and Theory end of your station, so it's no wonder you have no real use for it.. Please do not insult me by stereotyping like that. You do not have a Ham Husband? You are choosing to be obtuse. Yes I have a Ham Husband but no he does not take care of Ohm's law or Theory for me. I happen to be a degreed engineer (B.S. in Aerospace Engineering) with 20 years of applied experience in engineering (aerospace, nuclear, mechanical and automotive fields). I can't help but think that all engineers, aerospace or civil or otherwise, had to learn Ohm's Law as part of "thier" professional certification. If I am wrong, then shame on the state of American Engineerism, and shame on America. No wonder we're overrun with engineers from India, Pakistan, China and Russia. Mechanical engineers don't have a need for Ohm's law. They go hire the electrical engineers. Aerospace engineering is a branch of mechanical engineering (we don't get to drop the lesser terms in the equations since they have a significant impact for our field). Again we go hire the electrical engineers. Same with civil and structural engineers. On the other hand electrical engineers generally do not study basic pressure vessal theory but go hire the mechanical engineers for that. Learning Oh,'s Law for a hobby is one thing, but a professional engineer........ Again it depends on the field. We all studied common areas such as calculus and fast fourier transforms but items unique to a field generally were not taught across the board. We didn't study Ohms law and the electrical engineers didn't study cantilever beam theory. Should I happen to run into a need to use Ohms law and so on, I am perfectly capable of doing so. In addition, I was the one who taught the class for our club members who wished to upgrade to Extra, a class which my husband attended so that he could upgrade from General to Extra. You have ASSumed and made a donkey of yourself. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Be kind enough to show where. Merely claiming to be an engineer without a use for Ohm's Law or Radio Theory is not enough. You assumed that I needed help from my OM on theory, etc. That is the area to which I referred. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message So who do you think "Slow Code" is? Coslo? Miccolis? Roll? Deignan? Dan, Dan the CB Radio Man? Haven't a clue on Slow Code. The style doesn't sound like Coslo or Miccolis. Obviously it's someone who's been here awhile. Don't really know the style of the other fellows writing. Troll was the racist poster ("My favorite black on the bus...," and "Welfare mothers of Color with their hands out..."). Deignan was the vanity callsign collector and the original "RF Commando." He called me a liar when I said he had collected 12 callsigns, but I was wrong - one of the callsigns actually belonged to his wife at the same address. So I guess I was a liar after all. I should have known that he had a Ham Wife that collected vanity callsigns, too. Deignan's buddy in Hawaii loaned him his PO Box number so he could scam some Hawaiin calls, meanwhile, the Hawaiin PO Box owner was scamming a Guam callsign. Never been to Guam and could have operated /KH2 like I did for two years. I guess a Hawaiin Call Stroke Guam Call is a pretty cool thing... Anyway, these are the guys who pass judgement on me because I am too fat, lazy, and stupid to buy into the whole Morse Exam stuff at 5, and then 13, and then 20 WPM. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE That's the beauty of anon postings, they don't have to follow their own "style." I began posting as hot-ham when I gave up Billy Beeper at Hans request. I'd prefer to not post with my name and/or call as I used to, as I seem to get lots and lots of spam when I do. Meanwhile, Robesin has posted my name, call and address much more than I have. That's so swell of him. I guess when Mark posts Robesin's address and phone number, it's just tit for tat. No? |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: wrote: wrote: On 28 Oct 2006 14:01:31 -0700, wrote: wrote: On 27 Oct 2006 16:43:42 -0700, wrote: an_old_friend wrote: wrote: Dees coming around in her own way, but the brainwashing that she's undergone is strong. Perhaps in another decade... if there's still an amateur radio. If only she had been able to think spontaneously and resist, the brainwashing wouldn't have been so well received. thinking ability is not prised by our educational system by and large The Catholics have done a commendable job in the educational department. Realy No, not really. No? Yep, and for far less money than the public schools operate on. That's because they can pick and choose their students, and the areas they serve. Nope. The Catholic School can only accept students that apply. No one is forced to apply or attend. And there are no geographical restrictions to the area that a Catholic School services, only the ability of a parent to get their child to school on time. Public schools cannot. They can as much as any school can. i honestly have no real dat on the subject NOT being catholic and being from a religious background that frowns on Rome we have tended to avoid thier school That isn't to say that Catholics don't have a whole host of other problems. Some of which have made the headlines in recent years. Protestant Churches have made EXACTLY the same headlines. But serving in