Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Fri, Dec 29 2006 7:33 am
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Wed, Dec 27 2006 10:22 am
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

[long, long windy "reply" considerably edited to save others'
eyes...]


David, to you as always * F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

I'm not familiar with it. What does it mean, Len?

You can't guess? :-) Ask your buddie, Jimmie Miccolis.
No, don't bother...he couldn't find anything on ByteBrothers
either. Tsk, so MANY who aren't aware of older computer-
modem comms!


8.544,

I'll give it a 5.3 since it doesn't have a good beat and the lyrics
don't do much for me.

Tsk, math-deficient. 8.544 is the square-root of 73...to four
places.


Sayonara, Sore Loser,

LA

"Dee Flint" wrote:


Yes the same reasons would apply and I do believe that the number of
Novice licensees won't drop to zero. However looking at the slope of the
curve from the time the no-code Tech was implemented to now continues to
show a steep and steady drop.

This is entirely expected. With the codeless Tech license in 92 the de-facto
entry-level license became the Tech. Your observations are right on.


The rate of decline has been nearly constant with no sign yet of leveling
out for that license class. I would expect to see a few hundred Novices
continuing to renew as Novices but they will be statistically
insignificant.

Yes, at some point I think that steep drop will begin to level off. Much
like a graph of Y = 1/X

73
KH6HZ

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Fri, Dec 29 2006 7:33 am
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Wed, Dec 27 2006 10:22 am
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

[long, long windy "reply" considerably edited to save others'
eyes...]

That's another of your factual errors, Len. The long, windy part was
your post. My response did not even come close to your word count.


David, to you as always * F * Y * D * I * T * M * !
I'm not familiar with it. What does it mean, Len?

You can't guess? :-)

I might be able to come up with a guess, but I don't know what it means,
Len.

Ask your buddie, Jimmie Miccolis.

My "buddie"? I consider Jim as a buddy or a friend, but I didn't ask
him. He didn't post the term several times. You did.

No, don't bother...he couldn't find anything on ByteBrothers
either.

Well, make up your mind.

Tsk, so MANY who aren't aware of older computer-
modem comms!

I'm quite aware of older computer-modem comms. I'm not familiar with
the term you're using. Is it something someone said to you one or more
times? Is that how you are so familiar with it?


8.544,

I'll give it a 5.3 since it doesn't have a good beat and the lyrics
don't do much for me.

Tsk, math-deficient. 8.544 is the square-root of 73...to four
places.

Heck, Len, my comment doesn't make me math deficient. I thought it was
your rating of your own post.


Sayonara, Sore Loser,

Nakemiin, pikku paskianen.

LA

Boston

Dave K8MN

" wrote in
oups.com:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...s/My3Years.pdf

If you try just to the 'BroadcastHistory' part you will see a page
of
lots and lots of information on what was originally a site for
"Saving History from the Dumpster." My upload is under the
"Military


Very enjoyable! It was an unusual work week. Was there any rationale for
that?

Also, your lady friend Ada was kinda cute, did some lucky soldier run
off with her? ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

"KH6HZ" wrote in message
...
"Dee Flint" wrote:


Yes the same reasons would apply and I do believe that the number of
Novice licensees won't drop to zero. However looking at the slope of the
curve from the time the no-code Tech was implemented to now continues to
show a steep and steady drop.

This is entirely expected. With the codeless Tech license in 92 the
de-facto entry-level license became the Tech. Your observations are right
on.


The rate of decline has been nearly constant with no sign yet of leveling
out for that license class. I would expect to see a few hundred Novices
continuing to renew as Novices but they will be statistically
insignificant.

Yes, at some point I think that steep drop will begin to level off. Much
like a graph of Y = 1/X



The only question is where will the asymptote lie on that graph.

Dee, N8UZE

Mike Coslo wrote:
" wrote in
oups.com:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...s/My3Years.pdf

If you try just to the 'BroadcastHistory' part you will see a page
of
lots and lots of information on what was originally a site for
"Saving History from the Dumpster." My upload is under the
"Military


Very enjoyable! It was an unusual work week. Was there any rationale for
that?

