Re: Help with 2 Meters
Slow Code
> Hello I am a new ham and i have a friend in
> Parkersburg, West Virginia. He has a 2 meter radio and echolink.
>
> I do not have echolink.
>
> Does anyone know of a repeater close to where I am, that I
> would be able to hit with my 2 meter radio Radio Shack HTX 202 144-148
> MHZ.
>
> I live in Queens County NY.
>
> Any information or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thank you,
>
> 73
>
> Steven
I'd check with people on repeaters you can hear and ask them. Someone
should know unless they're also clueless no-coders. If all else fails,
you can take your HTX 202 back to Radio Shack and exchange blank stares
with the clerk.
SC
Pat Stevens
"Slow Code" <my....@no.spam> wrote in message
news:L795h.5463$ig4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...<snip>
> I'd check with people on repeaters you can hear and ask them. Someone
> should know unless they're also clueless no-coders.
> SC
Usually the no-code techs have a better idea as to how echolink and IRLP
work than most of the old-timers, because it is the only way that they can
access "long distance" radio. Most of the old-timers don't consider it to
be "real" radio and as such, are often stuck in their ways and slow to
accept the new form of communication on the service.
It is similar to many of the other forms that were incorporated into amateur
radio and were slow to be accepted, such as SSB, SSTV, even ATV. I don't
think any of these are any less ham radio than CW is ham radio.
dxAce
Pat Stevens wrote:
> "Slow Code" <my....@no.spam> wrote in message
> news:L795h.5463$ig4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > SR <mer...@mfire.com> wrote in news:12jj218...@corp.supernews.com:
> <snip>
> > I'd check with people on repeaters you can hear and ask them. Someone
> > should know unless they're also clueless no-coders.
> <snip>
> > SC
>
> Usually the no-code techs have a better idea as to how echolink and IRLP
> work than most of the old-timers, because it is the only way that they can
> access "long distance" radio. Most of the old-timers don't consider it to
> be "real" radio and as such..
That's because it's not 'real radio'..
Get a grip and get a clue.
Pat Stevens
"dxAce" <dx...@milestones.com> wrote in message
news:4555C85B...@milestones.com...
>
> Pat Stevens wrote:
<snip>
>> Usually the no-code techs have a better idea as to how echolink and IRLP
>> work than most of the old-timers, because it is the only way that they
>> can
>> access "long distance" radio. Most of the old-timers don't consider it
>> to
>> be "real" radio and as such..
>> amateur
>> radio and were slow to be accepted, such as SSB, SSTV, even ATV. I don't
>> think any of these are any less ham radio than CW is ham radio.
>
>
> Get a grip and get a clue.
>
Well, as far as I know, SSB, SSTV, even ATV, along with IRLP and even
echolink as long as you are using a radio at one of the ends of it during a
conversation, would all be considered "real radio."
Talk about getting a grip and getting a clue. That isn't even an arguement.
At least try to make a point and back your claim.
James
daily, with no license needed.
You can do the same thing with a cellphone.
There is nothing wrong with Echolink, but it is silly and dishonest to call
it communicating by radio, which is what hams do.
When a person says he "worked" Germany on Echolink, he is either mistaken
or dishonest. What he has "worked" is his local telephone connection,
usually a distance of about five miles. It is hard for me to believe that
this person could really believe that he "worked" Germany. If I pick up
my cellphone and call Germany, can I get a QSL card for it, and get ARRL
credit ??? Huh ??
It utterly amazes me that a person would study for a ham exam, only to use
Echolink, when you can do the very same thing with any computer or
telephone. There is no ham license or ham equipment needed to talk on the
phone or on the computer. Ever heard of ICQ and other chat programs ?
Ever heard of Voice Over Internet ?
Lots of folks have fun on Echolink. For that reason, I truly think it is
Great !!! Just don't pretend that it is ham radio when the world knows
that it isn't.
Well, that's my two cents worth. See ya on the radio waves !!
73 de Jim K4PYT
Pat Stevens
"James" <jnipp...@nospamfdn.com> wrote in message
news:4pOdnT3X97YPRcjY...@comcast.com...
at least on one of the ends should be connected by radio. Preferably, your
end would be at least using the radio, or what is the purpose of getting a
radio license.
As for just calling someone in Germany, I can't say that I would know too
many people that I could just randomly call and would (a) be willing to talk
to me and (b) that I would be able to understand, since I don't know German.
At least, with ham radio you have a start, since you usually can hear them
before you start talking to them. I have never used echolink to
communicate, so I am not exactly sure how that is kept straight on there,
though.
Also, if I were to talk to someone in Germany, by echolink or IRLP, I would
state it as that and not that I "worked" them. I agree that there is much
more to be said for working a station by HF, than when someone is doing by
way of the Internet. But it is a form of communication that is available to
hams and should be exploited as much as possible, so that it can be used in
any times of need.
I am sure that probably locally during Katrina, all Internet was out, but if
someone was on the fringe of the outage and could reach a repeater that was
linked to IRLP or echolink, then he would be able to communicate anywhere
and get messages into out of the area by that means. Not quite as good as
HF, but if you don't have the privileges, then it is a start.
Slow Code
news:DBj5h.11125$zB4...@twister.nyroc.rr.com:
>
> "Slow Code" <my....@no.spam> wrote in message
> news:L795h.5463$ig4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> SR <mer...@mfire.com> wrote in
>> news:12jj218...@corp.supernews.com:
> <snip>
>> I'd check with people on repeaters you can hear and ask them. Someone
>> should know unless they're also clueless no-coders.
> <snip>
>> SC
>
> Usually the no-code techs have a better idea as to how echolink and IRLP
> work than most of the old-timers, because it is the only way that they
> can access "long distance" radio. Most of the old-timers don't consider
> it to be "real" radio and as such, are often stuck in their ways and
> slow to accept the new form of communication on the service.
Echolink isn't real radio, it's Retard DX.
"No internet = The band ain't open." ROFL
> It is similar to many of the other forms that were incorporated into
> amateur radio and were slow to be accepted, such as SSB, SSTV, even ATV.
> I don't think any of these are any less ham radio than CW is ham radio.
RTTY, SSTV, CW, AMTOR, PSK, PACKET, ATV, etc. are all real. No
internet required.
SC
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>"Pat Stevens" <patst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in
>news:DBj5h.11125$zB4...@twister.nyroc.rr.com:
>
>>
>> "Slow Code" <my....@no.spam> wrote in message
>> news:L795h.5463$ig4....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>> SR <mer...@mfire.com> wrote in
>>> news:12jj218...@corp.supernews.com:
>> <snip>
>>> I'd check with people on repeaters you can hear and ask them. Someone
>>> should know unless they're also clueless no-coders.
>> <snip>
>>> SC
>>
>> Usually the no-code techs have a better idea as to how echolink and IRLP
>> work than most of the old-timers, because it is the only way that they
>> can access "long distance" radio. Most of the old-timers don't consider
>> it to be "real" radio and as such, are often stuck in their ways and
>> slow to accept the new form of communication on the service.
>
>
>Echolink isn't real radio, it's Retard DX.
stop the crap sc
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Nunya Bizness
activate without a confirmed callsign. Because Echolink connects to
radio equipment that can transmit over amateur frequencies, you are
required to be a licensed amateur to use it. In that way, it differs
tremendously from standard Internet communication software.
As for whether or not it's "real radio," by using my 440 HT, I've called
one of our local repeaters that connects to Echolink. Via that link, I
spoke with someone in Australia who was using a mobile radio to
communicate with a local Echolink node in his area. Neither of us was
directly using a computer yet Echolink allowed two licensed hams to
communicate around the world.
To say that using Echolink like this isn't real radio is like saying
that using repeaters isn't real radio.
But this doesn't mean that Echolink will or should ever replace standard
ham radio. I also see the value of continuing to require code testing
in order to get greater privileges.
And those are my two cents.
Jim
KI4OCC/AG
(Yep, I passed my code test this weekend!)
James
more, nothing less. And, you are WRONG about one thing........ you DON'T
have to have a license to do that. NO person using a cellphone or
internet chat who is talking to a person in Austrailia has a license to do
that. It simply isn't needed. No nation or government requires it.
Your 440 contact to your local repeater was the only radio communication
that you had. If you were five miles from your repeater, then you had a
five mile contact. The internet did the rest. That is fine, but you did
not work Austrailia, and would not be able to confirm it or get ARRL credit
for it. You can only get confirmation for two-way RADIO contacts. As
you know, you have to have a license for that.
73 de Jim K4PYT
Nunya Bizness
that and it's not what I would call a DX contact (like I hope to be
making on my HF rig). I won't call it "working" Australia. I don't
think that the ARRL should ever consider giving credit for it. But we
did use radio.
Using a cellphone? I agree... no license. But I've never used my
cellphone to talk with people randomly around the world to get an idea
of how people in different locations live. That's not what the
cellphone is for.
Using an internet chat program? Again, I agree... no license. But many
people in internet chat rooms or using chat programs tend to feel that
the anonymity of the internet gives them some kind of special
dispensation to behave like total idiots. Just look at some of the
conversations that occur in the newsgroups (someone I have in my
newsgroup filters comes to mind at this time). And, again, I don't
often just chat with someone randomly just to see how his/her day is
going, what the weather is like and so on.
Using Echolink? You need to be licensed to use it. In that way, it
differs from standard internet chat. And talking via Echolink still
requires you to follow the same regulations and restrictions as using
any other kind of repeater. You still need to identify using your
callsign and you have to keep the language clean. The callsign means
that there's no hiding behind the anonymity that typical internet chat
allows and the regulations regarding language make people behave
themselves better than typical internet chat. So, IMHO, that makes it
far superior to ICQ, YIM or all the other standard internet chat software.
I think the problem here is one of definitions and splitting hairs.
I'll be the first to admit that talking to Australia via Echolink isn't
the same as talking to someone in Ohio with my HF rig despite the
difference in distance. But the idea that I can sit in my truck with an
HT and chat with people around the world because this new bit of
technology is pretty cool and something I'll never be able to do working
directly radio to radio (unless some unforeseen and miraculous bit of
propagation occurs).
In that way, I think that Echolink has its place in amateur radio. It's
a means of bringing together people with a common hobby and interests in
a civilized manner. I think that's why most of us get into ham radio;
we like talking with other ordinary people from different locations for
no particular reason other than being interested in people in general.
So when it comes to DX bragging rights, I fully agree with you. But
when it comes to the place of Echolink in amateur radio, I think it's
got its place and I hope people can see it that way.
73!
Jim
KI4OCC/AG
(Does passing my code test give ME some bragging rights? <grin>)
kb9r...@hotmail.com
Nunya Bizness wrote:
> James wrote:
> So when it comes to DX bragging rights, I fully agree with you. But
> when it comes to the place of Echolink in amateur radio, I think it's
> got its place and I hope people can see it that way.
>
> 73!
>
> Jim
> KI4OCC/AG
> (Does passing my code test give ME some bragging rights? <grin>)
intersting that you dmeand OTHERS not respond to such crosposting trol
and do so yourself
can you say hypocrtie
I know you can but I suspect you are not man enough to fess up
Nunya Bizness
Actually, Einstein, if you look back through my posts, I NEVER mentioned
cross-posting. What I commented on was your perpetually replying to a
troll giving the idiot exactly what he wanted.
I don't see James as a troll. He has an opinion and I have another.
This is called discussion, not just pointless insults. If the messages
are cross-posted, they're pertinent to the groups in which they're posted.
If, for some reason, James turns out to be a troll (he doesn't seem to
be), I'll drop this discussion like a hot rock.
You, on the other hand, are a tremendous troll so I'll send yet another
variation of your e-mail address to the kill filter.
You can do both of us a favor... add me to your kill filter then we
don't ever need to cross paths again. Seems reasonable, eh?
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
wrote:
>kb9r...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Nunya Bizness wrote:
>>> James wrote:
>>
>>> So when it comes to DX bragging rights, I fully agree with you. But
>>> when it comes to the place of Echolink in amateur radio, I think it's
>>> got its place and I hope people can see it that way.
