"KØHB" wrote in message ink.net...
"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote

fm:
to:

Dear Rich,

Some time ago a story appeared in CQ that told a story about a
young,
recently licensed operator who made the mistake of using "CB" lingo on
the
repeater.

The story went on to tell about a "crusty" old op that
subsequently read
him the riot act on the air, causing the young op to rethink his
Amateur
"career".

Can you help me locate this article?

Thanks!

Steve Robeson, LPN
Amateur Call K4YZ
Winchester, TN

fm: K0HB
to: W2VU

Hi Rich,

Just so you know what's going on......(SNIP)

Received the following from Rich, W2VU:

QUOTE:

Dear Steve,

I did a search of our online database, which extends back to 1990, and
found nothing. I also checked and found nothing in CQ VHF. On the
other hand, this is unfortunately such a common experience that it
wouldn't surprise me if some variation on the theme has been published
somewhere before.

I see that you've copied K0HB on your request for information. Hans
and I have been e-mail correspondents over many years now, sometimes
agreeing on things and sometimes disagreeing. But I seem to recall
that some years back, HE wrote something along these lines - posted it
somewhere on the internet as I recall. Internet postings tend to take
on lives of their own, often traveling far beyond their original
intended audiences. Perhaps parts of his story were quoted by a
columnist for some ham magazine? Or maybe it was reprinted (with or
without his permission) in a club newsletter? You might ask Hans if
his story - if I'm remembering things correctly - was ever published
anywhere.

vy 73,
Rich W2VU
Editor, CQ

UNQUOTE

In as far as remembering that the article was from "CQ", I am
apparently wrong. My own personal "library" of "CQ" only goes back to
January 2001.

In as far as stating it was CQ, I was wrong and apologize to Hans
for that.

I have, however, sent a letter to the ARRL to inquire of them if
the story was thiers. If that too comes up empty (and assuming Hans
doesn't feel compelled to send THEM a "heads up", too...) I will
complete the apology. There WAS an story. If I remeber it from here,
then I was wrong as to it's origin and author.

Steve, K4YZ

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote


P L E A S E show me the "constructiveness" or "fairness" of Hans'
actions.

Inquiring minds, etc etc etc....


"Constructiveness" and "fairness"???? When attacked with unfounded and
untrue suggestions of wrongdoing (in this case, plagiarism) you will
never find me "fair" or "constructive". It was my intention to bare
your lie to public view, which I seem to have done.

I note in a message which the Editor of CQ sent to you and copied me, he
says:

"Dear Steve,

I did a search of our online database, which
extends back to 1990, and found nothing.
I also checked and found nothing in CQ VHF."


But keep looking, Steve, because my offer still stands. Cite the CQ
issue which contained this story, not written by me, and I'll send a
public apology "Letter to the Editor" of CQ.

Your move.

Put up or shut up.

36, de Hans, K0HB

Subject: WHICH Plagiarism, Steve?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 10/21/2004 10:43 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net


"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote


P L E A S E show me the "constructiveness" or "fairness" of Hans'
actions.

Inquiring minds, etc etc etc....


"Constructiveness" and "fairness"???? When attacked with unfounded and
untrue suggestions of wrongdoing (in this case, plagiarism) you will
never find me "fair" or "constructive". It was my intention to bare
your lie to public view, which I seem to have done.

I note in a message which the Editor of CQ sent to you and copied me, he
says:

"Dear Steve,

I did a search of our online database, which
extends back to 1990, and found nothing.
I also checked and found nothing in CQ VHF."


But keep looking, Steve, because my offer still stands. Cite the CQ
issue which contained this story, not written by me, and I'll send a
public apology "Letter to the Editor" of CQ.

Your move.

Put up or shut up.

Uh huh.

I see you've completely ignored the fact that I published that letter
already and APOLOGIZED for having for having got that attribute wrong.

And you misquoted Rich's letter.

Typical.

You truly ARE a scumbag, Hans.

I thought it was just a "summer thing".

Steve, K4YZ

"JAMES HAMPTON" wrote

Hello, Hans

This group could learn something, but I doubt most are able.


Thanks, Jim. Your plea for unity among hams of differing experience
level struck a chord with me, so I dragged out my old missive on that
subject to reinforce your point.

Unfortunately, no good deed goes unpunished!

