Info on Galaxy 99V?
Lenny Stover
Finally had to replace my poor old Uniden Grant, it took a severe beating
for a number of years.
Just bought a Galaxy 99V. Can't figure out how to get to 27 Mhz,
(everything on the frequency counter is 28 Mhz.) Is it possible to get it
down to 27 Mhz, or should I box it up and take it back?
Thanks in advance.
Alan S.
news:Jv3j9.808$JS7.21...@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com:
If it's worth anything to you (and it should be), that radio is illegal
to use on CB frequencies. Box it up and take it back.
If you dig Galaxy's, pick up a DX959. You should be able to score on for
180 bucks, and it is a legal radio (type accepted) for use on CB. It
works every bit as good as a 99V.
I'm not going to preach to you about legal/vs illegal stuff. Just know
that you can score a nice radio, and be legal at the same time. Have Fun!
Alan S.
Lenny Stover
"Alan S." <sub...@hotmail.com> wrote
> If it's worth anything to you (and it should be), that radio is illegal
> to use on CB frequencies. Box it up and take it back.
Hmmm...I learn something new every day. ;-)
> If you dig Galaxy's, pick up a DX959. You should be able to score on for
> 180 bucks, and it is a legal radio (type accepted) for use on CB. It
> works every bit as good as a 99V.
The old Grant had some "work" done to it and I really liked it. I bought
the 99V looking for a "big radio" sound..you know...slight reverb and deep
bass sound. Don't really care for "roger-beeps" and all that stuff, just
wanted a "big radio."
> I'm not going to preach to you about legal/vs illegal stuff.
Thanks. I tend to run "slightly" more wattage than I should, but almost
always practice proper etiquette. Don't want to be *too* illegal in my
operation, though.
Thanks for the quick response.
Tom Bridge - Doc
what some others say they are sad that you have it.
--
Best Regards!
- Doc -
http://hr2510.homeip.net:2510/
"Lenny Stover" <mppd...@the-police.com> wrote in message
news:Jv3j9.808$JS7.21...@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
Mad Dog
do a little searching for mods on the Galaxy.
--
Mad Dog
"Lenny Stover" <mppd...@the-police.com> wrote in message
news:Jv3j9.808$JS7.21...@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
Dave or Debby
better to get a Uniden Grant instead.
Dave!
"Lenny Stover" <mppd...@the-police.com> wrote in message
news:Jv3j9.808$JS7.21...@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
OZARK333
Channel Expansion
1) Open up your radio.
2) Find the small circuit board on the left of the radio.
3) Cut the green wire and tape it off.
4) There is an unplugged connector by this board....plug it in.
5) That's it.!You now have 8 bands of 40 channels.25.165-28.755.
This and more info at
http://www.radiomods.co.nz/galaxymodspage.html
"Got RF?"
Brian Griffey
--
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Griffey
http://home.att.net/~briangriffey/SkyWave2879AB.pdf
The New 1 Pill Design is almost Complete!
http://home.att.net/~briangriffey/1PILL.pdf
Dave or Debby
Dave!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Brian Griffey" <briang...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Fgmj9.49981$jG2.3...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Lenny Stover
email.
I tried taking the easy way out and returning the 99V to the dealer (a
Williams truckstop) and exchange it for a regular ole CB. They will not
take it back, they do exchanges only and wanted me to get a CB and an
additional $200.00 in store merchandise. Gonna try getting Visa to stop
payment, but if I can't I guess I'll try to do the mod.
Thanks again for all the info, folks.
TRA1N
Train
>Subject: Re: Info on Galaxy 99V?
>From: "Lenny Stover" mppd...@the-police.com
>Date: 9/24/02 11:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <0q%j9.16$M85.7...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com>
Lou Franklin
Rather than trying to describe this ( 1 picture worth 1000 words) we
have a 1-page fact sheet with pix that shows how to do it. Send me a
stamped #10 self-addressed envelope for this procedure.
Lou
*********************
"Lenny Stover" <mppd...@the-police.com> wrote:
***************************************************************************
Who are we? Since 1976, we've been THE source for CB Radio
technical information & high-performance CB accessories!
DIRECT link to our secure Web Order Form:
https://www.cbcintl.com/secure.htm
NOTE: Include the "s" in http; otherwise it's not secure!
Email: l...@cbcintl.com
Web: www.cbcintl.com
------------------------------------
CBC INTERNATIONAL
P.O. Box 30655
Tucson AZ 85751 USA
Toll-Free TEL. & FAX: (888) 434-9227
Local TEL. & FAX: (520) 298-7980
TRA1N
with it.
Train
>Subject: Re: Info on Galaxy 99V?
>From: Lou Franklin l...@cbcintl.com
>Date: 9/25/02 2:41 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <3gm2pus3uco6dj16a...@4ax.com>
>
>You need to move one wire over to open the full bandwidth of this one.
>Rather than trying to describe this ( 1 picture worth 1000 words) we
>have a 1-page fact sheet with pix that shows how to do it. Send me a
>stamped #10 self-addressed envelope for this procedure.
>Lou
>*********************
>
>"Lenny Stover" <mppd...@the-police.com> wrote:
>
>>First time poster. Dumb question. (It figures, right?)
>>
>>Finally had to replace my poor old Uniden Grant, it took a severe beating
>>for a number of years.
>>
>>Just bought a Galaxy 99V. Can't figure out how to get to 27 Mhz,
>>(everything on the frequency counter is 28 Mhz.) Is it possible to get it
>>down to 27 Mhz, or should I box it up and take it back?
>>
>>Thanks in advance.
>>
>
>
>
>***********************************************
Lou spam snipped!
Timbo Nebo
days in here is apreciated
>Lou you eternal putz...........That mod is all over the net with graphics to
>go
>with it.
>Train
>
Tim Nebo
OZARK333
enjoyment. Mine rocks! Ask all the DX stations!
333 Springfield MO
"Got RF?"
Lenny Stover
"OZARK333" <ozar...@aol.comnojunk> wrote
> It's a good radio Lenny. Don't let too many opinions interfere with your
> enjoyment. Mine rocks! Ask all the DX stations!
> 333 Springfield MO
Cool! I'm gonna make the mod this weekend and try it out next week. Wanted
to do it sooner but ran 3000 miles last week thru tropical storm
"Whats-her-name." :-(
Now if I can just get somebody to send me that link for the mod again. I
had my OE set to delete messages after 5 days, but that was before I went
back to long-haulin'.
> "Got RF?"
I will after this mod !!!!!!!! ;-)
Lenny Stover
"Lenny Stover" <mppd...@the-police.com> wrote
> Now if I can just get somebody to send me that link for the mod again.
Ooops! Forgot I have instructions for the mod in email, thanks to everybody
that sent them.
Need sleep....yea, that's it!
Lenny Stover
"OZARK333" <ozar...@aol.comnojunk> wrote
> It's a good radio Lenny. Don't let too many opinions interfere with your
> enjoyment. Mine rocks! Ask all the DX stations!
