On 19 Jun 2005 04:48:01 -0700, wrote:



Leo wrote:
On 18 Jun 2005 17:30:57 -0700, wrote:

Leo wrote:
On 18 Jun 2005 10:41:47 -0700, wrote:

From: Mike Coslo on Fri 17 Jun 2005 22:07

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
snip

Seig Heil!!! :-)

Next up, Jim will once again attempt to invoke Mr. Godwin's
rule.

"attempt"? Hardly!
snip

Attempt, definitely. Because, as has been demonstrated many times
before, the discusion will continue regardless of whether Godwin's
impotent rule has been 'invoked' or not.

The version of Godwin's rule that I use says that the person
who uses stoops to calling their opponent "Hitler", "Nazis"
or references to them, has lost the argument. That the discussion
continues is irrelevant. Len has lost the argument.

I see. Thanks for clearing that up, Jim - for a minute there, I was
afraid that you hadn't accomplished anything useful there!


But it just had to be done, didn't it?

No, it didn't. But I did it anyway.

Of course you did. You had to!

Is there a problem with that? Do you think Len's slurs
are acceptable behavior?

There are several folks here whose 'slurs' and language are much worse
than this example (a reference to the bumbling and comical 'Nazis' on
"Hogan's Heroes") - always has been, always will be. It's not my job
to run around and point that out all day every day.

It's not my job to point that out to each and every participant on
this group Jim - is it yours? Why?

(73 de Jim etc. sig missing again)

73, Leo

Leo wrote:
On 19 Jun 2005 04:48:01 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 18 Jun 2005 17:30:57 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 18 Jun 2005 10:41:47 -0700, wrote:

From: Mike Coslo on Fri 17 Jun 2005 22:07

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
snip

Seig Heil!!! :-)

Next up, Jim will once again attempt to invoke Mr.
Godwin's rule.

"attempt"? Hardly!
snip

Attempt, definitely. Because, as has been demonstrated many times
before, the discusion will continue regardless of whether
Godwin's impotent rule has been 'invoked' or not.

The version of Godwin's rule that I use says that the person
who uses stoops to calling their opponent "Hitler", "Nazis"
or references to them, has lost the argument. That the
discussion
continues is irrelevant. Len has lost the argument.

I see. Thanks for clearing that up, Jim - for a minute there, I was
afraid that you hadn't accomplished anything useful there!

So it wasn't an "attempt" but a success.

But it just had to be done, didn't it?

No, it didn't. But I did it anyway.

Of course you did. You had to!

Nope. I chose to.

Is there a problem with that? Do you think Len's slurs
are acceptable behavior?

There are several folks here whose 'slurs' and language are
much worse
than this example

Yes, Len has done worse....

(a reference to the bumbling and
comical 'Nazis' on "Hogan's Heroes")

The Fuhrer was a feldwebel in WW1

- always has been, always will be.

That claim is incorrect. Usenet is not eternal.

It's not my job
to run around and point that out all day every day.

You have avoided the question.

Do you think Len's slurs are acceptable behavior?

It's not my job to point that out to each and every participant on this group Jim - is it yours? Why?

Your argument seems to be that since Len will probably exhibit
his typical immature ethnic-slur Godwin-violating bad-pun
Unknown-Soldier-insulting jackass behavior anyway, there's no
point in pointing out when he is, indeed, exhibiting his typical
immature ethnic-slur Godwin-violating bad-pun Unknown-Soldier-insulting
jackass behavior. Is that about right?

Perhaps you have a valid point, since if what Len seeks is
attention, pointing out his typical immature ethnic-slur
Godwin-violating bad-pun Unknown-Soldier-insulting jackass behavior
gives him that attention.


(73 de Jim etc. sig missing again)

Not missing - omitted.

The original meaning of "73" is "a friendly greeting
between operators". In the context of amateur radio,
this means between amateur radio operators.

It would be inappropriate to use the greeting to
someone who is not an amateur radio operator.


73, Leo

Leo wrote:
On 19 Jun 2005 04:48:01 -0700, wrote:



Leo wrote:

On 18 Jun 2005 17:30:57 -0700, wrote:


Leo wrote:

On 18 Jun 2005 10:41:47 -0700, wrote:


From: Mike Coslo on Fri 17 Jun 2005 22:07


Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

snip

Seig Heil!!! :-)

Next up, Jim will once again attempt to invoke Mr. Godwin's
rule.