other ways hasn't made any headlines. I do hope some schools are doing a better job In public schools? Rare! Not in my experience. Of course, community support for the public schools varies all over the place. Just like community support for the military varies all over the place. I mean Dee equates being able to do Morse Code (which she flasely claims based on the lies she was taught is somehow related to basis of Radio Maxwells equations to data that wtries to keep someone from hurting themselves, shows poor thinking process One does not need to know Maxwell's Equations to do radio safely. Yet you speak of Maxwell's Equations often. Dee says she has no use for the Smith Charts. What were you saying about the smith charts? Dee's doing the best she can with her self-imposed handicaps. ?? ?? |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in message ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Slow Code wrote: Larry, Dee and Me are the only pro 'Keep the code test' people in the group anymore. SC Then the presentation of sound reasoning has been successful. No most of them have left due to the spam created by Mark Morgan, I see Mark Morgan as the necessary balance in the vicious postings by Robesin. He doesn't need to create dozens of posts to refute each one. You don't get to decide that. Has Robesin accused you of lesbian encounters or pedophilia? When he does, I'll be sure to keep track of the ratio of Robesin postings to Dee postings. Well if such an odd thing should ever happen, I'll killfile him. I refuse to get sucked into such stupidity. Many of Mark's posts are and were quite vicious. Um, yeh. It's really awful, isn't it? Almost as bad as accusing people of rape. I killfiled Morgan the day he made unacceptable comments about Steve's deceased daughter. Did you know that his daughter was severly retarded, and he makes jokes about "the short bus" on RRAP? I doubt that his daughter was well off enough to ride the short bus that Robesin pokes fun at.. I don't particularly care for either one's tactics and stay out of that mess. We actually have very little in common. We both claim to be amateur radio operator and military veterans. I got chopped to the US Army twice, so I know a little bit about the Army. I also got chopped to the US Navy once, and there and at service schools, and in Somalia, was fairly close to the USMC. As far as amateur radio goes, the only one of these bozos I've ever QSO'd was Heil when I was DX on Guam. the interminable pontification of Len Anderson, Yeh, well, we have Jim who served in other ways. I'm sure he has something to be proud of, too, but so far he hasn't mentioned it in other ways. I happen to remember the post. He said that one can serve in other ways. He did not say whether he himself served in the military or in other ways. Even worse. Yet based on that comment, Len Anderson and others have made ASSumptions. Jim's had YEARS to clarify, and he's been questioned SPECIFICALLY about that comment. the compulsive responses that some seem to feel that they must post to the spam, the vulgarity of people like Opus, I guess you conveniently forgot Dan and Bruce's postings to Kim.... Long time ago, but I think I mentioned it was stupid of them. Stupid? It was sexual harassment. That's illegal isn't it? Hard to say. One would have to weigh it against the specific wording of the law and adjudicated cases to determine if it was or was not illegal. However, she's an adult and is capable of dealing with these people on her own. Yeh, right. You didn't like her politics, so she's on her own. How do you come to that conclusion? I know very little about her politics and it wouldn't matter if I did. As I recall, she defended her choice far better than I or anyone else could have done it for her. I supported her right to choose a legally available call sign even though I thought her choice a little strange. It's not within my power to make others accept it. Talk about not just sexist, but bonifide sexual harassment (and Jim never once chimed in to say boo).... As tasteless and tacky as it was, it may not have actually meet the legal definition of sexual harassment. She was not threatened with a job loss or with an overall loss in her quality of life. Discussion groups are not for the faint of heart, especially ones like these newsgroups. Participation in these news groups does not contribute to quality of life in any significant way. It is an idle and insignificant form of recreation. She chose the call sign. I believe she did. Yup. A simple check of the call sign database shows that it is a vanity call. So it was hers by choice. I don't recall for sure but didn't she say she did it on a dare? It's not up to him or me or any one else to defend her other than to say it was her right. I believe that I commented that I thought it was a poor choice but it was up to her. I believe you did just that. So when a YL wearing a slit skirt and a push-up bra gets raped...? Not the same thing at all and you very well know it. Her overall quality of life is seriously affected and her life could even be in danger. Besides rapists don't care what the victim is wearing. They are looking for some one they can successfully dominate and terrorize. The shy school girl in the dowdy clothes hurrying home with her books clutched to her chest is just as likely or even more likely to be raped than the