>>>
>>> 73!
>>>
>>> Jim
>>> KI4OCC/AG
>>> (Does passing my code test give ME some bragging rights? <grin>)
>> intersting that you dmeand OTHERS not respond to such crosposting trol
>> and do so yourself
>>
>> can you say hypocrtie
>>
>> I know you can but I suspect you are not man enough to fess up
>>
>
>Actually, Einstein, if you look back through my posts,
as premitted you blame others rather than fess up to responding to
crosposting trols
hypocrtie but you know that deep down
James
well-taken.
73 de Jim K4PYT
Slow Code
news:1163362926.3...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Above you can see someone says they learned CW and passed the code test,
and Markie attacks them. Steve is not the problem in RRAP, Markie is.
SC
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
... -.-. -. . . -.. ... ... ..-. ..-
>
>SC
Eagle
No-code ops usually don't give a hoot about getting on the HF bands. They
are content with VHF/UHF communications, and so learning CW is not necessary
since that mode is for repeater I.D. AND NOTHING ELSE.
As far as learning the code, I see that as not only the most productive mode
for HF communication, but as a rite of passage.
The code tests should be more than 5 WPM, IMO.
Dave W6IML
<Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs> wrote in message
news:72ddl29u0l221448m...@4ax.com...
Eagle
<Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs> wrote in message
news:8p5il2h3rhcfgcpu2...@4ax.com...
Eagle
"Eagle" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:1DH9h.248546$FQ1.74717@attbi_s71...
John Doe
<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
damm I forgot what this stupid email was all about
>
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>Funny post.
glad to amuse you
>No-code ops usually don't give a hoot about getting on the HF bands.
where do you get yoursample? Most Notechs of my aquantance would LIKE
HF access but it isn't worth the effort
>They
>are content with VHF/UHF communications, and so learning CW is not necessary
>since that mode is for repeater I.D. AND NOTHING ELSE.
wrong althought it is close to useless at VHF and above it has its
uses in EME and at the upper edges of in the microwaves bands for
those interptid folk
>As far as learning the code, I see that as not only the most productive mode
>for HF communication, but as a rite of passage.
"rite of Pasage" their you have the basic Rub of the whole issue if I
may focus the point . I and other NoCode test advocates feel that the
Govt has NO right to impose or support any rite of passage stuff
either in radio or elsewhere
as to it usefulness in HF I don't see it . if am I not going the ehar
the other Id rather deal with a keyboard of deal with another CW mode
Hell where the eye rather than the ear deal with the fuzy mode
>The code tests should be more than 5 WPM, IMO.
there believe or not where we come the closest to agreeing. I see no
value at all in 5wpm test it is should go away (which is what I think
should or should always have been higher to produce a use operator )
the current system which I only supported going as step to ending
testing is Hilary care for the mode
Eagle
5WPM, let alone 13 or 20 as it was.
Stay at VHF...it's where you need to be.
<Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs> wrote in message
news:7trem2l3ag3r3k9di...@4ax.com...
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>You are right...no-code is what you should advocate since you couldn't pass
>5WPM, let alone 13 or 20 as it was.
nice of you to adknowlede that Nocode should be advocated
>Stay at VHF...it's where you need to be.
why?
Plexus
> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 01:24:35 GMT, "Eagle" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
> >You are right...no-code is what you should advocate since you couldn't pass
> >5WPM, let alone 13 or 20 as it was.
>
> nice of you to adknowlede that Nocode should be advocated
> >Stay at VHF...it's where you need to be.
>
> why?
> >
Mark,
Eagle was stating that, since you may have difficulty passing a >5wpm
Morse test (or are reticent to do the work necessary to pass it), *you*
should advocate dropping the requirement altogether. I expect you
won't need to advocate it because, over the past 20 years, the FCC has
made it increasingly easy to pass a Morse test.
In 1970, the requirement was letter-perfect copy of at least 1 minute
out of 5 of random characters. It was impossible to "fill in" any
missed characters. As a Novice, we had *no* voice privelages (part of
the FCC's "Incentive Licensing" structure). Most Novices & Techs who
were interested in increased privelages on HF had no issues with doing
the "work" necessary to upgrade. I might've taken to it better than
most but, within 12 months, my Morse speed was good enough to pass the
Extra exam.
My point is that like anything, Morse can be thought of as work or
unecessary, or you can give it a chance to grow on you. I'm not saying
you should do it (just) because many of us "had to". I'm saying you
don't know how enjoyable it can be until you try it.
vy 73 ob es gud dx,
Bryan WA7PRC
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 01:24:35 GMT, "Eagle" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >You are right...no-code is what you should advocate since you couldn't pass
>> >5WPM, let alone 13 or 20 as it was.
>>
>> nice of you to adknowlede that Nocode should be advocated
>> >Stay at VHF...it's where you need to be.
>>
>> why?
>> >
>
>Mark,
>
>Eagle was stating that, since you may have difficulty passing a >5wpm
>Morse test (or are reticent to do the work necessary to pass it), *you*
>should advocate dropping the requirement altogether.
are you realy dumb enough to think I do not know what he meant
i choose to take his words at face value, for the comedic value
eagle is just one of the ProCode cowards that refuse to even sign
their name to bashing NoCoder like myself
> I expect you
>won't need to advocate it because, over the past 20 years, the FCC has
>made it increasingly easy to pass a Morse test.
I choose to advocate because I do not feel it belongs in the licnese
requirements
>
>In 1970, the requirement was letter-perfect copy of at least 1 minute
>out of 5 of random characters. It was impossible to "fill in" any
>missed characters. As a Novice, we had *no* voice privelages (part of
>the FCC's "Incentive Licensing" structure). Most Novices & Techs who
>were interested in increased privelages on HF had no issues with doing
>the "work" necessary to upgrade. I might've taken to it better than
>most but, within 12 months, my Morse speed was good enough to pass the
>Extra exam.
with respect I have had this lecture or versions of it a number of
time Indeed I was trying and failing to get a license is the early
70's
>
>My point is that like anything, Morse can be thought of as work or
>unecessary, or you can give it a chance to grow on you. I'm not saying
>you should do it (just) because many of us "had to". I'm saying you
>don't know how enjoyable it can be until you try it.
obviously you have not read much of my writing. I spent 5 years
trying and failing I have taken and failed more than 100 code tests
the legal standard of imposible is basical a year of trying something
even listening to it and trying to break it out of sound gives me a
headache I don't want to listen to it any more than I want to listen
to RTTY or Hellshreiabe or JT65 modes
it simply not worth my time
which is a mtter whole aprt from the issue of wether the mode should
tested for
give a real, convincing arguement why we should continue code tsting I
will support continueing it, dispite the impact that would have on me
personaly
>
>vy 73 ob es gud dx,
>Bryan WA7PRC
Eagle
> you should do it (just) because many of us "had to". I'm saying you
> don't know how enjoyable it can be until you try it.
Exactly!
Dave
Eagle
You need to work on your spelling before even THINKING about trying to pass
a 5WPM code test... lol!
Dave
<Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs> wrote in message
news:eemfm29sm0hn1ebt9...@4ax.com...
Plexus
> On 24 Nov 2006 21:48:49 -0800, "Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
> >> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 01:24:35 GMT, "Eagle" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >You are right...no-code is what you should advocate since you couldn't pass
> >> >5WPM, let alone 13 or 20 as it was.
> >>
> >> nice of you to adknowlede that Nocode should be advocated
> >> >Stay at VHF...it's where you need to be.
> >>
> >> why?
> >> >
> >
> >Mark,
> >
> >Eagle was stating that, since you may have difficulty passing a >5wpm
> >Morse test (or are reticent to do the work necessary to pass it), *you*
> >should advocate dropping the requirement altogether.
>
>
> are you realy dumb enough to think I do not know what he meant
> i choose to take his words at face value, for the comedic value
I believe I have a fairly good command of the written English language.
The meaning and usage of his words and your response indicates that,
either you didn't understand what he meant, or you were replying in
sarcasm. I believed it to be the former.
> eagle is just one of the ProCode cowards that refuse to even sign
> their name to bashing NoCoder like myself
A coward chooses to do something difficult in order to gain something,
rather than take the easier road.
> > I expect you
> >won't need to advocate it because, over the past 20 years, the FCC has
> >made it increasingly easy to pass a Morse test.
>
> I choose to advocate because I do not feel it belongs in the licnese
> requirements
Would that be because you have been unable to master the minimum
requirement, after failing "more than 100 code tests"? Perhaps it is
simply a case that you are one of those who should be relegated to 6m
and above. If this had been 1970, you would not have a ham license of
any kind.
> >In 1970, the requirement was letter-perfect copy of at least 1 minute
> >out of 5 of random characters. It was impossible to "fill in" any
> >missed characters. As a Novice, we had *no* voice privelages (part of
> >the FCC's "Incentive Licensing" structure). Most Novices & Techs who
> >were interested in increased privelages on HF had no issues with doing
> >the "work" necessary to upgrade. I might've taken to it better than
> >most but, within 12 months, my Morse speed was good enough to pass the
> >Extra exam.
>
> with respect I have had this lecture or versions of it a number of
> time Indeed I was trying and failing to get a license is the early
> 70's
> >My point is that like anything, Morse can be thought of as work or
> >unnecessary, or you can give it a chance to grow on you. I'm not saying
> >you should do it (just) because many of us "had to". I'm saying you
> >don't know how enjoyable it can be until you try it.
>
> obviously you have not read much of my writing. I spent 5 years
> trying and failing I have taken and failed more than 100 code tests
> the legal standard of imposible is basical a year of trying something
>
> even listening to it and trying to break it out of sound gives me a
> headache I don't want to listen to it any more than I want to listen
> to RTTY or Hellshreiabe or JT65 modes
>
> it simply not worth my time
Then:
1) wait until the Morse requirement is dropped altogether (don't hold
your breath waiting for the FCC to act)
2) or learn to be satisfied with what you have.
> which is a mtter whole aprt from the issue of wether the mode should
> tested for
>
> give a real, convincing arguement why we should continue code tsting I
> will support continueing it, dispite the impact that would have on me
> personaly
> >
Morse is FUN.
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
>> On 24 Nov 2006 21:48:49 -0800, "Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 01:24:35 GMT, "Eagle" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >You are right...no-code is what you should advocate since you couldn't pass
>> >> >5WPM, let alone 13 or 20 as it was.
>> >>
>> >> nice of you to adknowlede that Nocode should be advocated
>> >> >Stay at VHF...it's where you need to be.
>> >>
>> >> why?
>> >> >
>> >
>> >Mark,
>> >
>> >Eagle was stating that, since you may have difficulty passing a >5wpm
>> >Morse test (or are reticent to do the work necessary to pass it), *you*
>> >should advocate dropping the requirement altogether.
>>
>>
>> are you realy dumb enough to think I do not know what he meant
>> i choose to take his words at face value, for the comedic value
>
>I believe I have a fairly good command of the written English language.
> The meaning and usage of his words and your response indicates that,
>either you didn't understand what he meant, or you were replying in
>sarcasm. I believed it to be the former.
then you are a fool
>
>> eagle is just one of the ProCode cowards that refuse to even sign
>> their name to bashing NoCoder like myself
>
>A coward chooses to do something difficult in order to gain something,
>rather than take the easier road.
no a coward avoids doing things you claim a fair understanding of
English that sentence argues against such a claim
>
>> > I expect you
>> >won't need to advocate it because, over the past 20 years, the FCC has
>> >made it increasingly easy to pass a Morse test.
>>
>> I choose to advocate because I do not feel it belongs in the licnese
>> requirements
>
>Would that be because you have been unable to master the minimum
>requirement, after failing "more than 100 code tests"?
no. not that it would matter if that were the case
> Perhaps it is
>simply a case that you are one of those who should be relegated to 6m
>and above.
why should any be be "relagated" your word to anything based on Code
skill?
