|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
It seems to me they want to eliminate all testing.
That's what happens when no-codes and nickle hams start running things. Or is that ruining things? SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Slow Code wrote: It seems to me they want to eliminate all testing. That's what happens when no-codes and nickle hams start running things. Or is that ruining things? Naw, ARRL isn't trying to do that. I haven't seen anything in their current goals that would lead me to believe that they are trying to send the rest of our spectrum the way of 11 meters. I may be wrong, but I don't think the FCC would do that again (if any of the current commissioners are students of FCC history that is) even if the ARRL suggested it. The numbers of Hams out there and how it's been dropping though the more recent years is an alarming trend. With the age of the average ham creeping higher, this hobby is set to all but die out in the USA within a generation unless something changes. Surely you see the problem that the ARRL is trying to address. You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? -= Bob =- |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. not that isn't fair BB there is No valid reasoning for the Code test any more the cllosest is boils down to "Tradition" and is fine as far as it goes but they all fall down toin todays world |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
an_old_friend wrote: wrote: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. not that isn't fair BB there is No valid reasoning for the Code test any more That's why I like to see them try to justify it. the cllosest is boils down to "Tradition" and is fine as far as it goes but they all fall down toin todays world Good Grief! It's as if the US Navy really does control the ARS, just like they wanted to do in the early days. With the Navy, its all about tradition. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: an_old_friend wrote: wrote: the cllosest is boils down to "Tradition" and is fine as far as it goes but they all fall down toin todays world Good Grief! It's as if the US Navy really does control the ARS, just like they wanted to do in the early days. With the Navy, its all about tradition. I was thinking of jews esp east european jews ala fiddler on the roof |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
an_old_friend wrote: wrote: an_old_friend wrote: wrote: the cllosest is boils down to "Tradition" and is fine as far as it goes but they all fall down toin todays world Good Grief! It's as if the US Navy really does control the ARS, just like they wanted to do in the early days. With the Navy, its all about tradition. I was thinking of jews esp east european jews ala fiddler on the roof I don't know much about them. Do they oppress their own people? |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in message oups.com... wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. If he and I wanted to have sex I'd invite him over, for that matter if Brian Burke is in the nighboorhood he is invited to drop by for a blow job two http://www.marksspamblog.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in
oups.com: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. Here's a valid reason for continued CW testing: To keep lowlifes like you and Markie out of ham radio and off HF. You're too lazy to try to be real hams. You see no value in being effective communicators, therefore you're both worthless to the service and if you had to use CW to save a life that person would die. You're both probably too lazy to use a microphone to help save anyone too. I'd like to see the No-code Tech class go away with a 5 wpm Tech the being entry level to the service, or bring back a code only Novice class again. Require 13 wpm code test for general and 20 wpm an Extra again. People that don't like it should stay on CB. Ten-Four? This should provide you and Markie a lot to stroke each other with. You both seem to sing the same tune. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
In article .net,
says... wrote in oups.com: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. You see no value in being effective communicators, The most effective communication is plain english! 73 Chris |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Slow Code is a disgrace to Amateur Radio!
