In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Lenof21 wrote:

It's a plain simple fact that all NCTA in here are always wrong, no
matter
what they write on anything. No one who is of the NCTA persuasion
should bother debating the subject in here. The matter is closed and all
NCTA are forever wrong, incorrect, and probably have underarm odor.

Interesting post. It doe not negate the fact that you have been wrong
on several occasions.

ALL such occasions, Mikey. :-)

It's a plain simple fact. :-)

We all are at times.

Never if you are a PCTA!

PCTA are Keepers of the Flame (and of flame wars against NCTA).

PCTA are the Only sources of TRVTH in hamme raddio.

They keep on telling each other that...and being to believe it. Tsk.


You post indicates that you are pretty upset about this.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahahahahahahah

It's a plain simple fact...your posting indicates you are trying to mask
someone else's comment or applying some weird salesman oil that
you think will calm waters or you are just so damn dumb you can't
understand sarcasm when it's served up to you on gleaming silver.
I'll bet on the latter.

Everything went about 50K feet over your head.

You might research "401 alarm" a bit and understand. But, QST
didn't print anything about it so I doubt you would know it. It would
be allied with the code word "wildfire." Perhaps even "agricultural
station." :-)

at yourself. Being wrong on a matter just means that the next time you
won't be.

Silly boy, trying reverse sarcasm doesn't work either.

The plain simple fact is that I - or any NCTA - can post ANYTHING,
whether right, wrong, or off the wall, and the plain simple factotum
in here will go into a prissy negative critique, perhaps even a prolonged
hissy-fit of superiority. :-)

That's the plain simple facts of content of THIS newsgroup.

"Discussion" is out. Personal denigration is IN. For a prime-cut
example, see the Avenging Angle's posting this same morning.
That paragon of perpetual personal pejoratives whacked off more
of his PR charisma for the PCTA cause...and you LIKE that...

Leo wrote:

On 09 Jan 2005 04:51:35 GMT, (Lenof21) wrote:


In article , Leo
writes:


On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:36:59 -0800 (PST), "Phil Kane"
wrote:


On 08 Jan 2005 21:31:53 GMT, N2EY wrote:


Lenof21 wrote:


All licensees are perfectly legal to continue operating in their grace
period.

Nope. Wrong. You are mistaken. Once an amateur's license expires,
he or she *cannot* legally operate until the is renewed.

Unless the renewal has been applied for before expiration. Then,
the license privileges continue until the FCC acts upon the application.

Oh oh. An exception to the rule rears its ugly head.....

How could the J & M tag team possibly miss that one?

Happy New Year, Leo...


Thanks - you too, Len!

Sure enough, the PCTA extras in here disregard the subject in order
to lambaste (and generally make nasty to) any NCTA about anything.
:-)


Some even enter a batch of posts on a variety of subjects, apparently
hoping to get sonething on the hook.......what's the word for that
again...?

To imagine anyone on Usenet would do that. 8^)



Doesn't matter if the NCTA are right or wrong (deliberately so in the
case suddenly become front-page news of sorts)...all NCTA are
targets of opportunity to be DISCREDITED by any means possible.

The "tag team" seems to think that all hams are always active on-
the-air as good "service personnel" (or something) during their valid
license period. Never mind that there are absences from the "service"
for many different reasons. The "grace period" insures that such
absence will not allow any licensee to lose their (apparently) so precious
tribal identification of a call sign. The call sign is "who we are" to
quote
one licensee in here some years ago. That would be especially true
for the Vanity calls. Licensees POSSESS their calls and those become
very, very personal.


That's true even more so up here in the (currently) frozen North -
licenses and call signs are issued to Canadian hams for life, no
renewal required. The call sign is protected for a year after you SK,
to allow a family member to qualify and acquire it.

That is a good way to do it.

No bureaucracy, no renewals, no paperwork, no grace period required -
unless you break the law and lose it, or move to a new province (the
call sign doesn't follow you around the country like they do in the
States), you'll expire long before it does


And in the end it is just a different system, some parts a lot better,
like lifetime license, and some parts worse, such as the mandatory
callsign by district (though some will prefer that)


In the USA I might even suggest that the FDA (Food and Drug
Administration) step in and help the FCC literally brand the granted
call sign on the physical person of the licensee, perhaps by a tatoo.
That might complete the process of the New Identity within the Tribe.
[why not? the FDA here certifies real hams ... :-) ]


A good application for the microchip, perhaps - technology proven in
the Veterinary world for quite a few years now....?


