| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#2
September 19th 03, 12:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
#3
September 21st 03, 12:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes: In article , (N2EY) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (N2EY) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (N2EY) writes: In article , "Clint" rattlehead@computronDOTnet writes: sending and receiving CW isn't a building block to anything else..... Yes, it is. First, it's a building block to the use of the mode on the air. Although other services have pretty much stopped using Morse Code, hams use it extensivley, and an amateur license is permission to operate an amateur station, not a station in another service. Roger that, Reverend Jim... Who is "Reverend Jim", Len? You and Brian Burke keep using that name to address someone. Tsk, tsk, tsk...you've never seen "Taxi" then... :-) I've seen most episodes of Taxi. My name's not Ignatowksi. We've all seen your prodigious output here in the Newsgroup. And we've all seen your even-more-prodigious output here in this newsgroup, Len. Under a wide variety of AOL screen names - nocwtest, lenof21, averyfine, averyfineman, lenover21, and probably more. Perhaps you aspire to emulate Louie DePalma...;-) Your surname is Miccolis but you are a dead-ringer for the Rev. Jim character, totally stoked on morsemanship...spaced out as to any other radio communications mode. Not me. I use a variety of communications modes. It can't be me, because I graduated from electrical engineering school, not divinity school. And my name isn't Ignatowski ;-) What engineering school did you graduate from, Len? One right here in Southern California... One without a name...:- It's easy enough for a BSEE to find out. Not that many out here. But you won't tell us the name. On the other hand, it is difficult to figure out WHERE YOU WORK, in terms of an actual company name. That's right. Because it's not relevant to an amateur radio policy discussion. You rationalize on "not revealing it" for some kind of "fear" of getting "bad mail" from others. Nope. It's not relevant. And, it's just common sense that no matter what job I hold/held, and no matter who my employer(s) are/were, they would not make any difference in your behavior towards me. I think your REAL fear is just in everyone discovering you don't do a damn thing in radio for a living. Nope. The only REAL fear is yours, because you desperately want to know, but I won't tell you. No problem for me. I've revealed most of my employers in here, plus a number of personal references who are long-time licensed radio amateurs. None of the employers had anything to do with amateur radio. They're irrelevant to the discussion. You want to knwo them for reasons that have nothing to do with amateur radio. You won't do that. I've given a number of personal references who are long-time licensed radio amateurs, too, Len. But what's really relevant is what a person has done in amateur radio. I've been an active, licensed radio amateur for almost 36 years - operating, building stations, writing articles, elmering, etc. You wrote a few basic articles for a now-defunct amateur radio periodical and have never held any class of amateur radio license. All you seem to want is some kind of "rep" in the newsgroup for being here almost all of your free time, writing terribly long, boring peans to yourself and morsemanship...when not using the newsgroup as some kind of "chat room" in talking about absolutely non-radio-amateur subjects. That's not me, Len. It's you - except the ""peans to morsemanship" are "diatribes against Morse code" in your case. IN the Archaic Radiotelegraphy Service... No such thing exists. Yes it do, de facto, just not de jure. :-) DeJur made projectors. You're projecting ;-) I'm telling it like it is. HAW! That's almost funny. You're projecting your own reactions and motivations onto others. Classical transference behavior, really. I've been "in" the Amateur Radio Service for almost 36 years. You have not done so for even one day. That's nice, Len. On what amateur band did you bootleg with it? Hmm? Or was it a broadcast band device so you could pretend you were on "Ted Mack's Amateur Hour"? ;-) I've never bootlegged on anything after 1948. Ah - but that means you may have bootlegged in 1948 and before! YOU don't really KNOW if I "bootlegged" at all, do you? Nope. But you raised the subject, not me. I wrote (emphasis added): "you *MAY* have bootlegged in 1948 and before!" Maybe you did - and maybe you didn't. I will say categorically that I have *never* bootlegged - that is, operated illegally. Can you say the same thing, Len? All you want to do is to selectively use my messages as an ignition point for a Flame War. Nope. Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? YOU didn't exist in 1948. That was 55 years ago. Irrelevant. Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? You have NO KNOWLEDGE of what I did back then or even 56 years ago, but you are trolling, trolling, looking for a Flame Fest to start. Nope. Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? So, great big expert radio ham, tell US your "personal experiences" with small output personal wireless AM broadcast band links of the pre-1950 period. Irrelevant. Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? Come clean and tell the group all about it. It will be good for your soul to admit your checkered past. Go stick a whouff-hong someplace, pervert. It will satisfy your sex life. Sounds like you're getting angry, Len. If you don't have a checkered past, there's nothing to admit. Your anger *may* indicate a guilty conscience....;-) ;-) Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? It's more than you had done in RADIO at that age. And mine was legal. No bootlegging. YOU didn't exist in 1947...or 1948. Doesn't matter. What I did at 13 is much more than you had done at age 14. By February 1953 I was already (at 20 years of age) a soldier serving overseas, assigned to an Army radio station with the callsign ADA. I was with ADA for three years. Fascinating - you were 14 in 1948 but 20 in early 1953. You've never served in the armed forces of the United States, much less "assigned overseas." I never claimed to be. How is that relevant to amateur radio or bootlegging by 14 year olds? You've made fun of my military service in the past. [that's in Google, by the way, you seem to live part of your time there...] Where? Produce the post. I dare ya! ;-) Shall we google up your frequent insults and denigrations of others' military and government service? For example - how about the way you made fun of Jeffrey Herman's Coast Gurad shore station radio operating? You want to be honored a respected for being safely within in the USA borders, never serving. You want to make fun of those veterans who who don't love your blessed sacrament, morsemanship. Not me. But you sure do demonstrate the principle of "can dish it out but can't take it". By 1967 I'd already DESIGNED and mostly built (technician help was not always available) several UHF to microwave RF emitters of more that 10 Watts. Well, give Len a Nobel Prize for accomplishment in physics! In 1967 you were almost three times 14 years old. Wow, for an ALLEGED MSEE, you've got BAD arithmetic skills. Nope. Three times fourteen is forty-two. The answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything. 1967 - 42 = 1925. And I wrote "almost three times 14". *almost* I was born in 1932. And you were 14 in 1948, huh? Talk about bad math skills! In early 1967 I was 34 years old, my Honorable Discharge was 7 years in the past. And it was your JOB, wasn't it? You are damn right is was MY JOB. So it is irrelevant to what *amateurs* do. That was the essence of your diatribe against Jeffrey Herman's job. I was good at enough to be given design responsibility. Me, too... All quite legal. Not for you to operate unless you held the station license. Go Whouff-Hong yourself, sweetums. And you call *me* a "pervert"... I DID have a station license in the PLMRS (as its called now) in a partnership in a business. Angrier and angrier you get. Strong is the dark side with you. Consume you it does.... Don't give us this CRAP about "holding a station license" when you've stated in the past in here that ham radio is "all about OPERATING." Where did I say that, Len? Produce the post. I double dare ya! ;-) ;-) Is it your guilt over your own bootlegging that causes you to attack those who followed the law, even as teenagers? You are really REACHING for some Flame War, aren't you, Rev. Jim? Not me. Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? Who is this "Rev. Jim" you keep addressing? Yourself, Stokey. Get off the hard stuff before it does you in... What ARE you talking about, Len? "Stokey"? The age thing is yours, Len, not mine. You recommended that FCC not license anyone under age 14. Let us know when you've passed the mental age of 14 and we can discuss things rationally. So far, you aren't close to that. ah, the old ad hominem by Len when all else fails. So predictable. Why are you avoiding that simple question? WHAT "question?" "Why should there be *any* written test on theory if all a person wants to do is operate manufactured radios? "If someone doesn't want to design, build or repair radios, why should they have to memorize all those symbols, diagrams and formulas?" Those aren't "questions" except to the loaded, "do you still beat your wife" sort of "questions." Not at all. The "do you still beat your wife" question is only "loaded" if the answers are confined to "yes" and "no". There's no such restriction on those questions. They don't have to be "answered" because YOU don't have one single bit of "authority" to demand answers. Not demanding. Asking. You don't like those questions because they demonstrate a *MAJOR* flaw in your jeremiads against Morse code testing. Take pride in your work for a living. Reveal at least the area of "electrical work" you do. I already have. Electrical engineering. Design work, to be precise. That's all you need to know. ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) If that makes you angry, it's your problem, not mine. Even that is irrelevant to an amateur radio policy discussion. Either way, ALL you are is an AMATEUR who tries to pass hisself off as a great big guru in AMATEURISM. Is being an amateur somehow bad? Amateurs do things for the love of the thing alone. You are not a radio amateur. Nor have you ever been. And that's a fact. As for "guru", that's all in your imagination. I don't claim to be an "expert" or "guru" in anything. Not even Morse Code. |
|
#4
October 2nd 03, 02:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes: In article , (N2EY) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (N2EY) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (N2EY) writes: In article , "Clint" rattlehead@computronDOTnet writes: sending and receiving CW isn't a building block to anything else..... Yes, it is. First, it's a building block to the use of the mode on the air. Although other services have pretty much stopped using Morse Code, hams use it extensivley, and an amateur license is permission to operate an amateur station, not a station in another service. Roger that, Reverend Jim... Who is "Reverend Jim", Len? You and Brian Burke keep using that name to address someone. Tsk, tsk, tsk...you've never seen "Taxi" then... :-) I've seen most episodes of Taxi. My name's not Ignatowksi. We've all seen your prodigious output here in the Newsgroup. And we've all seen your even-more-prodigious output here in this newsgroup, Len. Under a wide variety of AOL screen names - nocwtest, lenof21, averyfine, averyfineman, lenover21, and probably more. Perhaps you aspire to emulate Louie DePalma...;-) Your surname is Miccolis but you are a dead-ringer for the Rev. Jim character, totally stoked on morsemanship...spaced out as to any other radio communications mode. Not me. I use a variety of communications modes. It can't be me, because I graduated from electrical engineering school, not divinity school. And my name isn't Ignatowski ;-) What engineering school did you graduate from, Len? One right here in Southern California... One without a name...:- It's easy enough for a BSEE to find out. Not that many out here. But you won't tell us the name. On the other hand, it is difficult to figure out WHERE YOU WORK, in terms of an actual company name. That's right. Because it's not relevant to an amateur radio policy discussion. You rationalize on "not revealing it" for some kind of "fear" of getting "bad mail" from others. Nope. It's not relevant. And, it's just common sense that no matter what job I hold/held, and no matter who my employer(s) are/were, they would not make any difference in your behavior towards me. I think your REAL fear is just in everyone discovering you don't do a damn thing in radio for a living. Nope. The only REAL fear is yours, because you desperately want to know, but I won't tell you. No problem for me. I've revealed most of my employers in here, plus a number of personal references who are long-time licensed radio amateurs. None of the employers had anything to do with amateur radio. They're irrelevant to the discussion. You want to knwo them for reasons that have nothing to do with amateur radio. You won't do that. I've given a number of personal references who are long-time licensed radio amateurs, too, Len. But what's really relevant is what a person has done in amateur radio. I've been an active, licensed radio amateur for almost 36 years - operating, building stations, writing articles, elmering, etc. You wrote a few basic articles for a now-defunct amateur radio periodical and have never held any class of amateur radio license. All you seem to want is some kind of "rep" in the newsgroup for being here almost all of your free time, writing terribly long, boring peans to yourself and morsemanship...when not using the newsgroup as some kind of "chat room" in talking about absolutely non-radio-amateur subjects. That's not me, Len. It's you - except the ""peans to morsemanship" are "diatribes against Morse code" in your case. IN the Archaic Radiotelegraphy Service... No such thing exists. Yes it do, de facto, just not de jure. :-) DeJur made projectors. You're projecting ;-) I'm telling it like it is. HAW! That's almost funny. You're projecting your own reactions and motivations onto others. Classical transference behavior, really. I've been "in" the Amateur Radio Service for almost 36 years. You have not done so for even one day. That's nice, Len. On what amateur band did you bootleg with it? Hmm? Or was it a broadcast band device so you could pretend you were on "Ted Mack's Amateur Hour"? ;-) I've never bootlegged on anything after 1948. Ah - but that means you may have bootlegged in 1948 and before! YOU don't really KNOW if I "bootlegged" at all, do you? Nope. But you raised the subject, not me. I wrote (emphasis added): "you *MAY* have bootlegged in 1948 and before!" Maybe you did - and maybe you didn't. I will say categorically that I have *never* bootlegged - that is, operated illegally. Can you say the same thing, Len? All you want to do is to selectively use my messages as an ignition point for a Flame War. Nope. Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? YOU didn't exist in 1948. That was 55 years ago. Irrelevant. Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? You have NO KNOWLEDGE of what I did back then or even 56 years ago, but you are trolling, trolling, looking for a Flame Fest to start. Nope. Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? So, great big expert radio ham, tell US your "personal experiences" with small output personal wireless AM broadcast band links of the pre-1950 period. Irrelevant. Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? Come clean and tell the group all about it. It will be good for your soul to admit your checkered past. Go stick a whouff-hong someplace, pervert. It will satisfy your sex life. Sounds like you're getting angry, Len. If you don't have a checkered past, there's nothing to admit. Your anger *may* indicate a guilty conscience....;-) ;-) Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? It's more than you had done in RADIO at that age. And mine was legal. No bootlegging. YOU didn't exist in 1947...or 1948. Doesn't matter. What I did at 13 is much more than you had done at age 14. By February 1953 I was already (at 20 years of age) a soldier serving overseas, assigned to an Army radio station with the callsign ADA. I was with ADA for three years. Fascinating - you were 14 in 1948 but 20 in early 1953. You've never served in the armed forces of the United States, much less "assigned overseas." I never claimed to be. How is that relevant to amateur radio or bootlegging by 14 year olds? You've made fun of my military service in the past. [that's in Google, by the way, you seem to live part of your time there...] Where? Produce the post. I dare ya! ;-) Shall we google up your frequent insults and denigrations of others' military and government service? For example - how about the way you made fun of Jeffrey Herman's Coast Gurad shore station radio operating? You want to be honored a respected for being safely within in the USA borders, never serving. You want to make fun of those veterans who who don't love your blessed sacrament, morsemanship. Not me. But you sure do demonstrate the principle of "can dish it out but can't take it". By 1967 I'd already DESIGNED and mostly built (technician help was not always available) several UHF to microwave RF emitters of more that 10 Watts. Well, give Len a Nobel Prize for accomplishment in physics! In 1967 you were almost three times 14 years old. Wow, for an ALLEGED MSEE, you've got BAD arithmetic skills. Nope. Three times fourteen is forty-two. The answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything. 1967 - 42 = 1925. And I wrote "almost three times 14". *almost* I was born in 1932. And you were 14 in 1948, huh? Talk about bad math skills! In early 1967 I was 34 years old, my Honorable Discharge was 7 years in the past. And it was your JOB, wasn't it? You are damn right is was MY JOB. So it is irrelevant to what *amateurs* do. That was the essence of your diatribe against Jeffrey Herman's job. I was good at enough to be given design responsibility. Me, too... All quite legal. Not for you to operate unless you held the station license. Go Whouff-Hong yourself, sweetums. And you call *me* a "pervert"... I DID have a station license in the PLMRS (as its called now) in a partnership in a business. Angrier and angrier you get. Strong is the dark side with you. Consume you it does.... Don't give us this CRAP about "holding a station license" when you've stated in the past in here that ham radio is "all about OPERATING." Where did I say that, Len? Produce the post. I double dare ya! ;-) ;-) Is it your guilt over your own bootlegging that causes you to attack those who followed the law, even as teenagers? You are really REACHING for some Flame War, aren't you, Rev. Jim? Not me. Either you bootlegged before 1949 or you didn't. Which is it? Who is this "Rev. Jim" you keep addressing? Yourself, Stokey. Get off the hard stuff before it does you in... What ARE you talking about, Len? "Stokey"? The age thing is yours, Len, not mine. You recommended that FCC not license anyone under age 14. Let us know when you've passed the mental age of 14 and we can discuss things rationally. So far, you aren't close to that. ah, the old ad hominem by Len when