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 00:41:18 GMT, Slow Code wrote: wrote in roups.com: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. Here's a valid reason for continued CW testing: To keep lowlifes like you and Markie out of ham radio and off HF. You're too lazy to try to be real hams. You see no value in being effective communicators, therefore you're both worthless to the service and if you had to use CW to save a life that person would die. You're both probably too lazy to use a microphone to help save anyone too. I'd like to see the No-code Tech class go away with a 5 wpm Tech the being entry level to the service, or bring back a code only Novice class again. Require 13 wpm code test for general and 20 wpm an Extra again. People that don't like it should stay on CB. Ten-Four? This should provide you and Markie a lot to stroke each other with. You both seem to sing the same tune. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 20:45:49 -0500, john wrote:
Slow Code is a disgrace to Amateur Radio! Let Slow Code post, and "john" comes stumbling in while stepping on his crank, with both cap guns blazing. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Slow Code wrote: wrote in oups.com: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. Here's a valid reason for continued CW testing: To keep lowlifes like you and Markie out of ham radio and off HF. You're too lazy to try to be real hams. You see no value in being effective communicators, therefore you're both worthless to the service and if you had to use CW to save a life that person would die. You're both probably too lazy to use a microphone to help save anyone too. I'd like to see the No-code Tech class go away with a 5 wpm Tech the being entry level to the service, or bring back a code only Novice class again. Require 13 wpm code test for general and 20 wpm an Extra again. People that don't like it should stay on CB. Ten-Four? This should provide you and Markie a lot to stroke each other with. You both seem to sing the same tune. SC Why do you say I'm a low-life? |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: On 17 Oct 2006 17:39:19 -0700, wrote: Slow Code wrote: wrote in oups.com: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. Here's a valid reason for continued CW testing: To keep lowlifes like you and Markie out of ham radio and off HF. You're too lazy to try to be real hams. You see no value in being effective communicators, therefore you're both worthless to the service and if you had to use CW to save a life that person would die. You're both probably too lazy to use a microphone to help save anyone too. I'd like to see the No-code Tech class go away with a 5 wpm Tech the being entry level to the service, or bring back a code only Novice class again. Require 13 wpm code test for general and 20 wpm an Extra again. People that don't like it should stay on CB. Ten-Four? This should provide you and Markie a lot to stroke each other with. You both seem to sing the same tune. SC Why do you say I'm a low-life? according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: wrote: Slow Code wrote: It seems to me they want to eliminate all testing. That's what happens when no-codes and nickle hams start running things. Or is that ruining things? Naw, ARRL isn't trying to do that. I haven't seen anything in their current goals that would lead me to believe that they are trying to send the rest of our spectrum the way of 11 meters. I may be wrong, but I don't think the FCC would do that again (if any of the current commissioners are students of FCC history that is) even if the ARRL suggested it. The numbers of Hams out there and how it's been dropping though the more recent years is an alarming trend. With the age of the average ham creeping higher, this hobby is set to all but die out in the USA within a generation unless something changes. indeed What an inciteful response (No...I didn't mispell that...Pun intended...) Surely you see the problem that the ARRL is trying to address. honestly I don't think he does You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply He didn't get a response because : (a) His comments were concise, well written and in proper English...Traits that make it difficult for YOU to understand or "respond" to. (b) Accurate and able to stand on their own merits. Steve, K4YZ |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
|
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) Dave K8MN So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Papa Dog wrote in
: In article .net, says... wrote in oups.com: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. You see no value in being effective communicators, The most effective communication is plain english! 73 Chris Yes you're right, unless you're trying to pass a message through someone that doesn't know how to speak english. CW is a wonderful thing. Real communicators know CW and know how to use it. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in
ps.com: Slow Code wrote: wrote in oups.com: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. Here's a valid reason for continued CW testing: To keep lowlifes like you and Markie out of ham radio and off HF. You're too lazy to try to be real hams. You see no value in being effective communicators, therefore you're both worthless to the service and if you had to use CW to save a life that person would die. You're both probably too lazy to use a microphone to help save anyone too. I'd like to see the No-code Tech class go away with a 5 wpm Tech the being entry level to the service, or bring back a code only Novice class again. Require 13 wpm code test for general and 20 wpm an Extra again. People that don't like it should stay on CB. Ten-Four? This should provide you and Markie a lot to stroke each other with. You both seem to sing the same tune. SC Why do you say I'm a low-life? Did I say low-life? I meant to say lazy. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Slow Code is the kind of guy that everybodys hates on the air. He is