"attempt"? Hardly!
snip

Attempt, definitely. Because, as has been demonstrated many times
before, the discusion will continue regardless of whether Godwin's
impotent rule has been 'invoked' or not.

The version of Godwin's rule that I use says that the person
who uses stoops to calling their opponent "Hitler", "Nazis"
or references to them, has lost the argument. That the discussion
continues is irrelevant. Len has lost the argument.


I see. Thanks for clearing that up, Jim - for a minute there, I was
afraid that you hadn't accomplished anything useful there!


But it just had to be done, didn't it?

No, it didn't. But I did it anyway.


Of course you did. You had to!


Is there a problem with that? Do you think Len's slurs
are acceptable behavior?


There are several folks here whose 'slurs' and language are much worse
than this example (a reference to the bumbling and comical 'Nazis' on
"Hogan's Heroes") - always has been, always will be. It's not my job
to run around and point that out all day every day.

It's not my job to point that out to each and every participant on
this group Jim - is it yours? Why?

You are correct there Leo. Jim is perfectly capable of not responding
to anything Len posts. We all are.

And of course, Len knows quite well that all he has to do is put in a
reference to the Nazi's, and it will get a response. Sets the hook quite
regularly, he does! Irresistible bait apparently.

Stalemate. Looks like everyone is getting exactly what they want.

- Mike KB3EIA -

On 19 Jun 2005 07:19:22 -0700, wrote:

Leo wrote:
On 19 Jun 2005 04:48:01 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 18 Jun 2005 17:30:57 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 18 Jun 2005 10:41:47 -0700, wrote:

From: Mike Coslo on Fri 17 Jun 2005 22:07

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
snip

Seig Heil!!! :-)

Next up, Jim will once again attempt to invoke Mr.
Godwin's rule.

"attempt"? Hardly!
snip

Attempt, definitely. Because, as has been demonstrated many times
before, the discusion will continue regardless of whether
Godwin's impotent rule has been 'invoked' or not.

The version of Godwin's rule that I use says that the person
who uses stoops to calling their opponent "Hitler", "Nazis"
or references to them, has lost the argument. That the
discussion
continues is irrelevant. Len has lost the argument.

I see. Thanks for clearing that up, Jim - for a minute there, I was
afraid that you hadn't accomplished anything useful there!

So it wasn't an "attempt" but a success.

Was it? Not really - the discussion will continue.


But it just had to be done, didn't it?

No, it didn't. But I did it anyway.

Of course you did. You had to!

Nope. I chose to.

The choice, Sir, was not yours to make - you simply could not resist
doing so.


Is there a problem with that? Do you think Len's slurs
are acceptable behavior?

There are several folks here whose 'slurs' and language are
much worse
than this example

Yes, Len has done worse....

Is that what I said? Don't think so!


(a reference to the bumbling and
comical 'Nazis' on "Hogan's Heroes")

The Fuhrer was a feldwebel in WW1

Godwin invoked.


- always has been, always will be.

That claim is incorrect. Usenet is not eternal.

It's not my job
to run around and point that out all day every day.

You have avoided the question.

Do you think Len's slurs are acceptable behavior?

Not my job to judge that, Jim. That's apparently your role.


It's not my job to point that out to each and every participant on this group Jim - is it yours? Why?

Your argument seems to be that since Len will probably exhibit
his typical immature ethnic-slur Godwin-violating bad-pun
Unknown-Soldier-insulting jackass behavior anyway, there's no
point in pointing out when he is, indeed, exhibiting his typical
immature ethnic-slur Godwin-violating bad-pun Unknown-Soldier-insulting
jackass behavior. Is that about right?

Nope. You have avoided the question.


Perhaps you have a valid point, since if what Len seeks is
attention, pointing out his typical immature ethnic-slur
Godwin-violating bad-pun Unknown-Soldier-insulting jackass behavior
gives him that attention.


(73 de Jim etc. sig missing again)

Not missing - omitted.

In a fit of pique? As an insult? Forgot, maybe!

Lid-like behaviour, wouldn't you think?


The original meaning of "73" is "a friendly greeting
between operators". In the context of amateur radio,
this means between amateur radio operators.

In the words of Hans - thank you, Captain Obvious!