It was part of a private document that came about after
experimenting with restoring a bunch of digitized color slides
(roughly 600) using the Adobe photo program back in 2000.
Over 500 slides got restored and emulsion reticulation erased.
Once that was done, the explanations for the photos suggested
the photo essay. The final digitized slides were transferred to
a CD for safekeeping. Note: Not even Kodachrome will last
40+ years without change...

The original essay was 30 pages and several copies were
printed out on inkjet, given out. I edited it down to 20 pages
for electronic distribution. Since Hal's website is up the coast
towards Santa Barbara and was open for submission of
material, I sent it up there.

BTW, I got exactly nothing for all that work. It was a "labor of
love" (so stated by a retired civilian engineer who worked for
the Army there when I was in the Company) and a place where
I spent three years of my life doing things in radio that were
unique to just about everyone in this newsgroup. :-)

Also, your lady friend Ada was kinda cute, did some lucky soldier run
off with her? ;^)

No, just as her frosty demeanor began to thaw, her heart
melted and that was that. :-) [only her eyes remained true...]

Happy New Year,

" wrote in
ups.com:


Alun L. Palmer wrote:
" wrote in
oups.com:

From: Dave Heil on Fri, Dec 29 2006 7:33 am

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Wed, Dec 27 2006 10:22 am
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:


Len, get a ham licence. You might even enjoy it.

73 de Alun, N3KIP

Hello, Alun. Okay, I'll write a letter to the FDA and post it
Wednesday...

I wasn't aware one needed a ham license to purchase and eat ham.

My wife and I had ham during the holidays. He tasted like
chicken...

Best regards,





The thing is Len, you don't need a licence to comment on the subject, but
if you are that interested then why don't you get one? There's no reason
you couldn't get an Extra licence now, so why not do it?

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
" wrote in
ups.com:


Alun L. Palmer wrote:
" wrote in
oups.com:

From: Dave Heil on Fri, Dec 29 2006 7:33 am

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Wed, Dec 27 2006 10:22 am
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:


Len, get a ham licence. You might even enjoy it.

73 de Alun, N3KIP

Hello, Alun. Okay, I'll write a letter to the FDA and post it
Wednesday...

I wasn't aware one needed a ham license to purchase and eat ham.

My wife and I had ham during the holidays. He tasted like
chicken...


The thing is Len, you don't need a licence to comment on the subject, but
if you are that interested then why don't you get one? There's no reason
you couldn't get an Extra licence now, so why not do it?

Sigh...Alun, this whole "charge" of "PROMISING to get
an extra out of the box" dates back six years and is, itself, a
FALSE charge of "impropriety." Miccolis has the "polite insult"
tactic of taking things out of context, then fabricating some
kind of "indignation" or even "outrage" at such alleged perfidy.
:-)

SIX YEARS AGO I wrote what amounts to a throw-away
comment as part of a longer message and Miccolis apparently
got hit in his mental eye and remembered it. He then
manufactured a FALSE charge of my "not keeping promises."
Decades ago I promised myself to never get married again.
Then I re-connected with my high-school sweetheart and
"broke" my "promise."

COULD I get an extra class amateur license now? Yes, I
COULD. But I am NOT promising to do so. I never promised
to do so six years ago...despite what Miccolis "charges."

Radio-electronics is - to me - a totally fascinating part of still-
advancing technology. So much so that I changed my life career
goals from being an illustrator-artist to electronic engineering.
I've never regretted that despite having an aptitude and some skill
and experience in professional illustration before my military
service. There is no visible end to changes possible or forth-
coming in radio-electronics (or electronics-radio) and it is fun to
see it all evolve, grow, become a part of our lives. I look forward
every month to see what is new, exciting, indeed revolutionary
in electronics technology described in the many trade
magazines I receive.

