Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Mike Coslo
writes (under " Able Baker Charlie" thread): N2EY wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: snip There are all sorts of reasons to be involved in a newsgroup. Some of us like to post to exchange knowledge, some to debate, and others to have an adventure - using other posters as pro or antagonists in a sort of text based adventure game. Good precis, Mike. However, there's one group left out from this venue, the Traditionalist-Fundamentalist who has adopted a very rigid set of geas set out to cleanse a personal involvement with an avocational radio activity. ("geas" refers to magical gimmicks set to keep devils out of a local territory) With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter. Agreed. But, the "MARS is amateur radio" statement is an example of not only a Traditionalist-Fundamentalist but one who wants to make a hobby into a surrogate of a military life, of rigid obeyance of some kind of "orders" from a fantasy of what a hobby really is...and then fails to note the existance and the raison d'etre of that particular originally-military radio service. MARS was originally conceived (under the previous AARS) to get radio amateurs involved with the U.S. Army communications of 1925. Comms of any radio service of 1925 were rather simple. Even the Army admitted that. The AARS never grew to be a big thing and WW2 put a halt on everything amateur insofar as operations. There's not much about "phone patches" as a goodwill effort to give servicemen a link with home through amateur radio prior to 1942... :-) During the Cold War times, phone patches, whether through MARS or individual hams, were very good for boosting morale, especially for those stuck in so many foreign places. It hit a high point with the Vietnam War, the southeast Asian MARS stations handling up to 42,000 phone patches a month up to 1970. That's referenced at the Army's Center For Military History (CMH) and available for download by anyone. [I gave the link in here] But, the Vietnam War ended 29 years ago, almost a generation and a half in the past. MARS still has the task of involving civilians with military radio but MARS has, for a long time, changed its mission to be a true auxilliary radio service in the military, that of being an affiliate communications service with other U.S. government radio services. The one-month exercise two years ago of Grecian Firebolt 2002 showed that MARS does function quite well on its own without civilian radio amateurs to fulfill its mission. The existance and definition of MARS is covered by publicly- available documents. However, the image in the minds of many is solely from amateur publications (who overemphasize ham involvement relative to the bigger mission picture) and that image is about three decades out of date. If a poster is the type that is trying to antagonize others - that is to say one that is using the group in the text adventure mode - he or she does not want to get people so angry that they don't respond. That would be losing the game. This player will want to be antagonistic of course, but will want to allow other posters to stay just this side of filtering or ignoring him or her. Some have their minds made up and will never change. :-) In here, several operate slightly differently in that perceived personal "honor" is involved. They say something wrong or make an error and then refuse to admit it until pinned against several walls and had it rubbed all over them. :-) That applies on any subject in any computer-modem venue, was so even back in the late 1970s on ARPANET...then the original USENET (probably the worst are academics not yet risen to their full titled heights, heh heh)...continued on into BBSs and now the Internet. Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA. As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism. Most interesting, that conservatism. Radio communications involves the sharing of information. Radio does it very fast, yet the technology advancements are all coming from the designer-manufacturers. Some here filter Len, but enough do not that he finds a steady stream of willing participants in his game. The regulars are a very, very tiny percentage of the entire hum radio licensees...and they seem to be staunchly, archly, embedded-in-old- concept holes in the ground on what amateur radio "should be." Not a good venue to discuss anything but hidebound status-quoism. Those who aren't in agreement with keeping things absolutely the same as when those olde-tyme hammes got their beloved licenses is in for a rough go. :-) Face it, he is good at it. It may not be what you are in here for, but he succeeds in his game. It may be a game to others, Mike, but it is a lunchtime amusement for me. :-) In one way, it is fun to poke holes in others' faulty concepts such as telegraphy and the Absolute Need to test all licensees for that ability forever and ever into the end of time in order to invade their precious HF turf! :-) 51 years ago I lucked out in my military service and got stationed at a major communications facility. That changed my concepts of what radio communications was about. Practically a wholesale revision, having had little exposure prior, all from amateur publications. The Army, the Navy, the Air Force just didn't use any telegraphy then for fixed-point to fixed-point radio communications. They had not done so since WW2. The USN depended on on-line cryptographic communications in the fleet, on cruisers and heavier class ships back in 1940 (that's how the USN could coordinate movements to engage in the Battle of Midway). That crypto messaging was by RTTY, not manual telegraphy. The "Sigaba" crypto TTY system was never compromised. The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST. Except for Heil, none of the regulars were involved in any big-time radio communications experience. As a result, many are openly antagonistic against anyone who has done so and try to divert the thread into claims that I "embellish" my "CV," tooting my own horn so to speak :-) Really no. I'm trying to point out that "CW" was already being downsized a half century ago and its use is constantly decreasing until it has virtually disappeared for communications everywhere but in amateur radio. Note this does not apply to the strange fringe postings that appear to be personal battles, such as the one that Dave seems involved in with some hams in his locale. That is just really wierd stuff. The true antagonistic poster seldom gets much response. Those get a large charge out of saying the worst things about another. That's part of the time-distance isolation "safety factor" for them in computer- modem communications. They can get away with it! :-) What gets "weird" (or 'wired') is when another replies with correct