It would be inappropriate to use the greeting to
someone who is not an amateur radio operator.

Which I am. And have stated many times before.

Poor memory? Google 'er up.....



73, Leo

(73 de Jim omitted apparently intentionally - boo hoo )

73, Leo.

wrote:

Your argument seems to be that since Len will probably exhibit
his typical immature ethnic-slur Godwin-violating bad-pun
Unknown-Soldier-insulting jackass behavior anyway, there's no
point in pointing out when he is, indeed, exhibiting his typical
immature ethnic-slur Godwin-violating bad-pun Unknown-Soldier-insulting
jackass behavior. Is that about right?

Perhaps you have a valid point, since if what Len seeks is
attention, pointing out his typical immature ethnic-slur
Godwin-violating bad-pun Unknown-Soldier-insulting jackass behavior
gives him that attention.

Bingo!

We cannot control Len's behavior here.

We can however, control our own.

I don't know about your mail reader, but mine has a couple levels of
filtering. I can filter by name, or the easy way is to simply hit "k" at
the subject line. I never see that subject again.

That being said, I have mixed feelings on the filtering. I use it to
get rid of the lunatic fringe topics, but little else.

I don't filter people like Len though, as I look forward to his
postings. They are entertaining. So if the people who find his postings
offensive quit getting into p*****g contests with him by filtering him
out or just ignoring him, I'll have lost that bit of fun.

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 11:02:42 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Leo wrote:
On 19 Jun 2005 04:48:01 -0700, wrote:



Leo wrote:

On 18 Jun 2005 17:30:57 -0700, wrote:


Leo wrote:

On 18 Jun 2005 10:41:47 -0700, wrote:


From: Mike Coslo on Fri 17 Jun 2005 22:07


Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

snip

Seig Heil!!! :-)

Next up, Jim will once again attempt to invoke Mr. Godwin's
rule.

"attempt"? Hardly!
snip

Attempt, definitely. Because, as has been demonstrated many times
before, the discusion will continue regardless of whether Godwin's
impotent rule has been 'invoked' or not.

The version of Godwin's rule that I use says that the person
who uses stoops to calling their opponent "Hitler", "Nazis"
or references to them, has lost the argument. That the discussion
continues is irrelevant. Len has lost the argument.


I see. Thanks for clearing that up, Jim - for a minute there, I was
afraid that you hadn't accomplished anything useful there!


But it just had to be done, didn't it?

No, it didn't. But I did it anyway.


Of course you did. You had to!


Is there a problem with that? Do you think Len's slurs
are acceptable behavior?


There are several folks here whose 'slurs' and language are much worse
than this example (a reference to the bumbling and comical 'Nazis' on
"Hogan's Heroes") - always has been, always will be. It's not my job
to run around and point that out all day every day.

It's not my job to point that out to each and every participant on
this group Jim - is it yours? Why?

You are correct there Leo. Jim is perfectly capable of not responding
to anything Len posts. We all are.

I'm not sure that I'd agree, Mike. Jim seems to feel compelled to
respond to anything and everything regarding Len. From early morning
to late at night, 7 days a week, he wages his futile war on the
newsgroup.

Doesn't look like a choice - more like an obcession.


And of course, Len knows quite well that all he has to do is put in a
reference to the Nazi's, and it will get a response. Sets the hook quite
regularly, he does! Irresistible bait apparently.

Right you are, Mike. One of the most important things I learned from
being a parent - if you let the kids know where the buttons are, they
can't push 'em!


Stalemate. Looks like everyone is getting exactly what they want.

Or as Mick Jagger says - you can't always get what you want - you get
what you need!


- Mike KB3EIA -

73, Leo

Leo wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 11:02:42 -0400, Mike Coslo

You are correct there Leo. Jim is perfectly capable of not responding
to anything Len posts. We all are.

I'm not sure that I'd agree, Mike. Jim seems to feel compelled to
respond to anything and everything regarding Len. From early morning
to late at night, 7 days a week, he wages his futile war on the
newsgroup.

Doesn't look like a choice - more like an obcession.

Jim manages to respond to my comments only after someone else has.
That way he doesn't have to respond directly. WRT Len, that's a
completely different matter.

It still cracks me up that Jim said of Han's restructuring proposal,
that a "Morse Code Exam would be a barrier to CW use!" Hi!