Do I "need" an amateur radio license? Personally speaking, NO.
But, it might be fun...or it might not...depending who there is to
communicate with and how to communicate. Having gotten into
HF radio communications over a half century ago (on a more
massive scale than most amateurs in this group experienced),
I have absolutely NO desire to do, learn (once again), or bother
with on-off keying CW just on the HF bands. If one has spent
three years of their life keeping 40+ HF transmitters running
24/7 on long-distance (over 2000 miles) radio circuits, the
thought of collecting 10, 100, or a 1000 "DX" contacts (each one
a sporadic, minimal exchange of information) just for the act of
collecting them is a non-starter to me.

Do I "need" some fancy certificates framed and hung on the wall
or a federally-authorized operator license station callsign so that
I can put that next to my name (as if it were a PhD or similar)?
No. I have no use for Titles and the only thing on my home office
wall is paint. [one 13-foot long wall is mostly bookshelves which
are fairly well filled] One of the LAST things I need is some
certificate announcing "expertise" in a manual skill that was
already mature before the turn of the century befoe the latest
one. My wife has two post-graduate degrees which makes her
two up on mine, yet neither one of us makes a big thing of a
college diploma. [hers are in storage up north, for example]

Some who are skilled in an archaic form of "communications"
keep up the pretense of their being "superior" to others. That's
just a pretense fueled by an ego...and worse considering that
the old license class standards were set by even older egos
brought about when such OOK CW standards were a norm
in old radio communications. That time is past but the old
standards are still triumphed by those who've gotten enormous
emotional sustenance from the Titles they thus obtained.
I'm not about to give up my time to feed those egos nor agree
to maintain the federal welfare that kept those egos fed.

Modernization in ALL communications standards and
practices has been happening...and the hobby of amateur
radio has lagged behind the rest of the radio world. There's
finally some hope of ending the federal welfare of egos
who think that OOK CW is the end-all, be-all of radio and
thus some sort of God-given "superiority" over mere
mortals. I am secure in what I know and do, do not need
fancy titles or certificates or awards to stoke my ego. If
something new happens in electronics I take the trouble
to find out more about it, to continue a lifelong learning
endeavor that is itself most fascinating. I don't bother with
trying to be a "champion" of some skill that was already
old when I was born and see little use for such skill now.

Now, all that said, amateur radio MIGHT be a fun thing for
me to do, something to ADD to the many means of
communication I already have. I first communicated on
radio over a half century ago and have since done so
from ground, from the air (at the controls of an airplane),
and from the sea (okay, a harbor on the Pacific shore).
I once sent commands to a station ON the moon and
received a reply that such commands were accepted.
I don't need a radio or a hobby license just to show that
I can use a radio or communicate by radio...nor do I need
a lot of wallpaper to "prove" such communications. I'm
one of the very few in here who has the technological
smarts and experience to be able to cobble together
a "radio" from an amorphous collection of components,
often cited as the "reason" simple comms such as CW
"is needed for its simplicity." I don't bother trying that
since it is much better to design-build something better,
something more state-of-the-art than the pipe-dream
stuff spouted in this newsgroup in the past by morse
mavens.

My advocacy in here has been to end the morse code test
for an amateur radio license. It has never been one of
getting my own amateur license. Given that I've read just
about all the propaganda issued by the ARRL on their
idea of What Is Best For Amateurs, I'm rather immune to
their "reasons." If you have some NEW reasons to get
an amateur radio license, I'll listen. Old reasons haven't
worked so far.

wrote:
Alun L. Palmer wrote:
" wrote in
ups.com:
Alun L. Palmer wrote:
" wrote in
oups.com:

From: Dave Heil on Fri, Dec 29 2006 7:33 am

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Wed, Dec 27 2006 10:22 am
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:


Len, get a ham licence. You might even enjoy it.

73 de Alun, N3KIP

Hello, Alun. Okay, I'll write a letter to the FDA and post it
Wednesday...

I wasn't aware one needed a ham license to purchase and eat ham.

My wife and I had ham during the holidays. He tasted like
chicken...


The thing is Len, you don't need a licence to comment on the subject, but
if you are that interested then why don't you get one?

Len isn't interested in being a radio amateur.

