"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Kim:

I know you have been offended, and now you wish to attack, belittle,
defame and
outrage the object of your dislike and/or hatred (me!)


If you believe that I have been an attacker, belittler, defamer, and that I
am outraged and/or have hatred for you, I say have fun with your apparent
little trip that you are on. Your significance to me doesn't measure up
much more than something akin to a gnat that flies up one's nose on an
otherwise wonderful Summer night.


However, be careful, in your attacks you may end up disclosing far more
about
your own personality, your mind and your caliber than you would wish to
disclose.


I far from fear any disclosure about myself. I lead much too boring a life
to care about anyone knowing Kim Walker. In fact, if there's anything you'd
like to know, just ask. I can always deny a request, but doubt that I
would. Anyone who knows my history here in this newsgroup would be hard
pressed to say I am shy.


You do not need all the others to band with you in your attack of me,
indeed,
it is counter productive to your goals.


Mmm. And, uh, just what "goals" do you think I have? This is getting very
interesting.


Stand on your own two feed, Dee has set
an example of a strong/intelligent woman able to defend herself, stand
others
back from her "space" and win the respect which she rightly deserves--you
would
be well advised to study the high standards and excellent example(s) she
sets.


I fully agree that Dee has high standards and has quite an excellent record
of crisp, clear, concise communication. However, I fail to recognize what
you feel she--or I for that matter--needs to defend herself or myself from.
What, exactly, are you saying, John, that we should feel threatened by you
or someone else in this newsgroup? If you are saying that, perhaps you
would care to enlighten us as to why we should feel threatened or, at a
minimum, why you think we would need to defend ourselves?

I need not study a thing about Dee. She's been around long enough for me to
respect her, like the things she has to say, and know that we wholeheartedly
agree on some things and wholeheartedly disagree on some others...as it
should be or, should I say, as I like it. How boring it would be for
everyone to believe and think the same way.


There is nothing real to fear here, we are all ladies and gentlemen (well,
mostly.)


I fail to recognize why you keep bringing up fear. However, if you've got
yourself off on some delusion, far be it from me to attempt a reality check
for you.


If you have noticed that I, "March to the beat of another drummer." You
are
correct. If you call me a, "Non-conformer", you are again correct. If
you
call me a "free thinker" you are again correct. If you point out there
may be
few who have my personality traits, I suspect you may indeed be correct.


I haven't given you much more thought than to decide that--from my
perspective--you are one weird dude who apparently is quite impressed with
himself. That's it. Sorry. Well, no I'm not. I'm not sorry I feel that
way at all.


If you expect those to be reasons which would make me "want to be like
everyone
else" you are mistaken.


Oh, hardly. I am one of the most forefront non-conformers I know. Why
would I want or expect anyone to be like everyone else? I can think of
nothing more ugly in life.


In short, "I do not shame into 'my place' easily." You may wish to pick a
different tool to use on me.

Warmest regards,
John


First, **** your warmest regards. It's quite obvious you'll say things that
you don't even feel are true, with that sentiment as evidence. IF--and I
doubt this--you intended the sentiment in all seriousness, take just as
serious my refusal to accept them. I don't care about what "place" you have
in life.

Oh, and as far as tools--you seem to have a whole host of them all by
yourself... Perhaps next time, when I have a comment to give to someone
else, as I did to Jim, you'll not feel so compelled to be so affected by it?

Buhbye, Little John...you're just the other side of twisted for me, and I
generally don't allow myself to get tangled up in people's fantasies. I am
far too busy for that.

Kim W5TIT

"Kim" wrote in message
t...
"Jim Hampton" wrote in message
...
John,

Sorry if I'm not impressed; 75 and 40 meters are good for hundreds of
miles
on low power; thousands of miles at night. I ran 25 watts on 160
meters
and
was good to cover the United States at night.

Power is not everything. The ability to change frequencies (I'm
talking
decades, not channels) will determine what distances you can send and
receive well to. I remember well breaking into a group on 75 meters in
the
Carolinas. I was running well under 1 watt. Way *way* under 1 watt.

160 meters did me quite well even in the daytime. Check in to ground
wave.
Not what you think of ground wave (which is space wave); true ground
wave.
At that frequency, if you have it vertically polarized, the wave will
react
to the curvature of the earth as a knife edge. I could pound into
Washington, D.C. in the afternoon. With all of 65 watts.

My handheld reaches into Canada 24/7. On 440 MHz. Of course, I have
to
rely on a decent Canadian repeater for that, but the fact is that I hit
a
Canadian repeater directly from the handheld with no Internet involved.

On hf, the proper choice (I'll leave 160 out of this as the antennas
are
quite unwieldy) between 80 and 40 will allow you several hundred miles
24/7.
With a modest amount of power.

So I remain unimpressed with power alone. I buzzed right through a
kilowatt
station years ago running only 75 watts. It isn't the size of the
ship;
it's the motion through the ocean )


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA



heh heh, Jim...I think you're probably above this guy's ability to,
well,
understand

Kim W5TIT

Kim:

Then I stand corrected, obviously I was mistaken--we simply have nothing to
discuss...