The "new identity" is important since it bestows a rank/status/privilege
down here in a land without royals, no fancy titles or whatever. For
example, a Rhode Islander could, under older rules, suddenly become
a "resident" of Hawaii without even leaving the mainland. The arranger
of that was able to retitle hisself from junior college math teacher to
"mathematics lecturer in the university system." Neither one "did
anything wrong" according to them. But, a whole bunch of very phony
"radio club" calls got tossed in the dumpster by the FCC not too long
ago. Another fantasylander thought he had much more clout in the real
world than the U.S. aremed forces when he admonished another about
"permission to operate a radio" from Somalia when that individual served
in the military there. Yet another fantasylander keeps on bragging about
his military record ("seven hostile actions" without ever saying where or
when) and then trying to tear down others' real military records. Tsk.
Then we have the classic knowitall who never served at all making like
he knows more than Janes about USSR air power just because a real
veteran slipped up once in a message. There's still another "serviceman"
of the amateur corps who dines with aircraft carrier captains and looks
down his nose at those who've done real military HF communications
much more than he will have done in his lifetime. It's quite a collection!


It sure is.....engineers who have problems with basic math,
thinly-veiled trolls looking to provoke fights.....

Yeah, there are all kinds in here..........

It's a wonderful microcosm in here indeed. Of what, specifically, I'm
not quite sure!

Some people used to call me MicroCosm........ 8^)


Note: All those wonderful braggarts are PCTA extra. They can say
anything, write anything, do anything in here and are absolved from ANY
criticism. Should they be taken to task, the task-taker is soundly
objected to with endearing personal perjoratives having little to do with
the subject.


Ipso facto, with a few exceptions - there are several OMs here who are
quite civil, knowledgeable and conversational, and do not possess the
NetNanny gene.....


It's a plain simple fact that all NCTA in here are always wrong, no matter
what they write on anything. No one who is of the NCTA persuasion
should bother debating the subject in here. The matter is closed and all
NCTA are forever wrong, incorrect, and probably have underarm odor.


.....and skinned knuckles!

Here's a challenge, Leo, if you're up to it.

Name the PCTA's in here (active) that have called NCTA's by such names.
I'll give you a start:

Steve is pretty famous for name calling.

And since this subthread turned into a Mike and Jim "tag-team" thing,
where do our names show up in that list? When have I called anyone a
nasty name? I don't think Jim ever has either.

note: I will admit the one time I called Len "Lennie". No insult was
intended, but he didn't like it, so I stopped.




Note that it isn't always a PCTA / NCTA thing, though - we've seen
recent battles between folks of a similar stripe, simply because they
disagree on some arcane point. These disputes are just as vitriolic,
nasty and profane as any of the 'standard' ones here in the group!

Agreed. So it is more about personalities than PCTA/NCTA/NCTNA in my
estimation.


But, after all, what's more important than Always Being Right About
Everything?

Most of the time, if I think I am wrong about something, I'm not likely
to argue about it. YMMV! 8^)


It is pretty much a voluntary thing to post in this group. I don't know
of anyone that is required by law or employment to be here. If people
are thin skinned, they might want to examine why they hang out in such a
rough neighborhood. Otherwise, make a mistake, note it, and get on with
life.

- Mike KB3EIA -

N2EY wrote:

In article ,
(Lenof21) writes:


In article , Leo

writes:


On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:36:59 -0800 (PST), "Phil Kane"
wrote:


On 08 Jan 2005 21:31:53 GMT, N2EY wrote:


Lenof21 wrote:


All licensees are perfectly legal to continue operating in their grace
period.

Nope. Wrong. You are mistaken. Once an amateur's license expires,
he or she *cannot* legally operate until it is renewed.

Unless the renewal has been applied for before expiration. Then,
the license privileges continue until the FCC acts upon the application.


I did not know that! Thanks, Phil.

Amend my statement to read:

Once an amateur's license expires, he or she *cannot* legally operate until it
is renewed. If renewal has been applied for before expiration, the license
privileges continue until the FCC acts upon the application.

A good point, but not really an issue in this case. Once you think
about it, that sort of thing is mandatory. There is always a lag between
the application and issuance, So that lag would apply for the last day
of a persons license privileges.