brazen hookers down on Eight Mile (that's a Detroit reference). Was she asking for it and is she on her own? See my comment above. If I saw some one being threatened with violence and it were within my power to do something about it, I would. It wouldn't matter if it were that shy school girl or that brazen hooker. Today, I'd have to limit myself to calling for help but in my younger, more fit days, I'd also have taken an active (i.e. physical) part in her defense. the slamming that people like Slow Code do to those who licensed or will license under the current system and so on. He's only saying what the PCTA Extras would like to say without their callsigns attached to it. I'm a pro code test advocate and an Extra. I would never have guessed. I would never hide behind anonymity. Jim does. And I do not hold the candidates responsible for the quality or extent of the tests. They have no choice in the matter. What the new ham does have a choice in is to either stagnate or progress. He can gain the experience to then join in discussions and contribute or he can put his foot in his mouth with such inexperienced statements as "you need an amplifier to work DX" or "you can't work Texas from Michigan on VHF". However even then, I try to avoid anything that could be taken as a put down because I want them to stay in ham radio and grow and develop. I'll invite them over to work a contest with my measly 100 watts or I'll introduce them to one of the QRP enthusiasts. I'll invite them to work the VHF station at Field Day and pair them up with one of our VHF experts. It's called being a good ham and an Elmer. No "shack on a belt" quips? Nope. Why should I? It accomplishes nothing. I want people to enjoy ham radio. I want their motivation to develop to be based on the joy they get out of it and the joy they see others get out of it. Sarcasm does not serve that objective. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message So who do you think "Slow Code" is? Coslo? Miccolis? Roll? Deignan? Dan, Dan the CB Radio Man? Haven't a clue on Slow Code. The style doesn't sound like Coslo or Miccolis. Obviously it's someone who's been here awhile. Don't really know the style of the other fellows writing. Troll was the racist poster ("My favorite black on the bus...," and "Welfare mothers of Color with their hands out..."). I delete such without reading them and generally delete all the resulting posts. Deignan was the vanity callsign collector and the original "RF Commando." He called me a liar when I said he had collected 12 callsigns, but I was wrong - one of the callsigns actually belonged to his wife at the same address. So I guess I was a liar after all. I should have known that he had a Ham Wife that collected vanity callsigns, too. There are way too many people that confuse honest mistakes with lying. Don't be one of them. The FCC has been getting on people for doing that and making them justify the calls or give them up. Deignan's buddy in Hawaii loaned him his PO Box number so he could scam some Hawaiin calls, meanwhile, the Hawaiin PO Box owner was scamming a Guam callsign. Never been to Guam and could have operated /KH2 like I did for two years. I guess a Hawaiin Call Stroke Guam Call is a pretty cool thing... Don't see why. But again the FCC is getting wise to such antics. Anyway, these are the guys who pass judgement on me because I am too fat, lazy, and stupid to buy into the whole Morse Exam stuff at 5, and then 13, and then 20 WPM. Depends on how bad you want the privileges. Just don't ask for something for nothing. Originally I had no interest in ham radio but my husband at the time dragged me to a class as something we could do together. As I got involved, I found it interesting. I deduced very early on that what I wanted to get out of ham radio would best be served by going all the way to Extra. Since I wanted the privileges, I met the requirements including the 20 wpm. Not everyone wants those privileges. Kim is a case in point. She is a Tech Plus and could have gotten her General with just a written test and no further code testing as of April 2000. She chose not to because she did not really like HF operations. The typical background static of HF bothers her. Her interests lie in VHF and up. Since she has full privileges there, the General does not serve her goals. That's the beauty of anon postings, they don't have to follow their own "style." Very true. But it takes a lot of discipline to consistently write in a different style and not make tell tale slips. When Len Anderson was posting as Avery Fineman, it was quite obvious they were the same person. I began posting as hot-ham when I gave up Billy Beeper at Hans request. I'd prefer to not post with my name and/or call as I used to, as I seem to get lots and lots of spam when I do. Meanwhile, Robesin has posted my name, call and address much more than I have. That's so swell of him. I guess when Mark posts Robesin's address and phone number, it's just tit for tat. No? Doesn't really matter as with the internet this information is findable one way or another if one cares to go after it. Posting it here only shows that you have the internet search skills of any average user and get some kind of juvenile thrill out of posting it. Dee, N8UZE |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:11 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com