> If this had been 1970, you would not have a ham license of
>any kind.
so?
well it will take longer than I can hold my breathe I can't hold for
days could you?
>2) or learn to be satisfied with what you have.
you over looked that I have choosen chose three exercise my ruight as
a Citizen to petion My govt for redress and to contiue to do that
>
>> which is a mtter whole aprt from the issue of wether the mode should
>> tested for
>>
>> give a real, convincing arguement why we should continue code tsting I
>> will support continueing it, dispite the impact that would have on me
>> personaly
>> >
>
>Morse is FUN.
for you perhaps it is so
where is the real and convincing arguement
I can't in my own experence Morse is NOT fun
Plexus
> On 25 Nov 2006 10:30:55 -0800, "Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
> >> On 24 Nov 2006 21:48:49 -0800, "Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 01:24:35 GMT, "Eagle" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >You are right...no-code is what you should advocate since you couldn't pass
> >> >> >5WPM, let alone 13 or 20 as it was.
> >> >>
> >> >> nice of you to adknowlede that Nocode should be advocated
> >> >> >Stay at VHF...it's where you need to be.
> >> >>
> >> >> why?
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Mark,
> >> >
> >> >Eagle was stating that, since you may have difficulty passing a >5wpm
> >> >Morse test (or are reticent to do the work necessary to pass it), *you*
> >> >should advocate dropping the requirement altogether.
> >>
> >>
> >> are you realy dumb enough to think I do not know what he meant
> >> i choose to take his words at face value, for the comedic value
> >
> >I believe I have a fairly good command of the written English language.
> > The meaning and usage of his words and your response indicates that,
> >either you didn't understand what he meant, or you were replying in
> >sarcasm. I believed it to be the former.
>
> then you are a fool
Thank you for your edification in regard to my cerebral capacity...
> >> eagle is just one of the ProCode cowards that refuse to even sign
> >> their name to bashing NoCoder like myself
> >
> >A coward chooses to do something difficult in order to gain something,
> >rather than take the easier road.
>
> no a coward avoids doing things you claim a fair understanding of
> English that sentence argues against such a claim
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/coward
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/coward
By your definition, a coward chooses to *not* let the floodgates to HF
fone open for those w/o any Morse proficiency. In that case, I wear
the name "coward" with pride.
> >> > I expect you
> >> >won't need to advocate it because, over the past 20 years, the FCC has
> >> >made it increasingly easy to pass a Morse test.
> >>
> >> I choose to advocate because I do not feel it belongs in the licnese
> >> requirements
> >
> >Would that be because you have been unable to master the minimum
> >requirement, after failing "more than 100 code tests"?
>
> no. not that it would matter if that were the case
My point was that, I believe that is your sole incentive to abolish the
Morse requirement. Further, if that were the case, I believe it would
not be sufficient justification to the FCC for abolishing the Morse
requirement entirely. They threw you a bone (with the no-code
Technician license) and now you want the whole steer.
> > Perhaps it is
> >simply a case that you are one of those who should be relegated to 6m
> >and above.
>
> why should any be be "relagated" your word to anything based on Code
> skill?
It's a matter of available spectrum vs signal bandwidth. On a per-band
basis, 6m and up are several megahertz wide and can accommodate wider
phone signals. This is not the case with HF.
> > If this had been 1970, you would not have a ham license of
> >any kind.
>
> so?
So, you should feel fortunate for having *any* level of ham license.
I don't need to. Many others also don't need to -- they "cowboy up"
and learn Morse.
> >2) or learn to be satisfied with what you have.
>
> you over looked that I have choosen chose three exercise my ruight as
> a Citizen to petion My govt for redress and to contiue to do that
Then, please do so.
> >> which is a mtter whole aprt from the issue of wether the mode should
> >> tested for
> >>
> >> give a real, convincing arguement why we should continue code tsting I
> >> will support continueing it, dispite the impact that would have on me
> >> personaly
> >> >
> >
> >Morse is FUN.
>
> for you perhaps it is so
...and many thousands of other hams.
> where is the real and convincing arguement
See above.
> I can't in my own experence Morse is NOT fun
I sincerly find that unfortunate.
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
>> On 25 Nov 2006 10:30:55 -0800, "Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
>> >> On 24 Nov 2006 21:48:49 -0800, "Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
>> >> >> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 01:24:35 GMT, "Eagle" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >You are right...no-code is what you should advocate since you couldn't pass
>> >> >> >5WPM, let alone 13 or 20 as it was.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> nice of you to adknowlede that Nocode should be advocated
>> >> >> >Stay at VHF...it's where you need to be.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> why?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Mark,
>> >> >
>> >> >Eagle was stating that, since you may have difficulty passing a >5wpm
>> >> >Morse test (or are reticent to do the work necessary to pass it), *you*
>> >> >should advocate dropping the requirement altogether.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> are you realy dumb enough to think I do not know what he meant
>> >> i choose to take his words at face value, for the comedic value
>> >
>> >I believe I have a fairly good command of the written English language.
>> > The meaning and usage of his words and your response indicates that,
>> >either you didn't understand what he meant, or you were replying in
>> >sarcasm. I believed it to be the former.
>>
>> then you are a fool
>
>Thank you for your edification in regard to my cerebral capacity...
your welcome
do you intend to offer futher proof in this post?
>
>> >> eagle is just one of the ProCode cowards that refuse to even sign
>> >> their name to bashing NoCoder like myself
>> >
>> >A coward chooses to do something difficult in order to gain something,
>> >rather than take the easier road.
>>
>> no a coward avoids doing things you claim a fair understanding of
>> English that sentence argues against such a claim
>
>http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/coward
>http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/coward
>By your definition, a coward chooses to *not* let the floodgates to HF
>fone open for those w/o any Morse proficiency.
no Fool a coward is some one that makes offesive and errous statement
and lack the cowarage to even sign there name in an identifable manner
a Procoder CAN have courage. you and eagle do not
> In that case, I wear
>the name "coward" with pride.
well it it yours in pride or not
>
>> >> > I expect you
>> >> >won't need to advocate it because, over the past 20 years, the FCC has
>> >> >made it increasingly easy to pass a Morse test.
>> >>
>> >> I choose to advocate because I do not feel it belongs in the licnese
>> >> requirements
>> >
>> >Would that be because you have been unable to master the minimum
>> >requirement, after failing "more than 100 code tests"?
>>
>> no. not that it would matter if that were the case
>
>My point was that, I believe that is your sole incentive to abolish the
>Morse requirement
again you choose to proove yourself a fool
>. Further, if that were the case, I believe it would
>not be sufficient justification to the FCC for abolishing the Morse
>requirement entirely.
there is not since the WRC2003 a legl standing for them to mantian the
test we are simply dealing the inertia
not I have neevr contended that my personal ability or lack or lack
should be the deciding factor
> They threw you a bone (with the no-code
>Technician license) and now you want the whole steer.
I want what is mine by right of the constitution of the USA, for the
stadard of licensure to fall within the Constitutional parameter of US
law
>
>> > Perhaps it is
>> >simply a case that you are one of those who should be relegated to 6m
>> >and above.
>>
>> why should any be be "relagated" your word to anything based on Code
>> skill?
>
>It's a matter of available spectrum vs signal bandwidth.
bullshit were that the case SSB would not be allowed at hf it clearly
is and PSK of Hell manage BW limits as a manual morse
> On a per-band
>basis, 6m and up are several megahertz wide and can accommodate wider
>phone signals. This is not the case with HF.
more bullshit yes VHF and up has room for FM but sssb is basicaly the
same width oh hf and VHF
>
>> > If this had been 1970, you would not have a ham license of
>> >any kind.
>>
>> so?
>
>So, you should feel fortunate for having *any* level of ham license.
why?
it is MY right to fair and reasonable test for access regardless of
the date
again so? you not establish any reason to require morse code above all
other skills indeed passing the code does even insure one can use CW
morse at any speed on air
but you are back do or be called lazy BS
>
>> >2) or learn to be satisfied with what you have.
>>
>> you over looked that I have choosen chose three exercise my ruight as
>> a Citizen to petion My govt for redress and to contiue to do that
>
>Then, please do so.
I have and we are awaiting the result which according to FCC should eb
out this year
>
>> >> which is a mtter whole aprt from the issue of wether the mode should
>> >> tested for
>> >>
>> >> give a real, convincing arguement why we should continue code tsting I
>> >> will support continueing it, dispite the impact that would have on me
>> >> personaly
>> >> >
>> >
>> >Morse is FUN.
>>
>> for you perhaps it is so
>
>...and many thousands of other hams.
granted
>
>> where is the real and convincing arguement
>
>See above.
I saw and NO convicing argument was made
one of the problem with your argument is that it claims for Morse
encode CW peorpties for Morse Code that are by right also the property
of other CW modes such as Hellshrieber
>
>> I can't in my own experence Morse is NOT fun
>
>I sincerly find that unfortunate.
but given many thousand indeed 100's of thousands would seem to agree
with me that it is NOT fun or not much fun you statement Morse Code is
fun fails to serve as reason for testing for it
Sal M. Onella
"Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1164479455....@14g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
< snip >
> Morse is FUN.
Yeah, if you can do it. (Not everyone can.)
Plexus
Your response indicates that, apparently, you did not understand the
meaning of the words I used.
> >
> >> >> eagle is just one of the ProCode cowards that refuse to even sign
> >> >> their name to bashing NoCoder like myself
> >> >
> >> >A coward chooses to do something difficult in order to gain something,
> >> >rather than take the easier road.
> >>
> >> no a coward avoids doing things you claim a fair understanding of
> >> English that sentence argues against such a claim
> >
> >http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/coward
> >http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/coward
> >By your definition, a coward chooses to *not* let the floodgates to HF
> >fone open for those w/o any Morse proficiency.
>
> no Fool a coward is some one that makes offesive and errous statement
> and lack the cowarage to even sign there name in an identifable manner
Me thinks that (at least) the kettle is calling the pot black.
I *have* used my real name and callsign in this thread.
> a Procoder CAN have courage. you and eagle do not
> > In that case, I wear
> >the name "coward" with pride.
>
> well it it yours in pride or not
> >
> >> >> > I expect you
> >> >> >won't need to advocate it because, over the past 20 years, the FCC has
> >> >> >made it increasingly easy to pass a Morse test.
> >> >>
> >> >> I choose to advocate because I do not feel it belongs in the licnese
> >> >> requirements
> >> >
> >> >Would that be because you have been unable to master the minimum
> >> >requirement, after failing "more than 100 code tests"?
> >>
> >> no. not that it would matter if that were the case
> >
> >My point was that, I believe that is your sole incentive to abolish the
> >Morse requirement
>
> again you choose to proove yourself a fool
Eh... so you say...
> >. Further, if that were the case, I believe it would
> >not be sufficient justification to the FCC for abolishing the Morse
> >requirement entirely.
>
> there is not since the WRC2003 a legl standing for them to mantian the
> test we are simply dealing the inertia
> not I have neevr contended that my personal ability or lack or lack
> should be the deciding factor
oic. Then, could it be due to *collective* inability???
> > They threw you a bone (with the no-code
> >Technician license) and now you want the whole steer.
>
> I want what is mine by right of the constitution of the USA, for the
> stadard of licensure to fall within the Constitutional parameter of US
> law
I must've missed that, the last time I read the Constitution...
> >
> >> > Perhaps it is
> >> >simply a case that you are one of those who should be relegated to 6m
> >> >and above.
> >>
> >> why should any be be "relagated" your word to anything based on Code
> >> skill?
> >
> >It's a matter of available spectrum vs signal bandwidth.
>
> bullshit were that the case SSB would not be allowed at hf it clearly
> is and PSK of Hell manage BW limits as a manual morse
?Huh? No habla gibberish.
> > On a per-band
> >basis, 6m and up are several megahertz wide and can accommodate wider
> >phone signals. This is not the case with HF.
