| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#22
October 16th 04, 06:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , Dave Heil writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , (William) writes: There's somewhat the same keyboard lock-out at maximum rate in the Model 28s and later that are 100 WPM maximums. Few touch typists can go that fast except in bursts. That's incorrect, Leonard. Anyone who has spent more than a year steadily poking tape on a 28 can reasonably be expected to type at or near the machine's maximum capability. It's a fact, visible to anyone around a real communications center, that p-tape is what is used for continuous throughput. Yep, paper or mylar (for tapes used frequently). Trouble is, someone has to input that information to the tape without errors. Someone has to manually assign Message Reference Numbers and (for those who use them) Message Continuity Numbers. Someone has to look up the routers for stations infrequently addressed. There's a lot more to this "continuous throughput" than you've indicated. Yes...the transmitting distributors do their thing all by themselves. One racked-up tape will start pushing through as soon as the other reader finishes... Sunnuvagun! :-) Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't address my comments at all. Tsk. One is REQUIRED to "address your comments," your royalness? :-) Not at all, your Foghorn Lenhorn-ness. You can type a paragraph about regional variations in Swahili dialect in response to someone's input on the possibilities for the introduction of errors in RTTY messages. It's just that doing so will make you look rather simple-minded. Tsk. All the morsemen "know" that they do near-perfect copy every single time at high rates. :-) Tsk. I've not seen that written except by you. RTTY is only as perfect as a the typist who inputs the material and then only if there are no noise bursts to create additional errors. Tsk, you don't "see" much... :-) Well, I certainly don't see things which aren't there. :-) :-) More tsk...you forget that a p-tape TTY message can be read, scanned, checked, changed if needed by a new tape, checked all over again...usually at a message center or central before sent as RTTY. No, I haven't forgotten any of those things. My experience in such things is much more recent than your own and it is therefore fresher in my memory. All of those things introduce a time lag. Or done "off line" at a ham station just like a PC e-mail message. The obvious advantage is that the outgoing message as well as the incoming reply can be stored easily without resorting to a paper form. Nifty. Those things can be done with help from a PC while using morse. Those "noise bursts" affect manual morse reception as well, unless the sending rate is so slow that it occurs between dots. They surely do "affect" morse reception, but you were touting the superiority of RTTY. Technical tsk: The noise bursts are primarily of amplitude. They do have some wideband frequency content, but the common noise experienced at home hobby ham stations is primarily impulse noise with more amplitude (think AM) content that have less effect on Frequency Shift Keying. (think FM) Those "home hobby ham stations" use RTTY too, Leonard. I'm quite familiar with the use of FSK. It is still effected by noise and multipath distortion. RTTY can be resent easily and quickly without resorting to any paper. So, if I've got this right, we save on paper but spend on equipment. There's a dilemma. If my morse stuff is in memory on a keyer or PC, I can resend it quickly and easily without resorting to any paper. At 100 WPM continuous rates that still goes faster than common manual morse. Special character coding can include FEC (Forward Error Correction) or ECC (Error Correction), the latter able to automatically correct singular bit errors and to indicate double bit errors. The fact is that while FEC can be of some help, it is still subject to errors. It isn't a robust system like packet or Sitor/Amtor. The claim by many morsemen is that "CW gets through when nothing else will..." which is a hoary old myth dating from about the 1930s and morsemen bragging that they were better than the voice communicators. The only conclusion on "noise burst" circuit problems is that most of those morsemen were "filling in the blanks" and not doing real copy. :-) ....or so you've been told. :-) Despite all your negative criticism against non-morse communications methods, all the other radio services engaged in communications have dropped morse on-off keying modes. On-off keying of a carrier just doesn't cut it in the communications world of now. I don't have much in the way of negative criticism for non-morse communication methods, Leonard. Fact is, I use most of 'em. Fact is, on/off keying cuts it quite well in the communications world of now. That hasn't changed just because you aren't proficient in its use. I'm not too concerned with what other radio services do. I'll continue to enjoy the use of morse. I do hope that's all right with you. Enjoy it all you want. I was never against any morse USE...only against the TEST for same for radio operator licenses. Despite the statement above, your diatribe doesn't read like someone who supports use of morse code. If you want to claim extraordinary or even ordinary prowess of superhuman (or even ordinary superior human) ability, feel free to brag up a storm complete with your usual windy rhetoric. Did you confuse me with you there for a moment? None of that arrogant thundering is any sort of case to retain the old morse manual test for licensing for any newcomers. "Arrogant thundering" = any disagreement with your views. "Other" radio services, huh? I'm sure you're having a ball on lots of them. I have. :-) Past tense? No. Amateurs are the LAST vestige of morsemanship in radio. You say "No" but continue with the "LAST vestige" stuff. It sounds as if you're bothered by the use of morse by radio amateurs. Tsk. No. Only by the excessive self-righteous self-proclaimed superiority (as a 1930s expert radio morseman) and expecting all others to emulate your mighty and superior accomplishments. That's a load of manure, Leonard. That isn't the "only" at all. It is any radio amateur who uses morse and supports continuation of morse testing. I, for one, couldn't care less if you decide to "emulate" me or not. What YOU had to do long ago to get your license just does not apply to the radio world of now. What YOU write here isn't the case simply because YOU write it. Radio amateurs worldwide are using morse code daily for real communications. That you don't approve doesn't change that. The higher morse rate