And of course, Len knows quite well that all he has to do is put in a
reference to the Nazi's, and it will get a response. Sets the hook quite
regularly, he does! Irresistible bait apparently.

Right you are, Mike. One of the most important things I learned from
being a parent - if you let the kids know where the buttons are, they
can't push 'em!

Stalemate. Looks like everyone is getting exactly what they want.

Or as Mick Jagger says - you can't always get what you want - you get
what you need!

All this looks more like a Megadeath mosh pit. ;^)

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:
Phil Kane wrote:
On 15 Jun 2005 17:01:18 -0700, wrote:



[sni]

My class of 33 at Penn (1976, Moore School of Electrical Engineering)
graduated 3 women - all specializing in computers. I don't think Towne
School graduated any female engineers that year.

Of course that's ancient history compared to today's ratios, but
it shows a starting point almost 30 years ago.


I will add some anecdotal comments to that. At my school we graduated
approx 200 engineers and about 10% were women.

[snip]
If I have it right you spent most of your career with the FCC, another
huge entity. Is it possible that women in engineering tend to
gravitate
in large numbers to major entities where fair employment
practices are
actually practiced and you've gotten involved with more of them than
I've ever managed to meet?

Perhaps not so much "gravitate" as in "are forced by circumstances"?

All of which is and has been changing. But it takes a long
time for such trends to make their way through the workforce.

Keep in mind that the majority of engineering jobs are at major entities in
major cities. Thus they will be more apt to be statistically
representative. In small companies and/or rural areas the numbers are going
to be skewed.

Phila. and it's surrounding five-county region is a huge and
technology-diverse Gotham City with hundreds of small
engineering-based employers and the numbers are *really* skewed - in
the direction of the very small number of woman engineers I run into
where I work.

I've worked at several companies where I was the only female
engineer out of a staff of from 5 to 10 engineers.

Can't imagine any such thing around here . . As an example go back to
when I popped out of Drexel which in 1963 was the biggest private
undergrad engineering school on the planet. Probably still is. There
were 87 ME grads, 89 EE grads and significant numbers of civil,
chemical and metallurgical engineers plus the physics and chemistry
majors. Maybe 400 all told. There was ONE, uno, singular woman in the
whole bunch and she was chem major. I haven't seen any huge shift since
then either, one female engineer out of ten in a small organization
where I've been are still true oddities.

I've been in engineering for 30 years. I've seen virtually no
discrimination in this field as this country remains chronically short of
engineers. Oh there are spots in the country where it is difficult to find
a job and sometimes the economy slumps but that does not mean engineers are
not needed but that the companies make do with a short handed staff (been
there done that).

.. . . Tell me . . ! I think you've brought up an important side issue.
My experience strongly indicates that many in the general public
consider engineering a lousy biz to get into as far as employment
stability is concerened. They're right, and it's gotten much worse
over the years. I'd have a hard time today recommending engineering to
a kid male or female considering career options.

Instead I believe that women are more prone than men to select jobs more on
the perceived desireability of the job location. They are more prone to
select the office jobs rather than the plant jobs, thus placing themselves
at the headquarters and technical offices rather than the factories out in
the boonies and so on.

I think you just hit the nail on the head Dee, the skew is in my court.
I work in areas women simply don't get into. Schlepping around
neighborhood machine shops for a living like I have is obviously not
"woman's work" for any number of valid reasons which go 'way beyond the
fact that they happen to be engineers. So of course woman engineers are
scarce the way I see the engineering biz.

Also there is a difference in what defines a
desireable location. A higher percentage of the men will look at a facility
in a rural location and say "now I can go fishing more often."

I'd like to be there when some lady engineer/ham lusts for a nice quiet
antenna location out in the boonies and is married to some city boy . .
..

There's
probably a whole raft of reasons having nothing to do with discrimination
that contribute to the disparity.

Indeed: The code has been cracked.

w3rv

Leo wrote:
On 19 Jun 2005 07:19:22 -0700, wrote:

Leo wrote:
On 19 Jun 2005 04:48:01 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 18 Jun 2005 17:30:57 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 18 Jun 2005 10:41:47 -0700, wrote:

From: Mike Coslo on Fri 17 Jun 2005 22:07

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
snip

Seig Heil!!! :-)

Next up, Jim will once again attempt to invoke Mr.
Godwin's rule.