>
> more bullshit yes VHF and up has room for FM but sssb is basicaly the
> same width oh hf and VHF
SSB requires exactly the same bandwidth regardless of the radio
frequency. My point was that the HF bands have less room for expansion
of the fone spectrum to accommodate the increased use. If the entire
portion of an HF band were allocated to fone and the Morse requirement
was abolished, the crowding would be unbearable because of the all the
no-coders. Thankfully, as for myself, I'm ready with a narrow 270Hz IF
filter for Morse.
> >> > If this had been 1970, you would not have a ham license of
> >> >any kind.
> >>
> >> so?
> >
> >So, you should feel fortunate for having *any* level of ham license.
>
> why?
For the reason I explained... the already relaxed requirements. Had it
been the 1970s, you would've had to pass a real 5wpm Morse test in
order to operate as a Technician class licensee above 30MHz.
> it is MY right to fair and reasonable test for access regardless of
> the date
As it is now, it is *more* than fair. As explained, the Morse speed
requirement has been reduced to a paltry 5wpm, and one has to get only
70% correct (instead of 100%).
That's the point of learning Morse -- so a person can communicate using
it.
> but you are back do or be called lazy BS
?Huh? No habla gibberish.
> >> >2) or learn to be satisfied with what you have.
> >>
> >> you over looked that I have choosen chose three exercise my ruight as
> >> a Citizen to petion My govt for redress and to contiue to do that
> >
> >Then, please do so.
>
> I have and we are awaiting the result which according to FCC should eb
> out this year
> >
> >> >> which is a mtter whole aprt from the issue of wether the mode should
> >> >> tested for
> >> >>
> >> >> give a real, convincing arguement why we should continue code tsting I
> >> >> will support continueing it, dispite the impact that would have on me
> >> >> personaly
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Morse is FUN.
> >>
> >> for you perhaps it is so
> >
> >...and many thousands of other hams.
>
> granted
> >
> >> where is the real and convincing arguement
> >
> >See above.
>
> I saw and NO convicing argument was made
Please try to pay attention.
> one of the problem with your argument is that it claims for Morse
> encode CW peorpties for Morse Code that are by right also the property
> of other CW modes such as Hellshrieber
> >
> >> I can't in my own experence Morse is NOT fun
> >
> >I sincerly find that unfortunate.
>
> but given many thousand indeed 100's of thousands would seem to agree
> with me that it is NOT fun or not much fun you statement Morse Code is
> fun fails to serve as reason for testing for it
Alright; for the sake of argument, let's assume Morse is not fun and
not enough argument in favor of keeping the Morse requirement. How
about some numbers (with sources)...
Source: http://www.qrz.com/i/census.html
Total # of US hams: 675274
Extra: 105552 (15.63%)
Advanced: 79253 (11.74%)
General: 139251 (20.62%)
Tech+: 57986 (8.59%)
Tech: 262422 (38.86%)
Novice: 30810 (4.56%)
Code Total: 412852 (61.14%)
No Code Total: 262422 (38.86%)
There are nearly twice as many people who've passed a Morse test
(412852 or 61.14%), compared to those who haven't (262422 or 38.86%).
Nearly a super-majority managed to get to at least 5wpm. One could
speculate that there may be only 38.86% interest in dropping the Morse
requirement. It may be difficult to know how many non-hams would be
for it.
Source: ARRL Poll (http://www.arrl.org/survey.php3?pollnr=307)
This recent online poll indicates a majority of hams are/were against
abolishing the Morse requirement.
Fine with me: 2896 (45.1 %)
It is a terrible idea: 3107 (48.4 %)
I don't care either way: 415 (6.5 %)
Total votes: 6418
There were only 6418 responses but, it is the only hard measure in
regard to the proposal.
Source: ARRL Poll (http://www.arrl.org/survey.php3?pollnr=342)
This interesting poll shows the breakdown of Morse proficiency:
5 to 10 WPM 16.3% (850)
10 to 20 WPM 27.8% (1450)
20 to 30 WPM 14.4% (749)
30 to 40 WPM 4.4% (229)
40 to 50 WPM 1.3% (68)
Higher than 50 WPM 1.0% (51)
I don't operate CW 34.8% (1816)
Total votes: 5213
Discounting the lowest and the 3 highest ranges, a majority of hams
(2199 or 42.9%) are proficient in the 10 to 30wpm range. Assuming the
"I don't operate CW" hams are the only ones in favor of dropping the
Morse requirement, they are clearly outnumbered by the hams with a
"mid-range" proficiency.
You've stated that there are "100's of thousands would seem to agree
with me that it is NOT fun or not much fun". Assuming that refers to
the 34.8% figure above, you would be correct (0.348 * 675274 = 234995.
It's still a small minority. You need to quote a higher percentage
(with verifiable sources), if you're going to make your argument to
anyone in power to me -- or anyone.
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
no you have already adknoewled the possibility of srcasm and now you
post further proof of your cowardly nature
which is the statndard these days of the ProCoders
>
>> >
>> >> >> eagle is just one of the ProCode cowards that refuse to even sign
>> >> >> their name to bashing NoCoder like myself
>> >> >
>> >> >A coward chooses to do something difficult in order to gain something,
>> >> >rather than take the easier road.
>> >>
>> >> no a coward avoids doing things you claim a fair understanding of
>> >> English that sentence argues against such a claim
>> >
>> >http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/coward
>> >http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/coward
>> >By your definition, a coward chooses to *not* let the floodgates to HF
>> >fone open for those w/o any Morse proficiency.
>>
>> no Fool a coward is some one that makes offesive and errous statement
>> and lack the cowarage to even sign there name in an identifable manner
>
>Me thinks that (at least) the kettle is calling the pot black.
then you are an idiot but w e knew that
>I *have* used my real name and callsign in this thread.
but you don't now becuase you are afraid to have these words conceted
with your name and call
>
>> a Procoder CAN have courage. you and eagle do not
>> > In that case, I wear
>> >the name "coward" with pride.
>>
>> well it it yours in pride or not
>> >
>> >> >> > I expect you
>> >> >> >won't need to advocate it because, over the past 20 years, the FCC has
>> >> >> >made it increasingly easy to pass a Morse test.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I choose to advocate because I do not feel it belongs in the licnese
>> >> >> requirements
>> >> >
>> >> >Would that be because you have been unable to master the minimum
>> >> >requirement, after failing "more than 100 code tests"?
>> >>
>> >> no. not that it would matter if that were the case
>> >
>> >My point was that, I believe that is your sole incentive to abolish the
>> >Morse requirement
>>
>> again you choose to proove yourself a fool
>
>Eh... so you say...
indeed so I Mark Morgan say
you are whom? you tell to go look for your name
>
>> >. Further, if that were the case, I believe it would
>> >not be sufficient justification to the FCC for abolishing the Morse
>> >requirement entirely.
>>
>> there is not since the WRC2003 a legl standing for them to mantian the
>> test we are simply dealing the inertia
>
>> not I have neevr contended that my personal ability or lack or lack
>> should be the deciding factor
>
>oic. Then, could it be due to *collective* inability???
noppe the leaders of the Nocode Movement passed the code test at
various speeds
>
>> > They threw you a bone (with the no-code
>> >Technician license) and now you want the whole steer.
>>
>> I want what is mine by right of the constitution of the USA, for the
>> stadard of licensure to fall within the Constitutional parameter of US
>> law
>
>I must've missed that, the last time I read the Constitution...
did yu EVER read the constitution and think about what it said esp the
10th manedment?
>
>> >
>> >> > Perhaps it is
>> >> >simply a case that you are one of those who should be relegated to 6m
>> >> >and above.
>> >>
>> >> why should any be be "relagated" your word to anything based on Code
>> >> skill?
>> >
>> >It's a matter of available spectrum vs signal bandwidth.
>>
>> bullshit were that the case SSB would not be allowed at hf it clearly
>> is and PSK of Hell manage BW limits as a manual morse
>
>?Huh? No habla gibberish.
you no Habla anything
>
>> > On a per-band
>> >basis, 6m and up are several megahertz wide and can accommodate wider
>> >phone signals. This is not the case with HF.
>>
>> more bullshit yes VHF and up has room for FM but sssb is basicaly the
>> same width oh hf and VHF
>
>SSB requires exactly the same bandwidth regardless of the radio
>frequency. My point was that the HF bands have less room for expansion
>of the fone spectrum to accommodate the increased use.
if true (another point entirely) so?
> If the entire
>portion of an HF band were allocated to fone and the Morse requirement
>was abolished, the crowding would be unbearable because of the all the
>no-coders.
an asertion you make without reference to physics indeed the ARRL and
hams were sure that HF could not accomadate the number of hams we have
NOW so they convinced the FCC of incentive lecining now we more
numbers than ever and yet the bands are still mostly silent
based on what I here all the techs could arrive tomarrow without
overcrowding thebnads if tranmit in same protions as the current users
of those bands
>Thankfully, as for myself, I'm ready with a narrow 270Hz IF
>filter for Morse.
>
>> >> > If this had been 1970, you would not have a ham license of
>> >> >any kind.
>> >>
>> >> so?
>> >
>> >So, you should feel fortunate for having *any* level of ham license.
>>
>> why?
>
>For the reason I explained... the already relaxed requirements.
no you explained nothing indeed I have always been willing to conceed
I might be worng and this a valid reason for code testing but in that
unlikely event YOU don't know it
but you refuse to address the fact I have simply been allowed now what
I should have been allowed since the 60's
>
>> it is MY right to fair and reasonable test for access regardless of
>> the date
>
>As it is now, it is *more* than fair.
no it isn't
one obelelete mode is favoured above the others that ain't fair
> As explained, the Morse speed
>requirement has been reduced to a paltry 5wpm, and one has to get only
>70% correct (instead of 100%).
so? NO Morse Code skil is required at on air therefore no test for it
is fair
which is not assured by the test as given therefore it is afailure
even there
>
>> but you are back do or be called lazy BS
>
>?Huh? No habla gibberish.
you understand you are afraid to face it
>
>> >> >2) or learn to be satisfied with what you have.
>> >>
>> >> you over looked that I have choosen chose three exercise my ruight as
>> >> a Citizen to petion My govt for redress and to contiue to do that
>> >
>> >Then, please do so.
>>
>> I have and we are awaiting the result which according to FCC should eb
>> out this year
>> >
>> >> >> which is a mtter whole aprt from the issue of wether the mode should
>> >> >> tested for
>> >> >>
>> >> >> give a real, convincing arguement why we should continue code tsting I
>> >> >> will support continueing it, dispite the impact that would have on me
>> >> >> personaly
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Morse is FUN.
>> >>
>> >> for you perhaps it is so
>> >
>> >...and many thousands of other hams.
>>
>> granted
>> >
>> >> where is the real and convincing arguement
>> >
>> >See above.
>>
>> I saw and NO convicing argument was made
>
>Please try to pay attention.
I did
you made NO convicing arguement
>
>> one of the problem with your argument is that it claims for Morse
>> encode CW peorpties for Morse Code that are by right also the property
>> of other CW modes such as Hellshrieber
you have to avoid that point like all procoders
>> >
>> >> I can't in my own experence Morse is NOT fun
>> >
>> >I sincerly find that unfortunate.
>>
>> but given many thousand indeed 100's of thousands would seem to agree
>> with me that it is NOT fun or not much fun you statement Morse Code is
>> fun fails to serve as reason for testing for it
>
>Alright; for the sake of argument, let's assume Morse is not fun and
>not enough argument in favor of keeping the Morse requirement. How
>about some numbers (with sources)...
number of what?
no I don't the figure (do you realy want the cenus of the USA suggest
that roughly 200milion amercans don't find mores fun and few hunderd
thousand might since surely you will conceed some of those that passed
morse code tests did not find the mode fun
38 percent is hardly a small mnority we in law make perviosn for far
smaller ones
OTOH you armgument that Morse fun even if proven that 99 percent of
people founf this ture is not a reason to test for it
we are to the end and agin you refuse to sign your name to your drivel
Telamon
"Eagle" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
> Shouldn't this be in alt.ham-radio.flame?