testing was an artificiality of old, a left-over from the past when the only method of radio communications was by on-off keying. There isn't any "higher morse rate" testing. We're not "kiddies", Len and you aren't one of us. I'm not recreating anything. I'm using something which is there. Tsk. You are acting the usual arrogant bully when expecting all to agree with your idea of what constitutes "fun" in ham radio. You aren't even involved. It would really take an arrogant bully to expect radio amateurs to swallow your view of how amateur radio should be regulated. What do you know of the "fun" of amateur radio? All those old, tired, worn-out, dead cliches about "absolutely needing to prove manual morse capability to work HF" is just a heap of artificial BS left over from earlier times...repeated and repeated and repeated by the ARRL for so long that the league lost sight (and hearing) of what it originally meant. Well, there you have it--the opinion of one never involved in amateur radio; one whom it would seem finds that five word per minute exam an insurmountable obstacle to his entry into amateur radio. If you and the other mighty morsemen want to preserve and protect morsemanship through required manual morse testing, then you had best petition the FCC for changing the ARS to the Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society. Is that a DEMAND, Leonard? It's your idea. You petition for the name change for the service in which you have no part. That's what the HF part of U.S. ham radio became decades ago. So you believe that all that goes on in HF amateur radio is the use of morse? You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on. That's what the testing requlations required. A name change would make the ARS more meaningful to what it was. Petition your government for redress of your numerous grievances. Don't let it worry you, Leonard. You aren't involved in the slightest. You are to amateur radio what a chainsaw is to a symphony. Tsk, tsk. Mike Coslo had an innovative use for a chainsaw as a shallow trench maker for radial wires. You didn't like that. :-) I didn't like it? I recall suggesting something easier. I could have saved him some money if he was bent on sawing slits in his yard. A circular saw requires only a blade change to a carbide blade. It won't even care if it hits a rock what that blade. I'm sure you look down your nose at all who don't agree what you consider is vital to ham radio enjoyment...that's been demonstrated in your on-going comments to all who have different interests in here. Different interests? What are your "interests" in amateur radio, Len? What do YOU consider "vital" to ham radio enjoyment? Why should any of that concern you? You aren't in. Don't have to be "in." :-) You have to be in if you: 1. want to partake in those things "vital to ham radio enjoyment". 2. want to be seen as credible. The FCC regulates U.S. civil radio. You aren't the FCC. The laws of the USA don't require the FCC commissioners or staff to hold amateur radio licenses in order to regulate U.S. amateur radio. I'd have thought you'd have picked up on this one by now. Those people are paid to regulate amateur radio. They are PROFESSIONALS. Despite your mighty brass-section trumpeting about "needing to be 'in' in order to 'direct things' in ham radio," YOU are NOT a radio regulator. ....and have never claimed to be a regulator. YOU are nothing but a mighty wind section demanding all go along with your ideas, conceptions, and general wild hairs of what 'should be done' and 'who is allowed to regulate it.' :-) That's be another incorrect response. I'm a participant. Participants are more important than regulators. With no participants, there'd be nothing to regulate. Not an orchestra by any means, just a bad brass band, out of step with the times yet demanding that all keep the old things. You're an old thing and I'm not demanding to keep you. You aren't getting in. Are you going to STOP me?!? Oh, my. Tsk. Why, no. You do that. Consider yourself stopped by inertia. The FCC doesn't seem to have taken any action except to reduce the HF morse testing speed to 5 wpm. Why do you think that is? They seem to be overwhelmed by the olde-fahrt olde-tymer morsemen who are blindly believing in the morse religion and have filled the ECFS' 18 petition commentary with same. :-) Sure, Len. When will the scales fall from their eyes? :-) Is he here too? I'll bet he could give you some valueable insight as to how to better use your venerable R-70. That general purpose receiver is still working as good as it did when I bought it and when I tested it to its factory specifications shortly thereafter. Icom has a good product there. I'm sure it works as well as designed. Did you read up on phase noise yet? Tsk. Two NCTAs in here having the same Icom receiver (both still working) seems to be a sore point with you. Poor baby. If you own an R-70 and are happy with it, bully for you. It is fine for your sort of casual listening. Go play with your Orion, why don't you? That ready-made will bring you up to the "state of the art!" :-) It surely does, Leonard. Its receiver beats the specs on the $11,000 Icom IC-7800. I'm sure that my tired old Orion couldn't begin to compete with the likes of an R-70. Now THAT'S state of the art! You will go right ahead with your "not licensed" schtick... Yes, I will. It happens to be true. No, it is NOT "true." Yes, it is an undeniable truth that you have no amateur radio license. You don't regulate U.S. amateur radio. That doesn't give you an amateur radio license. All you are is an olde-tymer snarling about all having to do as you did before they are allowed to talk about it, discuss it, or anything else. "All" can't do that. You have no license but you've talked, discussed, demeaned, insulted and belittled. Tsk. Elementary civics teaches us that U.S. federal laws are open for dicsussion by all citizens according to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. You seek to BAR any citizen from talking about regulations of radio hobby licensing. You aren't any member of any bar association, so don't try to throw your weight around where you are weightless. It has been pointed out on numerous occasions that no one has prevented you from spilling your guts. But you just can't force anyone to take your stuff seriously. You aren't in. You have no plans to get in. Tsk. I don't tell all in here. :-) We can only go by what you've told us. If you do have plans to get in, then you've lied. It doesn't matter. As the President responded to John Kerry: "A litany of complaints is not a plan". Neither am I required to tell YOU on YOUR demand about anything. Excuse