There's no reason
you couldn't get an Extra licence now, so why not do it?

Len could have gotten a Technician 15+ years ago, but never did.

Sigh...Alun, this whole "charge" of "PROMISING to get
an extra out of the box" dates back six years and is, itself, a
FALSE charge of "impropriety."

Who said you promised anything, Len? Or said it was improper?

All you did, way back on January 19, 2000, was to write that you were
going to get an extra license "right out of the box", But here it is
almost *seven* years later, and you haven't.

Seems to me that you write all sorts of stuff here but don't take any
responsibility for it.

has the "polite insult"
tactic of taking things out of context, then fabricating some
kind of "indignation" or even "outrage" at such alleged perfidy.
:-)

Len, you consider any disagreement with your views, or disproof of your
claims,
as a direct insult.

SIX YEARS AGO

(actually, almost seven)

I wrote what amounts to a throw-away
comment as part of a longer message and

Throw-away comment?

Let's allow the reader to decide:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...e=source&hl=en

apparently
got hit in his mental eye and remembered it. He then
manufactured a FALSE charge of my "not keeping promises."
Decades ago I promised myself to never get married again.
Then I re-connected with my high-school sweetheart and
"broke" my "promise."

Sure doesn't look like a throw-away comment.

COULD I get an extra class amateur license now? Yes, I
COULD.

I don't think so. You'd have to pass all the current license elements -
including Element 1.

But I am NOT promising to do so. I never promised
to do so six years ago...despite what

"charges."

Promised?

Or simply stated your intention?

Seems to me you are saying that we should not believe your words.

If your statement was out of context, please explain how the context
could mean anything different than a statement that you were going for
an amateur Extra license.

Radio-electronics is - to me - a totally fascinating part of still-
advancing technology. So much so that I changed my life career
goals from being an illustrator-artist to electronic engineering.
I've never regretted that despite having an aptitude and some skill
and experience in professional illustration before my military
service. There is no visible end to changes possible or forth-
coming in radio-electronics (or electronics-radio) and it is fun to
see it all evolve, grow, become a part of our lives. I look forward
every month to see what is new, exciting, indeed revolutionary
in electronics technology described in the many trade
magazines I receive.

That's nice, Len. So why are you so interested in changing *amateur
radio*
regulations if you don't want a license?

Do I "need" an amateur radio license? Personally speaking, NO.
But, it might be fun...or it might not...depending who there is to
communicate with and how to communicate.

Judging by your inaction, Len, I'd say you don't want one.

Having gotten into
HF radio communications over a half century ago (on a more
massive scale than most amateurs in this group experienced),
I have absolutely NO desire to do, learn (once again), or bother
with on-off keying CW just on the HF bands.

Then you could not get an Amateur Extra class license now. You'll have
to wait until the rules change.

If one has spent
three years of their life keeping 40+ HF transmitters running
24/7 on long-distance (over 2000 miles) radio circuits, the
thought of collecting 10, 100, or a 1000 "DX" contacts (each one
a sporadic, minimal exchange of information) just for the act of
collecting them is a non-starter to me.

But not to many others.

Do I "need" some fancy certificates framed and hung on the wall
or a federally-authorized operator license station callsign so that
I can put that next to my name (as if it were a PhD or similar)?
No. I have no use for Titles and the only thing on my home office
wall is paint.

Yet you tell us all about yourself here, Len. Your Commercial licenses
and RA-number and much more. Seems like you only dislike titles
you don't have.

[one 13-foot long wall is mostly bookshelves which
are fairly well filled] One of the LAST things I need is some
certificate announcing "expertise" in a manual skill that was
already mature before the turn of the century befoe the latest
one. My wife has two post-graduate degrees which makes her
two up on mine, yet neither one of us makes a big thing of a
college diploma. [hers are in storage up north, for example]

Yet you mention them here - even though *she* earned them, not you.