Just like the IRS doesn't get the April 15th tax returns on April 15th.
What is important is that they are postmarked by then. If the mail takes
a week to get it to them, you are still covered.

However, it proves my point: *All* amateurs with expired licenses cannot
continue to operate in the grace period. Only those who have applied for
renewal *before the license actually expired* and whose applications have not
yet been processed by FCC can do so.

Where in Part 97 is this documented?

That is a procedural issue that simply addresses what would otherwise
become a paradox. If you had to have your renewed license in hand by the
end of the ten year license period, that would mean that you would have
to have the application in some time before that.

How long before that? two weeks? a month? a year? If a date is set, who
is responsible if the FCC is backlogged and they don't get the renewed
license to you.

Would the new license expire ten years from the new issuance date, or
would it be a ten year plus X days, weeks, or months.

My point is that that procedure is what makes the most sense because it
sets a date by which you must have your renewal in by, not a date by
which you must have the renewed license back by.

Much much easier.



Oh oh. An exception to the rule rears its ugly head.....

How could the J & M tag team possibly miss that one?

Sure enough, the PCTA extras in here disregard the subject in order
to lambaste (and generally make nasty to) any NCTA about anything.
:-)


It is *you* who are disregsarding the subject, Len.

Can *all* amateurs with expired licenses legally operate while in the grace
period, Len? That's what you claimed. It isn't so.

I would postulate that an amateur who has sent in their license renewal
by the expiry date *is not* operating on an expired license.

My precedent for this is what happened when I upgraded to General and
Extra. I operated with my new privileges after the test and before the
wallpaper arrived. In that case, I just noted my new status with my
callsign with the proper suffix.


Do you retract your statement or stand by it, Len?


Doesn't matter if the NCTA are right or wrong (deliberately so in the
case suddenly become front-page news of sorts)...all NCTA are
targets of opportunity to be DISCREDITED by any means possible.


Not at all, Len.

Your statement about operation in the renewal period was clearly wrong.
97.21(b) proves that. Has nothing to do with code testing at all, but has
everyhting to do with a basic understanding of Part 97.

Your statements err on the side of breaking the law rather than observing it.

The "tag team" seems to think that all hams are always active on-
the-air as good "service personnel" (or something) during their valid
license period.


Where do you get that?

Darned if I know! If you or I said half the things attributed to us, we
would be saying some strange things indeed!



Never mind that there are absences from the "service"
for many different reasons.


Such as?


The "grace period" insures that such
absence will not allow any licensee to lose their (apparently) so precious
tribal identification of a call sign.


That's not the issue. The issue is whether operating with an
expuired-but-in-the-grace-period license is legal. You've written that it is
legal for all amateurs. Part 97 says it isn't.


The call sign is "who we are" to
quote
one licensee in here some years ago.


Who was that?


That would be especially true
for the Vanity calls. Licensees POSSESS their calls and those become
very, very personal.

Is that a problem? Perhaps it is a sore point with you because you do not have
an amateur radio call sign.

And what dies it have to do with what, I dunno...

In the USA I might even suggest that the FDA (Food and Drug
Administration) step in and help the FCC literally brand the granted
call sign on the physical person of the licensee, perhaps by a tatoo.
That might complete the process of the New Identity within the Tribe.
[why not? the FDA here certifies real hams ... :-) ]


Perhaps USDA could certify your posts as "100% pure bull", too....;-) ;-)

The plain, simple fact is that Len Anderson simply made a mistake on 97.21(b).
But he won't admit it.

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:54:49 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

Just like the IRS doesn't get the April 15th tax returns on April 15th.
What is important is that they are postmarked by then. If the mail takes
a week to get it to them, you are still covered.

In Oregon, all voting is by mail-in paper ballot which must be
received by the county election system no later than 8 pm on
Election Day. Postmark does not count. For the procrastinators
among us, though, there are convenient drop-boxes at well-publicized
locations, and depositiing a ballot in them constitutes "reception".

Would the new license expire ten years from the new issuance date, or
would it be a ten year plus X days, weeks, or months.

Ten years from the new issuance date.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

Phil Kane wrote:

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:54:49 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:


Just like the IRS doesn't get the April 15th tax returns on April 15th.
What is important is that they are postmarked by then. If the mail takes
a week to get it to them, you are still covered.


In Oregon, all voting is by mail-in paper ballot which must be
received by the county election system no later than 8 pm on
Election Day. Postmark does not count. For the procrastinators
among us, though, there are convenient drop-boxes at well-publicized
locations, and depositiing a ballot in them constitutes "reception".