> 333 Springfield MO
Your darned right it is! Completed the mod yesterday and quickly asked for
a radio check on "Sesame." Everybody was talking about the "guy with the
big radio asking for a radio check." All I can say is.....YEEE HAAA!
<enormous grin>
> "Got RF?"
Yep. ;-)
Aaron H. Voobner
>Completed the mod yesterday and quickly asked for
>a radio check on "Sesame." Everybody was talking about
>the "guy with the big radio asking for a radio check."
>All I can say is.....YEEE HAAA!
i.e. "laws be damned"?
-A
OZARK333
>i.e. "laws be damned"?
>-A
"Got RF?"
Lenny Stover
"Aaron H. Voobner" <ahvo...@yahoo.com> wrote
> i.e. "laws be damned"?
I've also run more wattage than is legally allowed for a number of years. I
don't however, violate CB etiquette, use profanity, intentionally key on
others unless they are attempting to key over my communications, etc.
Until *very* recently, I used the CB primarily to provide information and
respond to requests for assistance on Channel 9. Nothing is more
infuriating than attempting to give somebody directions and then to be keyed
on by some idiot chanting the same thing over, and over, and over, and over,
and over..... With a flip of a switch, I could get the travelling
directions to the person requesting them. One thing that they taught us in
the police academy was that there is a difference between the "letter of the
law" and the "spirit of the law." When the laws limiting CB to low wattage
were enacted, a license was required to operate a CB and radio traffic was
minimal compared to now. Today, it is almost impossible to communicate on a
CB in a major metropolitan area (read suburban Chicago) without a little
extra wattage and modulation. As I previously stated, as long as proper
radio etiquitte is adhered to, I don't have a problem with it.
Aaron H. Voobner
> "Aaron H. Voobner" <ahvo...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> > i.e. "laws be damned"?
>
> I've also run more wattage than is legally allowed for a number of years. I
> don't however, violate CB etiquette, use profanity, intentionally key on
> others unless they are attempting to key over my communications, etc.
Problem is, everyone thinks everone else is 'keying' over them, and is
using linears 100% of the time. The need to "talk over" a million
other people using illegal linears is poor justification for the use
of an illegal linear.
>
> Until *very* recently, I used the CB primarily to provide information and
> respond to requests for assistance on Channel 9. Nothing is more
> infuriating than attempting to give somebody directions and then to be keyed
> on by some idiot chanting the same thing over, and over, and over, and over,
> and over.....
And he's probably using an amp because he thinks he needs it to "get
over" interference.
>With a flip of a switch, I could get the travelling
> directions to the person requesting them.
>One thing that they taught us in
> the police academy
Are you a police officer?
> was that there is a difference between the "letter of the
> law" and the "spirit of the law."
I agree with the spirit of the law. And the spirit of the law in
regard to CB is to avoid intentional interference and allow everyone a
chance to communicate. That was why power limits were set. Put everone
on an equal footing. No one station with "more watts" than any other.
> When the laws limiting CB to low wattage
> were enacted, a license was required to operate a CB and radio traffic was
> minimal compared to now. Today, it is almost impossible to communicate on a
> CB in a major metropolitan area (read suburban Chicago) without a little
> extra wattage and modulation.
It's become impossible to communicate BECAUSE a majority of people are
running extra wattage and modulation. Surely you can see that the
wattage limit was enacted to allow everyone an equal chance to
communicate. The spirit of the law is *equal access to communications
for all*. If the FCC let everyone decide their own wattage -- they'd
let only SOME people (the ones with extra power) communicate -- and
not others (the ones with low power).
As I previously stated, as long as proper
> radio etiquitte is adhered to, I don't have a problem with it.
Proper radio etiquette is about observing limits too. What if the 40
legal channels became so polluted by high power and so unusable that
the majority of CB'ers moved to unauthorized bands? Would you follow?
-A
tools
> > "Aaron H. Voobner" <ahvo...@yahoo.com> wrote
> BECAUSE a majority of people are
> running extra wattage and modulation
If you are correct, then it would seem that in a democratic country, extra
wattage would become legal. If you are right, fat chance of changing it. So
why strain yourself over it?.
Lenny Stover
"Aaron H. Voobner" <ahvo...@yahoo.com> wrote
> Problem is, everyone thinks everone else is 'keying' over them, and is
> using linears 100% of the time. The need to "talk over" a million
> other people using illegal linears is poor justification for the use
> of an illegal linear.
I think when somebody is chanting "Ba-ba-booyey" over and over and over, the
*need* to be keyed on. I don't interfere with people conversing, but when I
am giving someone directions and they key over me in the middle of my
exchange of information, then IMHO, I am justified in adding some "fire to
my wire."
> Are you a police officer?
Yes. And I also drive a truck. And I've been known to perform manual labor
on occassion.
> I agree with the spirit of the law. And the spirit of the law in
> regard to CB is to avoid intentional interference and allow everyone a
> chance to communicate.
And there were protocols that every licensed CBer knew and that "most"
practiced. Those protocols are out the window now, and CB is a free for
all. Your only chance to communicate effectively is to "pump it up."
> It's become impossible to communicate BECAUSE a majority of people are
> running extra wattage and modulation.
No...it is impossible to communicate because you have too many people trying
to talk at the same time.
>If the FCC let everyone decide their own wattage -- they'd
> let only SOME people (the ones with extra power) communicate -- and
> not others (the ones with low power).
The FCC did that when they dropped the licensing requirement and *anybody*
with 50 bucks was able to buy a CB and dominate the airways.
> Proper radio etiquette is about observing limits too.
We have differing opinions of what comprises "proper radio etiquette" on a
CB.
What if the 40
> legal channels became so polluted by high power and so unusable that
> the majority of CB'ers moved to unauthorized bands? Would you follow?
Ummmm......probably not, but then I don't anticipate that happening. What
if the FCC dropped licensing requirements for "hams" and all the CBers
bought export radios? Would you leave?
Aaron H. Voobner
is
>> using linears 100% of the time. The need to "talk over" a million
>> other people using illegal linears is poor justification for the
use
>> of an illegal linear.
>
over,
>the
>*need* to be keyed on. I don't interfere with people conversing, but
when
>I
>am giving someone directions and they key over me in the middle of my
>exchange of information, then IMHO, I am justified in adding some
"fire
>to
>my wire."
>
manual labor
>on occassion.
>
>> regard to CB is to avoid intentional interference and allow
everyone a
>> chance to communicate.
>
"most"
>practiced. Those protocols are out the window now, and CB is a free
for
>all. Your only chance to communicate effectively is to "pump it up."
Who said the protocols were "out the window"? CB does not require
individual station licenses anymore, but the FCC grants operating
privileges with the understanding that you agree to operate in
accordance with the rules. And the rules still exist.
