Billy Lardass N0VFP Smith wrote:
Papa Dog wrote:
I've been studying for my ham license. I hope when I get on the bands
that they aren't like this group. If so I'll be very disappointed.

Stay off of 75/80 at night, they are like this group. Good luck
otherwise.


Chris

You'll do fine on the air. It isn't nearly this bad at all on the air.
You'll find a few screws loose on 2 meters but HF tends to be much more

Yeah, Billy here can only pass the training wheel no code technician
beginner's license. He has no real experience on HF

Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote:

show-na-to-va (that is the greeting for this time of year as a JEW
rendered phonicticaly)
happy new years it means and it can be better one if Wismen Robson and
SC a few just decided to not to be as hateful

wrote:
Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote:

show-

**** off, Marqueer!

wrote:

show-na-to-va (that is the greeting for this time of year as a JEW
rendered phonicticaly)
happy new years it means and it can be better one if Wismen Robson and
SC a few just decided to not to be as hateful

In article om,
says...



Yeah, Billy here can only pass the training wheel no code technician
beginner's license. He has no real experience on HF


So what? Why would you care what he does? Thats the license I'm going
for first. As far as his experience anyone can listen in on any Ham
frequency with a reciever.

Chris

PS - You're id on this newsgroup is highly offensive.

In article , mmmm
says...


Here's some background which explains a lot about the guy.


I can't believe a grown man would act like that. Sounds like what kids
used to do when playing on the CB radio. When I was in High School CB
was popular and we talked on it a lot. One kid ran illegal power and
tried to block everyone elses transmissions (played music and strange
noises and cussed people out). His Dad got a letter from the FCC and he
got his CB taken away as well as his car. Too bad we can't do that with
adults.

Chris

"Papa Dog" wrote in message
...
In article om,
says...



Yeah, Billy here can only pass the training wheel no code technician
beginner's license. He has no real experience on HF


So what? Why would you care what he does? Thats the license I'm going
for first. As far as his experience anyone can listen in on any Ham
frequency with a reciever.

Chris

PS - You're id on this newsgroup is highly offensive.

Gte help
http://www.marksspamblog.blogspot.com/



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Papa Dog wrote:
In article om,
says...



Yeah, Billy here can only pass the training wheel no code technician
beginner's license. He has no real experience on HF


So what? Why would you care what he does? Thats the license I'm going
for first. As far as his experience anyone can listen in on any Ham
frequency with a reciever.

Chris

Too lazy and stupid to do any better just like N0VFP?

PS - You're id on this newsgroup is highly offensive.

Then don't read them, dumbass!

Papa Dog wrote:
Lardass wrote nothing important
I can't believe a grown man would act like that.

Too bad it's all bull****.


From: (LRod)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: 14.313 Jamming.K9BSD, N9PGE, and KK9G.
Message-ID:
References:
s.it

X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243
Lines: 41
X-Trace:
npbhgpngjbkmjfegdbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcboak lfjkplkonophhikjjlgnhjkiogimbnbgackcbpannchokbekkj flfncmkmngeibpdbhojbajjenkiigmijeekfoggfnklbkpodeb jebifnnkim
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:27:01 EDT
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 03:14:02 GMT


On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 20:32:06 -0500, "Rick Phillips" NoSpam@NoSpam
wrote:


If you are going to tell it, tell it straight. THAT person only recieved ONE
warning letter and was made to retest, yet the letter did not give
interference as being the reason for the retest.
This newsgroup has already hashed and rehashed THAT person's retest, ad
nauseaum.

One letter?
No "interference"?

Read everything closely. There were three letters sent.

The letters to both Wiseman and Tunder were a preemptive "warning"
that did not allege any activities. That hardly qualifies as a warning
in the context of someone having actually done something.

The letter with the warning in it ALLEGED interference, and warned of
consequences.

The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no
reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the
Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of
reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's
actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would
be a good example.

Only one letter was a warning referring to interference.

So, yes; if you are going to tell it, tell it straight.


LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net


Poor Lardass Lloyd, he gets on HF illegally and plays music!

Billy Smith wrote:
Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrote:

Yeah, Billy here can only pass the training wheel no code technician
beginner's license. He has no real experience on HF


That is very interesting there White Trash. I've held a General for many
years. By the way, weren't you required to retest per a letter from FCC
enforcement bureau? Shall we post the record for all to see again?

You don't hold a General license. You can't even post under your
callsign, since you don't have one.

From: (LRod)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: 14.313 Jamming.K9BSD, N9PGE, and KK9G.
Message-ID:
References:
s.it

X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243
Lines: 41
X-Trace:
npbhgpngjbkmjfegdbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcboak lfjkplkonophhikjjlgnhjkiogimbnbgackcbpannchokbekkj flfncmkmngeibpdbhojbajjenkiigmijeekfoggfnklbkpodeb jebifnnkim
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:27:01 EDT
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 03:14:02 GMT


On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 20:32:06 -0500, "Rick Phillips" NoSpam@NoSpam
wrote:


If you are going to tell it, tell it straight. THAT person only recieved ONE
warning letter and was made to retest, yet the letter did not give
interference as being the reason for the retest.
This newsgroup has already hashed and rehashed THAT person's retest, ad
nauseaum.

One letter?
No "interference"?

Read everything closely. There were three letters sent.

The letters to both Wiseman and Tunder were a preemptive "warning"
that did not allege any activities. That hardly qualifies as a warning
in the context of someone having actually done something.

The letter with the warning in it ALLEGED interference, and warned of
consequences.

The retest letter made no reference to interference; in fact gave no
reason for requiring the retest. Such a request is part of the
Volunteer Examining program. It could have been made for any number of
reasons that may have had nothing to do with any of the addressee's
actions. An investigation into the VE group that gave the test, would
be a good example.

Only one letter was a warning referring to interference.

So, yes; if you are going to tell it, tell it straight.


LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net