Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #91   Report Post  
Old October 29th 06, 01:42 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2006
Posts: 64
Default What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?

Dee killfiled you, Mark. She doesn't see your insipid comments.


  #92   Report Post  
Old October 29th 06, 02:43 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?


Dee Flint wrote:

Besides that, Jim, I'm the one who taught the class where my OM upgraded to
Extra!

Dee, N8UZE


That must mean that he can't play Tower Monkey for you.

  #93   Report Post  
Old October 29th 06, 02:49 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?


wrote:
From:
on Sat, Oct 28 2006 1:28pm

wrote:
From:
on Sat, Oct 21 2006 4:01pm
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:


Beyond that, he could be anybody with a computer and an internet
connection. "Slow Code" could be Len Anderson, who has used at least
seven different screen names here - that we know of.

How many screen names have you used here - that you know of?

Jimmie will NEVER admit to using any pseudonyms. :-)


Jim doesn't want to tell a lie, so he avoids the question... pretend it
wasn't asked.


...and then tries to misdirect the whole thread! :-)

OK, that's 'Quitefine' with me...:-)


Quiterite!

Jimmie is a proud amateur "serving his country in other ways"
such as playing with his radio hobby, spreading "international
good will" by working DX on HF with CW. :-)


A-1 Operator!


Is he into the sauce? :-)


Which one? There are 57 varieties.

"Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD,

Slow Code could be Jim/N2EY, despite protests that it isn't him.

Not in Miccolis' petty prissy manner of "always being correct."
[i.e., thinking as Miccolis thinks...all else is "wrong"]

Miccolis already tried at least one pseudonym. That pesudo
STOPPED when confronted. [that's in the Google archives]
But, but, but...Miccolis (who never swears) swears "it wasn't
him!" AS IF. :-)


Squeaky Clean.


Squeak...mouse..."the mouse that roared."


Into a maze of his own making.

Ditto
Robesin, Coslo, Bruce, Dan, Larry Roll, or anyone else who "appears" to
be absent from RRAP.

Maybe it is Val Germann, frustrated that he can't get his
(code speed) up? :-)


Probably never tried. For if he had really, really tried, he could
have been a 20WPM, Code-Tape Extra.


One of Missouri's Finest!


But he didn't try, for if anyone ever tries, they would suceede.

Could even be KH2D after starting the Alzheimer's route...who
knows?


That Jim's not that old...


Mental deterioration could be happening since he left Guam?


Mine sure has...

Maybe it is Lamont Cranston? "Who knows what evil lurks in
the hearts of No-Coders?" :-)


Little Billy Beeper's mentor?


Nah. Wouldn't be close to Hans Brakob. Hans has a sense
of humor. Humor is very rare among morsemen; Hans is a
morseman but is NOT for the US amateur radio code test. :-)

Blowcode is just an Attention-WANTER, making trouble so he
can feel "famous." All he can think about is memorized
lines from the ARRL hymnbook of a half century past. He
can't think for himself. His bigotry is in the way.


Then he really, really could be Jim.

who has used a wide variety of screen names
here, ("billy beeper", "hot ham and cheese", to name just a few)
usually without including his name or callsign.

I understand that Brian Burke has received a whole lot less spam email
on his regular user account than when he posted here under his name and
call. I also understand that he let go of "Billy Beeper" at Han's
Brakob's request, as "Billy Beeper" was an invention of Hans, a
fictitious boy who feared evil No-Coders.

There's lots of fictitious BOYS in here fearing evil No-Coders.

Most of them use pseudonyms. No guts. No courage. No brains.

They hide behind their BFO-enabled beeping, afraid to stray
beyond the anonymity of their monotonic dots and dashes...and
dreams of glory and honor via morsemanship..."serving their
country in 'other' ways." :-)

They wished.


They wish so hard they think it is real. Poor babies.



And if they clicked their heeels together...

  #94   Report Post  
Old October 29th 06, 02:52 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?


Slow Code wrote:
wrote in
ups.com:


Ha! Jim insulting Jim.


Now you've just insulted Jim, calling him he. LOL

SC


Him he who?

  #95   Report Post  
Old October 29th 06, 02:55 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 877
Default What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?

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.

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.

Public schools cannot.

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.

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.

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.

Dee's doing the best she can with her self-imposed handicaps.


??



  #96   Report Post  
Old October 29th 06, 03:04 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default 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.

  #98   Report Post  
Old October 29th 06, 03:24 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default 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.

  #99   Report Post  
Old October 29th 06, 03:27 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 618
Default 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


  #100   Report Post  
Old October 29th 06, 03:49 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default 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?

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
hey BB did steve do somethign specail toy uo laely? [email protected] Policy 90 April 18th 06 05:31 AM
More News of Radio Amateurs' Work in the Andamans Mike Terry Shortwave 0 January 16th 05 06:35 AM
Amateurs Handle Emergency Comms in Wake of Hurricane Ivan Mike Terry Broadcasting 6 September 29th 04 05:45 AM
Amateurs Handle Emergency Comms in Wake of Hurricane Ivan Mike Terry Shortwave 6 September 29th 04 05:45 AM
Response to "21st Century" Part One (Code Test) N2EY Policy 6 December 2nd 03 04:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:01 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017