Gosh Lenny, I think you're misinformed, or just yanking our chains. I
could be wrong. Let's let your boss decide. Try this:
1. Print out the The current Code of Federal Regulations Title 47,
Volume 5, Parts 80 to End. (You can find it on the official USG site,
or Frank has a copy of it posted here:
http://www.cet.com/~yeti/47cfr95_Subpart-D.txt)
2. Bring it to your commanding officer or superior. Tell him this is
current US Code and still in force. Show him this relevant section:
Sec. 95.411 (CB Rule 11) May I use power amplifiers?
(a) You may not attach the following items (power amplifiers) to
your certificated CB transmitter in any way:
(1) External radio frequency (RF) power amplifiers (sometimes
called
linears or linear amplifiers); or
(2) Any other devices which, when used with a radio transmitter as
a
signal source, are capable of amplifying the signal.
(b) There are no exceptions to this rule and use of a power
amplifier voids your authority to operate the station.
(c) The FCC will presume you have used a linear or other external
RF
power amplifier if--
[[Page 537]]
(1) It is in your possession or on your premises; and
(2) There is other evidence that you have operated your CB station
with more power than allowed by CB Rule 10, Sec. 95.410.
(d) Paragraph (c) of this section does not apply if you hold a
license in another radio service which allows you to operate an
external
RF power amplifier.
3. Next, point out this section of Code to him:
Sec. 95.421 (CB Rule 21) What are the penalties for violating these
rules?
(a) If the FCC finds that you have willfully or repeatedly
violated
the Communications Act or the FCC Rules, you may have to pay as much
as $10,000 for each violation, up to a total of $75,000. (See section
503(b) of the Communications Act.)
(b) If the FCC finds that you have violated any section of the
Communications Act or the FCC Rules, you may be ordered to stop
whatever action caused the violation. (See section 312(b) of the
Communications
Act.)
(c) If a Federal court finds that you have willfully and knowingly
violated any FCC Rule, you may be fined up to $500 for each day you
committed the violation. (See section 502 of the Communications Act.)
(d) If a Federal court finds that you have willfully and knowingly
violated any provision of the Communications Act, you may be fined up
to
$10,000 or you may be imprisoned for one year, or both. (See section
501
of the Communications Act.)
4. Tell him that the FCC enforcement division is still actively
prosecuting CB rule violations. Check out www.rainreport.com/ for
documentation of some recent busts.
5. Ask your boss, given all of the above, if he feels that you as a
peace offiicer should be actively violating the Code of Federal
Regulations Title 47, CB rules, and also going onto Internet
newsgroups and advising citizens to do the same.
-Aaron-
tools
to remember?
"Aaron H. Voobner" <ahvo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c9ceae5b.02100...@posting.google.com...
Aaron H. Voobner
<snip>
Stover says linears are required and CB is a free for all. I disagree, period.
-A
tools
"Aaron H. Voobner" <ahvo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c9ceae5b.02100...@posting.google.com...
Twistedhed
>Who said the protocols were "out the window"? <<
Hmmm....for starters,,,Dave Hall claimed it's a cesspoole that reflects
society. You Lelnad, Frank, Georgie,,,y'all have slammed cb on numerous
occcasions, going as far as laughingly saying it's useless for
communication.....but we still find you nocodes here wanting to jack
cbers off. Ya'll even ask about our private undergarment accessories.
>CB does not require individual station licenses anymore, but the FCC
grants operating privileges with the understanding that you agree to
operate in accordance with the rules. And the rules still exist.<<
And they are no longer enforced on cb as long as one does not create a
nuisance, problem, safety issue or interference.
>Gosh Lenny, I think you're misinformed, <<
That's pretty funny too, since you don't think too often...you usually
just post and we laugh later.
>or just yanking our chains. I could be wrong. Let's let your boss
decide. <<
Another veiled threat coming from the self-proclaimed leader of the
trouble posse.
You pulled the same garbage with Dennis' employer and he's still here.
And you're still whining about being impotent.
Twistedhed
Aaron H. Voobner
>
> Another veiled threat coming from the self-proclaimed leader of the
> trouble posse.
> You pulled the same garbage with Dennis' employer and he's still here.
> And you're still whining about being impotent.
Hi Twist. No threat, veiled or otherwise. But it does seem a tad
irresponsible for a sworn police officer to gleefully
(..."YEEE-HAWWW!"...) announce that he is operating a prohibited
transceiver illegally on the Citizens Band...proclaim that illegal
power amplifiers are necessary to communicate...and announce that CB
is no longer regulated and is a "free for all". People who are trying
to decide whether or not to operate within the law are likely reading
this newsgroup. IMO, Mr. Stover has a responsibility to see that any
information he posts here is accurate and reflects actual -not
estimated- FCC policy.
-Aaron-
Twistedhed
news:<18198-3D9...@storefull-2318.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
Another veiled threat coming from the self-proclaimed leader of the
trouble posse.
You pulled the same garbage with Dennis' employer and he's still here.
And you're still whining about being impotent.
>Hi Twist. <
Well, since we're dealing with several "aarons", I guess I can reply to
"this" Arron since he doesn't seem as pissed offf or rabid as the
others. Hello and good day.
>No threat, veiled or otherwise. But it does seem a tad irresponsible
for a sworn police officer to gleefully (..."YEEE-HAWWW!"...) announce
that he is operating a prohibited transceiver illegally on the Citizens
Band..<<
Irresponsibility was never a crime.
>.proclaim that illegal power amplifiers are necessary to
communicate...and announce that CB is no longer regulated and is a "free
for all".<<
Well, amps do help,,especially during the day when all the skip is
running, but I'd rather find a nice quiet off channel on the freeband
than run a buncha power. To me, and in my certainly humbled opinion, it
is the lesser of the 2 evils.
> People who are trying to decide whether or not to operate within the
law are likely reading this newsgroup. <<
Then they can see that the feds don't give a rats azz about low power
freebanding above the legal 40 but below 10 meter (especially 555) as
long as there are no safety, interference, etc., legitimate complaints.
Hell, even running amps (to a point) seems relevantly harmless unless
you're in a very populated area, otherwise the feds would make it a
priority..
>IMO, Mr. Stover has a responsibility to see that any information he
posts here is accurate and reflects actual -not estimated- FCC policy.
-Aaron-<<
I can appreciate your position while disagreeing at the same time
without prejudice. I believe it was merely an interpretation,,,,one that
is somewhat accurate of the current state of cb. Many of us know from
experience what to expect from the FCC, IE: which behavior causes
problems and what type action the feds will take. Most cbers know that
the heavy hand of enforcement by the FCC is not what certain types on
this board would like it to be, despite the false and oft reiterated
claims to the contrary.
Aaron H. Voobner
>From: ahvo...@yahoo.com (Aaron=A0H.=A0Voobner)
>news:<18198-3D9...@storefull-2318.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
>Another veiled threat coming from the self-proclaimed leader of the
>trouble posse.
>You pulled the same garbage with Dennis' employer and he's still
here.