facts and Strong response. The original antagonists almost go berserk. :-) [see the posts of the one who likes to use the word "putz"] The original antagonists Hate that sort of thing. It spoils their private little sociopathy game they so enjoy. :-) You (or anyone here) know what will happen when you rise to the bait, you know pretty much what the resulting exchange will be, and yet it is irresistable. Naw, it's totally resistible. And predictable. And yet you are now involved once more! He can't help it. His "honor" is at stake...someone put a stake through a vital part back when he was trying to peddle Uber-status-quoism all about keeping amateur radio forever locked into the old standards and practices. It may be an "evangelical" kind of thing. Or just brainwashed syndrome. Ethnic cleansing must be done, impure concepts washed away. This is no small accomplishment. I for one have to respect that. I don't. You don't have to, that much is true. Life is tough and then you newsgroup... :-) "Sine die" - someone turned off the audio oscillator... QED is not one of the "Q codes" in telegraphy. Back to trying to find out what's holding me down in my search for anti-gravity... |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/16/2004 2:59 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: With the different personalities involved, the games can get pretty interesting and funny, or sometimes they can become boring and repetitive. The MARS is Ham radio stuff is a good example of the latter. Agreed. But, the "MARS is amateur radio" statement is an example of not only a Traditionalist-Fundamentalist...(SNIP TO...) MARS was originally conceived (under the previous AARS) to get radio amateurs involved with the U.S. Army communications of 1925....(SNIP TO....) During the Cold War times, phone patches, whether through MARS or individual hams...(SNIP TO.....) But, the Vietnam War ended 29 years ago, almost a generation and a half in the past. MARS still has the task of involving civilians with military radio but MARS has, for a long time, changed its mission to be a true auxilliary radio service in the military, that of being an affiliate communications service with other U.S. government radio services. The one-month exercise two years ago of Grecian Firebolt 2002 showed that MARS does function quite well on its own without civilian radio amateurs to fulfill its mission. In order for PRESENT DAY MARS to continue to fulfil it's federal mission, it is DEPENDANT upon volunteer civilian licensees of the Amatuer Radio Service. Otherwise some nicely packaged editorializing by someone who is not active in the program and has no practical experience on the subject he's pontificating about. 51 years ago I lucked out in my military service...(SNIP) Here we go again...."Back at ADA......" (UNSNIP)...and got stationed at a major communications facility. That changed my concepts of what radio communications was about. No...that CEMENTED what your concepts of what radio communication was about. Very little in what you post here deviates from what you say you experienced in the 50's, yet YOU take every opportunity to denigrate any Amateur who has the temerity to suggest discussing ANYthing that happened more than a week ago as "traditionalist-fundamentalist". The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST. Well golly gee whiz, Your Putziness...Ya think it might be due to the fact that (a) it happened over FIVE decades ago, and (B) has NOTHING to do with AMATEUR RADIO...?!?!aphy. Back to trying to find out what's holding me down in my search for anti-gravity... It could be the lead in your....head. Putz.. Steve, K4YZ |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/17/2004 4:45 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: In order for PRESENT DAY MARS to continue to fulfil it's federal mission, it is DEPENDANT upon volunteer civilian licensees of the Amatuer Radio Service. No...MARS can and does function by itself. It is controlled by the military and therefore run by the military using government radio equipment. Getting civilians involved is only part of the task. MARS is dependent upon Amateurs to do the bulk of it's traffic. It was true during Viet Nam, it's true today. MARS has never involved "amatuer radio," only amateur radio. Again your only defensible argument is that I transposed two letters. For information on Army MARS, see the Fort Huachuca website and follow the links there. While Huachuca is the Military Intelligence School Hq, Army MARS is headquartered there off to one side. I know you'll find this hard to believe, but life exists beyond websites. Otherwise some nicely packaged editorializing by someone who is not active in the program and has no practical experience on the subject he's pontificating about. Now, now. I've been to Huachuca. I am sure you've been lot's of places. An active imagination allows for that. I've controlled MARS transmissions. Uh huh. 51 years ago I lucked out in my military service...(SNIP) Here we go again...."Back at ADA......" It could have been AGA (San Francisco) or AHA (Hawaii) or Seattle or Manila or Okinawa or even Anchorage. Uh huh. No...that CEMENTED what your concepts of what radio communication was about. Nursie did not exist a half century ago. He isn't in any way, shape, or form able to conceptualize much of anything of that time unless spoon-fed the information from some ARRL publication. Regardless of my birthdate, your rhetoric and spamming of the NG exists TODAY, and it is rife with your tales of what you did five decades ago. None of it has anything to do with Amateur Radio. Nursie should stop trying to dictate what others said long ago or experienced long ago...or even what they say they thought long ago...when nursie didn't exist. "Dictating" what you said? All I have to do is quote it. I couldn't invent some of the silly stuff you come up with! Very little in what you post here deviates from what you say you experienced in the 50's, yet YOU take every opportunity to denigrate any Amateur who has the temerity to suggest discussing ANYthing that happened more than a week ago as "traditionalist-fundamentalist". Nope. Only very specific amateurs. Principally those which hang out in here trying to make noises like they are special representatives from Newington. The ONLY people who have ever presented themselves as "representitives from Newington" were Ed Hare and Jon Bloom, and even then they were quite clear in stating that thier persoanlly held opinions did not represent the ARRL. Only YOU make that assertion, and it's still a lie. If anyone keeps harping on obeyance-adherence to the standards and practices of the 1930s in amateuism of the 2000s, then they automatically join the "traditionalist- fundamentalist" club. Then I guess we get to heap you into that pile, Your