Some who are skilled in an archaic form of "communications"
keep up the pretense of their being "superior" to others. That's
just a pretense fueled by an ego...and worse considering that
the old license class standards were set by even older egos
brought about when such OOK CW standards were a norm
in old radio communications. That time is past but the old
standards are still triumphed by those who've gotten enormous
emotional sustenance from the Titles they thus obtained.
I'm not about to give up my time to feed those egos nor agree
to maintain the federal welfare that kept those egos fed.

Len, when it comes to egos, yours is most obvious here.

Modernization in ALL communications standards and
practices has been happening...and the hobby of amateur
radio has lagged behind the rest of the radio world.

How so?

Sounds to me like you're saying you want radio amateurs to stop
*using* Morse Code, not just testing for it.

There's
finally some hope of ending the federal welfare of egos
who think that OOK CW is the end-all, be-all of radio and
thus some sort of God-given "superiority" over mere
mortals. I am secure in what I know and do, do not need
fancy titles or certificates or awards to stoke my ego.

Seems to me like you stoke it by telling us over and over again
about yourself and your accomplishments, Len.

If you were *really* secure, you wouldn't have to put others
down by making fun of their names, ethnicity, education,
job/military/govt. service experience, gender, etc.

But you do all those things and more. That tells me you are
really not secure, and are threatened by anyone who
disagrees with you.

If
something new happens in electronics I take the trouble
to find out more about it, to continue a lifelong learning
endeavor that is itself most fascinating. I don't bother with
trying to be a "champion" of some skill that was already
old when I was born and see little use for such skill now.

Stoker set to "HIGH"....

Now, all that said, amateur radio MIGHT be a fun thing for
me to do, something to ADD to the many means of
communication I already have. I first communicated on
radio over a half century ago and have since done so
from ground, from the air (at the controls of an airplane),
and from the sea (okay, a harbor on the Pacific shore).

Using somebody else's license and somebody else's radio, right?

I once sent commands to a station ON the moon and
received a reply that such commands were accepted.

Using somebody else's license and somebody else's radio, right?

I don't need a radio or a hobby license just to show that
I can use a radio or communicate by radio...nor do I need
a lot of wallpaper to "prove" such communications.

Then don't get one, Len.

But why not let those who do such things alone?

What is wrong with live and let live?

I'm
one of the very few in here who has the technological
smarts and experience to be able to cobble together
a "radio" from an amorphous collection of components,
often cited as the "reason" simple comms such as CW
"is needed for its simplicity."

Yet we haven't seen a single example of such. No website,
no magazine articles, no pictures, no results.

Some of us (such as myself) have built complete amateur radio stations
and used them on the air to contact many others. Could you do that,
Len? I think not.

I don't bother trying that
since it is much better to design-build something better,
something more state-of-the-art than the pipe-dream
stuff spouted in this newsgroup in the past by morse
mavens.

IOW, you'd rather insult what others *have* done than do
something yourself.

My advocacy in here has been to end the morse code test
for an amateur radio license.

And a lot more. Like the addition of a minimum age requirement
for a US amateur license, even though no such requirement has
ever existed.

It has never been one of
getting my own amateur license.

Jan 19, 2000:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...e=source&hl=en

Never is a long time.

Given that I've read just
about all the propaganda issued by the ARRL on their
idea of What Is Best For Amateurs, I'm rather immune to
their "reasons." If you have some NEW reasons to get
an amateur radio license, I'll listen. Old reasons haven't
worked so far.

The big question is why Len is so interested in changing the rules of
amateur radio,
when he's not involved with amateur radio in any other way.

Perhaps it just bothers him that someone is having fun?

wrote:
...
The big question is why Len is so interested in changing the rules of
amateur radio,
when he's not involved with amateur radio in any other way.

Perhaps it just bothers him that someone is having fun?


Now I'd say that must be a trick question, as certainly, on the surface,
it appears only a moron would ask such a thing!

I'd say Len would do little or nothing to hinder anyone from having
"fun." Now, for instance, say they were hogging up all the radio freqs
for a good 'ole boys club, he'd be a ****ed as hell--and rightly so!

That is all you are seeing. Len don't give a chit about children having
fun ...

JS