me? Which demand was that? Heh heh heh. Ever the demanding arrogance of someone who likes to push folks around. You attempt to push others around quite frequently. It's tough being arrogant about amateur radio when you aren't actually a licensed ham though. First Amendment. Refresh your memory with what it means. It says that my right to free speech is equal to your own. It makes no requirement for me to accept your views or to refrain from giving you the raspberries. Feel free to review Title 47 C.F.R. Part 97 and show us all where ONLY already-licensed radio amateurs can talk or discuss the amateur radio regulations. Show your work. Is that a DEMAND? You have no experience in amateur radio. I have MUCH experience in RADIO. You misread. I wrote that you have no experience in *amateur* radio. It's true that I have no amateur radio license. It certainly is. It's also true that I have a commercial radio operator license and had several other radio licenses. Irrelevant. See Part 97 again and tell us all the sub-part that allows ONLY already-licensed radio amateurs to talk about amateur radio. You've "talked". I find you incredibly incredible. You have no stake in amateur radio. Tsk. There you go again DEMANDING a "stake!" I didn't see a demand, Leonard. Do you see a demand in my six word statement? Be advised that von Helsing may give YOU a stake. Wooden. [I would suggest wormwood as fitting...] I'll take it. If he has a few more, I can use 'em during Field Day. It doesn't seem to matter if people take pokes at you or razz you or if they are civil to you. Heh heh heh heh. I'm a long-time veteran of computer-modem communications with a survivor's thick virtual skin. :-) Virtual skin? Is that like those "message knuckles" you wrote about some time back? But, very very FEW PCTAs in here have been civil to me. Gee...I wonder why that would be. Begin with Jim Kehler, continue through assorted types who couldn't take it in here and left, on through a couple of now-deceased PCTAs who weren't able to continue for obvious reasons. Well, you seem to have it on points over those who tired of your nonsense and left, and over those whose respiration stopped. I'm betting that I can outlast you. ALL of them insisted and insisted and insisted that the morse code test "must" stay...as "tradition," as a number of invalid reasons, but (unvoiced) was the real reason, that of making all newcomers jump through the same hoops they had to jump through. You probably lose some folks as soon as you start your "jump through the same hoops" schpiel. You aren't yet a newcomer and you'll not be able to jump through my hoops. They no longer exist. You continue to insult and demean. Tsk. I return fire with fire. :-) Naw, fess up. You more often fire and wait for the return. Say, didn't you claim that you didn't know much about this battle stuff? You don't like it because you imperiously demand that all the "firing" be yours against others. Tsk. I'm sure that it seems that way to a guy with an obvious inferiority complex; a guy who sees demands in ordinary statements; a guy who views the comments of those who don't agree with him as "arrogant", "bullying", "imperious". You deserve everything you get here, poor old piranha. Tsk. Someone wrote that all were "civil TO me?" :-) Who was that? Hello? Can you understand 'hypocrisy?' :-) Yes, I've been reading your stuff for years. You can't possibly endure the test I had to take. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!! Did you find that funny or did the Metamucil kick in? The test I had to take isn't being given any longer. Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehheeehhheeee e. You can't even take the same written test. No need, is there? Tsk, tsk. Need matters not. You brayed about insistence that all must do as I have done. Fact is, it can't be done. Tsk, tsk. Poor baby. You're an old fart, Len and you're on the periphery of amateur radio. I did have some bean soup a couple days ago. Black bean. Very good with a salad and a sandwich. No flatulence, though. You underestimate yourself. I come in here and sense a great deal of flatulence from you olde-tymers boasting that NOBODY "could endure the kind of test they endured." That wasn't a boast, Leonard. Nobody wrote "endure". You made a false statement. Now you can eat your own words with your bean soup. Funny as hell, this newsgroup. :-) It just seems that way if you don't know what's going on. I suppose you'll stay there. Maybe I will. Maybe I won't. Did you hear that noise? That was me giving a rat's patoot. Either way, YOU have NO CONTROL over it! Sure I do, Len. Watch this: Leonard Anderson, you'll stay out of amateur radio. Now, watch it come to pass. Dave K8MN |
|
#23
October 16th 04, 05:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message A french poodle in a flight suit. Watch him do tricks. Hi, hi! That "poodle" got too close to a trimming razor last time...:-) He be a little poodle on the flight line, close to the landing gear... But...a "pilot in command!" "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue" From the Anthology of Lies Of Leonard H. Anderson (and now including a preface entitled "How Learning To Lie From Lennie Made Me the Man I am Today", By Brian (PuppetBoy) Burke) Sheeeesh. Steve, K4YZ |
|
#24
October 16th 04, 05:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: 1. Nursie is NOT a member of the IEEE, can't even qualify. And with "role models" like you, do you think I'd want to join? I could be a pathological liar without paying the dues, Lennie. From your standpoint as an ex-purchasing agent for a small company who couldn't hack that for more than about a half year...