Sounds like a great way to vote.



Would the new license expire ten years from the new issuance date, or
would it be a ten year plus X days, weeks, or months.


Ten years from the new issuance date.

Right of course. I was using a hypothetical situation if there was not
the sort of rule there is now.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Lenof21 wrote:


Sure enough, the PCTA extras in here disregard the subject in order
to lambaste (and generally make nasty to) any NCTA about anything.
:-)

Is disagreement with you making nasty to you?

Is pointing out a mistake making nasty to you?

Apparently, *any* disagreement with Len is
interpreted as "making nasty" by him.

Doesn't matter if the NCTA are right or wrong (deliberately so in the
case suddenly become front-page news of sorts)...all NCTA are
targets of opportunity to be DISCREDITED by any means possible.

hmm, sounds like a conspiracy...... 8^)

Can *all* amateurs with expired-but-in-the-grace-period
operate an amateur station *legally*?

The "tag team" seems to think that all hams are always active on-
the-air as good "service personnel" (or something) during their valid
license period.

Who said that? I have a post in answer to you that would indicate that
I definitely do *not* think that way.

Nor I. In fact, I gave several reasons why a ham might not renew in the
90 day window.

Never mind that there are absences from the "service"
for many different reasons. The "grace period" insures that such
absence will not allow any licensee to lose their (apparently) so
precious
tribal identification of a call sign. The call sign is "who we are" to
quote
one licensee in here some years ago. That would be especially true
for the Vanity calls. Licensees POSSESS their calls and those become
very, very personal.

Is that a bad thing?

In the USA I might even suggest that the FDA (Food and Drug
Administration) step in and help the FCC literally brand the granted
call sign on the physical person of the licensee, perhaps by a tatoo.
That might complete the process of the New Identity within the Tribe.
[why not? the FDA here certifies real hams ... :-) ]

Now who's "making nasty"?

The "new identity" is important since it bestows a rank/status/privilege
down here in a land without royals, no fancy titles or whatever.

What land is that?

For
example, a Rhode Islander could, under older rules, suddenly become
a "resident" of Hawaii without even leaving the mainland.

What relevance does that have to amateurs with expired licenses and
their operating privileges?

The arranger
of that was able to retitle hisself from junior college math teacher to
"mathematics lecturer in the university system."

Was that true or not?

Neither one "did
anything wrong" according to them. But, a whole bunch of very phony
"radio club" calls got tossed in the dumpster by the FCC not too long
ago.

And what relevance does that have to amateurs with expired licenses and
their operating privileges?

Another fantasylander thought he had much more clout in the real
world than the U.S. aremed forces when he admonished another about
"permission to operate a radio" from Somalia when that individual served
in the military there.

And what relevance does that have to amateurs with expired licenses and
their operating privileges?

Yet another fantasylander keeps on bragging
about
his military record ("seven hostile actions" without ever saying where
or
when) and then trying to tear down others' real military records. Tsk.

The problem is?

Then we have the classic knowitall who never served at all making like
he knows more than Janes about USSR air power just because a real
veteran slipped up once in a message.

Hmm...

Does that mean a civilian must never correct a mistake made by a military
veteran? If so, why not?

There's still another
"serviceman"
of the amateur corps who dines with aircraft carrier captains and looks
down his nose at those who've done real military HF communications
much more than he will have done in his lifetime.

It sounds like no one can measure up to Len's standards of what
a person must be to point out his mistakes.

It's quite a collection!

Note: All those wonderful braggarts are PCTA extra.

I think Len is mistaken about that.

They can say
anything, write anything, do anything in here and are absolved from ANY
criticism.

By whom?

Should they be taken to task, the task-taker is soundly
objected to with endearing personal perjoratives having little to do
with the subject.

Does this include phrases like

'shut the hell up, you little USMC feldwebel'?

Do any of the above people have names?
Amateur radio callsigns?

Is there some reason Len cannot bring himself to call people
by their names or calls?

It's a plain simple fact that all NCTA in here are always wrong, no
matter
what they write on anything.

That's clearly untrue.

No one who is of the NCTA persuasion
should bother debating the subject in here. The matter is closed and
all
NCTA are forever wrong, incorrect, and probably have underarm odor.

More nonsense from Len.