< Snip >
Nope. It belongs in the kill file with all other cross posts about
either being a ham or using code Mr. Eagle eyes.
< Plonk >
--
Telamon
Ventura, California
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
<telamon_s...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote:
>In article <aFH9h.248548$FQ1.221986@attbi_s71>,
> "Eagle" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
>> Shouldn't this be in alt.ham-radio.flame?
>
>< Snip >
>
>Nope. It belongs in the kill file with all other cross posts about
>either being a ham or using code Mr. Eagle eyes.
>
>< Plonk >
ah yes asserting your specail right to respond to materail you
consider improper
get e alife
Slow Code
news:aFH9h.248548$FQ1.221986@attbi_s71:
> Shouldn't this be in alt.ham-radio.flame?
Everything Markie posts is a flame ie. crap-job if he's following up to a
real radio operator. My advice, Ignore Markie, you'll just get a headache
if you try to figure out what he is trying to say.
SC
Slow Code
news:o09ah.35501$zT4....@newsfe11.phx:
Sal.
Please keep your whiney ass out of the CW threads. If you want to shit
your diaper, please take it to the CB group, or start up a new own thread
with Markie and Opus.
SC
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
looking at yourself in the glare of your monitor again steve
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>"Sal M. Onella" <salmo...@food.poisoning.org> wrote in
>news:o09ah.35501$zT4....@newsfe11.phx:
>
>>
>> "Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1164479455....@14g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> < snip >
>>
>>> Morse is FUN.
>>
>> Yeah, if you can do it. (Not everyone can.)
>
>
>Sal.
>
>Please keep your whiney ass out of the CW threads.
why you whine in all th thread and spew your hatred of REAL Hams like
me
> If you want to shit
>your diaper, please take it to the CB group, or start up a new own thread
>with Markie and Opus.
get help for your intantace on toilet sex discussion in radio NGs,
steve
>
>SC
Eagle
"Telamon" <telamon_s...@pacbell.net.is.invalid> wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-6...@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
an_old_friend
Eagle wrote:
> What is a plonk?
>
>
he is claiming he has killfiled you
net speack you might know if you were not obessed with Morse Code
Eagle
"Sal M. Onella" <salmo...@food.poisoning.org> wrote in message
news:o09ah.35501$zT4....@newsfe11.phx...
The only reason 'not everyone can' is that these ops refuse to invest the
time and effort it takes to learn something new. It takes very little effort
to learn a dot from a dash.
Code is indeed fun and very rewarding!
Eagle
an_old_friend
Eagle wrote:
> "Sal M. Onella" <salmo...@food.poisoning.org> wrote in message
> news:o09ah.35501$zT4....@newsfe11.phx...
> >
> > "Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:1164479455....@14g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > < snip >
> >
> >> Morse is FUN.
> >
> > Yeah, if you can do it. (Not everyone can.)
> >
> >
>
> The only reason 'not everyone can' is that these ops refuse to invest the
> time and effort it takes to learn something new.
what 5 years 40 mintue a day 7 day a week isn't enough for you?
>It takes very little effort
> to learn a dot from a dash.
if only that was all that was required
> Code is indeed fun and very rewarding!
for some it is
but if this is the norma why does it need the prod to learn it
the test is nothing more than Mode Welfare and I am opposed to welfare
>
> Eagle
Eagle
him...lol!
You sound like a no coder...true?
"an_old_friend" <kons...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1164676264.6...@l39g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Eagle
>
> Eagle wrote:
>> "Sal M. Onella" <salmo...@food.poisoning.org> wrote in message
>> news:o09ah.35501$zT4....@newsfe11.phx...
>> >
>> > "Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1164479455....@14g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > < snip >
>> >
>> >> Morse is FUN.
>> >
>> > Yeah, if you can do it. (Not everyone can.)
>> >
>> >
>>
>> The only reason 'not everyone can' is that these ops refuse to invest the
>> time and effort it takes to learn something new.
>
> what 5 years 40 mintue a day 7 day a week isn't enough for you?
And you STILL haven't learned code???
>
>>It takes very little effort
>> to learn a dot from a dash.
>
> if only that was all that was required
Well, a bright mind would help, but it isn't nessesary.
>
>> Code is indeed fun and very rewarding!
>
> for some it is
>
> but if this is the norma why does it need the prod to learn it
Prod? You can take the time to learn?
>
> the test is nothing more than Mode Welfare and I am opposed to welfare
Then get off welfare.
>
>
>>
>> Eagle
>
Sal M. Onella
"Eagle" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:55Mah.161107$aJ.151195@attbi_s21...
It takes very little effort
> to learn a dot from a dash.
Baloney!
gwatts
> ... If you want to shit
> your diaper, please take it to the CB group, or start up a new own thread
> with Markie and Opus.
>
> SC
Is this how you only start a thread and let everyone else keep it going?
You're rapidly approaching pitiful.
W8LNA
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>What a loser. Now that he has killfiled me, he won't see me laughing at
>him...lol!
>You sound like a no coder...true?
odoit you have been flaming as as one
>
>
>"an_old_friend" <kons...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1164676264.6...@l39g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Eagle wrote:
>>> What is a plonk?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> he is claiming he has killfiled you
>>
>> net speack you might know if you were not obessed with Morse Code
>>
>
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
wrote:
no he he is wil past past that
>
>W8LNA
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>
>"an_old_friend" <kons...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1164676987....@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Eagle wrote:
>>> "Sal M. Onella" <salmo...@food.poisoning.org> wrote in message
>>> news:o09ah.35501$zT4....@newsfe11.phx...
>>> >
>>> > "Plexus" <plexu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> > news:1164479455....@14g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>>> >
>>> > < snip >
>>> >
>>> >> Morse is FUN.
>>> >
>>> > Yeah, if you can do it. (Not everyone can.)
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> The only reason 'not everyone can' is that these ops refuse to invest the
>>> time and effort it takes to learn something new.
>>
>> what 5 years 40 mintue a day 7 day a week isn't enough for you?
>
>And you STILL haven't learned code???
yep
>>
>>>It takes very little effort
>>> to learn a dot from a dash.
>>
>> if only that was all that was required
>
>Well, a bright mind would help, but it isn't nessesary.
I am a former memeber of MENSA man inteligence simply does not relate
it is a fairly spesific talent
>>
>>> Code is indeed fun and very rewarding!
>>
>> for some it is
>>
>> but if this is the norma why does it need the prod to learn it
>
>Prod? You can take the time to learn?
I have wasted enough but the question is is morse is so much fun why
does it require mode welfare in thenlicense scheme
>>
>> the test is nothing more than Mode Welfare and I am opposed to welfare
>
>
>Then get off welfare.
I am not on Code is
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Eagle
Merlin-7 KI4ILB
I am a new ham (general) that said, I think that code should be dropped for
the simple reason that none of the other digital modes are required. (yes
code is a digital mode) There is no easy fix that will make everyone happy
on this subject but why should someone have to learn a mode that they will
never use? Why not add all the modes, rtty,psk etc.?
I did notice one thing that I did not like about the general test. I took
the test Aced it but I still did not know anything about proper operating
practices. I found that out by listening. I think that the testing and study
materal should have a lot more in the way of operating practices.
However, as soon as I pass my extra, I plan on sharping up on my code but I
think its fun.
I do know someone that just plain cant do code at all. I do not know if it
is the way he hears sounds or what, he just cant get it.
I look at code like learning another language say french or german. Some
people that have been in code a long time quit hearing letters, they hear
words.
my 2 cents
Joe
KI4ILB
solar powered ham radio 24/7
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
<merl...@sc.rr.com> wrote:
>From my point of view...
>
> I am a new ham (general) that said, I think that code should be dropped for
>the simple reason that none of the other digital modes are required. (yes
>code is a digital mode) There is no easy fix that will make everyone happy
>on this subject but why should someone have to learn a mode that they will
>never use? Why not add all the modes, rtty,psk etc.?
>
> I did notice one thing that I did not like about the general test. I took
>the test Aced it but I still did not know anything about proper operating
>practices. I found that out by listening. I think that the testing and study
>materal should have a lot more in the way of operating practices.
inded I agree that we need to tinker a good deal with what the written
test cover and don't cover
>
> However, as soon as I pass my extra, I plan on sharping up on my code but I
>think its fun.
and I will wil not when I acheieve my extra becuase for me is is hell
on radio and that freedom should ours
>
> I do know someone that just plain cant do code at all. I do not know if it
>is the way he hears sounds or what, he just cant get it.
oir the way he processe langage we don't all process the same things
the same way
>
> I look at code like learning another language say french or german. Some
>people that have been in code a long time quit hearing letters, they hear
>words.
>my 2 cents
> Joe
> KI4ILB
> solar powered ham radio 24/7
>
solar eh I prefe my win generaors myself but I live a windy area (my
home produces over time more power than it uses althought I use u
tility power at times and reutn power to grid at other)
K4YZ
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs created even more online fantasies with:
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 22:54:23 GMT, "Merlin-7 KI4ILB"
> > I did notice one thing that I did not like about the general test. I took
> >the test Aced it but I still did not know anything about proper operating
> >practices. I found that out by listening. I think that the testing and study
> >materal should have a lot more in the way of operating practices.
>
> inded I agree that we need to tinker a good deal with what the written
> test cover and don't cover
Here's more evidence that you wasted all that money on thoise
alleged college degrees, Morkie...You can't even finish a simple
sentence.
> > However, as soon as I pass my extra, I plan on sharping up on my code but I
> >think its fun.
>
> and I will wil not when I acheieve my extra becuase for me is is hell
> on radio and that freedom should ours
Even More Morkie Mularkie.
Finish your sentences, fatboy...IN ENGLISH.
> > I do know someone that just plain cant do code at all. I do not know if it
> >is the way he hears sounds or what, he just cant get it.
>
> oir the way he processe langage we don't all process the same things
> the same way
Speaking of how people "processe langage"...
HOW ABOUT PROCESSING YOUR POSTS IN ENGLISH...?!?!
> > I look at code like learning another language say french or german. Some
> >people that have been in code a long time quit hearing letters, they hear
> >words.
> >my 2 cents
> > Joe
> > KI4ILB
> > solar powered ham radio 24/7
> >
> solar eh I prefe my win generaors myself but I live a windy area (my
> home produces over time more power than it uses althought I use u
> tility power at times and reutn power to grid at other)
The only energy producing wind at your QTH is that which leaks
from around the seams of your Dickies overalls from too much beeer and
too many potato chips.
Unless you have wind generators on at least 75' towers, you aren't
producing enough electricity for a pair of FRS HT's.
Stop lying. No one's impressed with your fantasies, fatboy.
Steve, K4YZ
an old friend
K4YZ wrote:
> Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs created even more online fantasies with:
> > On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 22:54:23 GMT, "Merlin-7 KI4ILB"
>
> > > I did notice one thing that I did not like about the general test. I took
> > >the test Aced it but I still did not know anything about proper operating
> > >practices. I found that out by listening. I think that the testing and study
> > >materal should have a lot more in the way of operating practices.
> >
> > inded I agree that we need to tinker a good deal with what the written
> > test cover and don't cover
>
> Here's more evidence that you wasted all that money on thoise
> alleged college degrees, Morkie...You can't even finish a simple
> sentence.
nothing you playing english teacher
well this is not class and you are not incharge
now go run away since you can't stand up to the light out cockroach
did you bury your dead daughter or keep her for sex the way Wismen is
alleged to have done with dead mother?
Slow Code
news:u8Wah.6331$Ka1....@news01.roc.ny:
He wanted to push for dumbing down ham radio, and we can't let that happen
in a thread that wants to protect it.
SC
kb9r...@hotmail.com
nobdoy but the ProCode want Ham radio dumbed down
we are just trying to free Ham radio form the orible hamr done by the
ARRL with incentive licensing
>
> SC
Ron
<kb9r...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1164850369.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Are you a "Pro-Code" person? If so, then how is it that you can be so with
such poor spelling skills?