>And you're still whining about being impotent.
>-
>>Hi Twist. <
>
>
>
>Well, since we're dealing with several "aarons", I guess I can reply
to
>"this" Arron since he doesn't seem as pissed offf or rabid as the
>others. Hello and good day.
Corrections:
1.There's only one Aaaron, and you're talking to him.
2. The only rabidity and pissed-offedness in this thread is coming
from you.
>>No threat, veiled or otherwise. But it does seem a tad irresponsible
>for a sworn police officer to gleefully (..."YEEE-HAWWW!"...)
announce
>that he is operating a prohibited transceiver illegally on the
Citizens
>Band..<<
>
>
>
>
>
>Irresponsibility was never a crime.
>
>
I don't know about you, but I'd want to know the police officers hired
in my town were selected on the basis of their ability to act
responsibly.
>>.proclaim that illegal power amplifiers are necessary to
>communicate...and announce that CB is no longer regulated and is a
"free
>for all".<<
>
>
>
>Well, amps do help,,especially during the day when all the skip is
>running, but I'd rather find a nice quiet off channel on the freeband
>than run a buncha power. To me, and in my certainly humbled opinion,
it
>is the lesser of the 2 evils.
That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. Supporting illegal
operation has some built-in disadvantages though. It labels you as
irresponsible and unlawful. These are not traits that people in
general find trustworthy.
>
>
>
>
>
>> People who are trying to decide whether or not to operate within
the
>law are likely reading this newsgroup. <<
>
>
>
>Then they can see that the feds don't give a rats azz about low power
>freebanding above the legal 40 but below 10 meter (especially 555) as
>long as there are no safety, interference, etc., legitimate
complaints.
If they looked closer they'd see that several amateurs have indeed
been busted for "freebanding" and running illegal power on the legal
40 in the last year (case files available in the FCC enforcement
logs). Truck stops are being cited for selling non-type-accepted CB
gear. eBay auctions for illegal CB amps continue to be stopped.
Operating in open defiance of FCC rules whether you're a ham or not
doesn't make sense, except perhaps to antisocials and misfits.
>Hell, even running amps (to a point) seems relevantly harmless
unless
>you're in a very populated area, otherwise the feds would make it a
>priority..
With cutbacks in funding, it's a given that the FCC can't make
enforcement in ANY radio service a "priority". They can't be
everywhere at once. However that doesn't automatically signal that the
entire spectrum is "a free for all".
>
>
>
>
>
>>IMO, Mr. Stover has a responsibility to see that any information he
>posts here is accurate and reflects actual -not estimated- FCC
policy.
>-Aaron-<<
>
>
>
>I can appreciate your position while disagreeing at the same time
>without prejudice. I believe it was merely an interpretation,,,,one
that
>is somewhat accurate of the current state of cb.
But his interpretation is not accurate as to the current state of
Federal Regulations governing CB. It is in fact, harmfully erroneous.
For example, there have been no statements issued by the FCC to the
effect that the old RF power rules may be ignored due to increasing
use of the band. If anything, CB sales have declined since the 1970's
boom. Finally, current Title 47 CFR states that external CB amplifiers
are prohibited - and there are no exceptions to this rule, (not even
for police, fire, and public service).
> Many of us know from
>experience what to expect from the FCC, IE: which behavior causes
>problems and what type action the feds will take. Most cbers know
that
>the heavy hand of enforcement by the FCC is not what certain types on
>this board would like it to be, despite the false and oft reiterated
>claims to the contrary.
As I said before, the FCC can't be everywhere at once. No one is
disputing that you'll probably be able to commit outrageous rule
violations and get away with it. But you have to wonder what kind of
person enjoys the fact that he can "get away with" breaking rules and
federal laws that have been enacted for the good of all. I certainly
wouldn't want this kind of person to be a police officer in my town.
-Aaron-
Twistedhed
From: ahvo...@yahoo.com (Aaron=A0H.=A0Voobner)
twist...@webtv.net (Twistedhed) wrote in message
news:<18198-3D9...@storefull-2318.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
Another veiled threat coming from the self-proclaimed leader of the
trouble posse.
You pulled the same garbage with Dennis' employer and he's still here.
And you're still whining about being impotent.
-
>Hi Twist. <
Well, since we're dealing with several "aarons", I guess I can reply to
"this" Arron since he doesn't seem as pissed offf or rabid as the
others. Hello and good day.
>Corrections: <
.....opinions.
>1.There's only one Aaaron, and you're talking to him.<<
Then use the voobner@yahoo addy you were using before with the same
path.
Until then, just initate the OE and wordwrap mistakes. Or don't.
>2. The only rabidity and pissed-offedness in this thread is coming from
you. <<
Never has anyone pissed me off in this group.
Perplexed, yes, confused, yes,,,,even fooled and taken advantage of, but
never has anyone, certainly not you, managed to piss me off.
>No threat, veiled or otherwise. But it does seem a tad irresponsible
for a sworn police officer to gleefully (..."YEEE-HAWWW!"...)
announce
that he is operating a prohibited transceiver illegally on the
Citizens
Band..<<
Why the hell would that piss you off to the point you felt to comment on
it? I don't go frothing at the mouth like you're doing now when JerryO
comes in here gloating when a cber gets popped. Hell, if we wanted, us
ignunt and lowly cbahs could glote ever dayz az dem hammyz getz ders on
da regler bassis by da fedz!.
Irresponsibility was never a crime.
>I don't know about you, but I'd want to know the police officers hired
in my town were selected on the basis of their ability to act
responsibly. <<
Some of us don't judge what they do in their off time short of a "real"
crime,,...it is clear the majority do not believe the malarkey you
attempt but fail to set forth as being priorities.
>.proclaim that illegal power amplifiers are necessary to
communicate...and announce that CB is no longer regulated and is a "free
for all".<<
Well, amps do help,,especially during the day when all the skip is
running, but I'd rather find a nice quiet off channel on the freeband
than run a buncha power. To me, and in my certainly humbled opinion, it
is the lesser of the 2 evils.
That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
>Supporting illegal operation has some built-in disadvantages though.<<<
If I choose to do something it does not mean I encourage another to do
so. Learn the difference.
> It labels you as irresponsible and unlawful. <<
Your lables are in the extreme minority and of no real
consequence....hence you being underground. Let us imagine only for a
moment that not true..........your word among these pages
is,,,well,,,,,a bit more than compromised...again...it leads back to
your attempts at being underground.
>These are not traits that people in general find trustworthy. <<
I agree. Most people do not agree with you that people that drive 56 in
a 55 are criminals or irresponsible, or untrustworthy.
Ditto for freebanding where we do and for DX.
>People who are trying to decide whether or not to operate within the
law are likely reading this newsgroup. <<
Then they can see that the feds don't give a rats azz about low power
freebanding above the legal 40 but below 10 meter (especially 555) as
long as there are no safety, interference, etc., legitimate complaints.