Scumminess, since YOU are the ONLY one making any such assertion. No one in this forum has made any such assertion. Even those who staunchly support Morse Code testing have advocated advancement in the service. I encourge you to provide even ONE quote that supports your assertion to the contrary.... If anyone uses manual telegraphy skill testing as a requirement for use of amateur HF bands then they are automatically in the "traditionalist-fundamentalist" club. Time can't be frozen but those club members all want to freeze out anyone not thinking as they do. And again that would be you. Everyone MUST be Lennie, otherwise they are "traditionalist-fundamentalist, jack-booted Nazi thugs". The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST. Well golly gee whiz, Your Putziness...Ya think it might be due to the fact that (a) it happened over FIVE decades ago, and (B) has NOTHING to do with AMATEUR RADIO...?!?! Poor nursie. Never did any big-time radio communications in his military days...resents anyone who did. This is a forum about AMATEUR RADIO. And yes, I did "big time radio communication" in the military. Poor nursie...never did any radio-electronics engineering and resents anyone who did. I don't resent your alleged engineering career, Lennie. I know several electronics engineers, and they are fine fellows who make meaningful contributions. You are NOT a fine fellow, and there's more than a few indicators that your "contribution" to radio communications were limited to your few articles sold to Ham Radio magazine. (No doubt a last resort in "getting published" since I am sure the professional journals cut you off at the knees.) Even then I can't find a single example where any of your "work" was original, nor can I find any example of where your "contributions" were complimentary to the advancement of ANY radio communications discipline. Poor nursie...never could take an opposite opinion to his in here and is bitterly resentful to anyone who had spoken out in opposition to him. I am only "bitterly resentful" of pathological liars and persons who proactively seek to cause ACAN (Army Command-Administration Network) of the late...(SNIP) has NOTHING to do with Amateur Radio, then or now. Tsk, tsk, tsk...poor nursie wants to concentrate solely on amateur RADIO as if it works by different physical principles than other radio of other radio services. It doesn't. The examples useful to amateur radio are neglected in the amateur press, therefore nursie doesn't want to know anything except what is spoon-fed him through hum radio magazines. Another lie. I have repeatedly stated it's not the physics. It's the application. And it's too bad YOU don't avail yourself of the "hum radio magazines". (Your true colors are showing, Scumbag.) Poor nursie...bitter and resentful to the last. I'll bet nursie loves to heckle entertainers from the audience while they are trying to entertain an audience. If I paid money to see someone who isn't, in my opionion, entertaining, I do one better...I get up, go the manager and get my money back on the way out the door. Nursie can't lighten up. Always has to make fun of others. Not a good mental health sign. Untrue again. I find it QUITE "enlightening" to keep an eye on you. And I don't have to make fun of you. You do it yourself. And I am still waiting for you to post your credentials to tell us what qualified you to make determinations as to what is or isn't "good mental health". Leafing through wifey's correspondence courses doesn't qulify. Putz.. Well, back to nursie's name-calling again. "Meaningful discourse" in the only way nursie can get along...dissing and cursing those who won't agree with him. It's not name calling if it's true. And you ARE a putz. Of course I could gobact through tons of YOUR "name calling" and recite it...Or is Lennie the Liar ABOVE lving up to his own rhetoric...?!?! Must be the "new" 'inherent good will of radio amateurs'... You're not an Amatuer and this forum isn't regulated by Part 97 of the FCC Rules and Regulations. Steve, K4YZ |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , (Steve
da CAP Ace with too much carburetor heat) sputters and foams: Subject: The Game's Afoot! From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/17/2004 4:45 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: In order for PRESENT DAY MARS to continue to fulfil it's federal mission, it is DEPENDANT upon volunteer civilian licensees of the Amatuer Radio Service. No...MARS can and does function by itself. It is controlled by the military and therefore run by the military using government radio equipment. Getting civilians involved is only part of the task. MARS is dependent upon Amateurs to do the bulk of it's traffic. Military police direct military traffic. Military communications uses wide-environment government radio equipment and military personnel to do communications. It was true during Viet Nam, it's true today. The Vietnam War ended in 1975. That was 29 years ago, senior. The Internet went public in 1991. That was 13 years ago, senior. Every government and military agency and most military units now have websites. The modern U.S. military encourages military personnel to use computer e-mail to message family and friends. The DSN (Digital Switched Network) tying U.S. installations and government locations around the world allow easy dial-up from the DSN to the outside telephone infrastructure. Try to get with the modern times. Reality is all around you. MARS has never involved "amatuer radio," only amateur radio. Again your only defensible argument is that I transposed two letters. That transposition is a common thing with nursie. Usually done when very angry and outraged that anyone dare talk back to the gunnery nurse! :-) For information on Army MARS, see the Fort Huachuca website and follow the links there. While Huachuca is the Military Intelligence School Hq, Army MARS is headquartered there off to one side. I know you'll find this hard to believe, but life exists beyond websites. I am well acquainted with life. :-) Been to Fort Huachuca, seen the Army MARS headquarters. Been to several modern military communications locations, seen what they have, talked to individuals there. Reality exists beyond the tattered, dog-eared pages of old QST issues and ARRL handbooks. Try to experience reality, not imaginations of long ago. Otherwise some nicely packaged editorializing by someone who is not active in the program and has no practical experience on the subject he's pontificating about. Now, now. I've been to Huachuca. I am sure you've been lot's of places. An active imagination allows for that. Fort Huachuca was okay in early spring but I've heard it is uncomfortable in mid-summer, being in Arizona. Glad I wasn't there in mid-summer. The Military Intelligence museum wasn't built or open to visitors when I was there and that interesting place (like the CIA museum) can only be visited on the Internet. Sandia Laboratories is different. But, I can't talk much about that except that visit concerned things like SID. I've controlled MARS transmissions. Uh huh. I'm glad you concede something factual. :-) 51 years ago I lucked out in my military service...