all else fails. So predictable. Why are you avoiding that simple question? WHAT "question?" "Why should there be *any* written test on theory if all a person wants to do is operate manufactured radios? "If someone doesn't want to design, build or repair radios, why should they have to memorize all those symbols, diagrams and formulas?" Those aren't "questions" except to the loaded, "do you still beat your wife" sort of "questions." Not at all. The "do you still beat your wife" question is only "loaded" if the answers are confined to "yes" and "no". There's no such restriction on those questions. They don't have to be "answered" because YOU don't have one single bit of "authority" to demand answers. Not demanding. Asking. You don't like those questions because they demonstrate a *MAJOR* flaw in your jeremiads against Morse code testing. Take pride in your work for a living. Reveal at least the area of "electrical work" you do. I already have. Electrical engineering. Design work, to be precise. That's all you need to know. ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) If that makes you angry, it's your problem, not mine. Even that is irrelevant to an amateur radio policy discussion. Either way, ALL you are is an AMATEUR who tries to pass hisself off as a great big guru in AMATEURISM. Is being an amateur somehow bad? Amateurs do things for the love of the thing alone. You are not a radio amateur. Nor have you ever been. And that's a fact. As for "guru", that's all in your imagination. I don't claim to be an "expert" or "guru" in anything. Not even Morse Code. |
|
#5
October 2nd 03, 06:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , (N2EY)
writes: In article , (Len Over 21) writes: In article , (N2EY) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (N2EY) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (N2EY) writes: In article , "Clint" rattlehead@computronDOTnet writes: sending and receiving CW isn't a building block to anything else..... Yes, it is. First, it's a building block to the use of the mode on the air. Although other services have pretty much stopped using Morse Code, hams use it extensivley, and an amateur license is permission to operate an amateur station, not a station in another service. Roger that, Reverend Jim... Who is "Reverend Jim", Len? You and Brian Burke keep using that name to address someone. Tsk, tsk, tsk...you've never seen "Taxi" then... :-) I've seen most episodes of Taxi. My name's not Ignatowksi. We've all seen your prodigious output here in the Newsgroup. And we've all seen your even-more-prodigious output here in this newsgroup, Len. Under a wide variety of AOL screen names - nocwtest, lenof21, averyfine, averyfineman, lenover21, and probably more. I have never used "Avery Fine" as a screen name. "Len Of 21" is my primary AOL screen name. Someone else has "No CW Test." I have used NO other screen names in here. My real name and current mailing address is the same as it appeared many times as bylines in Ham Radio Magazine. Not me. I use a variety of communications modes. Of course you do. You are a true-blue amateur who believes in all the guidance of the ARRL and the purity and sanctity of morse code following all directives from Newington to the letter.. The only REAL fear is yours, because you desperately want to know, but I won't tell you. What "REAL fear?" It is NOT anything about the tuff tawk in here. :-) Since you won't say, we just put you closer to the BOGUS boys. But what's really relevant is what a person has done in amateur radio. I've been an active, licensed radio amateur for almost 36 years - operating, building stations, writing articles, elmering, etc. You wrote a few basic articles for a now-defunct amateur radio periodical and have never held any class of amateur radio license. Oooooo...! Was that supposed to "hurt" big fella? :-) I got a COMMERCIAL Radiotelephone license in 1956 (only one test needed) and had a career in radio-electronics design since then. You will no doubt have to say such is "irrelevant" for lots of reasons. You don't want to admit your occupation's firm name or what it does, so you try to denigrate all those who aren't afraid of naming where they worked or where they worked or what they did at work in detail. You want to diminish the efforts of Ham Radio Magazine founders Skip Tenney and Jim Fisk and their TWENTY TWO YEARS of successful, INDEPENDENT newsstand publications. Why? Tenney is a radio amateur. Fisk is deceased and his old call (W1HR) is now used by a club in Jim Fisk's honor. You keep wanting to say HR is "defunct" as if that is somehow unclean. You weren't published in HR, Jimmie. You got as far as "Electric Radio," a non-newsstand periodical for a special interest group in old radio. Did you ever write for Electronics magazine (McGraw-Hill's old biweekly)? I did. Did you ever write for BYTE? I did. I've written for Microcomputing