>If they looked closer they'd see that several amateurs have indeed been
busted for "freebanding" and running illegal power on the legal 40 in
the last year (case files available in the FCC enforcement logs). <<
We're cbers, not amateurs.
Several out of millions of cbers are odds most can live with. More
people get struck by lightning each year than cbers get busted. Ditto
for hitting the lottery. I think we can all live with those astronomical
odds.
>Truck stops are being cited for selling non-type-accepted CB gear. <<
Most of us here don't buy from truckstops.
Even you know this.
>eBay auctions for illegal CB amps continue to be stopped.<<
And sold anyway as the bidders all have the sellers email addy. Old
news. You're impotent........
> Operating in open defiance of FCC rules
whether you're a ham or not doesn't make sense, except perhaps to
antisocials and misfits.<<
Maybe not to those who do what they're told and have never learned to
think outside the box..
Hell, even running amps (to a point) seems relevantly harmless unless
you're in a very populated area, otherwise the feds would make it a
priority..
>With cutbacks in funding, it's a given that the FCC can't make
enforcement in ANY radio service a "priority". <<
BS! They been busting the worst of the worst of amateurs slowly, but
it's getting done ever since 'ol suthin' bo Riley got hisself a cush
job.
>They can't be everywhere at once. However that doesn't automatically
signal that the entire spectrum is "a free for all". <<
We have went from talking of cb being a free for all until your last
sentence where you conveniently attempted to insert your disinformation
by substituting "spectrum" for cb. No argument there, never was, except
with your self trying to convince your battered ego that others fail to
see your BS.
>IMO, Mr. Stover has a responsibility to see that any information he
posts here is accurate and reflects actual -not estimated- FCC policy.
-Aaron-<<
I can appreciate your position while disagreeing at the same time
without prejudice. I believe it was merely an interpretation,,,,one that
is somewhat accurate of the current state of cb.
>But his interpretation is not accurate as to the current state of
Federal Regulations governing CB.<<
If you work for the FCC, please state your rank and department..I don't
need your name. Otherwise, his interpretation is just as valid as yours.
Moreso, even.
> It is in fact, harmfully erroneous. For example, there have been no
statements issued by the FCC to the effect that the old RF power rules
may be ignored due to increasing use of the band. If anything, CB sales
have declined since the 1970's boom. <<
Not true and I won't try to argue that with you. There are several
dealers that can tell you they have had banner sales since the last 11
meter skip cycle. Maybe not in as short as time, but nonetheless.
>Finally, current Title 47 CFR states that external CB amplifiers are
prohibited - and there are no exceptions to this rule, (not even for
police, fire, and public service).
<<
Ok. But you are wrong. If there is a true life or death emergency, I can
hook up the nearest Davemade, Noname, Skullcracka, Cookie, Texas Star,
Palomar, etc.....or whatever the hell I want to make my emergency known.
Many of us know from
experience what to expect from the FCC, IE: which behavior causes
problems and what type action the feds will take. Most cbers know that
the heavy hand of enforcement by the FCC is not what certain types on
this board would like it to be, despite the false and oft reiterated
claims to the contrary.
>As I said before, the FCC can't be everywhere at once. No one is
disputing that you'll probably be able to commit outrageous rule
violations and get away with it.<<
The majority present, as demonstrated, do not agree with your assessment
of what constitutes "outrageous rule violations" and luckily that term
is to be found nowhere among your dead sacred cb scrolls,,er,,rules.
> But you have to wonder what kind of person enjoys the fact that he can
"get away with" breaking rules and federal laws that have been enacted
for the good of all.<<<
Actually, this is the first time I have entertained the thought of
experiencing an emotion due to the breaking of any rules since what I do
is such a mundane and trivial thing I. I have better things to do than
dwellon my psyche.
I would question the morality of someone who has named a troubled posse
of nocodes, one who has spammed the group, and ones who are interested
in personal lives of cbers who happen to be complete strangers on the
internet.
> I certainly wouldn't want this kind of person to be a police officer
in my town.
-Aaron- <<
Which town is that? Ah, never mind.
Aaron H. Voobner
> From: ahvo...@yahoo.com (Aaron H. Voobner)
> twist...@webtv.net (Twistedhed) wrote
> From: ahvo...@yahoo.com (Aaron=A0H.=A0Voobner)
> twist...@webtv.net (Twistedhed) wrote in message
> news:<18198-3D9...@storefull-2318.public.lawson.webtv.net>...
> Another veiled threat coming from the self-proclaimed leader of the
> trouble posse.
> You pulled the same garbage with Dennis' employer and he's still here.
> And you're still whining about being impotent.
> -
> >Hi Twist. <
>
>
>
> Well, since we're dealing with several "aarons", I guess I can reply to
> "this" Arron since he doesn't seem as pissed offf or rabid as the
> others. Hello and good day.
>
>
>
>
> >Corrections: <
>
>
>
>
> .....opinions.
>
>
>
>
>
> >1.There's only one Aaaron, and you're talking to him.<<
>
>
>
>
> Then use the voobner@yahoo addy you were using before with
> the same path.
Can do. But first I'd like to see you use this addy and path again:
From: Twste...@webtv.net (Twste...@webtv.net)
Subject: Re: CBer's to be fined
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 1999/10/06
Everyone knows amps on 11 meters are illegal. So what? So we have the
holier-than-thou schmoes out there trying to convince us that we ought
to change our ways. Look, I,ll make it real simple 4 u self appointed
cops and monitors or whatever the hell u refer to yourselves as. We
know
the risks, if we take the chance, most of us are ready to deal with
the
consequences should the heat come down. I have respect for MOST
hams,but I achieve the same results at a fraction of the cost. If I
bleed a
neighbor, all they have to do is knock on my door. We will work it
out.
I have been in the same area for quite some years and have no
problems.
If I am not hurting anyone, why the hell should you care WHAT I do?
The
bottom line is you shouldn't. Get a life. You guys that bitch about us
freebanders and "peaked" radios have way too much time on your hands.
I don't need to run anymore than 30 watts where I am located and I
talk
all over the world......yes.. on the freeband. Nothng pleases me more
than one of you cb rambos to come in to my conversation and start
preaching about rules. God, I love to squash you suckers.
Gettin' WAY-UP from the sandpile
> Until then, just initate the OE and wordwrap mistakes. Or don't.
You lost me on that one.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >2. The only rabidity and pissed-offedness in this thread is coming from
> you. <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Never has anyone pissed me off in this group.
> Perplexed, yes, confused, yes,,,,even fooled and taken advantage of, but
> never has anyone, certainly not you, managed to piss me off.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >No threat, veiled or otherwise. But it does seem a tad irresponsible
> for a sworn police officer to gleefully (..."YEEE-HAWWW!"...)