If you are an example of what a "Pro-Code" person is, then I don't think
that HAM can really be "dumbed" down any further.
Ron
K4YZ
Ron wrote:
> <kb9r...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > we are just trying to free Ham radio form the orible hamr done by the
> > ARRL with incentive licensing
>
> Are you a "Pro-Code" person? If so, then how is it that you can be so with
> such poor spelling skills?
>
> If you are an example of what a "Pro-Code" person is, then I don't think
> that HAM can really be "dumbed" down any further.
Ron, Morkie is the No-Code camp's worst enemy...He's one of "them".
Morkie (Mark Morgan, KB9RQZ) claims to have three college degrees,
is allegedly now a geologist, and claims to have been "colonel" in the
US Army Chemical Corps. He's the only multi-degreed professional that
seems to be so incompetent as to be unable to employ spellchecking
software, however.
The funny thing about his latter claim was that he (a) alleged to
have been "drafted", (b) would have only bee SEVEN years old as the
last conscriptee was being mustered out in the 70's, and (c)
brandishes a sexual perversity that would get ANY officer's security
clearance pulled, let alone play with NBC / CBR items.
He also claims to be a Jewish Pagan, whatever those are supposed
to be, and has apparently "married" a male person while in Israel,
which I find hard to believe...Not that he'd "marry" a man, but that
the government of Israel would allow such things to occur in the Holy
Land.
He's trashed every newsgroup he's come into contact with and has
actually searched out newsgroups in order to cross post items in a lame
attempt to intimidate those who he'd like to see go away since they
make it a habit of busting him for his lying and tales.
So...Basically you're right when you say it can't get much "dumber"
than what it is...He passed the writtens...perhaps. The jury's out on
whether or not he was able to find a corruptable VE team to pass him
after he passed them an undetermined quantity of Jacksons or
Franklins.....
In any case...caveat emptor when it comes to dealing with him. I
do it because I'm already in a high stress job and he's cheap
entertainment.
73
Steve, K4YZ
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
<apositi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
><kb9r...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1164850369.6...@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Slow Code wrote:
>>> gwatts <gwa...@frontiernet.net> wrote in
>>> news:u8Wah.6331$Ka1....@news01.roc.ny:
>>>
>>> > Slow Code wrote:
>>> >> ... If you want to shit
>>> >> your diaper, please take it to the CB group, or start up a new own
>>> >> thread with Markie and Opus.
>>> >>
>>> >> SC
>>> >
>>> > Is this how you only start a thread and let everyone else keep it
>>> > going?
>>> >
>>> > You're rapidly approaching pitiful.
>>> >
>>> > W8LNA
>>>
>>>
>>> He wanted to push for dumbing down ham radio, and we can't let that
>>> happen
>>> in a thread that wants to protect it.
>>
>> nobdoy but the ProCode want Ham radio dumbed down
>>
>> we are just trying to free Ham radio form the orible hamr done by the
>> ARRL with incentive licensing
>
>Are you a "Pro-Code" person?
no
indeed I think the ARS would better off if code use were banned but I
still believe in free speech
> If so, then how is it that you can be so with
>such poor spelling skills?
GIGO
>
>If you are an example of what a "Pro-Code" person is, then I don't think
>that HAM can really be "dumbed" down any further.
we are trying to end the dumbing down by ending code testing
>
>Ron
John Smith
"K4YZ" <steven...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1164905170.1...@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> ...
> do it because I'm already in a high stress job and he's cheap
> entertainment.
>
> 73
>
> Steve, K4YZ
>
If you are NOT SC, you are his brother... indeed the
glitch/mis-configuration/error or settings which have been introduced
into your news reader/poster is a dead giveaway!
Perhaps your "high stress" job leads you to commit such mistakes? You
really should look into getting some help with that "little problem" of
yours, they have done wonders with new medications, yanno? <grin>
JS
an old friend
John Smith wrote:
> "K4YZ" <steven...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1164905170.1...@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> > ...
> > do it because I'm already in a high stress job and he's cheap
> > entertainment.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Steve, K4YZ
> >
>
> If you are NOT SC, you are his brother... indeed the
> glitch/mis-configuration/error or settings which have been introduced
> into your news reader/poster is a dead giveaway!
for my edifcation would you care to elaborate I am always insterested
in learning new things
>
> Perhaps your "high stress" job leads you to commit such mistakes? You
> really should look into getting some help with that "little problem" of
> yours, they have done wonders with new medications, yanno? <grin>
it isn't his job it is the stress he feels whan anybody step out of the
box at all or opposes him
Tood dress his fire for the harmless if IMO silly interest Todd in
anime
Ander in his stubbron insistance on hold the ARSaccoutable for the
large amount of specturm we do hold ( and we deserve to held to it)
BB for just daring to disagree on what the ARS and how will it does it
with of course it started out as a simple disagree then he dicovered I
am Bisexaul tried to balck mail me about and I simply came out of the
ham shack closet. I made a fool years over his death threats and after
8 years he is still pissed about it
SC is Robeson borther of coconspirtor or siamaesetwin i can't realy
tell and I don't realy care abiout the detail
>
> JS
John Smith
http://www.qrz.com/callsign/K4YZ
I once dated a nurse, yanno? She didn't look like him!
JS
"an old friend" <kb9...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1164910335....@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
<assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Interesting site:
>http://www.qrz.com/callsign/K4YZ
indeed and I wonder how much of it SciFi
Slow Code
news:ekn5up$5ll$1...@news.ndhu.edu.tw:
>
> "K4YZ" <steven...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1164905170.1...@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
>> ...
>> do it because I'm already in a high stress job and he's cheap
>> entertainment.
>>
>> 73
>>
>> Steve, K4YZ
>>
>
> If you are NOT SC, you are his brother... indeed the
> glitch/mis-configuration/error or settings which have been introduced
> into your news reader/poster is a dead giveaway!
You're as looney as Markie, John. Stop trying to figure out who
everyone is and maybe try to work on being a good radio operator. Then
maybe your presence on the internet will be valuable.
SC
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
steve/SC you have ben busted
John Smith
No trouble at all...
Noticing who the idiots are is easy, more so in your case, but easy with
most of 'em...
JS
Ron
<Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs> wrote in message
news:vl3um2l9dhdjftl39...@4ax.com...
Interesting. Does speach apply to CW? After all, it is a non-voice form of
operation.
>> If so, then how is it that you can be so with
>>such poor spelling skills?
>
> GIGO
Can I assume by that you mean that you never learned to spell?
OK, neither did I, but then again my news reader has a spell-checking
program.
>>
>>If you are an example of what a "Pro-Code" person is, then I don't think
>>that HAM can really be "dumbed" down any further.
>
> we are trying to end the dumbing down by ending code testing
>>
>>Ron
>>
> http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/
I am a no-code op. Removing the requirement for CW neither dumbs down the
HAM service, nor makes it more intelligent. CW is a niche form of operation
anymore. Some people enjoy it for reasons that I cannot personally fathom,
but what the heck, if its their thing then let them have at it. More power
to them. CW is no longer the main mode of operation used anywhere in the
world. Phone is. CW has no "practical" use any longer, it is used for
entertainment only. Again, more power to those who choose to do it.
Removing the 5wpm requirement for more advanced licensing only makes sense.
No one requires anyone to know PSK31 or RTTY now do they? The FCC does not
add that as a specific element of the testing process because it is a "mode"
of operation, no more or less than CW is. Knowing and being able to operate
CW does not make one more of a man, more of a woman, smarter, taller,
slimmer, or better looking. Its just another mode of operation, one that is
going into retirement slowly and painfully. Why not just let those who
enjoy it, do so, and let the rest of us get on with expanding the hobby into
new areas that technology make available to us. Why force us to regress 30
years instead of allowing those who enjoy CW to learn and participate in the
revolution that technology is providing for the Amateur Radio Service?
Ron
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
sure it does
which is ilrelavant to the fact that the ARS would be better off if it
were banned
staing that the ARS would be better if CW USE were banned is not the
same as calling for it to be to be
that you choose imply it is is indicative of your lack of skill with
english or in your lack of belief in the free speech rights of all
the facts you object and insinate that I lack the free speech to state
my opinion is IMO indicative that you don't truely believe in free
speech etc for yourself
>
>>> If so, then how is it that you can be so with
>>>such poor spelling skills?
>>
>> GIGO
>
>Can I assume by that you mean that you never learned to spell?
you can assume what ever you like. that amoug your absolute rights
as is the right to be an ass
you excerise both as you choose
>
>OK, neither did I, but then again my news reader has a spell-checking
>program.
the one I prefer does not
>
>>>
>>>If you are an example of what a "Pro-Code" person is, then I don't think
>>>that HAM can really be "dumbed" down any further.
>>
>> we are trying to end the dumbing down by ending code testing
>>>
>>>Ron
>>>
>> http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/
>
>I am a no-code op.
realy? so am I
> Removing the requirement for CW neither dumbs down the
>HAM service, nor makes it more intelligent.
indeed
> CW is a niche form of operation
>anymore. Some people enjoy it for reasons that I cannot personally fathom,
>but what the heck, if its their thing then let them have at it. More power
>to them. CW is no longer the main mode of operation used anywhere in the
>world. Phone is. CW has no "practical" use any longer, it is used for
>entertainment only. Again, more power to those who choose to do it.
>Removing the 5wpm requirement for more advanced licensing only makes sense.
>No one requires anyone to know PSK31 or RTTY now do they? The FCC does not
>add that as a specific element of the testing process because it is a "mode"
>of operation, no more or less than CW is. Knowing and being able to operate
>CW does not make one more of a man, more of a woman, smarter, taller,
>slimmer, or better looking. Its just another mode of operation, one that is
>going into retirement slowly and painfully. Why not just let those who
>enjoy it, do so, and let the rest of us get on with expanding the hobby into
>new areas that technology make available to us. Why force us to regress 30
>years instead of allowing those who enjoy CW to learn and participate in the
>revolution that technology is providing for the Amateur Radio Service?
all true
John Smith
> the one I prefer does not
Mark:
Take a look at this link, the software is shareware, claims to work with
ANY windows app. I am hoping it might be worth your time, look for the
download link, I have not tried it.
http://www.sharewareconnection.com/spell-magic.htm
Regards,
JS
K4YZ
John Smith wrote:
> "K4YZ" <steven...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1164905170.1...@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> > ...
> > do it because I'm already in a high stress job and he's cheap
> > entertainment.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Steve, K4YZ
> >
>
> If you are NOT SC, you are his brother... indeed the
> glitch/mis-configuration/error or settings which have been introduced
> into your news reader/poster is a dead giveaway!
Nope.
The IP Address and servers are complete proof that I do NOT share
any annonymous character's "address".
> Perhaps your "high stress" job leads you to commit such mistakes? You
> really should look into getting some help with that "little problem" of
> yours, they have done wonders with new medications, yanno? <grin>
Sounds like Lennie, to me....
Steve, K4YZ
John Smith
> Nope.
>
> The IP Address and servers are complete proof that I do NOT share
> any annonymous character's "address".
>
>
> Steve, K4YZ
>
To anyone with even an elementary understanding of anonymous proxies,
anonymous remailers, zombie backdoors, etc., the ability to change ones
IP address and header details is simplistic, indeed, with little time
spent anyone can appear to be "coming" from anywhere in the world.
You waste my time. Worse, you think us all idiots here. You remind me
of the "street smart" prosecutors and defense attorneys who stack jurys
with members of little or no technical knowledge and then call in
"expert witnesses" and propose arguments of technical details to boggle
their minds.
You have only proven that you, yourself are either ignorant to such
technical details, or else you are indeed street smart, I favor the
latter in this case (however, if you in the dark about such things, 15
minutes on google will enlighten you.)
JS
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>
>John Smith wrote:
>> "K4YZ" <steven...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1164905170.1...@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
>> > ...