(SNIP) Wrong again, Lennie, but then facts aren't your strongpoint. So...you LIED about working as a purchasing agent? Nope. But you still don't have your facts right, Lennie. Do some research. Get it right. You DO know how to do RESEARCH, don't you Mr Engineer? Well, Lennie...It fits, what can I say? You lie. You don't get your facts right. You misrepresent factual events, you are deceitful and just plain lousy as human beings go. Tsk. You DID use the word "Putz." Again. Many times. That's not "deceit." Everyone else who reads here saw it. You are a putz, Lennie. Everytime you enter this forum and try to play "King of the Hill" you prove it. So, while chastising me for some perceived personal transgression, you furhter perpetuate yet another LennieLie by yet again using diminutives Jim Micciolis, despite the fact that he does nothing of the like to you. Tsk. I've written nothing to some "Jim Micciolis." Ahhhh...I see..... Slide out on my addition of an "i" to Jim's surename. But you sure HAVE written to "Parson Jim", "Jimmie", "Reverend Jim", and other diminuitives for Jim Miccolis. He has never used any alteration of your name except as you have, ie: Len, Leonard, or Mr. Anderson. Really puts some perspective on who the real men are here and who's a putz. So, big "qualified" medical health professional, have you "dialled" and made that "call to authorities" yet? I'm just sitting here waiting for some other things to arrive. Good opportunity for those "authorities" (under your mighty telephoned orders, of course) to come and "have me committed!" Indeed I did have some conversations with folks very close to you, Lennie. Tsk, Tsk, TSK! You've had NOTHING of the kind. You blatantly LIE. Keep repeating that to yourself over and over and over and over and......... The only "conversations" you've had are with your alternate personalities in your head... Sorry, Your Putziness...a real, live, California Licensed Mental Health Social Worker and a real, live, Registered Nurse Case Manager. Interesting stuff, too. Brought me up-to-date on Chapter 5150, and what are recordable events, etc. "Chapter?" What "chapter" and from what? A work of fiction? Nursie seems to be confusing Lewis Carroll's "Through The Looking Glass" with reality. Too many trips through that "glass" with the Mad Hatter... Why don't you Google up "5150" and see what you get, Lennie. A report by a duly-licensed healthcare worker is a recordable event. It may or maynot warrant an investigation, however files are started and any similar report by another licensed person or law enforcement flags the subject's name in future investigations. Tsk. More implied threats, compounding the original lie. Nursie's list of threats grows and grows like a magical beanstalk...but with no giant at the top... Not an implied threat, Lennie. Fact of law in the State of California. Want "investigations?" Investigate your own blathering outpourings of implied threats in here. Plenty enough for some shrinks to make a recycled paper of... No "implied threats", Lennie. You have demonstrated chronic obsessive-compulsive behaviour compounded by repeated lying and willful deception. Feel free to send a letter to Tom Ridge, if you want. Why? Does he have licensure as an LMHSW in California? Or the FBI. Or the CIA. Or the DIA. Or even the IBEW. [try not to use crayon again...they didn't like that the last time...] Now compounded by illusions and fantasy. Your above statement suggests that a factual event occcured. You are now obligated to prove that assertion of have yet ANOTHER LennieLie piled on the stack that has gotten you flagged as a pathological liar. Tsk. Get some REAL medical help, nursie...your meds just aren't working...too many side effects visible to all readers here. What "side effects", Lennie? What level of healthcare licensure do you hold that allows you to make such diagnosis and suggestions? Or would you like to cut to the chace and admit that you are, once again, manifesting a lie in order to cover your own tracks? Putz. Steve, K4YZ |
|
#25
October 17th 04, 01:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Steve Robeson K4CAP) writes: 1. Nursie is NOT a member of the IEEE, can't even qualify. I could be a pathological liar without paying the dues, Lennie. Len, that's a slam dunk. Steve's pathologies have nothing to do with the IEEE. |
|
#26
October 17th 04, 01:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/15/2004 4:02 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (William) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message A french poodle in a flight suit. Watch him do tricks. Hi, hi! That "poodle" got too close to a trimming razor last time...:-) He be a little poodle on the flight line, close to the landing gear... But...a "pilot in command!" "I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue" Steve's here to display his pathologies. |
|
#27
October 17th 04, 06:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , Dave Heil
writes: Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't address my comments at all. Tsk. One is REQUIRED to "address your comments," your royalness? :-) Not at all, your Foghorn Lenhorn-ness. You can type a paragraph about regional variations in Swahili dialect in response to someone's input on the possibilities for the introduction of errors in RTTY messages. It's just that doing so will make you look rather simple-minded. Tsk. Try to stay focussed. I wasn't "introducing Swahili dialect" into anything. :-) Can a morse radiotelegraph circuit introduce error or is it supposedly free from error of any kind? Answer that yes and you yourself are very simple-minded. Tsk. Well, I certainly don't see things which aren't there. :-) :-) Tsk. You are seeing things not there continually. I made no remark about "introducing Swahili dialects." You did. No, I haven't forgotten any of those things. My experience in such things is much more recent than your own and it is therefore fresher in my memory. All of those things introduce a time lag. Tsk. Are you saying that TTY "introduces a time lag" now? Are you also saying manual morse is instantaneous? More tsk. You should be out educating all the rest of the radio services on the supposed efficacy of morse code and manual on-off carrier keying. All the rest of those radio services that once used morse have dropped it for communications purposes. Then there are a number of radio services which never bothered with any morse code when they began. But, you will then "argue" that "this is amateur radio" as if it was a haven, shrine, or religious temple for morse code and that all amateurs MUST test for it...won't you? :-) They surely do "affect" morse reception, but you were touting the superiority of RTTY. Incorrect. I was simply pointing out that morse code telegraphy is the SLOWEST of all modes available to U.S. radio amateurs. But, you cannot keep on the subject and must always attack the persons of those who disagree with you. Tsk. Those "home hobby ham stations" use RTTY too, Leonard. You don't, do you? :-) I'm quite familiar with the use of FSK. It is still effected by noise and multipath distortion. ...and on-off keyed carriers are NOT so affected? :-) Of course they are. You are too simple-minded to admit to that. So, if I've got this right, we save on paper but spend on equipment. There's a dilemma. If my morse stuff is in memory on a keyer or PC, I can resend it quickly and easily without resorting to any paper. Tsk. "Spend on equipment?" What are you communicating with on this newsgroup? Morse code into your telephone line? :-) Tsk. So simple-minded you walked into that very visible trap like a blind man trying