> announce
> that he is operating a prohibited transceiver illegally on the
> Citizens
> Band..<<
>
>
>
>
>
> Why the hell would that piss you off to the point you felt to comment on
> it? I don't go frothing at the mouth like you're doing now when JerryO
> comes in here gloating when a cber gets popped. Hell, if we wanted, us
> ignunt and lowly cbahs could glote ever dayz az dem hammyz getz ders on
> da regler bassis by da fedz!.
If hams are getting popped for tainting 11 meters, then CB'ers should
get popped for trespassing on 10. One good turn deserves another.
Turnabout is fair play. What's good for the goose....well, you get it,
right?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Irresponsibility was never a crime.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >I don't know about you, but I'd want to know the police officers hired
> in my town were selected on the basis of their ability to act
> responsibly. <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Some of us don't judge what they do in their off time short of a "real"
> crime,,...it is clear the majority do not believe the malarkey you
> attempt but fail to set forth as being priorities.
I am not judging. I am quoting Title 47 US Code Of Federal
Regulations. It's not marlarkey, Twist. It's the law.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >.proclaim that illegal power amplifiers are necessary to
> communicate...and announce that CB is no longer regulated and is a "free
> for all".<<
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Well, amps do help,,especially during the day when all the skip is
> running, but I'd rather find a nice quiet off channel on the freeband
> than run a buncha power. To me, and in my certainly humbled opinion, it
> is the lesser of the 2 evils.
> That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Supporting illegal operation has some built-in disadvantages though.<<<
>
>
>
>
>
>
> If I choose to do something it does not mean I encourage another to do
> so. Learn the difference.
So you're NOT encouraging people to freeband? Or run amps? Wow. Cool!
Let's hear about it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > It labels you as irresponsible and unlawful. <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your lables are in the extreme minority and of no real
> consequence....hence you being underground. Let us imagine only for a
> moment that not true..........your word among these pages
> is,,,well,,,,,a bit more than compromised...again...it leads back to
> your attempts at being underground.
When you willfully and repeatedly disobey US Code Of Federal
Regulations Title 47 you do commit a crime and you are a criminal.
That ain't my "lable", it's the government's. Take it up with them.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >These are not traits that people in general find trustworthy. <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I agree. Most people do not agree with you that people that drive 56 in
> a 55 are criminals or irresponsible, or untrustworthy.
> Ditto for freebanding where we do and for DX.
Tut tut, now, I have never said that people driving 56 in a 55 are
criminals. Neither have I ever said that if you disobey one law you
disobey them all. However any fool can see the difference between a
$10,000 fine (FCC NAL) and a $100 fine (speeding ticket). Well, maybe
not ANY fool. There is one I know who can't...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >People who are trying to decide whether or not to operate within the
> law are likely reading this newsgroup. <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Then they can see that the feds don't give a rats azz about low power
> freebanding above the legal 40 but below 10 meter (especially 555) as
> long as there are no safety, interference, etc., legitimate complaints.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >If they looked closer they'd see that several amateurs have indeed been
> busted for "freebanding" and running illegal power on the legal 40 in
> the last year (case files available in the FCC enforcement logs). <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> We're cbers, not amateurs.
> Several out of millions of cbers are odds most can live with. More
> people get struck by lightning each year than cbers get busted. Ditto
> for hitting the lottery. I think we can all live with those astronomical
> odds.
Making a habit of "getting away with" breaking rules is antisocial.
And it's a crappy thing to build a hobby around, too.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Truck stops are being cited for selling non-type-accepted CB gear. <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Most of us here don't buy from truckstops.
> Even you know this.
No I didn't. But FYI, Internet CB stores have been busted too.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >eBay auctions for illegal CB amps continue to be stopped.<<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> And sold anyway as the bidders all have the sellers email addy. Old
> news. You're impotent........
I don't understand why you'd be so proud of "getting around the law".
Unless you're a criminal.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Operating in open defiance of FCC rules
> whether you're a ham or not doesn't make sense, except perhaps to
> antisocials and misfits.<<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Maybe not to those who do what they're told and have never learned to
> think outside the box..
Let me get this right: "doing what your told" (i.e. being a good
citizen) is a bad thing and disobeying the law is merely "thinking
outside the box". Are you so out of touch with reality that you
actually believe this dopeyness?
> Hell, even running amps (to a point) seems relevantly harmless unless
> you're in a very populated area, otherwise the feds would make it a
> priority..
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >With cutbacks in funding, it's a given that the FCC can't make
> enforcement in ANY radio service a "priority". <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> BS! They been busting the worst of the worst of amateurs slowly, but
> it's getting done ever since 'ol suthin' bo Riley got hisself a cush
> job.
One man in the entire FCC organization has been assigned to amateur
enforcement. Doesn't sound like a "priority" to me. But if you say
so....
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >They can't be everywhere at once. However that doesn't automatically
> signal that the entire spectrum is "a free for all". <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> We have went from talking of cb being a free for all until your last
> sentence where you conveniently attempted to insert your disinformation
> by substituting "spectrum" for cb. No argument there, never was, except
> with your self trying to convince your battered ego that others fail to
> see your BS.
Wrong, I was making a comparative assumption. Read carefully:
IF
CB + no enforcement = free for all.
THEN
Other Parts Of Spectrum + no enforcement = free for all.
Of course my comparitive assumption merely serves to illustrate the
ludicrousness of the initial assumption. Lack of FCC enforcement in
ANY portion of the spectrum does NOT signal that portion of the
spectrum is a "free for all".
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >IMO, Mr. Stover has a responsibility to see that any information he
> posts here is accurate and reflects actual -not estimated- FCC policy.
> -Aaron-<<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I can appreciate your position while disagreeing at the same time
> without prejudice. I believe it was merely an interpretation,,,,one that
> is somewhat accurate of the current state of cb.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >But his interpretation is not accurate as to the current state of
> Federal Regulations governing CB.<<
>
>
>
>
>
>
> If you work for the FCC, please state your rank and department..I don't
> need your name. Otherwise, his interpretation is just as valid as yours.
> Moreso, even.
There's no interpretation on my part. I don't need to interpret. I can
quote the actual law. And the actual law contradicts what Mr. Stover
says. External amplifiers ARE illegal on CB. FCC rules ARE still
enforced. Don't take my word for it. Read US CFR Title 47.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > It is in fact, harmfully erroneous. For example, there have been no
> statements issued by the FCC to the effect that the old RF power rules
> may be ignored due to increasing use of the band. If anything, CB sales
> have declined since the 1970's boom. <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Not true and I won't try to argue that with you. There are several
> dealers that can tell you they have had banner sales since the last 11
> meter skip cycle. Maybe not in as short as time, but nonetheless.
I don't have the annual sales figures of CB equipment handy. Neither
do you. But I'm willing to bet there is quite a difference in CB sales
between 1976 (the year "Convoy" came out) and this year. Which means
there are less CB'ers on the air now that there were then.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Finally, current Title 47 CFR states that external CB amplifiers are
> prohibited - and there are no exceptions to this rule, (not even for
> police, fire, and public service).