(SNIP) Here we go again...."Back at ADA......" It could have been AGA (San Francisco) or AHA (Hawaii) or Seattle or Manila or Okinawa or even Anchorage. Uh huh. Good. Another concession instead of brainless battering against what happened before you existed. Unless one is flag rank, it is difficult to pick and choose where ordinary military folks get assigned. I was fortunate in being assigned to a big-time communications center. So was Eugene Rosenbaum. Part of the time. Gene (N2JTV) got reassigned to Funabashi, TDY with the small USAF radio communications station there which was not as nice an assignment as the Hardy Barracks billet or ADA duties. Nursie did not exist a half century ago. He isn't in any way, shape, or form able to conceptualize much of anything of that time unless spoon-fed the information from some ARRL publication. Regardless of my birthdate, your rhetoric and spamming of the NG exists TODAY, and it is rife with your tales of what you did five decades ago. No, not "rife." :-) If you are trying a larger vocabulary, try to get something somewhat close to correct...and in context. You are trying to "poison the well" by singling out only specific instances of what I've mentioned as to experiences and work over the last 51+ years. Common tactic in computer-modem comms but easily defeated in fact, made arduous only in the stubborn insistence of the argumentative to ignore everything else and try to beat on specifics. Oddly, it is usually easier to reference military things of the past due to easier access of reference information compared to civilian- only occupations. That includes references of a public nature such as the Pacific Stars & Stripes (see interview with staffer Rick Chernitzer of their 10 November 2002 edition). None of it has anything to do with Amateur Radio. Radio is radio, regardless of the differentiation that mere human regulation makers make of its differences. The Pacific Stars & Stripes did not include a nice photo I made of the MARS antenna newly installed at Hardy Barracks in 1955 (Stripes used only 6 of my photos for that Hardy retro- spective interview). One of the two GIs shown on the cover sheet is/was Stan Peschel who was a ham and the son of the founder of Hypotronics of New York. Nursie should stop trying to dictate what others said long ago or experienced long ago...or even what they say they thought long ago...when nursie didn't exist. "Dictating" what you said? Absolutely. You are outraged that anyone dare confront your ideas and fantasies with actual, real-life experiences. The same with several others in here. The dictatorial attitude is fairly common, done with heckling and name-calling and general denigration in an effort to make a poster stop writing. Weak intimidation. Works sometimes, but is not a guarantee of suppressing truth and reality. All I have to do is quote it. I couldn't invent some of the silly stuff you come up with! It's a losing battle to keep dredging up old, lost arguments in a newsgroup. Those can't be "won" by re-runs as if this were summer television. The military directives and regulations about MARS are not "silly stuff." Those are real. The information published by the various military branches on their MARS activities isn't "silly stuff." Those are real. "Silly stuff" is the exaggeration and over-emphasis on civilian amateur radio participation - done by part-time participants in MARS - and trying to make such "silly stuff" be the raison d'etre (French for "reason for being") of the existance of MARS. Nope. Only very specific amateurs. Principally those which hang out in here trying to make noises like they are special representatives from Newington. The ONLY people who have ever presented themselves as "representitives from Newington" were Ed Hare and Jon Bloom, and even then they were quite clear in stating that thier persoanlly held opinions did not represent the ARRL. You forgot Jim Haynie. :-) Not a long series of messages from Haynie but here nonetheless. [hint: Haynie is the elected president of the ARRL. :-) ] The PARROTING the Noble Goals as written/said by ARRL is the very same thing as acting like League representatives. Only YOU make that assertion, and it's still a lie. Jim Haynie wasn't elected president of the ARRL? :-( If anyone keeps harping on obeyance-adherence to the standards and practices of the 1930s in amateuism of the 2000s, then they automatically join the "traditionalist- fundamentalist" club. Then I guess we get to heap you into that pile, Your Scumminess, since YOU are the ONLY one making any such assertion. Tsk, tsk, tsk. More of that "meaningful discourse" again! :-) So, trying to dictate what opinions others may have again? Not nice. No one in this forum has made any such assertion. Even those who staunchly support Morse Code testing have advocated advancement in the service. ...by more and more manual telegraphy use, praising its supposed qualities, and generally getting into silly stuff about how it's so much "better" than any other mode. :-) Note use of the word "service" again. Military surrogate use. Desire to make amateur radio much more than it is by trying to identify a hobby with military service. Tsk, tsk. Lost focus. I encourge you to provide even ONE quote that supports your assertion to the contrary.... Heh heh heh. No, "encourage" is the wrong word. You CHALLENGE. You DEMAND. You all but hop up and down in spiteful hollering to try to divert the discussion. :-) Everyone MUST be Lennie, otherwise they are "traditionalist-fundamentalist, jack-booted Nazi thugs". Tsk, tsk, tsk. Obviously not a Jedi. Wrong connection of metaphors. :-) "Use the Metaphors, Luke, the Metaphors!" :-) Nursie is into Mirror Time again, reflecting on the total one-sided viewpoint all must have, the vista according to Newgington. Tsk, tsk. The regulars in this venue don't want to hear of that. It wasn't about "amateur radio" and it hasn't been publicized in QST. Well golly gee whiz, Your Putziness...Ya think it might be due to the fact that (a) it happened over FIVE decades ago, and (B) has NOTHING to do with AMATEUR RADIO...?!?! Nursie is an amateur. Nursie didn't exist 50 years ago. Ergo, nursie is irrelevant? :-) Poor nursie. Never did any big-time radio communications in his military days...resents anyone who did. This is a forum about AMATEUR RADIO. And yes, I did "big time radio communication" in the military. Yes...on par with those "hostile action" things...all conveniently UNdetailed, no specifics, nothing but a CLAIM. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Fish story. Poor nursie...never did any radio-electronics engineering and resents anyone who did. I don't resent your alleged engineering career, Lennie. I know several electronics engineers, and they are fine fellows who make meaningful contributions. I'm sure you have "Jewish best friends," too. :-) They must have made "meaningful contributions" to your knowledge of Yiddish. :-) You are NOT a fine fellow, and there's more than a few indicators that your "contribution" to radio communications were limited to your few articles sold to Ham Radio magazine. (No doubt a last resort in "getting published" since I am sure the professional journals cut you off at the knees.) Tsk, tsk, tsk. :-) You can check out McGraw-Hill's old biweekly Electronics and Designer's Casebook. You can check out Microcomputing, a former monthly for personal computerists. You can check out BYTE magazine as well as BYTE Books on articles concerning circuit simulation. All reviewed and accepted by others. You want to make a Big Thing about Ham Radio Magainze going "defunct" back in 1990...even though HR was considered a leader in U.S. ham periodicals for technical information...which it was. The "defunction" was due to a shrinking ham advertising market already begun by 1990. That shrinking is even affecting QST. It hit 73 Magazine big time. Unlike QST which can get support from the ARRL membership monies, HR and 73 were independent publications whose entire income was derived by advertising. CQ is the same way and is barely hanging on. Even then I can't find a single example where any of your "work" was original, nor can I find any example of where your "contributions" were complimentary to the advancement of ANY radio communications discipline. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Having nursie as a critic is like having a blind color coordinator for interior decoration. :-) Try to differentiate between "compliment" and "complement." Nursie struggles on understanding Ohm's Law of Resistance and tries to mean-mouth things like explanations of timing diagrams in phase-frequency detectors? :-) Poor nursie...never could take an opposite opinion to his in here and is bitterly resentful to anyone who had spoken out in opposition to him. I am only "bitterly resentful" of pathological liars and persons who proactively seek to cause What am I "seeking to cause?" Sentence unfinished. :-( What are "pathological liars," nursie? Nursie no gots da edumcation in sykology, sointanly ain't gots no certificates (suitable for framing, hanging on da wall) as a licensed shrink. Nursie like to mean-mouth anyone who ain't love his one- sided opinions. Tsk, tsk. ACAN (Army Command-Administration Network) of the late...(SNIP) has NOTHING to do with Amateur Radio, then or now. Just the same, MARS was allowed to use some of ACAN's radio circuits on HF. How about that? By nursie logic, MARS is then NOT amateur radio! Must be hell when a rant is stomped on... :-) Tsk, tsk, tsk...poor nursie wants to concentrate solely on amateur RADIO as if it works by different physical principles than other radio of other radio services. It doesn't. The examples useful to amateur radio are neglected in the amateur press, therefore nursie doesn't want to know anything except what is spoon-fed him through hum radio magazines. Another lie. Nursie definition of "lie:" Anything against nursie's beliefs. :-) I have repeatedly stated it's not the physics. Radio works by magic, not laws of physics? Oh, my! It's the application. "Rub into affected area once daily, as prescribed by physician?" :-) And it's too bad YOU don't avail yourself of the "hum radio magazines". (Your true colors are showing, Scumbag.) A long-time radio amateur used to say "hum radio." :-) He is the same one that put tongue firmly in cheek and stated, "Ham is the butchered meat of swine." :-) Funny in context. Probably a cause for thermonuclear war to nursie. :-) Poor nursie...bitter and resentful to the last. I'll bet nursie loves to heckle entertainers from the audience while they are trying to entertain an audience. If I paid money to see someone who isn't, in my opionion, entertaining, I do one better...I get up, go the manager and get my money back on the way out the door. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Nursie should read the entertainment reviews in QST before going. Saves everyone time and trouble. :-) Nursie can't lighten up. Always has to make fun of others. Not a good mental health sign. Untrue again. I find it QUITE "enlightening" to keep an eye on you. Nursie is OBSESSED. Is COMPELLED to mean-mouth others who go against his opinions. Sicko. And I am still waiting for you to post your credentials to tell us what qualified you to make determinations as to what is or isn't "good mental health". Leafing through wifey's correspondence courses doesn't qulify. Sicko words are sicko words to lay people, nursie. Putz.. Well, back to nursie's name-calling again. "Meaningful discourse" in the only way nursie can get along...dissing and cursing those who won't agree with him. It's not name calling if it's true. And you ARE a putz. Tsk, tsk, nursie should have his Jewish best friends tell him more about the Yiddish dialect-language. Needs more "meaningful discourses" on Yiddish snarlies. :-) Of course I could gobact through tons of YOUR "name calling" and recite it...Or is Lennie the Liar ABOVE lving up to his own rhetoric...?!?! First you need to explain what and how of "gobact." Not in any dictionary I have. That word published in QST? Must be the "new" 'inherent good will of radio amateurs'... You're not an Amatuer and this forum isn't regulated by Part 97 of the FCC Rules and Regulations. Nursie ain't no "amatuer" either. :-) Newsgroup ain't regulated by nursie, either. [ain't that a bitch?] :-) Temper fry... LHA / WMD |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/18/2004 2:48 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve da CAP Ace with too much carburetor heat) sputters and foams: "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue". From the archived lies of Leonard H. Anderson. That was 29 years ago, senior. That was 13 years ago, senior. If you're going to parody Spanish, Lennie, you should at least spell it correctly. The DSN (Digital Switched Network) ...