wrote:
Opus- wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:01:03 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

I'm sorry Opus, but I refuse to lie. You did get a hand-out, and you're
Lazy because you refuse to learn CW to 20wpm, and too lazy to to use it.

"Slow Code" does not know what code speed "Opus" can do. He simply
*assumes*.
of course

Note that we do not know "Slow Code's" code speed, either.

You don't want to be a good capable communicator in every way. That's just
how it is. I'm sorry if the truth seems like an insult. You're right
about one thing, I spelled Kanada wrong, I meant to type KKKanaduh. Eh.

Xenophobic attack rather than reasoned argument.

indeed which is the standard in procode wrold these days

Tell me right now what "handout" I have received. Back up your "good
sound arguments" or forever be a PROVEN liar!

You have lied and have been caught. You can't wiggle out of it.

Once again..you are a proven liar and a fool.

You are a disgrace to the amateur radio community.

Opus, you are making a simple but common logical mistake: You are
taking "Slow Code" seriously.
why not he posts just like Robeson and Wismen and Heil

wrote:
Opus- wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:01:03 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:
Opus- wrote in
:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:44:42 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:
Opus- wrote in
:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

wrote in
legroups.com:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Slow Code wrote:


Opus, you are making a simple but common logical mistake: You are
taking "Slow Code" seriously.

Are we supposed to take YOU "seriously?" :-)




Now keep hunting for those PCs that use vacuum tubes, old
computerist...

Opus- wrote in
:

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:18:15 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

Opus- wrote in
m:

On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:01:03 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

Opus- wrote in
m:

On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:44:42 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

Opus- wrote in
news:iovli2lg2oiscbvcg0ej0eq723cpithf94@4ax. com:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code
spake thusly:

wrote in
ooglegroups.com:


Cecil Moore wrote:
Slow Code wrote:
It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have
everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the
one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical
wise.

If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a
century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF
hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their
technical expertise.

Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?!

Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else
who is
equally ill informed?

Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century
ago
were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF
circles...

Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin
and tell
us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only
"self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?!

Try again.

Steve, K4YZ


Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets
teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter
reply to try to be-little the original argument.

Pot, meet kettle.


No. All my arguments are good sound arguments.

Oh PuhlEEEZE!!! Spelling Canada with a "K" is a good sound argument?
Calling me a "lazy ass" is a good sound argument? Claiming I get a
handout is a good sound argument?

You have NEVER put out ANY kind of argument at all!!! Why don't you
try to cite some source that back up any of your "good sound
arguments".

Free hint: Hurling insults and innuendo does NOT a "good sound
argument" make.

Hope this helps.



I'm sorry Opus, but I refuse to lie. You did get a hand-out, and
you're Lazy because you refuse to learn CW to 20wpm, and too lazy to
to use it. You don't want to be a good capable communicator in every
way. That's just how it is. I'm sorry if the truth seems like an
insult. You're right about one thing, I spelled Kanada wrong, I meant
to type KKKanaduh. Eh.

Tell me right now what "handout" I have received. Back up your "good
sound arguments" or forever be a PROVEN liar!


KKKanadian licenses are all hand-outs now, just like your health care
system, but that's not your fault and I don't blame you for it. Still,
if you want to be a real ham you might want to get your code speed up so
you can communicate with other real hams. We'd love communicating with
ya.

Your blunt refusal to back up anything you claim simply proves to the
world what kind of loser you are. Can you deduct your mortgage
interest from your income tax? You can? Nice handout because I can't.

Welcome to the killfile, you pathetic little turd, along with the rest
of the little trolls hiding under bridges.



He's upset because he knows CW makes a real ham, and he can't cut it.
That's OK, I encouraged him to try to learn CW while I could before I
ended up in the killfile.

NEXT!

SC

wrote in
oups.com:

Opus- wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:01:03 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:
Opus- wrote in
:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:44:42 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:
Opus- wrote in
:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:08:42 GMT, Slow Code
spake thusly:

wrote in
legroups.com:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Slow Code wrote:
It's funny, and most telling. The no-code hams have
everything over 30 MHz, but it's the code hams that are the
one's moving ham radio forward and doing anything technical
wise.

If that's true, it's certainly a change from half a
century ago when we HF hams observed the VHF/UHF
hams revolutionizing amateur radio with their
technical expertise.

Uhhhhhhhh...Cecil...??!?!

Did you actually make that up, or just quote someone else
who is
equally ill informed?

Most of the people who were "moving forward" half a century
ago
were ALSO folks who were active on and well known in HF
circles...

Unless, of course, you're now going to take Lennie's spin
and tell
us that any / everything reported in QST, CQ, etc, was only
"self-serviing rhetoric"...?!?!

Try again.

Steve, K4YZ


Anyone that puts out an argument to keep the code requirement gets
teased by Cecil. He loves to throw out some goof-ball counter
reply to try to be-little the original argument.

Pot, meet kettle.


No. All my arguments are good sound arguments.

Oh PuhlEEEZE!!! Spelling Canada with a "K" is a good sound argument?
Calling me a "lazy ass" is a good sound argument? Claiming I get a
handout is a good sound argument?

You have NEVER put out ANY kind of argument at all!!! Why don't you
try to cite some source that back up any of your "good sound
arguments".

Free hint: Hurling insults and innuendo does NOT a "good sound
argument" make.

Hope this helps.

I'm sorry Opus, but I refuse to lie. You did get a hand-out, and
you're Lazy because you refuse to learn CW to 20wpm, and too lazy to
to use it.

"Slow Code" does not know what code speed "Opus" can do. He simply
*assumes*.

Note that we do not know "Slow Code's" code speed, either.

You don't want to be a good capable communicator in every way. That's
just how it is. I'm sorry if the truth seems like an insult. You're
right about one thing, I spelled Kanada wrong, I meant to type
KKKanaduh. Eh.

Xenophobic attack rather than reasoned argument.

Tell me right now what "handout" I have received. Back up your "good
sound arguments" or forever be a PROVEN liar!

You have lied and have been caught. You can't wiggle out of it.

Once again..you are a proven liar and a fool.

You are a disgrace to the amateur radio community.

Opus, you are making a simple but common logical mistake: You are
taking "Slow Code" seriously.


He's upset because he knows CW helps makes a real communicator, and he
can't cut it. That's OK, I encouraged him to try to learn CW while I could
before I ended up in the killfile.

SC