Interesting post. It doe not negate the fact that you have been wrong
on several occasions. We all are at times. But it isn't "all NCTA's, or
even NCTNA's. But that is okay. No damage done.

You post indicates that you are pretty upset about this. Don't be mad
at yourself. Being wrong on a matter just means that the next time you
won't be.

Chin up! 8^)

Good advice, Mike. But it seems that Len simply cannot tolerate
having his mistakes pointed out.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:24:07 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Leo wrote:

On 09 Jan 2005 04:51:35 GMT, (Lenof21) wrote:


In article , Leo
writes:


On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:36:59 -0800 (PST), "Phil Kane"
wrote:


On 08 Jan 2005 21:31:53 GMT, N2EY wrote:


Lenof21 wrote:

snip

Some even enter a batch of posts on a variety of subjects, apparently
hoping to get sonething on the hook.......what's the word for that
again...?

To imagine anyone on Usenet would do that. 8^)

......found it - "Trolling" - that's the word I was looking for!

snip


Note: All those wonderful braggarts are PCTA extra. They can say
anything, write anything, do anything in here and are absolved from ANY
criticism. Should they be taken to task, the task-taker is soundly
objected to with endearing personal perjoratives having little to do with
the subject.


Ipso facto, with a few exceptions - there are several OMs here who are
quite civil, knowledgeable and conversational, and do not possess the
NetNanny gene.....


It's a plain simple fact that all NCTA in here are always wrong, no matter
what they write on anything. No one who is of the NCTA persuasion
should bother debating the subject in here. The matter is closed and all
NCTA are forever wrong, incorrect, and probably have underarm odor.


.....and skinned knuckles!

Here's a challenge, Leo, if you're up to it.

Name the PCTA's in here (active) that have called NCTA's by such names.
I'll give you a start:

Steve is pretty famous for name calling.

Great idea! - that would certainly get a nice warm flamefest going,
wouldn't it?

Request respectfully declined.


And since this subthread turned into a Mike and Jim "tag-team" thing,
where do our names show up in that list? When have I called anyone a
nasty name? I don't think Jim ever has either.

note: I will admit the one time I called Len "Lennie". No insult was
intended, but he didn't like it, so I stopped.

Hmmm - maybe you're one of the exceptions?

Your pal was doing just fine too, until he decided to start using
profanities in his posts. To claim that another is speaking
"bull$#!+" is to directly infer that they are a "bull$#!+ter".

Acgeed that this example does not meet your specification of "PCTA vs
NCTA", but as I said earlier it's more about personalities than it is
about affiliation.

And character.

YMMV.

snip

- Mike KB3EIA -

73, Leo

Leo wrote:
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:24:07 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:


Leo wrote:


On 09 Jan 2005 04:51:35 GMT, (Lenof21) wrote:



In article , Leo
writes:



On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:36:59 -0800 (PST), "Phil Kane"
wrote:



On 08 Jan 2005 21:31:53 GMT, N2EY wrote:



Lenof21 wrote:


snip


Some even enter a batch of posts on a variety of subjects, apparently
hoping to get sonething on the hook.......what's the word for that
again...?

To imagine anyone on Usenet would do that. 8^)


.....found it - "Trolling" - that's the word I was looking for!


Here is a bit of a question. I had started a number of these threads
recently in order to get some newsgroup related activities going,
because in December the group simply was losing ground to the wild and
whacky adventures of some West Virginia hams, and some others of
indeterminate origin, but of the sort to turn us into a clone of
r.r.a.misc. So far, It has had its intended effect, to get some
discussion going.

So was that a troll?


snip


Note: All those wonderful braggarts are PCTA extra. They can say
anything, write anything, do anything in here and are absolved from ANY
criticism. Should they be taken to task, the task-taker is soundly
objected to with endearing personal perjoratives having little to do with
the subject.


Ipso facto, with a few exceptions - there are several OMs here who are
quite civil, knowledgeable and conversational, and do not possess the
NetNanny gene.....



It's a plain simple fact that all NCTA in here are always wrong, no matter
what they write on anything. No one who is of the NCTA persuasion
should bother debating the subject in here. The matter is closed and all
NCTA are forever wrong, incorrect, and probably have underarm odor.


.....and skinned knuckles!

Here's a challenge, Leo, if you're up to it.

Name the PCTA's in here (active) that have called NCTA's by such names.
I'll give you a start:

Steve is pretty famous for name calling.