the Jammer because no one listens to him. On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:13:24 GMT, Slow Code wrote: Papa Dog wrote in : In article .net, says... wrote in oups.com: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. You see no value in being effective communicators, The most effective communication is plain english! 73 Chris Yes you're right, unless you're trying to pass a message through someone that doesn't know how to speak english. CW is a wonderful thing. Real communicators know CW and know how to use it. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Slow Code is the kind of guy that everybodys hates on the air. He is
the Jammer because no one listens to him. On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:13:41 GMT, Slow Code wrote: wrote in ups.com: Slow Code wrote: wrote in oups.com: wrote: On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote: wrote: wrote: You may not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree that we have a problem. Right? notice you have gotten no reply Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response... The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care.. indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse than the problem because it does not promote cw forever Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with any valid reasoning. Here's a valid reason for continued CW testing: To keep lowlifes like you and Markie out of ham radio and off HF. You're too lazy to try to be real hams. You see no value in being effective communicators, therefore you're both worthless to the service and if you had to use CW to save a life that person would die. You're both probably too lazy to use a microphone to help save anyone too. I'd like to see the No-code Tech class go away with a 5 wpm Tech the being entry level to the service, or bring back a code only Novice class again. Require 13 wpm code test for general and 20 wpm an Extra again. People that don't like it should stay on CB. Ten-Four? This should provide you and Markie a lot to stroke each other with. You both seem to sing the same tune. SC Why do you say I'm a low-life? Did I say low-life? I meant to say lazy. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Dave K8MN |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Dave K8MN I don't believe you, and you seem to have an opinion on everything else... It's probably Quitefine again. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Dave K8MN I don't believe you, and you seem to have an opinion on everything else... There's no pleasing some folk. You asked. I answered. It's probably Quitefine again. I don't think you'll be able to pin it on Dick Carroll. Dave K8MN |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Well, I know "Slow Code" is not me. 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. "Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD, 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. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Dave K8MN I don't believe you, and you seem to have an opinion on everything else... There's no pleasing some folk. You asked. I answered. It's probably Quitefine again. I don't think you'll be able to pin it on Dick Carroll. Dave K8MN I have not intention of doing so. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Well, I know "Slow Code" is not me. 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? "Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD, Slow Code could be Jim/N2EY, despite protests that it isn't him. Ditto Robesin, Coslo, Bruce, Dan, Larry Roll, or anyone else who "appears" to be absent from RRAP. 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. 73 de Jim, N2EY 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. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in
oups.com: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Well, I know "Slow Code" is not me. 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. "Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD, 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. 73 de Jim, N2EY I've never been so insulted in all my life. Calling me Len. May you be cursed with six weeks of HF QRN and your antenna tip over. Slow Code |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in
oups.com: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Well, I know "Slow Code" is not me. 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? "Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD, Slow Code could be Jim/N2EY, despite protests that it isn't him. Ditto Robesin, Coslo, Bruce, Dan, Larry Roll, or anyone else who "appears" to be absent from RRAP. Why don't you build up your CW skills and quit worrying about who everyone is. 73 de Slow Code |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Slow Code wrote: wrote in oups.com: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Well, I know "Slow Code" is not me. 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? "Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD, Slow Code could be Jim/N2EY, despite protests that it isn't him. Ditto Robesin, Coslo, Bruce, Dan, Larry Roll, or anyone else who "appears" to be absent from RRAP. Why don't you build up your CW skills and quit worrying about who everyone is. 73 de Slow Code OK, Len. I'll stop worrying. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
'Mark in the Dark' wrote in