>> > do it because I'm already in a high stress job and he's cheap
>> > entertainment.
>> >
>> > 73
>> >
>> > Steve, K4YZ
>> >
>>
>> If you are NOT SC, you are his brother... indeed the
>> glitch/mis-configuration/error or settings which have been introduced
>> into your news reader/poster is a dead giveaway!
>
> Nope.
yep
>
> The IP Address and servers are complete proof that I do NOT share
>any annonymous character's "address".
Steve I can easily fake a set of header for any location where I had
interenet access in the past
I lack the knowledge of how to generate new one but I know it is can
be done
you are therefore lying when you claim thae fact you succeeded in
comiting forgery is proof you are not SC
it is merely proof you are a forger
>
>> Perhaps your "high stress" job leads you to commit such mistakes? You
>> really should look into getting some help with that "little problem" of
>> yours, they have done wonders with new medications, yanno? <grin>
>
> Sounds like Lennie, to me....
>
>Steve, K4YZ
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
I use it some but it is very cumbersome and certainly unuable due to
time constraints when some like robeson is in full vioce or keyboard
is you prefer
>
>Regards,
>JS
A. G. Bell
<Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs> wrote in message
news:0ks0n2hpd00e5ncmb...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 22:05:10 -0800, John Smith
> <assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
> >
> >> the one I prefer does not
> >
> >Mark:
> >
> >Take a look at this link, the software is shareware, claims to work with
> >ANY windows app. I am hoping it might be worth your time, look for the
> >download link, I have not tried it.
> >
> >http://www.sharewareconnection.com/spell-magic.htm
>
> I use it some but it is very cumbersome and certainly unuable due to
> time constraints when some like robeson is in full vioce or keyboard
> is you prefer
> >
> >Regards,
> >JS
Don't waste your time sounding intelligent, Mark! God forbid you'd miss a
chance to dump on any of Steve's posts at least six times each.
Steve Robesin is apparetly to you what Lloyd Davies is to Roger Wiseman. He
stalks, you punce.
Lloyd Davies Slappa
"John Smith" <assembl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ekq0u5$vq3$1...@aioe.org...
> K4YZ wrote:
>> The IP Address and servers are complete proof that I do NOT share
>> any annonymous character's "address".
>>
>>
>
> You might enjoy viewing the headers associated with this post, it is the
> result of doing nothing, except proxy-ing though a very high security
> proxy--now what country do you think I am in? And, if you had to use the
> headers to find out?
>
> JS
>
>
That's way too easy "John Smith" aka lardass. Here's everything about you.
http://www.qrz.com/detail/N0VFP
John Smith
> That's way too easy "John Smith" aka lardass. Here's everything about you.
>
> http://www.qrz.com/detail/N0VFP
>
>
At 6'1" and 185 lbs. I am far from a lardass. I take pride in being
physically fit in a world of obese blobs!
JS
Slow Code
You still hoping to be a good radio operator some day or did you decide to
pack it in like Markie?
SC
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
JS is code tested and aprooved just missed the brain washing sessions
you attened steve
>
>SC
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
wrote:
>
><Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs> wrote in message
>news:0ks0n2hpd00e5ncmb...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 22:05:10 -0800, John Smith
>> <assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
>> >
>> >> the one I prefer does not
>> >
>> >Mark:
>> >
>> >Take a look at this link, the software is shareware, claims to work with
>> >ANY windows app. I am hoping it might be worth your time, look for the
>> >download link, I have not tried it.
>> >
>> >http://www.sharewareconnection.com/spell-magic.htm
>>
>> I use it some but it is very cumbersome and certainly unuable due to
>> time constraints when some like robeson is in full vioce or keyboard
>> is you prefer
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >JS
>
>Don't waste your time sounding intelligent, Mark!
I waste nothing sir
>God forbid you'd miss a
>chance to dump on any of Steve's posts at least six times each.
god forbids no such nor do I post more than or twice to any of steve
posts that he chooses to post the same over and over 300 times as he
did today required the cuting and pasting of 30 replies is all
you don't like the reptivenes ask Roesb to at least come up with new
lies to tell
>Steve Robesin is apparetly to you what Lloyd Davies is to Roger Wiseman. He
>stalks, you punce.
I defend myself but thank you for publicly agreeing that Steve is
Stalking me that is a crime
why is it that you blame the victum of the crime for the result?
kb9r...@hotmail.com
John Smith wrote:
please forgive me Allow me to introduce to one the few poster that may
be nuttier than Robeson and Slow code
his name is Roger Wismen AB8MQ
> Lloyd Davies Slappa wrote:
> > That's way too easy "John Smith" aka lardass. Here's everything about you.
> >
> > http://www.qrz.com/detail/N0VFP
http://www.qrz.com/detail/ab8mq
> >
> >
>
> At 6'1" and 185 lbs. I am far from a lardass. I take pride in being
> physically fit in a world of obese blobs!
Roger has a relationship with LLoyf that is based on one of them
propsitioning the other and being turned down but somehow the offended
part was Roger and he ihas prused a vendata as vicous as any Robeson
has tried to unleash on Me
Roger also claims that any body that disagrees with him is gay, in lust
for his body, deperately interested in both Kiddy and shemales
>
> JS
please accept this courtesy of an introduction
John Smith
>
> Roger also claims that any body that disagrees with him is gay, in lust
> for his body, deperately interested in both Kiddy and shemales
>
In that case, I am 500+ lbs, wart on nose, bad breath, feet stink, don't
love Jesus, make obscene advances towards ugly women and still live with
my mother... <grin>
JS
A. G. Bell
<kb9r...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165040511.4...@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
In all reality, truth be known, the "nuttiest" of posters herein is most
certainly Mark himself.
Mark has ample time to post to these newsgroups...look at his timelines.
That bespeaks volumes.
Look at the posts made by others and then compare them to the posts made by
Mark. Clearly Mark has far too much time to whittle away. His home life is
quite obviously lacking anything of interest.
Usenet is Mark's entire life. He lives for it, breathes it, and is a sad
result of same.
So sad, he is.
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
wrote:
>
><kb9r...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1165040511.4...@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> John Smith wrote:
>>
>> please forgive me Allow me to introduce to one the few poster that may
>> be nuttier than Robeson and Slow code
>>
>> his name is Roger Wismen AB8MQ
>> > Lloyd Davies Slappa wrote:
>> > > That's way too easy "John Smith" aka lardass. Here's everything about
>you.
>> > >
>> > > http://www.qrz.com/detail/N0VFP
>>
>> http://www.qrz.com/detail/ab8mq
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > At 6'1" and 185 lbs. I am far from a lardass. I take pride in being
>> > physically fit in a world of obese blobs!
>>
>> Roger has a relationship with LLoyf that is based on one of them
>> propsitioning the other and being turned down but somehow the offended
>> part was Roger and he ihas prused a vendata as vicous as any Robeson
>> has tried to unleash on Me
>>
>> Roger also claims that any body that disagrees with him is gay, in lust
>> for his body, deperately interested in both Kiddy and shemales
>> >
>> > JS
>>
>> please accept this courtesy of an introduction
>>
>
>In all reality, truth be known, the "nuttiest" of posters herein is most
>certainly Mark himself.
in your opion perhaps
>
>Mark has ample time to post to these newsgroups...look at his timelines.
>That bespeaks volumes.
so what I make my living at my pPC lots of down time during the day
>
>Look at the posts made by others and then compare them to the posts made by
>Mark.
well Wismen goes around claiming everybody is haveing rapist incest
and child molesting
Robeson goes around claiming everybody rapes stral comites child
molestoing
You whine on about your obessive intert in My personal life
Jim accuses everybody a lessor crimes like fraud
Personaly Id love it if even once and a while you posted about RADIO
I defend myself from stlaking and slander mostly these days
amazing how it is acceptable to YOU bell to comit CRIMES against
people but not permited to defend themselves
> Clearly Mark has far too much time to whittle away.
reaaly steve? you claiming to have the house under survalnce agan?
> His home life is
>quite obviously lacking anything of interest.
how do you support that conclusion?
my personal private life (although after 8 years of stalking by
Robeson it is hardly private anymore) is vast and obcessvie intert to
many of the posters
and WHY the hell are you ProCoders obessed with everybody personal
private life?
>
>Usenet is Mark's entire life.
Bullshit I spend here a few hour a day
OTOH I know when ceertain poster are going show and speww there filth
SC indeed is one you can almost set your watch by
I spend more as much time on my email steve
Hi steve
> He lives for it, breathes it, and is a sad
>result of same.
why is it that you insist maligning everyone?
>
>So sad, he is.
no I am a happy most of the time
are you going to suggest again stve (or steve wannabe
k4y...@yahoo.com
Do...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 03:52:05 -0500, "A. G. Bell" <hello?@marksakook>
> wrote:
> >In all reality, truth be known, the "nuttiest" of posters herein is most
> >certainly Mark himself.
>
> in your opion perhaps
And the opinion of everyone else herein.
Even your "Feeble Five" buddies wouldn't come to your aid when you
tried some blustering about a suit against me.
> >Mark has ample time to post to these newsgroups...look at his timelines.
> >That bespeaks volumes.
>
> so what I make my living at my pPC lots of down time during the day
Lot's of "down time" bacause you're waiting for the welfare check
to arrive.
> >Look at the posts made by others and then compare them to the posts made by
> >Mark.
>
> well Wismen goes around claiming everybody is haveing rapist incest
> and child molesting
He hasn't claimed that I am, Morkie.
Makes you a liar, by YOUR rules.....
> Robeson goes around claiming everybody rapes stral comites child
> molestoing
Now you're getting mad, Morkie...
> You whine on about your obessive intert in My personal life
What's an 'intert", fatboy?
> Jim accuses everybody a lessor crimes like fraud
Jim hasn't accused you of fraud.
He HAS poked holes in your stories.
> Personaly Id love it if even once and a while you posted about RADIO
We'd love it if YOU did, Morkie, and then DIDN'T GET CAUGHT LYING
ABOUT IT like you did with your most recent "moonbunce" debacle.
> I defend myself from stlaking and slander mostly these days
There's nothing to defend, Morkie...You're guilty.
Google archives refer.
> amazing how it is acceptable to YOU bell to comit CRIMES against
> people but not permited to defend themselves
He's commited no crime.
> > Clearly Mark has far too much time to whittle away.
>
> reaaly steve? you claiming to have the house under survalnce agan?
More paranoia, Morkie.
Follow the headers, fatboy.
> > His home life is
> >quite obviously lacking anything of interest.
>
> how do you support that conclusion?
Your complete incompetence in any subject you dare broach in here
and the hundreds of hours you dedicate to RRAP.
The 20+ screen names you use to defeat Google are pretty strong
evidence, too.
> my personal private life (although after 8 years of stalking by
> Robeson it is hardly private anymore) is vast and obcessvie intert to
> many of the posters
It's WHAT...?!?!
> and WHY the hell are you ProCoders obessed with everybody personal
> private life?
Hey Mork....
YOU are the one who said that if you post here, anything's game.
Unless you want to retract that statement and then live up to it,
guess what..?!?!
> >Usenet is Mark's entire life.
>
> Bull#### I spend here a few hour a day
You spend a few hours a day in bed, you mean...
The rest is spent here.
The DTG's in your posts prove it.
> OTOH I know when ceertain poster are going show and speww there filth
> SC indeed is one you can almost set your watch by
Which only meanas that Slow has another life...a REAL life...that
doesn't tie him to USENET.
> I spend more as much time on my email steve
More paranoia.
> Hi steve
Hi Morkie.
Still not dealing with that paranoia, I see
> > He lives for it, breathes it, and is a sad
> >result of same.
>
> why is it that you insist maligning everyone?
He's not malinging anyone.
Everything he's said is fact.
> >So sad, he is.
>
> no I am a happy most of the time
No, you're not happy. But you are gay.
> are you going to suggest again stve (or steve wannabe
Suggest what, fatboy?