and Call-A.P.P.L.E. about more avoactional and recreational activities concerning electronics. That's not me, Len. It's you - except the ""peans to morsemanship" are "diatribes against Morse code" in your case. Someone has to counter your religious evangelism about morse code and its "necessary" testing. :-) You're projecting your own reactions and motivations onto others. Classical transference behavior, really. Nooo. The most I've been "projecting" lately are some Power Point presentations. :-) "you *MAY* have bootlegged in 1948 and before!" Maybe you did - and maybe you didn't. When did you last engage in a homosexual act? Same sort of "question." I will say categorically that I have *never* bootlegged - that is, operated illegally. ...as far as we know...but then you will not reveal ALL that you do... Can you say the same thing, Len? I can say anything I want. Whatever that is, if I don't religiously praise morse code, you will find some fault with it and write yards and yards of copy manufacturing all sorts of nonsensical "arguments." All you want to do is to selectively use my messages as an ignition point for a Flame War. Nope. Incorrect. YOU didn't exist in 1948. That was 55 years ago. Irrelevant. Anything before your birthdate is "irrelevant?" A very elitist, arrogant attidude. Tsk, tsk... Sounds like you're getting angry, Len. If you don't have a checkered past, there's nothing to admit. Your anger *may* indicate a guilty conscience....;-) I once took a Checker cab. I've played checkers. I've watched many a checkered flag wave at the end of NASCAR and CART races. What I did at 13 is much more than you had done at age 14. You MUST say that anything you've done at anyone else's same age is "better." :-) Did you win any International contest awards at 14? :-) By February 1953 I was already (at 20 years of age) a soldier serving overseas, assigned to an Army radio station with the callsign ADA. I was with ADA for three years. Fascinating - you were 14 in 1948 but 20 in early 1953. 15 in early 1948. Between 20 and 21 in 1953 depending on month. Why are you so concerned about minutae in years? Looking for another TROLL opening for more FLAMING? Of course... You've never served in the armed forces of the United States, much less "assigned overseas." I never claimed to be. How is that relevant to amateur radio or bootlegging by 14 year olds? You are the one featuring BOOTLEGGING, Jimmie. That's a main subject with you? Why? You've made fun of my military service in the past. [that's in Google, by the way, you seem to live part of your time there...] Where? Produce the post. I was posted to 8235th AU in 1953 and stayed there for 3 years as one of the many who worked ADA, the primary communicaations station for the Far East Command. 24/7 service via HF. You've not done anything close to that. For example - how about the way you made fun of Jeffrey Herman's Coast Gurad shore station radio operating? You civilians will never understand that former military persons can joke about their military branches because we all KNOW what military life was like. You CANNOT. The USCG has NEVER done HF communications in any magnitude approaching either the US Army, US Air Force, or US Navy. That's a fact. You want to be honored a respected for being safely within in the USA borders, never serving. You want to make fun of those veterans who who don't love your blessed sacrament, morsemanship. Not me. But you sure do demonstrate the principle of "can dish it out but can't take it". No problem. You want to throw food in a food fight here, go ahead. If I care to do so, I can toss it right back at you with increased tonnage and far better delivery. Go to someone else to attempt a flame war. The answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything. 1967 - 42 = 1925. IRRELEVANT. Only a few are interested in a dead, DEFUNCT, British fantasy novelist who was a darling of a few eastern anglophiles. Sorry, but it was all a flash in the pan, then goodbye. Don't try to pass that off as "science-fiction," it will never play at the SFWA. Is being an amateur somehow bad? Amateurs do things for the love of the thing alone. And a few of you insist your amateurism is "better" than anything the professionals could ever do. You are not a radio amateur. Nor have you ever been. And that's a fact. I've been a PROFESSIONAL in the electronics industry. That's a fact. I've been a hobbyist in electronics. That's a fact. I've done military communicaations for three years a half century ago. That's a fact. I've done commercial communications as a civilian. That's a fact. You have NOT done any of the above and that's a fact. I don't venerate or worship or glorify morse code. That's a fact. I don't fantasize or pretend that any amateur "needs" an out-dated skill in any radio just to get a license to operate. That's a fact. I'm willing to state anything I've done, barring NDAs or national security subjects and that's a fact. You are unwilling to state anything in any detail of what you have done in radio or electronics for a living and that's a fact. You try to amplify minutae into gigantic "arguments" over nothing and that's a fact. When you act civil and rational, then I might discuss things with you. That's not a fact because it hasn't happened yet. Now fire up your Time Machine and go back to the Past in radio that you love so much. Bye.... |
