Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#12
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd Secwet Woger wrote:
Slow Code wrote: Lloyd wrote in : GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. ... 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. ROFL, I always laugh at that reply, because he posts it so much. No other person from the VE group was tested, so we have to assume that the FCC guys were just sitting around the office one day when one of them said, "Hey, guys: Let's retest Roger Wiseman." There was no reason for it at all, of course, and it just happened. |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Lloyd wrote in :
On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd Secwet Woger wrote: Slow Code wrote: Lloyd wrote in : GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. ... 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. ROFL, I always laugh at that reply, because he posts it so much. LOL! Wouldn't it really suck to have to take the General exam twice? Hee Hee Heeeeeeeeeeeeeee!! SC |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roger Wiseman AB8MQ, posing as "Not Cocksucker Lloyd" wrote:
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. Do they send warning letters to those who have done nothing, Rog? The letter with the warning in it ALLEGED interference, and warned of consequences. Yep. The FCC allegedly has an interesting tape of you doing the alleged deed. There are allegedly a number of other copies floating about. Want one? 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. Was there an investigation into the VE group administering one of your exams, Roger? Dave K8MN |
#15
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Lardass and 33 year old virgin Lloyd who can't pass 5 wpm code or the General exam once whined: On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrong again, fatty,. imagine that! wrote: Slow Code wrote: Lloyd wrote in : GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. ... 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. ROFL, I always laugh at that reply, because he posts it so much. Then you also laugh at your reflerction of your pig like face in the mirror. Why can't you even pass the General test even once? No other person from the VE group was tested, BWHAHAHAHA Lardass, you'd better go re-read the FCC enforcement actions (in your case you need somebody to re-read it for you), plenty of retests have been given and most either fail or don't show. Roger pased his test and upgraded (something you can't do), so that was a real lousy "sanction", huh? so we have to assume that the FCC guys were just sitting around the office one day when one of them said, "Hey, guys: Let's retest Roger Wiseman." From: http://www.arrl.org NOTE: Issuance by the FCC of a Warning Notice indicates that the FCC has what it believes to be reliable evidence of possible rules infractions and not necessarily that the recipient has violated FCC rules. The FCC has the authority, pursuant to §97.519(d)(2) of the rules to readminister any examination element previously administered by a volunteer examiner. There was no reason for it at all, of course, and it just happened. ------------ July 11, 2000 CERTIFIED MAIL--RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. Roger L. Wiseman 610 Glen Haven Avenue Glendale, WV 26038-1302 SUBJECT: Amateur Radio license KC8JBO Dear Mr. Wiseman: Pursuant to Section 97.519(d)(2) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. Section 97.519(d)(2), the Commission has the authority to re-administer any examination element previously administered by Volunteer Examiners (VE's). The Commission may either administer the examination itself, or under the supervision of a Volunteer Examiner Coordinator (VEC) or VE designated by the Commission. Accordingly, we are requiring you to re-take the General Class Amateur Examination, (Elements 2, 3(A) and 3(B)) under the supervision of an American Radio Relay League Volunteer Examiner Coordinator. This examination must be completed on or before September 11, 2000. The required code speed that you must demonstrate is 5 words per minute. Please be prepared to verify your current address and to present a photo identification. Pursuant to Commission rules, your license will be cancelled if you do not appear for re-examination. You will be granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements you pass upon re-examination. Sincerely, W. Riley Hollingsworth Special Counsel, Amateur Radio Enforcement Bureau ------------------------------ Poor Lardass......................................... |
#16
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Slow Code wrote: Wouldn't it really suck to have to take the General exam twice? Hee Hee Heeeeeeeeeeeeeee!! Lardass Lloyd N0VFP can't even pass the test ONCE! BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! |
#17
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#18
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd Secwet Woger plagiarized:
: "Two-test" Slow **** makes good sentence. Slow **** is so stupid, he : rehashes 6 year old bull****. Roger still PASSED his retest and : upgraded, something you couldn't do. : : 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. Oh my! Another plagiarism by Woger. Who would've thought? Here's the relevant part of the original post, as archived by Google (for the whole post, see http://tinyurl.com/ynxoam): | From: (LRod) | Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc | Subject: 14.313 Jamming.K9BSD, N9PGE, and KK9G. | Message-ID: | ... | 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 Woger's ho? ==================== "Plagiarize, Let no one else's work evade your eyes, Remember why the good Lord made your eyes, So don't shade your eyes, But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize" -- Tom Leherer, the Lobachevsky song |
#19
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Saggytits Stan Lawson Lee whined: On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrong again, ****tard didn't plagiarize: : "Two-test" Slow **** makes good sentence. Slow **** is so stupid, he : rehashes 6 year old bull****. Roger still PASSED his retest and : upgraded, something you couldn't do. : : 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. Oh my! Another Oh, my, the pot calling the kettle black cut and paste FROM any physics websites lately, ****tard? | From: (LRod) | Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc | Subject: 14.313 Jamming.K9BSD, N9PGE, and KK9G. | Message-ID: | ... | 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 Woger's ho? That would be you, bitch boy from Plano, Texas! "****UP Lee" geography idiot and imbecile ****s up as usual when he thinks Marshall County, Alabama and Marshall County, West Virginia are the same place in message : " Then what is at http://www.geocities.com/skywarncanwarn/ doodle brain? It sure looks like the Marshall County ARES, and it even has a place to send email." |
#20
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Twice Tested General lied: On 9 Nov 2006 05:02:10 -0800, Not Cocksucker Lloyd wrong again, fatty,. imagine that! wrote: Slow Code wrote: GLENDALE, WV: The FCC requested July 11, 2000, that Roger L. Wiseman, KC8JBO, retake the General examination elements under the supervision of an ARRL-VEC volunteer examiner team. Wiseman must appear for retesting by September 11, 2000, or his license will be canceled. Applicants appearing for re-examination are granted an Amateur Radio license consistent with the elements passed. The FCC had written Wiseman on March 29, 2000, advising that it had been made aware of "an ongoing personal dispute" between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters. FCC Special Counsel for Amateur Radio Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth invited the two licensees to contact him to discuss the matter. Additionally, the FCC had sent Wiseman a Warning Notice last November in response to allegations of deliberate and malicious interference on 20 meters. ROFL, I always laugh at that one. ... 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. ROFL, I always laugh at that reply, because he posts it so much. Then you also laugh at your reflerction of your pig like face in the mirror. Why can't you even pass the General test even once? It has always been a hoot to watch him twist that to suit his lies. The letter sent specifically states, "an ongoing personal dispute between Wiseman and another licensee that included allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters." Un-Wiseman, take NOTE once and for all; The letter does NOT imply that you were being retested for, as you say, "any number of reasons". It specifically states, "allegations of interference or jamming on 20 meters" and dance as you try, you cannot change the meaning of the text. It is no secret you did this, Un-Wiseman. You simply make yourself look even more foolish than you already are by continually lying about the letter, thus allowing us poke to the soft spot in Baby Wiseman's little head so we can hear him squeal. Nice dancing, though. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Utillity freq List; | Shortwave | |||
203 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (27-NOV-04) | Shortwave | |||
shortwv | Shortwave | |||
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1402 Â June 25, 2004 | General | |||
214 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (09-APR-04) | Shortwave |