to bluff. The fact is that while FEC can be of some help, it is still subject to errors. It isn't a robust system like packet or Sitor/Amtor. ...and, to you, of course, manual morse code is without error. :-) Lacking a few received characters in morse? Why, just fill in the blanks. Who will know? :-) I don't have much in the way of negative criticism for non-morse communication methods, Leonard. Fact is, I use most of 'em. Of course you do...oh, yes, everything from facsimile to slow- scan TV. :-) Fact is, on/off keying cuts it quite well in the communications world of now. By whom? Third- and fourth-world nations who don't have any capital monies to invest? :-) Face the facts. The rest of the radio world does NOT use morse code for communications. That hasn't changed just because you aren't proficient in its use. TRY to stay focussed on the subject instead of (once more) launching into personalities. TRY to understand that the rest of the radio communications world does NOT use morse code for communications. All you can do is to be very trying... Despite the statement above, your diatribe doesn't read like someone who supports use of morse code. Tsk. You ARE seeing things that aren't there... Did you confuse me with you there for a moment? Never happen. I know me. I know you. You do NOT know me. "Arrogant thundering" = any disagreement with your views. You can't stay focussed on the subject. All you can do is act the thunder mug on anything I post. :-) Past tense? I'm using the Internet to send these messages. Whether that uses radio or other means is not an issue. Except by your misdirection and seeing things that aren't there. That's a load of manure, Leonard. That isn't the "only" at all. It is any radio amateur who uses morse and supports continuation of morse testing. I, for one, couldn't care less if you decide to "emulate" me or not. Irrelevant. NO one cares to "emulate" you. :-) What YOU write here isn't the case simply because YOU write it. Radio amateurs worldwide are using morse code daily for real communications. That you don't approve doesn't change that. Again, irrelevant. At issue is the morse code TEST, not whether or not "Dave" or his ilk "use morse." Note that USE has no real relation to the MORSE TEST. Or do you spend all your amateur radio time "taking tests?" :-) There isn't any "higher morse rate" testing. Isn't that awful...hi hi. You aren't even involved. Tsk...with role models like the archtypical PCTA extra, who would want to be "involved" in amateur radio? :-) It would really take an arrogant bully to expect radio amateurs to swallow your view of how amateur radio should be regulated. Tsk. I feel that the USA should have the FCC regulate amateur radio, all according to the Communications Act of 1934 plus the Congressional law of 1996. Who do you feel should "regulate" U.S. amateur radio? A bunch of arrogant bullies trying to make newcomers swallow their bilge about doing as they had to do? What do you know of the "fun" of amateur radio? Tsk. What do you know of "fun" in ANYTHING? :-) Well, there you have it--the opinion of one never involved in amateur radio; one whom it would seem finds that five word per minute exam an insurmountable obstacle to his entry into amateur radio. Tsk. Still seeing things that aren't there. Still tossing out personal pejoratives instead of discussing the subjects. THAT is the "fun" that appears in this amateur radio newsgroup. :-) So you believe that all that goes on in HF amateur radio is the use of morse? You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on. Tsk. You don't have any idea of how to discuss things civilly. Petition your government for redress of your numerous grievances. I have. :-) You don't like that. TS for you. :-) Different interests? What are your "interests" in amateur radio, Len? What do YOU consider "vital" to ham radio enjoyment? Freedom from the oppression of olde-tyme hammes insistent on ruling over all others would be a good start... :-) Oh, tsk. That would eliminate you, wouldn't it? Can't have that. You have to stay here and effect ethnic cleansing of U.S. amateur radio. All must think and act in the "officially approved" manner. :-) Which has a strange similarity to your own interests, narrow as those might be... You have to be in if you: 1. want to partake in those things "vital to ham radio enjoyment". This was NOT a discussion about "partaking" in anything. Then, again, this isn't a discussion at all...just "Dave" trying to push others around. Again. 2. want to be seen as credible. Lets "Dave" out...he is INcredible. :-) The FCC regulates U.S. civil radio. You aren't the FCC. NEITHER ARE YOU. :-) I'd have thought you'd have picked up on this one by now. Those people are paid to regulate amateur radio. They are PROFESSIONALS. YOU are not a professional regulator...just an amateur one. YOU may be admitted to A bar, but never a bar association. That's be another incorrect response. I'm a participant. You are a precipitate. The dried leftovers following evaporation. Participants are more important than regulators. Tell that to Congress. Have them change the Communications Act of 1934. :-) With no participants, there'd be nothing to regulate. Keep at it with your warmth and charm in newsgroups and that will be a foregone conclusion. :-) You're an old thing and I'm not demanding to keep you. Tsk. Again with the personal pejoratives. :-) So...you are "young?" :-) Are you going to STOP me?!? Oh, my. Tsk. Why, no. You do that. Consider yourself stopped by inertia. Tsk. You, repeat YOU, keep trying to stop me. Your technique (word used instead of other nasty ones) does NOT work! Sunnuvagun! It has been pointed out on numerous occasions that no one has prevented you from spilling your guts. Feel free to do your own seppuku. Nobody is stopping you... :-) But you just can't force anyone to take your stuff seriously. You aren't "anyone." You are the arrogant bully of the newsgroup, even better than the gunnery nurse. :-) Wouldn't dream of trying to make YOU seriously "take" anything. That's what you try to do to others. :-) You attempt to push others around quite frequently. Tsk. You gods of radio seem to think you are inviolate. Nobody is supposed to say ANYTHING nasty to you dieties. :-) It's tough being arrogant about amateur radio when you aren't actually a licensed ham though. It's much much more arrogant when you ARE a licensed ham (either FCC or FDA) and you keep on trying to push folks around, strip citizens of their Rights such as the First Amendment. Tsk. First Amendment. Refresh your memory with what it means. It says that my right to free speech is equal to your own. Tsk. It does NOT say