|
#6
October 2nd 03, 11:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes: I have never used "Avery Fine" as a screen name. Yes, you have. Here's just one example - there are more. http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...000514%40nso-c v.aol.com&output=gplain BEGIN QUOTE: From: (Avery Fine) Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy Subject: PSK31 Sked Lines: 65 NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder07.news.aol.com X-Admin: Date: 16 Sep 2000 23:17:20 GMT References: Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com X-Newsreader: Session Scheduler Message-ID: In article , Sig Heil writes: You remain a bitter and ancient child. Now, now, you are looking into the mirror again when you write. :-) It is now quite obvious that you have no intention of ever obtaining an amateur radio license exam. That is YOUR suppository, er, supposition, Herr Standartenfuhrer. Why do you continue to post these lengthy diatribes having nothing to do with amateur radio? On the contrary, YOUR lengthy diatribes address nothing but an attempt to suppress dissent and to "get even" with being taken to task two years ago on your braggadoccio of radio expertise. You've never forgotten and want vindication. You get none. This makes you whiney and petulant. Poor baby. The restructuring in amateur radio is not yet complete. More needs to be done to bring US amateur radio regulations closer to 1980s standards (it had been at 1950s standards, more or less). You and a few others who achieved their "qualifications" (!) from high-rate code and 1-by-2 or 2-by-1 callsigns cannot take the new rules and insist that all be "qualified" under the old ones or you will not "recognize them." Those who do not accept YOUR definition are objects of your highly-negative, follow-the-law-as-it-is-NOW criticsm. Just the same, in other threads on other subjects, Herr Heil hasn't spoken out on any technical subjects that can affect policy of now or even later...except to go on at length on a non-relationship of surname Heil in regards to microphones. [ for shame! 'real' hams don't bark into microphones! :-) ] Have you nothing else in your life? Considerably more, four-neuroned-brain Heil. The attitudes of national socialist partei one-by-twos who think they are wielding two-by-fours of arrogant superiority make the prospect of "proper" and "right" licensing unattractive to be placed at the top of any agenda. YOU are in such a category by public observation of anyone accessing this newsgroup. Perhaps your many years of public service at the State Department have made you oblivious to the fact that the FCC (that's another government agency that regulates civil radio in the USA) sets licensing standards for US radio amateurs. It also grants licenses. It granted yours (apparently). The US amateur radio community does not grant licenses...nor does it "rule" on the "motivations" it thinks citizens have in regards to radio licenses. You seem to think that you "know" everything about those who post contrary opinions to yours. Have fun in your self-important ignorance, go ahead and post more of your "hate" allegations as if you represent the entire US ARS community. I don't care to message with you further (as if I ever did to your libelous postings), Herr Standartenfuhrer. I'm going to a college reunion. QRT. didit END QUOTE |
|
#7
October 2nd 03, 10:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , (N2EY)
writes: In article , (Len Over 21) writes: I have never used "Avery Fine" as a screen name. Yes, you have. Here's just one example - there are more. I stand corrected. Three and a half years ago AOL still had a limit on the number of characters in a screen name. Once that limit was changed to a longer string, I cancelled the "Avery Fine" screen name and changed it to my old Sysop handle of "Avery Fineman" used many years ago before the Internet went public. LATER, someone picked up on that particular screen name of "Avery Fine" and used it as soon as the six-month time was up. The same is true of "No CW Test" screenname...which I cancelled and someone else used after it was available. At NO time have I ever tried to disguise my legal name or address or location by adopting some false personna. Yet you GRASP AT STRAWS in trying to light up a Flame War to satisfy your childish pique in here. Tsk, tsk, don't play with matches... there are others here who have flamethrowers