73, Hans, ex-KG6AQI/Saipan

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: These EXTRA'S, Steve::: WHICH Extras, Brain?
From: (William)
Date: 10/20/2004 6:55 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message
om...
(William) wrote in message
. com...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
ink.net...
Riley is not a Extra class.

Dan/W4NTI

Quote from several Extra's on RRAP, "So what's his problem?"

Which of "several Extra's", Brain?

There's only a few of us, so it can't be TOO hard to pony up a quote.

Re-quotes from posts, please? FACTS...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ

---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------

From: N2EY )
Subject: Excellent ARRL proposal


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Date: 2004-01-25 12:31:04 PST


In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:
go thru to get on the air. There were neighborhood radio clubs which
didn't allow full voting memberships to Novices and Techs . . .


And in the mid-60s there were still some who did similar things. Indeed,
there
were Advanceds who looked down on Generals, Generals who looked down on
Conditionals, Conditionals who looked down on Techs, and Techs who looked
down
on Novices. Etc.

And it wasn't just kids vs. adults, either.

Yessir, It's 2004 and it's **still** out there. Guy was up late last
year for the vote on approving his membership application into The
Group (the 43rd & Kingsessing "Group" we're both familair with yes?)

You mean the one where the attendance sheet looks like the DXCC Honor Roll?

and somebody asked "what license class does he have?" His sponser:
"Uhhh . . Advanced." Then he ducked. Immediate 180dBA noise level from
the Back Benchers, "what the hell is this guy's problem?"

Well, what IS his problem?

That group is heavily focused on DX and contesting - particularly DX
contesting.
They're "a bit competitive"....

Anything less than an Extra is a big competitive disadvantage in DX
contesting.
Like not being able to work split. So why doesn't the guy get one? Even if he
only works 'phone, all he need do is pass element 4. And he's had almost 4
years.

No, wait, that's not a good reason. Those writtens are really tough. More
than
4 years ago, (Jan 19, 2000, to be exact) a certain verbose nonham here said
he
was going for Extra "right out of the box". But no ham license of any class
yet.
And this nonham says he's a "radio PROFESSIONAL"....

Maybe he should apply to The Group. I'd like to attend that meeting....

Then as now, they were few - but noisy.

Maybe it was different where you were, Dan.

It's all just cycles Dan and the 1968 maneuver was not the first cycle
by any means and welcome to the current cycle. There will be others.

Circle Game.

Dit-dit!

Still nothing from one of "us"

It STILL does not answer your suggestion about "several Extras" in RRAP
suggesting that anything less than an Extra Class is "a problem".

That's right.

The story relates the telling of some club some time ago wherein some
other group of people may have acted stupidly.

That depends on the definition of "stupid".

You have yet to quote Brian (W3RV), Hans, Jim, the other Jim, or myself,
among others, as having said anything close to "what's his problem" over not
being an Extra class licensee.

Let's clear this up.

The club referred to above is a special-interest amateur radio
organization, not a general-purpose club. Their focus is HF contesting
and DXing, setting up stations to do those things better, and not
much else. They don't do domestic contests or QSO parties; they focus
on the big stuff. Their members are highly competitive, and
progressive. (Example: They were among the very first to have
computers in their hamshacks).

In pursuit of the club goals, an Extra class license is pretty much a
necessity, because the DX is often in those subbands. That's just the
way it is.

So the fact that somebody without an Extra would even apply for
membership and expect to be taken as a serious DXer/contester by that
bunch indicates a problem someplace.

The "what's his problem" reaction above happened a relatively short
time ago, not the 1960s, so the code test wasn't the issue at all.

Is that an "elitist" situation? Maybe - but that club is an elite
group. Their accomplishments in their chosen field tell the tale.

73 de Jim, N2EY

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

I wrote a very benign letter to Rich, W2VU at CQ
magazine to try and locate the article that I remembered reading.


Here's why it looks familiar:

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...ews.com&output
=gplain

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...1.deja.com&out
put=gplain

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...1.deja.com&out
put=gplain

I don't read CQ with any regularity so I don't know if it's in there or not.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Well there you have it!

----------------
----------------
From: N2EY )
Subject: Excellent ARRL proposal


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Date: 2004-01-25 12:31:04 PST


In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:
go thru to get on the air. There were neighborhood radio clubs which
didn't allow full voting memberships to Novices and Techs . . .