"attempt"? Hardly!
snip

Attempt, definitely. Because, as has been demonstrated many times
before, the discusion will continue regardless of whether
Godwin's impotent rule has been 'invoked' or not.

The version of Godwin's rule that I use says that the person
who uses stoops to calling their opponent "Hitler", "Nazis"
or references to them, has lost the argument. That the
discussion
continues is irrelevant. Len has lost the argument.

I see. Thanks for clearing that up, Jim - for a minute there, I was
afraid that you hadn't accomplished anything useful there!

So it wasn't an "attempt" but a success.

Was it? Not really - the discussion will continue.

Irrelevant - Len has lost the argument.

But it just had to be done, didn't it?

No, it didn't. But I did it anyway.

Of course you did. You had to!

Nope. I chose to.

The choice, Sir, was not yours to make - you simply could not
resist doing so.

I chose to respond. Other times I choose not to. Len posts
far more than I respond.

Is there a problem with that? Do you think Len's slurs
are acceptable behavior?

There are several folks here whose 'slurs' and language are
much worse
than this example

Yes, Len has done worse....

Is that what I said? Don't think so!

It's a valid interpretation.

(a reference to the bumbling and
comical 'Nazis' on "Hogan's Heroes")

The Fuhrer was a feldwebel in WW1

Godwin invoked.

For what? I did not use Hitler/Nazi references to anyone
involved in the discussion. I simply stated the fact
that ol' Adolf was a feldwebel in the German Army in WW1.

- always has been, always will be.

That claim is incorrect. Usenet is not eternal.

It's not my job
to run around and point that out all day every day.

You have avoided the question.

Do you think Len's slurs are acceptable behavior?

Not my job to judge that, Jim. That's apparently your role.

In other words, you won't answer the question.

It's not my job to point that out to each and every participant on this group Jim - is it yours? Why?

Your argument seems to be that since Len will probably exhibit
his typical immature ethnic-slur Godwin-violating bad-pun
Unknown-Soldier-insulting jackass behavior anyway, there's no
point in pointing out when he is, indeed, exhibiting his typical
immature ethnic-slur Godwin-violating bad-pun Unknown-Soldier-insulting
jackass behavior. Is that about right?

Nope. You have avoided the question.

See how that works?

Perhaps you have a valid point, since if what Len seeks is
attention, pointing out his typical immature ethnic-slur
Godwin-violating bad-pun Unknown-Soldier-insulting jackass behavior
gives him that attention.


(73 de Jim etc. sig missing again)

Not missing - omitted.

In a fit of pique? As an insult? Forgot, maybe!

None of the above.

Lid-like behaviour, wouldn't you think?

Not at all.

The original meaning of "73" is "a friendly greeting
between operators". In the context of amateur radio,
this means between amateur radio operators.

In the words of Hans - thank you, Captain Obvious!

Most people don't know the original meaning.

It would be inappropriate to use the greeting to
someone who is not an amateur radio operator.

Which I am. And have stated many times before.

And your callsign is?

You can state almost anything here, but as long as you
remain an "anony-mousie", there's room for doubt.

Poor memory? Google 'er up.....

I know what you claimed. But there's no independent
evidence.

From: Leo on Sun 19 Jun 2005 11:08

On 19 Jun 2005 07:19:22 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 19 Jun 2005 04:48:01 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 18 Jun 2005 17:30:57 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 18 Jun 2005 10:41:47 -0700, wrote:
From: Mike Coslo on Fri 17 Jun 2005 22:07
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

Seig Heil!!! :-)

Next up, Jim will once again attempt to invoke Mr.
Godwin's rule.

"attempt"? Hardly!
snip

Attempt, definitely. Because, as has been demonstrated many times
before, the discusion will continue regardless of whether
Godwin's impotent rule has been 'invoked' or not.

The version of Godwin's rule that I use says that the person
who uses stoops to calling their opponent "Hitler", "Nazis"
or references to them, has lost the argument. That the
discussion continues is irrelevant. Len has lost the argument.

I see. Thanks for clearing that up, Jim - for a minute there, I was
afraid that you hadn't accomplished anything useful there!

So it wasn't an "attempt" but a success.

Was it? Not really - the discussion will continue.

Heh heh heh. The "Seig Heil" is, etymologically speaking, a
SALUTE...as in the speaker meaning "we salute you." :-)

What is interesting is the reverse psychology to The Big Lie
technique of the late 1930s' national socialist partei changed
that to be some kind of sole honorific to Adolf Hitler.