your right is in any way stronger than mine. Yet, throughout in here, that's what you keep on claiming. It makes no requirement for me to accept your views or to refrain from giving you the raspberries. YOU would NOT come even close to accepting a contrary idea to what you hold... :-) You misread. I wrote that you have no experience in *amateur* radio. According to "Dave," one can't have ANY "interest in radio" without getting an amateur radio license! :-) Wasn't any qualifier to the word "radio" when "Dave" wrote it. :-) Heh heh heh heh. I'm a long-time veteran of computer-modem communications with a survivor's thick virtual skin. :-) Virtual skin? Is that like those "message knuckles" you wrote about some time back? LIke I've seen lots of computer-modem bullies in the last 20 years. Most of those are gone. I'm still here... :-) Well, you seem to have it on points over those who tired of your nonsense and left, and over those whose respiration stopped. I'm betting that I can outlast you. Anything is possible... :-) You are a god of radio. One of the Four Morsemen of this Apocalypse. You probably lose some folks as soon as you start your "jump through the same hoops" schpiel. Poor baby. Still can't get used to what others say of the morse test, can you? :-) You aren't yet a newcomer and you'll not be able to jump through my hoops. They no longer exist. Incorrect. But, it is impossible to get you to admit to an error. You are a god of radio and therefore inviolate. I'm sure that it seems that way to a guy with an obvious inferiority complex; a guy who sees demands in ordinary statements; a guy who views the comments of those who don't agree with him as "arrogant", "bullying", "imperious". Now, now, don't get upset...the mirror you are looking into when writing that has YOUR reflection! :-) Need matters not. You brayed about insistence that all must do as I have done. Fact is, it can't be done. Tsk, tsk. Poor baby. Sadness is. When "Dave" was made, the mould was broken... [or was that "mold?" Sometimes its hard to tell the difference...] Now, watch it come to pass. Tsk. "Dave" keeps on with the personal pejoratives and gets all flustered when they aren't received well. If you threw passes properly then receivers might catch them. Remember which way your goalposts are on the field...you keep forgetting and that's not good. You should practice punting. Your arm must be so sore from throwing all that stuff you throw.... Try to play with your Orion some more. Seriously, not trivially. Can't have a god of radio use equipment trivially. :-) If you go away from your radio toys into the newsgroup, then lots of replies to you will "just write themselves!" :-) |
|
#28
October 17th 04, 08:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil writes: Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't address my comments at all. Tsk. One is REQUIRED to "address your comments," your royalness? :-) Not at all, your Foghorn Lenhorn-ness. You can type a paragraph about regional variations in Swahili dialect in response to someone's input on the possibilities for the introduction of errors in RTTY messages. It's just that doing so will make you look rather simple-minded. Tsk. Try to stay focussed. I wasn't "introducing Swahili dialect" into anything. :-) That's right, you introduced equally unrelated. Then again, you don't have to address my comments ;-) Can a morse radiotelegraph circuit introduce error or is it supposedly free from error of any kind? It isn't necessarily free of error, Len. Then again, I've not claimed that it is. Well, I certainly don't see things which aren't there. :-) :-) Tsk. You are seeing things not there continually. Which things are not there continually? I made no remark about "introducing Swahili dialects." You did. Your response was equally irrelevant. No, I haven't forgotten any of those things. My experience in such things is much more recent than your own and it is therefore fresher in my memory. All of those things introduce a time lag. Tsk. Are you saying that TTY "introduces a time lag" now? We'll never know. You snip the relevant portions. Are you also saying manual morse is instantaneous? I don't think so. More tsk. You should be out educating all the rest of the radio services on the supposed efficacy of morse code and manual on-off carrier keying. I have no interest in educating the rest of the radio world in anything. You may, if you like. All the rest of those radio services that once used morse have dropped it for communications purposes. So? What is that supposed to mean for the service which uses it commonly and regularly? Then there are a number of radio services which never bothered with any morse code when they began. Did you have a point? But, you will then "argue" that "this is amateur radio" as if it was a haven, shrine, or religious temple for morse code and that all amateurs MUST test for it...won't you? :-) As pointed out quite a few times to you, thousands of radio amateurs use morse daily despite what the "rest of the radio world" decides to do. They surely do "affect" morse reception, but you were touting the superiority of RTTY. Incorrect. I was simply pointing out that morse code telegraphy is the SLOWEST of all modes available to U.S. radio amateurs. Incorrect. That isn't what you were doing. Since you don't use morse and aren't a radio amateur, why do you worry about morse throughput? But, you cannot keep on the subject and must always attack the persons of those who disagree with you. Tsk. You can't possibly realize how silly the above statement makes you look. Those "home hobby ham stations" use RTTY too, Leonard. You don't, do you? :-) Why, yes, I do. I'm quite familiar with the use of FSK. It is still effected by noise and multipath distortion. ...and on-off keyed carriers are NOT so affected? :-) By noise? Sure. By multipath distortion? Not much at all. So, if I've got this right, we save on paper but spend on equipment. There's a dilemma. If my morse stuff is in memory on a keyer or PC, I can resend it quickly and easily without resorting to any paper. Tsk. "Spend on equipment?" What are you communicating with on this newsgroup? Morse code into your telephone line? :-) Tsk. So simple-minded you walked into that very visible trap like a blind man trying to bluff. Some "very visible trap"! I regularly use morse from my car. I don't have a PC in my car. The fact is that while FEC can be of some help, it is still subject to errors. It isn't a robust system like packet or Sitor/Amtor. ...and, to you, of course, manual morse code is without error. :-) I've not stated such. Lacking a few received characters in morse? Why, just fill in the