> <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ok. But you are wrong. If there is a true life or death emergency, I can
> hook up the nearest Davemade, Noname, Skullcracka, Cookie, Texas Star,
> Palomar, etc.....or whatever the hell I want to make my emergency known.
Twist, we are not talking about "true life and death emergency". We
are talking about Lennie Stover telling a motorist which exit to take
to find the gas station. And he doesn't require a Skullcracka or an
illegal Galaxy DX99V to do it with.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Many of us know from
> experience what to expect from the FCC, IE: which behavior causes
> problems and what type action the feds will take. Most cbers know that
> the heavy hand of enforcement by the FCC is not what certain types on
> this board would like it to be, despite the false and oft reiterated
> claims to the contrary.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >As I said before, the FCC can't be everywhere at once. No one is
> disputing that you'll probably be able to commit outrageous rule
> violations and get away with it.<<
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The majority present, as demonstrated, do not agree with your assessment
> of what constitutes "outrageous rule violations" and luckily that term
> is to be found nowhere among your dead sacred cb scrolls,,er,,rules.
Complain, cry, bitch and moan all you want, it's your right. But the
US Government does not share your opinion that the Code Of Federal
Regulations are "dead sacred scrolls".
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > But you have to wonder what kind of person enjoys the fact that he can
> "get away with" breaking rules and federal laws that have been enacted
> for the good of all.<<<
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Actually, this is the first time I have entertained the thought of
> experiencing an emotion due to the breaking of any rules since what I do
> is such a mundane and trivial thing I. I have better things to do than
> dwellon my psyche.
> I would question the morality of someone who has named a troubled posse
> of nocodes, one who has spammed the group, and ones who are interested
> in personal lives of cbers who happen to be complete strangers on the
> internet.
We're talking about illegal amplifier use on CB. Want to shift the
subject to newsgroup behavior and etiquette? We can go there. I still
have copies of your old "1mangang" posts. We can discuss those. Let me
know.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I certainly wouldn't want this kind of person to be a police officer
> in my town.
> -Aaron- <<
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Which town is that? Ah, never mind.
Why? Coming over to watch The Sopranos with me? Ahh, forgedaboudit.
-Aaron-
Twistedhed
Then use the voobner@yahoo addy you were using before with the same
path.
>Can do. But first I'd like<<
Etiquette dictates first question gets fist response. Do you have any
etiquette?
> to see you use this addy and path again:
From: Twste...@webtv.net (Twste...@webtv.net)
Subject: Re: CBer's to be fined
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 1999/10/06
Everyone knows amps on 11 meters are illegal. So what? So we have the
holier-than-thou schmoes out there trying to convince us that we ought
to change our ways. Look, I,ll make it real simple 4 u self appointed
cops and monitors or whatever the hell u refer to yourselves as. We know
the risks, if we take the chance, most of us are ready to deal with the
consequences should the heat come down. I have respect for MOST hams,but
I achieve the same results at a fraction of the cost. If I bleed a
neighbor, all they have to do is knock on my door. We will work it out.
I have been in the same area for quite some years and have no problems.
If I am not hurting anyone, why the hell should you care WHAT I do? The
bottom line is you shouldn't. Get a life. You guys that bitch about us
freebanders and "peaked" radios have way too much time on your hands. I
don't need to run anymore than 30 watts where I am located and I talk
all over the world......yes.. on the freeband. Nothng pleases me more
than one of you cb rambos to come in to my conversation and start
preaching about rules. God, I love to squash you suckers.
Gettin'
WAY-UP from the sandpile
<<
You lost me on that one. Besides, I still like to squash hammies that
come causing trouble on the freeband. I put Lelnad KC8LDO so far back
out with his little amp that had no azz on 555 a few months ago when he
tried to jam me. He was PISSED!
Until then, just initate the OE and wordwrap mistakes. Or don't.
>You lost me on that one. <<
Then toss it out your Windows.
>2. The only rabidity and pissed-offedness in this thread is coming from
you. <<
Never has anyone pissed me off in this group. Perplexed, yes, confused,
yes,,,,even fooled and taken advantage of, but never has anyone,
certainly not you, managed to piss me off.
>No threat, veiled or otherwise. But it does seem a tad irresponsible<<
Irresponsibility isn't a crime and it is merely you humble opinion
anyway.
>for a sworn police officer to gleefully (..."YEEE-HAWWW!"...)
announce
that he is operating a prohibited transceiver illegally on the Citizens
Band..<<
Why the hell would that piss you off to the point you felt to comment on
it? I don't go frothing at the mouth like you're doing now when JerryO
comes in here gloating when a cber gets popped. Hell, if we wanted, us
ignunt and lowly cbahs could glote ever dayz az dem hammyz getz ders on
da regler bassis by da fedz!.
>If hams are getting popped for tainting 11 meters, then CB'ers should
get popped for trespassing on 10. One good turn deserves another.
Turnabout is fair play. What's good for the goose....well, you get it,
right?<<
Not only do I get it, I wholeheartedly agree.
>I don't know about you, but I'd want to know the police officers hired
in my town were selected on the basis of their ability to act
responsibly. <<
Some of us don't judge what they do in their off time short of a "real"
crime,,...it is clear the majority do not believe the malarkey you
attempt but fail to set forth as being priorities.
>I am not judging. I am quoting Title 47 US Code Of Federal Regulations.
It's not marlarkey, Twist. It's the law. <<
Some laws are outdated and obsolete, such as the one on the books that
says you can't hang laundry on a Sunday within 250 feet of a church in
certain parts of Kansas. There exist a ton of such laws still on the
books.
>.proclaim that illegal power amplifiers are necessary to
communicate...and announce that CB is no longer regulated and is a "free
for all".<<
Well, amps do help,,especially during the day when all the skip is
running, but I'd rather find a nice quiet off channel on the freeband
than run a buncha power. To me, and in my certainly humbled opinion, it
is the lesser of the 2 evils.
>That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
Supporting illegal operation has some built-in disadvantages though.<<<
If I choose to do something it does not mean I encourage another to do
so. Learn the difference.
>So you're NOT encouraging people to freeband? Or run amps? Wow. Cool!
Let's hear about it.<<
Whats to hear? I'm nobody's mother and tell no one what they should or
shoudn't do unless their question dictates it..
>It labels you as irresponsible and unlawful. <<
Your lables are in the extreme minority and of no real
consequence....hence you being underground. Let us imagine only for a
moment that not true..........your word among these pages
is,,,well,,,,,a bit more than compromised...again...it leads back to
your attempts at being underground.
>When you willfully and repeatedly disobey US Code Of Federal
Regulations Title 47 you do commit a crime and you are a criminal. That
ain't my "lable", it's the government's. Take it up with them.<<
I have never sen the governement use the term "criminal" concerning
freebanders or folks that run a hundred watts or so.
Even if they did, the government is usually wrong.