The major cause of the reverse psychology was a rather good
(technically speaking) totally-slanted "documentary" done by
a German gal with the given name of "Leni." :-) :-)

But it just had to be done, didn't it?

No, it didn't. But I did it anyway.

Of course you did. You had to!

Nope. I chose to.

The choice, Sir, was not yours to make - you simply could not resist
doing so.

I mentioned a trilogy by novelist Len Deighton the other day.
Here's another trilogy by the same author, same characters, etc:
"Hook, Line, Sinker." :-)

I may have to market my bait. Sounds like its a money-maker!
It appears to be irresistable!


Is there a problem with that? Do you think Len's slurs
are acceptable behavior?

There are several folks here whose 'slurs' and language are
much worse
than this example

Yes, Len has done worse....

Is that what I said? Don't think so!

Had you two been turned around on that, Jimmie would DEMAND you
SHOW THE QUOTE!!!! :-)

Jimmie thinks he be barrister in the Queen's Bench. His wig is
on crooked...


(a reference to the bumbling and
comical 'Nazis' on "Hogan's Heroes")

The Fuhrer was a feldwebel in WW1

Godwin invoked.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Jimmie not know that the title of "fuhrer" (with
an emphasis on the second syllable, not the first) is an old, old
European military title of French origin. It means a grade that
is usually in between the underofficer (NCO) and "commissioned"
officer...vaguely like the USA warrant officer...and means simply
"leader."

It's use got remarkably altered from origin to later times, much
the same as the word "ham" went from its original "bad, sloppy,
non-professional" radio operation to glorious noble champion of
all radio, the amateur.


- always has been, always will be.

That claim is incorrect. Usenet is not eternal.

[only Jimmie eternal...]


It's not my job
to run around and point that out all day every day.

You have avoided the question.

Do you think Len's slurs are acceptable behavior?

Not my job to judge that, Jim. That's apparently your role.

I hear he gets paid quite a bit in that job.


Your argument seems to be that since Len will probably exhibit
his typical immature ethnic-slur Godwin-violating bad-pun
Unknown-Soldier-insulting jackass behavior anyway, there's no
point in pointing out when he is, indeed, exhibiting his typical
immature ethnic-slur Godwin-violating bad-pun Unknown-Soldier-insulting
jackass behavior. Is that about right?

Nope. You have avoided the question.

Jimmie do dat a lot. Mucho so when he totally ****ed off. :-)


Perhaps you have a valid point, since if what Len seeks is
attention, pointing out his typical immature ethnic-slur
Godwin-violating bad-pun Unknown-Soldier-insulting jackass behavior
gives him that attention.

[K4YZ use "PUTZ," "coward," "dishonor" etc and dat be okay]

[anyting use by PCTA okay...anyting by NCTA be "immature
ethnic-slur, Godwin-invoking, jackass behavior" if not
praise PCTA and morsemanship......:-) ]


(73 de Jim etc. sig missing again)

Not missing - omitted.

In a fit of pique? As an insult? Forgot, maybe!

Lid-like behaviour, wouldn't you think?

Jimmie need to "put a lid on it..." :-)


The original meaning of "73" is "a friendly greeting
between operators". In the context of amateur radio,
this means between amateur radio operators.

In the words of Hans - thank you, Captain Obvious!

Jimmie try to be cross between Miss Manners and Sister
Nun of the Above. Jimmie get as far as "cross."

Tsk. Origin of "73" (as well as "88") was among COMMERCIAL
telegraphers of the 1800s. Just a shorthand by them to cut
time in standard ending salutations common to written comms
of that era.


It would be inappropriate to use the greeting to
someone who is not an amateur radio operator.

Which I am. And have stated many times before.

Poor memory? Google 'er up.....

Tsk, tsk. Jimmie, representative of the "amateur community,"
dons his barrister wig and robes and proclaims "appropriate"
and "inappropriate" behaviour (especially with his "you") by
"all hams." Looks impressive but is dum**** behavior by
self-proclaimed, self-righteous ruler-spank by Sister Nun of
the Above.

73, Leo

(73 de Jim omitted apparently intentionally - boo hoo )

73, Leo.

Heeheeheeheeheeheeheehee.........