blanks. Who will know? :-) One thing for su You won't. I don't have much in the way of negative criticism for non-morse communication methods, Leonard. Fact is, I use most of 'em. Of course you do...oh, yes, everything from facsimile to slow- scan TV. :-) That's right. Fact is, on/off keying cuts it quite well in the communications world of now. By whom? Third- and fourth-world nations who don't have any capital monies to invest? :-) By radio amateurs across the globe, those with CASH and those without. Face the facts. The rest of the radio world does NOT use morse code for communications. Why this concern about what the "rest of the radio world" is doing? Hams aren't required to follow other services. That hasn't changed just because you aren't proficient in its use. TRY to stay focussed on the subject instead of (once more) launching into personalities. Tell you what: You settle on a subject and perhaps we can do that...if you can't keep from launching into personalities. TRY to understand that the rest of the radio communications world does NOT use morse code for communications. Try coming up with a valid explanation as to why I should concern myself with that. Despite the statement above, your diatribe doesn't read like someone who supports use of morse code. Tsk. You ARE seeing things that aren't there... Incorrect. You've snipped them so they aren't there. Did you confuse me with you there for a moment? Never happen. I know me. I know you. You do NOT know me. Interesting that you believe you can know me without my knowing you. I've read your stuff for nearly a decade. Past tense? I'm using the Internet to send these messages. Whether that uses radio or other means is not an issue. We'll never know. Your snippage removes any context. Except by your misdirection and seeing things that aren't there. I can't see them. You snipped 'em. That's a load of manure, Leonard. That isn't the "only" at all. It is any radio amateur who uses morse and supports continuation of morse testing. I, for one, couldn't care less if you decide to "emulate" me or not. Irrelevant. Very relevant. NO one cares to "emulate" you. :-) You aren't in a position to know that. :-) What YOU write here isn't the case simply because YOU write it. Radio amateurs worldwide are using morse code daily for real communications. That you don't approve doesn't change that. Again, irrelevant. Very relevant. Why should radio amateurs follow the methods of unrelated services? At issue is the morse code TEST, not whether or not "Dave" or his ilk "use morse." The issue, according to you, is that other radio services don't use morse. Do try to stay focussed. Note that USE has no real relation to the MORSE TEST. I don't agree. Or do you spend all your amateur radio time "taking tests?" :-) I'll spend my amateur radio time doing what I choose. You spend your amateur radio time....Oh, never mind. There isn't any "higher morse rate" testing. Isn't that awful...hi hi. You seemed to think it an issue a couple of posts ago. You aren't even involved. Tsk...with role models like the archtypical PCTA extra, who would want to be "involved" in amateur radio? :-) Lots of folks want to and do. You haven't and won't. It would really take an arrogant bully to expect radio amateurs to swallow your view of how amateur radio should be regulated. Tsk. I feel that the USA should have the FCC regulate amateur radio, all according to the Communications Act of 1934 plus the Congressional law of 1996. *Poof!* You've got your wish. What do you know of the "fun" of amateur radio? Tsk. What do you know of "fun" in ANYTHING? :-) I know all about the fun in amateur radio. I know quite a bit about the fun in usenet. Couldn't you come up with a meaningful answer? Well, there you have it--the opinion of one never involved in amateur radio; one whom it would seem finds that five word per minute exam an insurmountable obstacle to his entry into amateur radio. Tsk. Still seeing things that aren't there. Not really. I just took a look at amateur radio. I didn't see you. Still tossing out personal pejoratives instead of discussing the subjects. THAT is the "fun" that appears in this amateur radio newsgroup. :-) Why, Leonard, that is PRECISELY your mode of operation here on a regular basis. I know. We're to do as you say, not as you do. So you believe that all that goes on in HF amateur radio is the use of morse? You don't seem to have any idea of what goes on. Tsk. You don't have any idea of how to discuss things civilly. Why, Leonard. That is precisely your mode of operation here. Petition your government for redress of your numerous grievances. I have. :-) Don't get upset with me because the government hasn't seen things your way. You don't like that. TS for you. :-) I wouldn't mind if you petitioned government for something each and every day of the remainder of your life. Different interests? What are your "interests" in amateur radio, Len? What do YOU consider "vital" to ham radio enjoyment? Freedom from the oppression of olde-tyme hammes insistent on ruling over all others would be a good start... :-) Oppression? Oooooooh! Are you a victim now? Oh, tsk. That would eliminate you, wouldn't it? Can't have that. No, you can't have that. You have to stay here and effect ethnic cleansing of U.S. amateur radio. You aren't an ethnic group and you aren't in amateur radio. You have to be in if you: 1. want to partake in those things "vital to ham radio enjoyment". This was NOT a discussion about "partaking" in anything. Why'dja snip the relevant portion, Leonard? I directly responded to something written by you. 2. want to be seen as credible. Lets "Dave" out...he is INcredible. :-) Couldn't you come up with anything original? The FCC regulates U.S. civil radio. You aren't the FCC. NEITHER ARE YOU. :-) What's with the caps? I'd have thought you'd have picked up on this one by now. Those people are paid to regulate amateur radio. They are PROFESSIONALS. YOU are not a professional regulator...just an amateur one. That's incorrect. I don't regulate amateur radio. That's be another incorrect response. I'm a participant. Participants are more important than regulators. Tell that to Congress. Have them change the Communications Act of 1934. :-) No changes are needed. No regulators are needed where there are no participants. You're an old thing and I'm not demanding to keep you. Tsk. Again with the personal pejoratives. :-) So...you are "young?" :-) Everything is relative, Leonard. I'm just a kid when compared to you. Are you going to STOP me?!? Oh, my. Tsk. Why, no. You do that. Consider yourself stopped by inertia. Tsk. You, repeat YOU, keep trying to stop me. There, there, Leonard. I'll