You need to complete your sentences.
Steve, K4YZ
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>
>Do...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
cyber vandal
>> On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 03:52:05 -0500, "A. G. Bell" <hello?@marksakook>
>> wrote:
>
>> >In all reality, truth be known, the "nuttiest" of posters herein is most
>> >certainly Mark himself.
>>
>> in your opion perhaps
>
> And the opinion of everyone else herein.
nope you can't tell the truth about anything can you
K4YZ
his single line "cyber vandal" posts, so I'll just reitereate the
context and give fatboy a second chance.
Probably a waste of time, but oh well...
Steve, K4YZ
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
> Morkie avoided answerng the context of this message with another of
>his single line "cyber vandal" posts, so I'll just reitereate the
>context and give fatboy a second chance.
>
> Probably a waste of time, but oh well...
stve unil you begin to act you might at least be of school age all you
get in response is what I choose
now you desperately try to misquote yourself out of context Morkie, I
will conceed that you know two things that I will never know...What
it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals, and the
going welfare rates in Michigan. steve goes claiming
deal with admiting this quote is lie and apologize for your lie deceit
and distrotions and I might reply to some of your mountioan of shit
K4YZ
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
> On 8 Dec 2006 05:29:07 -0800, "K4YZ" <steven...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Morkie avoided answerng the context of this message with another of
> >his single line "cyber vandal" posts, so I'll just reitereate the
> >context and give fatboy a second chance.
> >
> > Probably a waste of time, but oh well...
>
> stve unil you begin to act you might at least be of school age all you
> get in response is what I choose
I guess that meant something to you, Morkie, but I'll be darned if
I know what it is.
> now you desperately try to misquote yourself out of context Morkie, I
> will conceed that you know two things that I will never know...What
> it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's genitals, and the
> going welfare rates in Michigan. steve goes claiming
If you pay attention to the attributes, Morkie, you will see that
it appears as if they are YOUR words since you are simply doing
cut-and-pastes in order to keep up with the traffic.
And you CONTINUE to make it clear that your English comprehension
skills are woefully inadequate for a "man" who alledges three college
degrees.
> deal with admiting this quote is lie and apologize for your lie deceit
> and distrotions and I might reply to some of your mountioan of ####
The "mountioan of ####" is yours, Morkie, including all of the
"excrement" subject lines.
Steve, K4YZ
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>
>Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
cyber vandalism
stve until you final stop your vandalizing of every post you get no
real response unles I see on the first screenfull or so that it suits
me to respond to
esp when you post 40 plus pieces of shit
and apoloze for your lies that I have eaten your shit
k4y...@yahoo.com
K4YZ repeated for Morkie's benefit:
k4y...@yahoo.com
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>
>K4YZ repeated for Morkie's benefit:
Morkie, I will conceed that you know two things that I will never
know...What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's
genitals, and the going welfare rates in Michigan. steve goes claiming
othermen eat his shit
stop the lying stop the vandalism and stop the bull at this point my
server say you have post 8o plus itme titled with shit or a synoym in
the title
stop lying syaing I eat your shit
stop lying about being miiss quoted
get a life and get help since you are clearly obessed with staking a
man sexualy
the truth I trick you in 1998 when you thrented to MURDER me
stop this whining and face facts you are the one that is sick with
your obesstion for shit
the ruth is you are truly MAD robeson get help
and please stop the lie I have seen that you are doing ANYTHING for my
benifit
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>
Morkie, I will conceed that you know two things that I will never
know...What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's
genitals, and the going welfare rates in Michigan. steve goes claiming
othermen eat his shit
stop the lying stop the vandalism and stop the bull at this point my
server say you have post 8o plus itme titled with shit or a synoym in
the title
stop lying syaing I eat your shit
stop lying about being miiss quoted
get a life and get help since you are clearly obessed with staking a
man sexualy
the truth I trick you in 1998 when you thrented to MURDER me
stop this whining and face facts you are the one that is sick with
your obesstion for shit
the ruth is you are truly MAD robeson get help
and please stop the lie I have seen that you are doing ANYTHING for my
benifit
Plexus
Eagle wrote:
> Brian,
> You need to work on your spelling before even THINKING about trying to pass
> a 5WPM code test... lol!
>
> Dave
Dave,
Please don't confuse me with our (former member of) Mensa friend! btw,
I passed 13 wpm decades ago, when the Morse test was administered by
the FCC. That was when you had to be letter-for-letter perfect one
minute straight, of random 5-letter code groups... and (for the
majority of us) it was no big strain. Since then, the test has been
slowed-down and dumbed-down considerably.
Fortunately, for those unable/unwilling to put a modicum of effort into
achieving a paltry 5 wpm proficiency, the FCC appears to have decided
to eliminate Element 1 entirely.
Unfortunately, for those of us who thought it was no big deal to attain
13 wpm (and even 5 wpm) proficiency, the recently expanded HF fone
bands will now be clogged with lids.
Bryan
K4YZ
> you will have all seen the rsults today of K4YZ obessive stalking of
> Myself One KB9RQZ
There's no stalking here, fatboy.
You come here voluntarily. Any suggestion otherwise is, (as if we
should expect something else?) a lie from you.
> as I said more than a year ago I would not stand for the constant
> libel of Robeson and few other in NG for more than year we have been
> "treated" to steve effort to wera me down under his torrent of filth
> and lies
The torrent of "filth and lies" comes from Chassell, Michigan,
Morkie.
> whe n I saw 100 plus posts on this subject from obviously I could
> answer them indivualy, unlike Robeson I have life
No, you don't.
Any quick perusal of YOUR posts shows that you post everyday,
around the clock.
My posts come on "off" days and when there's nothing on the late
movie.
You're my cheap, late night entertainment.
> I may have steamrolled over something other than steve diatribe if I
> steamrooled over you missing your content for this I am sorry
No you're not.
Everyone in this forum, your "friends" included, have told you
your crap isn't appreciated here, yet you outpost everyone here, myself
included, 15:1.
> this message will be sent multitime in hope in may survive
And there's my point. You're bound and determined to frag the NG
no matter what. You're announcing your intention to SPAM the NG.
> following is at this point is the cut and paste at it full measure bit
> got afdded as I noted charged made again that I wished to adress
In other words, you STILL haven't gotten it through your numb
skull that you're making a fool out of yourself, to wit:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Morkie, I will conceed that you know two things that I will never
> know...What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's
> genitals, and the going welfare rates in Michigan. steve goes claiming
> othermen eat his ####
Stupid, stupid stupid, Morkie...That's all I can say about YOUR
interpretation of that paragraph.
YOU have re-quoted it over 2,500 times now and I only posted it
once...Yet YOU still think it somehow has words in it that clearly are
not there.
> stop the lying stop the vandalism and stop the bull at this point my
> server say you have post 8o plus itme titled with #### or a synoym in
> the title
Like I said, Morkie...You out-post me 15:1. Daily.
There's no vandalism. The filth and profanity are YOURS and YOURS
alone.
> stop lying syaing I eat your ####
Stop claiming you have three college degrees and then clearly
demonstrating that you're incompetent in basic English comprehension.
I never said you consume ANYONE'S excrement except YOUR OWN,
Morkie!
An YOU have been providing the proof everytime you cite that
quote!
> stop lying about being miiss quoted
I am being misquoted.
YOU keep claiming that I suggest that you consume MY excrement, or
that I am claiming that other men consume my excrement.
That's a lie.
I am claiming YOU consume your OWN!
And again...YOU prove it!
> get a life and get help since you are clearly obessed with staking a
> man sexualy
I HAVE a life...That's why I don't pound EVERY post of yours with
foul language and deceitful misquotes on a daily basis like you do
mine.
> the truth I trick you in 1998 when you thrented to MURDER me
The truth is you've been lying since 1998 on every subjected you've
engaged in RRAP. The truth is your tales are so transparent that you
couldn't hold water with them.
> stop this whining and face facts you are the one that is sick with
> your obesstion for ####
You are the one with an "obesstion" for excrement,
fatboy....That's why you continually re-post that subject line and then
use that word blatantly in most of your posts.
> the ruth is you are truly MAD robeson get help
Nope.
> and please stop the lie I have seen that you are doing ANYTHING for my
> benifit
I am. I am trying to make you see what an idiot and a fool you
make out of yourself in public. These "apology" posts of yours are
classic.
> and stop lying about the ToS of Google they expressly prohibit your
> cyvervandalism
Stop whining. Stop being a dork that acts lie Mork. And WHAT is
"cyvervandalism"..??
Someone vandalizd a cyver? What's a cyver and HOW did it get
vandalized...?!?!
> and stop lying about my Military service I have my DD 214 as I guess
> you do likely yours list section 8 as reason for discharge
What military service?
The only thing YOU "serviced" in the military were some drunk
soldiers via a knothole in the latrine.
Steve, K4YZ
Ma...@kb9rqz.aprs
>Do...@kb9rqz.aprs wrote:
>> you will have all seen the rsults today of K4YZ obessive stalking of
>> Myself One KB9RQZ
>
> There's no stalking here, fatboy.
Morkie, I will conceed that you know two things that I will never
know...What it's like to lick my excrement off of another man's
genitals, and the going welfare rates in Michigan. steve goes claiming
stop your lies fess up
stop your lying about my not having served in the armed you stole the
records that prove to you otherwsie
stop your staking online and off stop harrassing my neighboors with
your frauduelnt mailings
stop you vandism of my my post and please stop the pethic lie your are
being misquoted
jioing a newgruop is not signing some kind of consent to being stalked
stev stop that lie
stop you big that you are trying to do me some sort of favor
you are not you are lying and engaing in your gay bashing hate
mongering
steve I do have a life but mine is set differently than yours
as to filth steve it is amazing that it ok for you post something but
filthy if I dare repat it
and if I am entertianing you as you clim then you have NO cause to be
upset and should thanking me for it
and stev it is LIE on your part to say Todd and are firend or buddies
or lovers. we have meet a few times when I lived in springfeild and
have encoutered one another on the air and here but that is it
Steve you must enoy having it said that you force men to eat your shit
since you come here of your own free will. No? then you lie when my
comming has anything to do with the matter
indeed you did not stop you r attacks on me here in or in real life
when I left rrap years as you demended in your blackmial
Ma...@kb9rqz.org
<assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>K4YZ wrote:
>> Nope.
>>
>> The IP Address and servers are complete proof that I do NOT share
>> any annonymous character's "address".
>>
>> Sounds like Lennie, to me....
>>
>> Steve, K4YZ
>>
>
>To anyone with even an elementary understanding of anonymous proxies,
>anonymous remailers, zombie backdoors, etc., the ability to change ones
>IP address and header details is simplistic, indeed, with little time
>spent anyone can appear to be "coming" from anywhere in the world.
>
>You waste my time. Worse, you think us all idiots here. You remind me
>of the "street smart" prosecutors and defense attorneys who stack jurys
>with members of little or no technical knowledge and then call in
>"expert witnesses" and propose arguments of technical details to boggle
>their minds.
>
>You have only proven that you, yourself are either ignorant to such
>technical details, or else you are indeed street smart, I favor the
>latter in this case (however, if you in the dark about such things, 15
>minutes on google will enlighten you.)
>
>JS
Dlod it would help if you went and found some gruop where everybody is
indeed stupid to try your misderection tricks in
"one useless man is disgrace 2 become a law firm 3 or more become a congress"
adams
woger you are a Congress all in your own head
http://kb9rqz.bravejournal.com/
G
Dloyd Lavies
>
> - Show quoted text -
Mark, why would I need a group where everyone is stupid when I have
you? You seem to have enough stupidity to cover the entire group.
Like I've said and you can believe what you want to believe, I really
don't care, I only post under this nym or my own call, I don't need
mulitple nyms, I have no need, one is sufficent and appears that it
still is because you have been unable to detect who I am. Think for a
minute Mark, what purpose would it serve to have multiple nyms? None.
Dloyd