and you could get severely burned. (apparently). The US amateur radio community does not grant licenses...nor does it "rule" on the "motivations" it thinks citizens have in regards to radio licenses. You seem to think that you "know" everything about those who post contrary opinions to yours. Have fun in your self-important ignorance, go ahead and post more of your "hate" allegations as if you represent the entire US ARS community. I don't care to message with you further (as if I ever did to your libelous postings), Herr Standartenfuhrer. I'm going to a college reunion. QRT. didit END QUOTE The college reunion was in the midwest in 2000, my wife's college class. Rainy, dreary, but a fun event formally and socially. I'm sorry you have to pollute the contents in here with bringing up THREE YEAR OLD (PLUS) arguments to satisfy your apparent "need" to get back at your perceived pique. Try living in the here and now instead of constantly going back to the past. You are not salving old word wounds by going back to the past, only re-opening your own wounds for more hurt. Tsk, tsk. LHA |
|
#8
October 3rd 03, 05:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes: In article , (N2EY) writes: In article , (Len Over 21) writes: I have never used "Avery Fine" as a screen name. Yes, you have. Here's just one example - there are more. I stand corrected. Well, there you have it ;-) Three and a half years ago AOL still had a limit on the number of characters in a screen name. Irrelevant. Once that limit was changed to a longer string, I cancelled the "Avery Fine" screen name and changed it to my old Sysop handle of "Avery Fineman" used many years ago before the Internet went public. Irrelevant. LATER, someone picked up on that particular screen name of "Avery Fine" and used it as soon as the six-month time was up. The same is true of "No CW Test" screenname...which I cancelled and someone else used after it was available. Irrelevant. At NO time have I ever tried to disguise my legal name or address or location by adopting some false personna. It's spelled "persona", Len. In the quoted post, you do not mention your name, address, or other identifiers. Just "Avery Fine" and nothing else. Some people would say that you were trying to conceal your identity. But your hostile persona comes through.... Yet you GRASP AT STRAWS in trying to light up a Flame War to satisfy your childish pique in here. "Childish pique"? You're the one shouting, calling names, making fun of other people's jobs, military and government service, education, technical achievements, geographic location, gender and sexual orientation. Pretty childish stuff you post here. Like rewriting the reference line of that quoted post so that Dave Heil's name becomes 'Sig Heil'. Really mature stuff, Len old boy. Me, I'm simply correcting your mistakes. You said you never used a certain screen name, and I proved you to be mistaken. In error. Wrong. Incorrect. Live with it. Tsk, tsk, don't play with matches... there are others here who have flamethrowers and you could get severely burned. Sounds like a threat. That's at least two so far. It is clear you wish to kill the messenger, for the unspeakable crime of telling the truth and proving you to be in error. (apparently). The US amateur radio community does not grant licenses...nor does it "rule" on the "motivations" it thinks citizens have in regards to radio licenses. You seem to think that you "know" everything about those who post contrary opinions to yours. Have fun in your self-important ignorance, go ahead and post more of your "hate" allegations as if you represent the entire US ARS community. I don't care to message with you further (as if I ever did to your libelous postings), Herr Standartenfuhrer. I'm going to a college reunion. QRT. didit END QUOTE The college reunion was in the midwest in 2000, my wife's college class. Rainy, dreary, but a fun event formally and socially. Irrelevant. I'm sorry you have to pollute the contents in here with bringing up THREE YEAR OLD (PLUS) arguments to satisfy your apparent "need" to get back at your perceived pique. "Pollute the contents"? How? Here are some of your own words, from that post: "Sig Heil" "Herr Standartenfuhrer" "Poor baby." "Herr Heil" "four-neuroned-brain Heil" "national socialist partei one-by-twos" "libelous postings" "Herr Standartenfuhrer." And you say I "pollute the contents"? You made a statement and I proved you to be wrong. Grow up a little. Try living in the here and now instead of constantly going back to the past. You are not salving old word wounds by going back to the past, only re-opening your own wounds for more hurt. Tsk, tsk. You can always just hide your head in the sand and killfile my posts, Len. No problem. |
|
#9
October 6th 03, 11:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#10
October 6th 03, 08:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