give back your study guides, repair your practice oscillator and allow you access to the site where you can download the appropriate forms. Only your own failure to act keeps you from an amateur radio license. Your technique (word used instead of other nasty ones) does NOT work! Oh? You mean you'll have that Extra "right out of the box" sometime in the forseeable future? Sunnuvagun! It has been pointed out on numerous occasions that no one has prevented you from spilling your guts. Feel free to do your own seppuku. Nobody is stopping you... :-) But you just can't force anyone to take your stuff seriously. You aren't "anyone." You may not like it but, yes, I am someone. You are the arrogant bully of the newsgroup, even better than the gunnery nurse. :-) Actually, I believe that title is rightfully yours. You've earned it. You attempt to push others around quite frequently. You often confuse me with yourself. Tsk. You gods of radio seem to think you are inviolate. Nobody is supposed to say ANYTHING nasty to you dieties. :-) Oh, here we go again. One time I'm a god. The next, I'm no god. Fact is, I'm a radio amateur. You are not. It's tough being arrogant about amateur radio when you aren't actually a licensed ham though. It's much much more arrogant when you ARE a licensed ham (either FCC or FDA) and you keep on trying to push folks around, strip citizens of their Rights such as the First Amendment. Tsk. Funny that you mention the First Amendment as if your rights have somehow been taken away. That view is as incorrect now as it was the very first time you tried to sell it. First Amendment. Refresh your memory with what it means. It says that my right to free speech is equal to your own. Tsk. It does NOT say your right is in any way stronger than mine. Yeah? And? Yet, throughout in here, that's what you keep on claiming. Is it? You've written and written and written and written. I've not attempted to prevent you from doing so at any time. I have often ridiculed you and laughed at you. I intend to continue doing so. It makes no requirement for me to accept your views or to refrain from giving you the raspberries. YOU would NOT come even close to accepting a contrary idea to what you hold... :-) You have no way of knowing that. All that you can be certain of is that I find your ideas on regulating amateur radio to be laughable. I find you to be a peculiar oddity--a man obsessed with regulating that in which he has no part. You misread. I wrote that you have no experience in *amateur* radio. According to "Dave," one can't have ANY "interest in radio" without getting an amateur radio license! :-) You've been corrected on this one a number of times. You persist in writing the same thing. It is a lie. Wasn't any qualifier to the word "radio" when "Dave" wrote it. :-) Yes, there certainly was. Heh heh heh heh. I'm a long-time veteran of computer-modem communications with a survivor's thick virtual skin. :-) Virtual skin? Is that like those "message knuckles" you wrote about some time back? LIke I've seen lots of computer-modem bullies in the last 20 years. Most of those are gone. I'm still here... :-) That doesn't fill us in on "virtual skin" or "message knuckles". Well, you seem to have it on points over those who tired of your nonsense and left, and over those whose respiration stopped. I'm betting that I can outlast you. Anything is possible... :-) Any many things are likely. :-) You are a god of radio. One of the Four Morsemen of this Apocalypse. You seem to have some trouble making up your mind on the issue. There is an archived record on the subject. You probably lose some folks as soon as you start your "jump through the same hoops" schpiel. Poor baby. Still can't get used to what others say of the morse test, can you? :-) Poor baby. You can't get used to the idea that you'll have to climb that 5 wpm mountain in order to partake in HF amateur radio. You aren't yet a newcomer and you'll not be able to jump through my hoops. They no longer exist. Incorrect. Quite correct. I took a 20 wpm morse exam. It isn't possible for you take it. I took and passed written exams for the Novice, General, Advanced and Extra. It is no longer possible for you to do so. No exams are given for two of those classes. Exams very different from those taken by me are now being used to test for both the General and Amateur Extra. But, it is impossible to get you to admit to an error. I'd first have to make one. You are a god of radio and therefore inviolate. No, I'm inwestvirginia. I'm sure that it seems that way to a guy with an obvious inferiority complex; a guy who sees demands in ordinary statements; a guy who views the comments of those who don't agree with him as "arrogant", "bullying", "imperious". Now, now, don't get upset...the mirror you are looking into when writing that has YOUR reflection! :-) Can't be, Leonard. You're the guy who uses the terms "arrogant", "bullying" and "imperious". You're the guy who sees simple statements as DEMANDS. You're mistaken. Now, watch it come to pass. Tsk. "Dave" keeps on with the personal pejoratives and gets all flustered when they aren't received well. The only thing you could do to fluster me would be to swear that you actually like them. Try to play with your Orion some more. Seriously, not trivially. Can't have a god of radio use equipment trivially. :-) Irrelevant. Dave K8MN |
|
#29
October 17th 04, 02:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#30
October 17th 04, 03:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting?
From: (Len Over 21) Date: 10/16/2004 11:00 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , Dave Heil writes: Indeed. You managed to cobble together a paragraph which doesn't address my comments at all. Tsk. One is REQUIRED to "address your comments," your royalness? :-) Not at all, your Foghorn Lenhorn-ness. You can type a paragraph about regional variations in Swahili dialect in response to someone's input on the possibilities for the introduction of errors in RTTY messages. It's just that doing so will make you look rather simple-minded. Tsk. Try to stay focussed. Rest snipped. Same typo repeated over and over. According to Lennie's Newsgroup Rules of Engagement, a typo is an indicator that the respondant is "mad". Until Lennie calms down, I say we not talk to him any more. Steve, K4YZ |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Doing Battle? Can't Resist Posting? | Policy | |||
| Money just for posting | Digital | |||
| Who peed in the pool? | Policy | |||
| Guidelines for posting to this newsgroup? | Boatanchors | |||
| rsgb now posting their fantastic $2 membership offer | Antenna | |||
Linear Mode