Great idea! - that would certainly get a nice warm flamefest going,
wouldn't it?

Request respectfully declined.




And since this subthread turned into a Mike and Jim "tag-team" thing,
where do our names show up in that list? When have I called anyone a
nasty name? I don't think Jim ever has either.

note: I will admit the one time I called Len "Lennie". No insult was
intended, but he didn't like it, so I stopped.


Hmmm - maybe you're one of the exceptions?

Your pal was doing just fine too, until he decided to start using
profanities in his posts. To claim that another is speaking
"bull$#!+" is to directly infer that they are a "bull$#!+ter".

I admit, that was a bit odd. I'm known to drop the very occasional off
colored word, but only for effect.


Acgeed that this example does not meet your specification of "PCTA vs
NCTA", but as I said earlier it's more about personalities than it is
about affiliation.

And character.

Well sure.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo wrote:
Leo wrote:
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 15:24:07 -0500, Mike Coslo

wrote:

Leo wrote:

On 09 Jan 2005 04:51:35 GMT, (Lenof21) wrote:

In article , Leo

writes:

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 15:36:59 -0800 (PST), "Phil Kane"
wrote:

On 08 Jan 2005 21:31:53 GMT, N2EY wrote:

Lenof21 wrote:

snip

Some even enter a batch of posts on a variety of subjects,
apparently
hoping to get sonething on the hook.......what's the word for that
again...?

To imagine anyone on Usenet would do that. 8^)

.....found it - "Trolling" - that's the word I was looking for!

Here is a bit of a question. I had started a number of these threads

recently in order to get some newsgroup related activities going,
because in December the group simply was losing ground to the wild
and
whacky adventures of some West Virginia hams, and some others of
indeterminate origin, but of the sort to turn us into a clone of
r.r.a.misc. So far, It has had its intended effect, to get some
discussion going.

So was that a troll?

Not that I can see.

snip

Note: All those wonderful braggarts are PCTA extra.

Is one of them Mike Deignan? If so, Len is wrong *again*,
because ol' Mike was/is for the elimination of the Morse Code test.

At least that's what he wrote in his comments to the FCC.

They can say
anything, write anything, do anything in here and are absolved
from ANY
criticism. Should they be taken to task, the task-taker is
soundly
objected to with endearing personal perjoratives having little
to do with
the subject.

Ipso facto, with a few exceptions - there are several OMs here who
are
quite civil, knowledgeable and conversational, and do not possess
the
NetNanny gene.....

Len obviously isn't one of them ;-)

It's a plain simple fact that all NCTA in here are always wrong,
no matter
what they write on anything. No one who is of the NCTA
persuasion
should bother debating the subject in here. The matter is
closed and all
NCTA are forever wrong, incorrect, and probably have underarm
odor.

.....and skinned knuckles!

Here's a challenge, Leo, if you're up to it.

Name the PCTA's in here (active) that have called NCTA's by such
names.
I'll give you a start:

Steve is pretty famous for name calling.

Great idea! - that would certainly get a nice warm flamefest going,
wouldn't it?

Request respectfully declined.

And since this subthread turned into a Mike and Jim "tag-team"
thing,
where do our names show up in that list? When have I called anyone
a
nasty name? I don't think Jim ever has either.

note: I will admit the one time I called Len "Lennie". No insult
was
intended, but he didn't like it, so I stopped.

Hmmm - maybe you're one of the exceptions?

Your pal was doing just fine too, until he decided to start using
profanities in his posts.

Do you mean me, Leo?

If so - when have I called Len a nasty name? Or anyone else here?
Specific instances, please.

To claim that another is speaking
"bull$#!+" is to directly infer that they are a "bull$#!+ter".

Actually it would be "to imply". The listener/reader draws the
inference.

I admit, that was a bit odd. I'm known to drop the very occasional
off
colored word, but only for effect.

"Sometimes the pool-pah defies the efforts to describe it".

I think if you compare the nasty names Len has called me, with the
names I have
called him, you will see a distinct contrast. Unless you consider "Len"
and "Mr. Anderson" to be nasty names.

Acgeed that this example does not meet your specification of "PCTA
vs
NCTA", but as I said earlier it's more about personalities than it
is
about affiliation.

And character.

Well sure.

Some people take the correction of their mistakes as an insult. I
don't.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article . com,
writes:

Some people take the correction of their mistakes as an insult. I
don't.

Tsk. You don't even "take" them. :-)