And in the mid-60s there were still some who did similar things. Indeed, there
were Advanceds who looked down on Generals, Generals who looked down on
Conditionals, Conditionals who looked down on Techs, and Techs who looked down
on Novices. Etc.

And it wasn't just kids vs. adults, either.

Yessir, It's 2004 and it's **still** out there. Guy was up late last
year for the vote on approving his membership application into The
Group (the 43rd & Kingsessing "Group" we're both familair with yes?)

You mean the one where the attendance sheet looks like the DXCC Honor Roll?

and somebody asked "what license class does he have?" His sponser:
"Uhhh . . Advanced." Then he ducked. Immediate 180dBA noise level from
the Back Benchers, "what the hell is this guy's problem?"

Well, what IS his problem?

-----------------
-----------------

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , "JAMES HAMPTON"
writes:

No one, CB, novice, technician, general, advanced, nor extra, has all of the
answers.

If we learn to live together, we might *all* learn something.

I agree 100%, Jim.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Yeh, right. Like the guys below wondering about the following ham's license class?

"What IS his problem?"

-----------------
-----------------

From: N2EY )
Subject: Excellent ARRL proposal


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Date: 2004-01-25 12:31:04 PST


In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:
go thru to get on the air. There were neighborhood radio clubs which
didn't allow full voting memberships to Novices and Techs . . .


And in the mid-60s there were still some who did similar things. Indeed, there
were Advanceds who looked down on Generals, Generals who looked down on
Conditionals, Conditionals who looked down on Techs, and Techs who looked down
on Novices. Etc.

And it wasn't just kids vs. adults, either.

Yessir, It's 2004 and it's **still** out there. Guy was up late last
year for the vote on approving his membership application into The
Group (the 43rd & Kingsessing "Group" we're both familair with yes?)

You mean the one where the attendance sheet looks like the DXCC Honor Roll?

and somebody asked "what license class does he have?" His sponser:
"Uhhh . . Advanced." Then he ducked. Immediate 180dBA noise level from
the Back Benchers, "what the hell is this guy's problem?"

Well, what IS his problem?

Subject: WHICH Extras, Brain?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 10/21/2004 11:49 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net

Unfortunately, no good deed goes unpunished!

What was YOUR last "good deed", Hans?

In THIS century, please...

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: These EXTRA'S, Steve::: WHICH Extras, Brain?
From: (N2EY)
Date: 10/21/2004 12:07 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...

It STILL does not answer your suggestion about "several Extras" in
RRAP
suggesting that anything less than an Extra Class is "a problem".

That's right.


The story relates the telling of some club some time ago wherein some
other group of people may have acted stupidly.

That depends on the definition of "stupid".

That's why I said "may", Jim. Nothing in what Brain cited was
inappropriate.

You have yet to quote Brian (W3RV), Hans, Jim, the other Jim, or
myself,
among others, as having said anything close to "what's his problem" over
not
being an Extra class licensee.

Let's clear this up.

The club referred to above is a special-interest amateur radio
organization, not a general-purpose club. Their focus is HF contesting
and DXing, setting up stations to do those things better, and not
much else. They don't do domestic contests or QSO parties; they focus
on the big stuff. Their members are highly competitive, and
progressive. (Example: They were among the very first to have
computers in their hamshacks).

Which would answer why the possession of an Extra MIGHT make the
difference.

In pursuit of the club goals, an Extra class license is pretty much a
necessity, because the DX is often in those subbands. That's just the
way it is.

Then that IS the difference.

So the fact that somebody without an Extra would even apply for
membership and expect to be taken as a serious DXer/contester by that
bunch indicates a problem someplace.

The "what's his problem" reaction above happened a relatively short
time ago, not the 1960s, so the code test wasn't the issue at all.

Is that an "elitist" situation? Maybe - but that club is an elite
group. Their accomplishments in their chosen field tell the tale.

Nothing like documented results to prove a point.

The emphasis, for Brain's benefit, on the word DOCUMENTED.

73

Steve, K4YZ

"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote


In as far as stating it was CQ, I was wrong and apologize to Hans
for that.


Apology accepted. Thank you.

I have, however, sent a letter to the ARRL to inquire of them if
the story was thiers. If that too comes up empty (and assuming Hans
doesn't feel compelled to send THEM a "heads up", too...) I will
complete the apology. There WAS an story. If I remeber it from here,
then I was wrong as to it's origin and author.

Apology accepted in advance.

de Hans, K0HB