Strange, that has never happened before, oh well...

John

"Kim" wrote in message
...
"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Kim:

I know you have been offended, and now you wish to attack, belittle,
defame and
outrage the object of your dislike and/or hatred (me!)


If you believe that I have been an attacker, belittler, defamer, and that I
am outraged and/or have hatred for you, I say have fun with your apparent
little trip that you are on. Your significance to me doesn't measure up
much more than something akin to a gnat that flies up one's nose on an
otherwise wonderful Summer night.


However, be careful, in your attacks you may end up disclosing far more
about
your own personality, your mind and your caliber than you would wish to
disclose.


I far from fear any disclosure about myself. I lead much too boring a life
to care about anyone knowing Kim Walker. In fact, if there's anything you'd
like to know, just ask. I can always deny a request, but doubt that I
would. Anyone who knows my history here in this newsgroup would be hard
pressed to say I am shy.


You do not need all the others to band with you in your attack of me,
indeed,
it is counter productive to your goals.


Mmm. And, uh, just what "goals" do you think I have? This is getting very
interesting.


Stand on your own two feed, Dee has set
an example of a strong/intelligent woman able to defend herself, stand
others
back from her "space" and win the respect which she rightly deserves--you
would
be well advised to study the high standards and excellent example(s) she
sets.


I fully agree that Dee has high standards and has quite an excellent record
of crisp, clear, concise communication. However, I fail to recognize what
you feel she--or I for that matter--needs to defend herself or myself from.
What, exactly, are you saying, John, that we should feel threatened by you
or someone else in this newsgroup? If you are saying that, perhaps you
would care to enlighten us as to why we should feel threatened or, at a
minimum, why you think we would need to defend ourselves?

I need not study a thing about Dee. She's been around long enough for me to
respect her, like the things she has to say, and know that we wholeheartedly
agree on some things and wholeheartedly disagree on some others...as it
should be or, should I say, as I like it. How boring it would be for
everyone to believe and think the same way.


There is nothing real to fear here, we are all ladies and gentlemen (well,
mostly.)


I fail to recognize why you keep bringing up fear. However, if you've got
yourself off on some delusion, far be it from me to attempt a reality check
for you.


If you have noticed that I, "March to the beat of another drummer." You
are
correct. If you call me a, "Non-conformer", you are again correct. If
you
call me a "free thinker" you are again correct. If you point out there
may be
few who have my personality traits, I suspect you may indeed be correct.


I haven't given you much more thought than to decide that--from my
perspective--you are one weird dude who apparently is quite impressed with
himself. That's it. Sorry. Well, no I'm not. I'm not sorry I feel that
way at all.


If you expect those to be reasons which would make me "want to be like
everyone
else" you are mistaken.


Oh, hardly. I am one of the most forefront non-conformers I know. Why
would I want or expect anyone to be like everyone else? I can think of
nothing more ugly in life.


In short, "I do not shame into 'my place' easily." You may wish to pick a
different tool to use on me.

Warmest regards,
John


First, **** your warmest regards. It's quite obvious you'll say things that
you don't even feel are true, with that sentiment as evidence. IF--and I
doubt this--you intended the sentiment in all seriousness, take just as
serious my refusal to accept them. I don't care about what "place" you have
in life.

Oh, and as far as tools--you seem to have a whole host of them all by
yourself... Perhaps next time, when I have a comment to give to someone
else, as I did to Jim, you'll not feel so compelled to be so affected by it?

Buhbye, Little John...you're just the other side of twisted for me, and I
generally don't allow myself to get tangled up in people's fantasies. I am
far too busy for that.

Kim W5TIT

"Kim" wrote in message
t...
"Jim Hampton" wrote in message
...
John,

Sorry if I'm not impressed; 75 and 40 meters are good for hundreds of
miles
on low power; thousands of miles at night. I ran 25 watts on 160
meters
and
was good to cover the United States at night.

Power is not everything. The ability to change frequencies (I'm
talking
decades, not channels) will determine what distances you can send and
receive well to. I remember well breaking into a group on 75 meters in
the
Carolinas. I was running well under 1 watt. Way *way* under 1 watt.

160 meters did me quite well even in the daytime. Check in to ground
wave.
Not what you think of ground wave (which is space wave); true ground
wave.
At that frequency, if you have it vertically polarized, the wave will
react
to the curvature of the earth as a knife edge. I could pound into
Washington, D.C. in the afternoon. With all of 65 watts.

My handheld reaches into Canada 24/7. On 440 MHz. Of course, I have
to
rely on a decent Canadian repeater for that, but the fact is that I hit
a
Canadian repeater directly from the handheld with no Internet involved.

On hf, the proper choice (I'll leave 160 out of this as the antennas
are
quite unwieldy) between 80 and 40 will allow you several hundred miles
24/7.
With a modest amount of power.

So I remain unimpressed with power alone. I buzzed right through a
kilowatt
station years ago running only 75 watts. It isn't the size of the
ship;
it's the motion through the ocean )


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA



heh heh, Jim...I think you're probably above this guy's ability to,
well,
understand

Kim W5TIT