(SNIP) Even more completely unrealted, off topic trivia from one who must hide behind it. Try to get with the modern times. Reality is all around you. Yes, it is. Too bad you can't share in it, eh...?!?! I am well acquainted with life. Nop, you're not. You are well acquainted with your PERCEPTION of it from behind textbooks and CRTs. Reality exists beyond the tattered, dog-eared pages of old QST issues and ARRL handbooks. Yes, it does. I and others have pointed that out to you on numerous occassions and invited you to come out and try it. You've declined. Too much security in LennieLand. Fort Huachuca was okay in early spring but I've heard it is uncomfortable in mid-summer, being in Arizona. Glad I wasn't there in mid-summer. I HAVE been there in mid-summer...and late summer when it's actually worse. On several occassions. Sandia Laboratories is different. But, I can't talk much about that except that visit concerned things like SID. Ahhhhhhhhhh.......I see. Someone else suggests some "security" issues and you try to denigrate them for it. You think you're promoting your "insiderness" and you wave it like a flag. No, not "rife." :-) If you are trying a larger vocabulary, try to get something somewhat close to correct...and in context. Yes...rife was correct and in context. You are trying to "poison the well" by singling out only specific instances of what I've mentioned as to experiences and work over the last 51+ years. In other words, I hit the mark so close that you'll be dressing the wounds from the "collateral damage" for days. None of it has anything to do with Amateur Radio. Radio is radio, regardless of the differentiation that mere human regulation makers make of its differences. Only in your mind, Lennie. If that assertion was so true, you'd have no basis for your OTHER rants that insist that Amateurs must spend thier time learning about "other" radio services. If "Radio is radio", your other assertions are baseless. The Pacific Stars & Stripes did not include a nice photo I made of the MARS antenna newly installed at Hardy Barracks in 1955. And they didn't use the pictures I had of the Loch Ness monster either, Lennie. "Dictating" what you said? Absolutely. You are outraged that anyone dare confront your ideas and fantasies with actual, real-life experiences. The same with several others in here. Why is it that all those "others" are focused on YOU, Lennie? Perhaps YOU are the one with the perception problems? That's a rhetorical question, of course. With absolutely NO experience in Amateur Radio, we know you have no informed, valid expereicen from which to base your comments. The dictatorial attitude is fairly common, done with heckling and name-calling and general denigration in an effort to make a poster stop writing. Weak intimidation. Works sometimes, but is not a guarantee of suppressing truth and reality. And therein lies the bane of your existence... Still having a hard time wondering why your "superior intellect" can't squash all those "lesser beings" with your infinite wisdom..... Too bad you can't objectively review what you just wrote against your conduct over the last several years. No one in this forum has made any such assertion. Even those who staunchly support Morse Code testing have advocated advancement in the service. ...by more and more manual telegraphy use, praising its supposed qualities, and generally getting into silly stuff about how it's so much "better" than any other mode. Note use of the word "service" again. Hmmmmmm....The FCC uses it to describe Amateur Radio. The Commissioners are not licensed Amateurs...Lord knows none of them hold ANY form of licensure by the FCC. YOU frequently point out the Commissioners status. Are you NOW telling us that the language used by those very same Commissioners is WRONG...?!?! Military surrogate use. Desire to make amateur radio much more than it is by trying to identify a hobby with military service. That's YOUR schtick, Lennie. Tsk, tsk. Lost focus. Nope. Never have. I encourge you to provide even ONE quote that supports your assertion to the contrary.... Heh heh heh. No, "encourage" is the wrong word. You CHALLENGE. You DEMAND. It would be a "challenge" to you, Lennie...In as much as the quotes you need do not exist. You all but hop up and down in spiteful hollering to try to divert the discussion. Nope...It's right on. You make all sorts of assinine assertions about Amateur Radio in general and some Amateurs in particular, then can NEVER back up your assertions. You make assertions of fact. I want you to validate them. You never do. You CLAIM to be a "radio professional". You are not now nor ever were anything of the kind. I don't resent your alleged engineering career, Lennie. I know several electronics engineers, and they are fine fellows who make meaningful contributions. I'm sure you have "Jewish best friends," too. I don't have to make such claims, Lennie. You seem to make a lot of them, though. You are NOT a fine fellow, and there's more than a few indicators that your "contribution" to radio communications were limited to your few articles sold to Ham Radio magazine. (No doubt a last resort in "getting published" since I am sure the professional journals cut you off at the knees.) You can check out McGraw-Hill's old biweekly Electronics and Designer's Casebook. You can check out Microcomputing, a former monthly for personal computerists. You can check out BYTE magazine as well as BYTE Books on articles concerning circuit simulation. All reviewed and accepted by others. But not accepted as "PROFESSIONAL" publishing. If you tried to pass off "credentials" like some hobbyist periodicals as "profesional publishing", you'd be laughed out of the IEEE. You want to make a Big Thing about Ham Radio Magainze going "defunct" back in 1990...even though HR was considered a leader in U.S. ham periodicals for technical information...which it was. The "defunction" was due to a shrinking ham advertising market already begun by 1990. That shrinking is even affecting QST. It hit 73 Magazine big time. Unlike QST which can get support from the ARRL membership monies, HR and 73 were independent publications whose entire income was derived by advertising. CQ is the same way and is barely hanging on. The "shrinking ham advertising" was due to a lack of support of consumers. No consumers = no advertising monies = defunct. Corporate advertisers do not spend thier advertising monies where it is not netting a reasonable return. If "Ham Radio" had been the marvel of publishing accomplishment you'd care to have us beleive, it would still be actively published instead of being polished and repackaged as a CD novelty. "73" lost it's readership because Wayne Green is a senile idiot who ran it into the ground...not once, but twice. And how many "QRP" and "antenna specials" can one magazine run in a year...?!?! And those "editiorials"...?!?! Sheeeesh! Talk about being the poster boy for "Paranoia Today".... Even then I can't find a single example where any of your "work" was original, nor can I find any example of where your "contributions" were complimentary to the advancement of ANY radio communications discipline. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Having nursie as a critic is like having a blind color coordinator for interior decoration. :-) Try to differentiate between "compliment" and "complement." In either use of either word, there is no professional historical documentation that would indicate that Leonard H. Anderson did anything other than sweep floors in ANY "aerospace" installation or facility. And as far as your "contributions" to Amateur Radio via your HR pieces, I find no occassion where your work was footnooted, included or otherwise madse part-and-parcel of any other paper or work. And I did look. Closely. Poor nursie...never could take an opposite opinion to his in here and is bitterly resentful to anyone who had spoken out in opposition to him. I am only "bitterly resentful" of pathological liars and persons who proactively seek to cause What am I "seeking to cause?" Sentence unfinished. Yep...I changed a sentence prior to "sending" and clipped it. Here's the full sentence: "I am only 'bitterly resentful' of pathological liars who proactively seek to cause harm to Amateur Radio for no other purpsoe than to sate his own ego". What are "pathological liars," nursie? You are a pathological liar, Lennie. You can't tell or acknowledge the truth. Your lying is habitual. Even when you DO quote or recite factual information, who can trust you? Nursie no gots da edumcation in sykology, sointanly ain't gots no certificates (suitable for framing, hanging on da wall) as a licensed shrink. No licensure as a mental health worker, Lennie. True. However I DO have certifications in Emergency Nursing, in and among which is included managing psychiatric emergencies. Which is one more than YOU have. And it's too bad YOU don't avail yourself of the "hum radio magazines". (Your true colors are showing, Scumbag.) A long-time radio amateur used to say "hum radio." And you are not a "long time radio amateur". Never were, and God willing, never will be. I find it QUITE "enlightening" to keep an eye on you. Nursie is OBSESSED. Is COMPELLED to mean-mouth others who go against his opinions. Nope...not "mean-mouth". Expose. As if it took any effort to do... And if you didn't post such foolishness, I wouldn't have anything to work with. HARDLY "obsessed". And I am still waiting for you to post your credentials to tell us what qualified you to make determinations as to what is or isn't "good mental health". Leafing through wifey's correspondence courses doesn't qulify. Sicko words are sicko words to lay people, nursie. Well, Lennie, I am neither "lay people", nor am I the "sicko" that you insinuate. And still waiting on your psychiatry credentials. Steve, K4YZ |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Len Over 21 wrote:
Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA. As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism. I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first read-through. Simply excellent. - Mike KB3EIA - |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: Mike Coslo Date: 6/17/2004 1:39 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Len Over 21 wrote: Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA. As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism. I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first read-through. Simply excellent. It wasn't meant as a pun, Mike. He's being insulting. Again. Not to mention that the paragraph you cited was yet another utterance of ignorance, in particularly the part about ".....(radio) hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services.". He couldn't be MORE wrong....Well...Yes, he could, but it's hard to tell with him. I like the part about "Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA". First of all, they do. Regularly. Therefore Lennie's busted lying again. (I know...he makes a joke out being labelled a liar, but hey, if the shoe fits....) Secondly, there are several "radio hobbyist" magazines available in the US, espcially "Popular Communications" and "Monitoring Times" that cover the "SWL" and scanning disciplines. If someone is interested in "other radio services", then they can go to those other sources. Lastly, why would an Amateur Radio-specific publication spend an inordinate amount of time on "other" radio services? Where does this idiot (and I am being a bit liberal with praise there...) get the idea that an AMATEUR RADIO publication should discuss issues pertaining to Public Service, Common Carrier or military services when the topic does not correspondingly and directly affect Amateur Radio...?!?! One has to wonder what Lennie could have REALLY amounted to if he'd been issued some grade-school level common sense. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , (Steve
the Grate Meaningful Communicator) writes: Subject: The Game's Afoot! From: Mike Coslo Date: 6/17/2004 1:39 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: Len Over 21 wrote: Amateur radio in general seems to be one of the most conservative of all radio services...plus the fact that most of the hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services. Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA. As a result there is a great deal of insularity (a sort of "dielectric materialism") which, in turns, breeds even more conservatism. I'm so glad I re-read this one - I missed that pun the first read-through. Simply excellent. It wasn't meant as a pun, Mike. He's being insulting. Again. Poor nursie...can't even take some simple word-play. Note "dielectic materialism" v. "dielectric materialism." See "dialectic" as "a logical test of ideas for validity" versus "dialectric" which is a fancy word for "insulator." :-) Tsk, tsk...some are strung so tight that they are "insulated" from a little levity. :-) Not to mention that the paragraph you cited was yet another utterance of ignorance, in particularly the part about ".....(radio) hobbyists are quite unaware of what goes on in other radio services.". He couldn't be MORE wrong....Well...Yes, he could, but it's hard to tell with him. I like the part about "Amateur radio publications seldom mention other radio services in the USA". First of all, they do. Regularly. Oh? Where? When? :-) Was the SINCGARS family of radios ever mentioned? A quarter million of those radios have been produced since 1989 and are in standard small-unit communications use of the U.S. military today. Made by ITT, Fort Wayne, IN. Has the PRC-104 HF manpack radio ever been mentioned? Dates back before 1986, still in use today. The R/T module is standard in a variety of ground radios, from the manpack through vehicular to the fixed-site systems. Made by Hughes Ground Systems. Neat little antenna tuner module in the manpack version...uses the same Bruene detector first used on the USMC-contract T-195 HF transmitter back in 1955. Has the AN/FRC-93 ever been mentioned? It should. Amateurs know it as the ham version of the Collins KWM2. :-) Trouble is, the FRC-93 is the military-labeled version of the COMMERCIAL KWM2 which is supplied with a quartz crystal pack covering much more than ham bands. Ham publications have strummed HAARP and mentioned only the ham involvement in MARS...and lots of ancient stuff of old radio stations before most everyone's time. Just nothing in the last two decades. Therefore Lennie's busted lying again. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Nursie getting all red in the face with rage again and can't pull out any information from all those "secret" military radios "he can't talk about." :-) Secondly, there are several "radio hobbyist" magazines available in the US, espcially "Popular Communications" and "Monitoring Times" that cover the "SWL" and scanning disciplines. If someone is interested in "other radio services", then they can go to those other sources. Won't be much there, either. :-) There's much more on the Internet, especially the military collector sites...but those are about as behind the times as the boatanchor and surplus sites. Or, anyone that is interested in what is done today in the military (or of two decades back) can just ask anyone in the defense electronics industry. Very little of the "radios" built for the U.S. military or government are classified or "sensitive" (for security reasons, not receiver sensitivity). Lastly, why would an Amateur Radio-specific publication spend an inordinate amount of time on "other" radio services? "Inordinate?!?" No one was asking for "inordinate." Even a minor mention might draw some interest...except for those who wish to remain insular, isolated from having to learn anything but the latest DX contest scores. :-) Where does this idiot (and I am being a bit liberal with praise there...) get the idea that an AMATEUR RADIO publication should discuss issues pertaining to Public Service, Common Carrier or military services when the topic does not correspondingly and directly affect Amateur Radio...?!?! Must be more of this "meaningful discourse" again. :-) The "A" in APCO does NOT refer to Amateur. The "A" in SHARES does NOT refer to Amateur. The "A" in MARS does NOT refer to Amateur. Nursie needs to know his "A" from a hole in the ground. :-) One has to wonder what Lennie could have REALLY amounted to if he'd been issued some grade-school level common sense. Tsk, tsk, tsk. "Meaningful discourse?" Poor nursie. Still resentful that someone took the time and trouble to educate himself and keep working in radio-electronics in the aerospace industry as a design engineer in radio-electronics and then retire with a comfortable income. :-) Sucks to be nursie? :-) LHA / WMD |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Subject: The Game's Afoot!
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 6/17/2004 5:24 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve the Grate Meaningful Communicator) writes: "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue"...Leonard H. Anderson Was the SINCGARS family of radios ever mentioned? ...(SNIPPED) There are a LOT of military radio systems and equipment NOT mentioned in Amateur media...and byt eh same token most of those systems are NOT mentions in a great many professional journals, either...! ! ! ! ! Your point? Therefore Lennie's busted lying again. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Nursie getting all red in the face with rage again and can't pull out any information from all those "secret" military radios "he can't talk about." Only you've tried to make it "secret". Secondly, there are several "radio hobbyist" magazines available in the US, espcially "Popular Communications" and "Monitoring Times" that cover the "SWL" and scanning disciplines. If someone is interested in "other radio services", then they can go to those other sources. Won't be much there, either. Then you've not been reading any of THOSE publications either. There's much more on the Internet, especially the military collector sites...but those are about as behind the times as the boatanchor and surplus sites. Then carry your rants THERE, Lennie. I am sure your spiteful wit and willingness to be antagonistic will be as well received there as it is here. At least it will be a bit more pertinent in those forums...Not by much, but some. Lastly, why would an Amateur Radio-specific publication spend an inordinate amount of time on "other" radio services? "Inordinate?!?" No one was asking for "inordinate." Sure "they" are....Well, at least YOU are. Even a minor mention might draw some interest...except for those who wish to remain insular, isolated from having to learn anything but the latest DX contest scores. Perhaps the Amateur Radio magazines limit the scope of thier content for the same reasons you don't find a whole lot of fly fishing technique articles in "Cosmo"...?!?! Where does this idiot (and I am being a bit liberal with praise there...) get the idea that an AMATEUR RADIO publication should discuss issues pertaining to Public Service, Common Carrier or military services when the topic does not correspondingly and directly affect Amateur Radio...?!?! Must be more of this "meaningful discourse" again. The "A" in APCO does NOT refer to Amateur. The "A" in SHARES does NOT refer to Amateur. The "A" in MARS does NOT refer to Amateur. Sure it does...to what other radio service is MARS "affiliated" with...?!?! Nursie needs to know his "A" from a hole in the ground. Too bad YOU don't realize that all those "A"'s don't represent "Army communications of ocer 50 years ago". One has to wonder what Lennie could have REALLY amounted to if he'd been issued some grade-school level common sense. Tsk, tsk, tsk. "Meaningful discourse?" Poor nursie. Still resentful that someone took the time and trouble to educate himself and keep working in radio-electronics in the aerospace industry as a design engineer in radio-electronics and then retire with a comfortable income. Too bad there weren't some human relations courses in that 14 years of night school, Lennie. And I don't resent your efforts to be an engineer. One day you may be one. That you invested your money well was, as I have acknowleged before, one of your only positive acts in your adult life. Congratulations. My nest egg isn't quite as secure yet, but then I still have another 15-20 years to go before I think I'll be ready to stop wotking. Unlike you, I DO have the pleasure of seeing a meaningful, positive impact on my chosen profession. When I retire, I'll stop by your grave and see if all of YOUR "comfortable income" got you any farther than it does any other working person. Sucks to be nursie? If there was a "nursie" here, it might. But we KNOW it sucks to be Lennie! Putz. Steve, K4YZ |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|