: On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 23:33:30 GMT, Slow Code wrote: wrote in groups.com: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Well, I know "Slow Code" is not me. 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? "Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD, Slow Code could be Jim/N2EY, despite protests that it isn't him. Ditto Robesin, Coslo, Bruce, Dan, Larry Roll, or anyone else who "appears" to be absent from RRAP. Why don't you build up your CW skills and quit worrying about who everyone is. whjy should he He has passed the test and hold a general class license Mark in the Dark. He can keep building his code skills to make himself a better operator. Why does everyone only want to do the minimum and not improve. It's because they're lazy. They don't care to be good communicators, all they want is a hand-out license that doesn't require skill or knowledge. If that's what they want they should have stayed on CB. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Slow Code wrote: 'Mark in the Dark' wrote in : On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 23:33:30 GMT, Slow Code wrote: wrote in groups.com: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Well, I know "Slow Code" is not me. 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? "Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD, Slow Code could be Jim/N2EY, despite protests that it isn't him. Ditto Robesin, Coslo, Bruce, Dan, Larry Roll, or anyone else who "appears" to be absent from RRAP. Why don't you build up your CW skills and quit worrying about who everyone is. whjy should he He has passed the test and hold a general class license Mark in the Dark. He can keep building his code skills to make himself a better operator. Again, the pro-coders only equate code speed with being a good operator. Amateur radio has only a single dimension for them - CW on HF. Their attitude is bankrupting amateur radio. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
Dr.Ace wrote: "john" wrote in message ... Slow Code is a disgrace to Amateur Radio! I doubt that SC even has a call sign . Ace - WH2T you may be right But honestly I don't think so I beleive that SC is a older hams who moved to some retirement village, did not read the fine print, and so can't go on the air anymore and having put his saving in it is just plain screwed andf unable to move and not driving much can't go HF mobile even and he come on here and takes it out on us |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote: On 25 Oct 2006 04:04:07 -0700, wrote: Slow Code wrote: 'Mark in the Dark' wrote in : On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 23:33:30 GMT, Slow Code wrote: wrote in groups.com: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Well, I know "Slow Code" is not me. 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? "Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD, Slow Code could be Jim/N2EY, despite protests that it isn't him. Ditto Robesin, Coslo, Bruce, Dan, Larry Roll, or anyone else who "appears" to be absent from RRAP. Why don't you build up your CW skills and quit worrying about who everyone is. whjy should he He has passed the test and hold a general class license Mark in the Dark. He can keep building his code skills to make himself a better operator. Again, the pro-coders only equate code speed with being a good operator. Amateur radio has only a single dimension for them - CW on HF. Their attitude is bankrupting amateur radio. be fair they equate Code and some even promote code acuratcy The late Dick Carrol/W0EX prided himself on being able to send code so poorly that even a computer code reader couldn't copy him. This was in order to prevent unworthy No-Code Technicians from eavesdropping on him. BTW, all the other Pro-Code Extras were good with it, coming up with cool, old-timey sounding excuses for such bad behavoir. "Banana Boat Swing" and "unique fist" were heard. A ham needn't try to produce CW that meets the Morse Code specification for dots, dashes, inter-dot/dash spacing, inter-character spacing, and inter-word spacing. |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
"john" wrote in message ... Slow Code is a disgrace to Amateur Radio! I doubt that SC even has a call sign . Ace - WH2T |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
"Thats Right_ 20wpm" wrote in message ... Slow Code is the kind of guy that everybodys hates on the air. He is the Jammer because no one listens to him. Probably because he doesn't have an amateur radio license . Ace - WH2T |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
wrote in
oups.com: Slow Code wrote: 'Mark in the Dark' wrote in : On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 23:33:30 GMT, Slow Code wrote: wrote in groups.com: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie That's really sad. ...and pathetic. No one should have to go through life as a lowlfie. (extraneous groups deleted) So who do you think Slow Code is? Kelly? Coslo? Deignan? I haven't the slightest idea. Well, I know "Slow Code" is not me. 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? "Slow Code" could be Brian Burke, N0IMD, Slow Code could be Jim/N2EY, despite protests that it isn't him. Ditto Robesin, Coslo, Bruce, Dan, Larry Roll, or anyone else who "appears" to be absent from RRAP. Why don't you build up your CW skills and quit worrying about who everyone is. whjy should he He has passed the test and hold a general class license Mark in the Dark. He can keep building his code skills to make himself a better operator. Again, the pro-coders only equate code speed with being a good operator. Amateur radio has only a single dimension for them - CW on HF. Their attitude is bankrupting amateur radio. Improving your skills doesn't make you a better operator? Sheeesh. You can still have your microphone, but you should have to pass a code test before you're allowed to use it. I like 5 WPM for Tech, 13 for General, and 20wpm for Extra, but then, I'm not lazy. SC |
What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
"Dr.Ace" wrote in
: "Thats Right_ 20wpm" wrote in message ... Slow Code is the kind of guy that everybodys hates on the air. He is the Jammer because no one listens to him. Probably because he doesn't have an amateur radio license . Ace - WH2T Tnx, 73, good luck in the contest. SC |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com