>These are not traits that people in general find trustworthy. <<
I agree. Most people do not agree with you that people that drive 56 in
a 55 are criminals or irresponsible, or untrustworthy. Ditto for
freebanding where we do and for DX.
>Tut tut, now, I have never said that people driving 56 in a 55 are
criminals.<<
But you did. Driving 56 in a 55 is technically breaking the law, and you
just claimed that makes one a criminal.
> Neither have I ever said that if you disobey one law you disobey them
all. However any fool can see the difference between a $10,000 fine (FCC
NAL) and a $100 fine (speeding ticket). Well, maybe not ANY fool. There
is one I know who can't...<<
Maybe to that one person, 100 dollar fine is no different to his
pocketbook than a 10,000 dollar fine. I have a wealthy friend who
routinely speeds even when he sees the signs in some states that
announce the HIGH fines for each mile over the posted limit...he says,
"I can afford it" and hammers down. You think there are no wealthy
cbers? A few come to mind right off the bat. Matter of fact, there are
several well to do cbers here. Big businesses routinely pay fines as a
part of doing business, a wealthy cber may have no problem paying to
play...BUT, as I taught Dave Hall, more folks get hit by lightning and
win the lottery thancbers receiving NALS. The odds you and your party
set forth concerning cbers getting into hot water are bogus.
>People who are trying to decide whether or not to operate within the
law are likely reading this newsgroup. <<
Then they can see that the feds don't give a rats azz about low power
freebanding above the legal 40 but below 10 meter (especially 555) as
long as there are no safety, interference, etc., legitimate complaints.
>If they looked closer they'd see that several amateurs have indeed been
busted for "freebanding" and running illegal power on the legal 40 in
the last year (case files available in the FCC enforcement logs). <<
We're cbers, not amateurs.
Several out of millions of cbers are odds most can live with. More
people get struck by lightning each year than cbers get busted. Ditto
for hitting the lottery. I think we can all live with those astronomical
odds.
>Making a habit of "getting away with" breaking rules is antisocial.<<
See the education I gave Dave Hall concerning his socialism he attempts
to breed and spread among us. Besides, being antisocial is not a
negative thing like you are trying to stereotype it into being. There is
nothing wrong with a loner who wishes to live alone on a mountaintop or
farm or what have you....only your opinion.
> And it's a crappy thing to build a hobby around, too. Truck stops are
being cited for selling non-type-accepted CB gear. <<
Most of us here don't buy from truckstops. Even you know this.
>No I didn't. <<<
Then you're missing posts again.
>But FYI, Internet CB stores have
been busted too.
eBay auctions for illegal CB amps continue to be stopped.<<
And sold anyway as the bidders all have the sellers email addy. Old
news. You're impotent........
>I don't understand why you'd be so proud of "getting around the law".
Unless you're a criminal.<<
Again, your failure at putting words in anothers mouth illustrates your
motives.
What most are proud of, is getting around you attempting to stop a
seller, you're not the law.
>Operating in open defiance of FCC rules
whether you're a ham or not doesn't make sense, except perhaps to
antisocials and misfits.<<
Maybe not to those who do what they're told and have never learned to
think outside the box..
>Let me get this right: "doing what your told" (i.e. being a good
citizen) <<
Another error of yours. Equating blindly doing what you're told with
making a good citizen is so far removed from reality that..well.it's not
unexpected coming from you.
>is a bad thing and disobeying the law is merely "thinking outside the
box". <<
You made the link between thinking out of the box and an illegal
act...not I.
>Are you so out of touch with reality that you actually believe this
dopeyness? <<
Along with the majority of freedom loving socialist-haters in America, a
resounding yes.
Hell, even running amps (to a point) seems relevantly harmless unless
you're in a very populated area, otherwise the feds would make it a
priority..
>With cutbacks in funding, it's a given that the FCC can't make
enforcement in ANY radio service a "priority". <<
BS! They been busting the worst of the worst of amateurs slowly, but
it's getting done ever since 'ol suthin' bo Riley got hisself a cush
job.
>One man in the entire FCC organization has been assigned to amateur
enforcement. <<
Yea, and he been bustin' the hell out of 'em, huh?
>Doesn't sound like a "priority" to me. But if you say so.... <<
Not me. The FCC reports say so. Take it up with them.
>They can't be everywhere at once. However that doesn't automatically
signal that the entire spectrum is "a free for all". <<
We have went from talking of cb being a free for all until your last
sentence where you conveniently attempted to insert your disinformation
by substituting "spectrum" for cb. No argument there, never was, except
with your self trying to convince your battered ego that others fail to
see your BS.
>Wrong, I was making a comparative assumption. Read carefully:
IF
CB + no enforcement = free for all.
<<
Proven. The "IF" word means nothing.
>THEN
Other Parts Of Spectrum + no enforcement = free for all. <<
Clearly a subjective opinion on your behalf,,,,,,an opinion can be
neither right oe wrong.
>Of course my comparitive assumption merely serves to illustrate the
ludicrousness of the initial assumption. <<
I agree. YOUR initial assumption that cbers are in danger of the FCC for
simple freebanding and running a bit of power is bunk, with very few
exceptions..
>Lack of FCC enforcement in ANY portion of the spectrum does NOT signal
that portion of the spectrum is a "free for all".
IMO, Mr. Stover has a responsibility to see that any information he
posts here is accurate and reflects actual -not estimated- FCC policy.
-Aaron-<<
I can appreciate your position while disagreeing at the same time
without prejudice. I believe it was merely an interpretation,,,,one that
is somewhat accurate of the current state of cb.
>But his interpretation is not accurate as to the current state of
Federal Regulations governing CB.<<
If you work for the FCC, please state your rank and department..I don't
need your name. Otherwise, his interpretation is just as valid as yours.
Moreso, even.
>There's no interpretation on my part. I don't need to interpret. I can
quote the actual law.<<
I can quote several obscure laws that are no longer or only selectively
enforced. There is no point to you doing so redundantly.
> And the actual law contradicts what Mr. Stover says.<<
And actual enforcement against cbers
contradicts what you say.
> External amplifiers ARE illegal on CB. FCC rules ARE still enforced.<<
What, by that one man you mentioned? Make up your mind.
And they are NOT enforced for the majority of simple freebanders and
cbers
causing no problems. I know this upsets you greatly, but those are the
cold facts.
> Don't take my word for it. Read US CFR Title 47.<<
Don't take my word for it, listen in on 555 and send ol' Riley all the
tapes want. The proof is in the pudding.
>It is in fact, harmfully erroneous. For example, there have been no
statements issued by the FCC to the effect that the old RF power rules
may be ignored due to increasing use of the band. If anything, CB sales
have declined since the 1970's boom. <<
Not true and I won't try to argue that with you. There are several
dealers that can tell you they have had banner sales since the last 11
meter skip cycle. Maybe not in as short as time, but nonetheless.
>I don't have the annual sales figures of CB equipment handy. Neither do
you. But I'm willing to bet there is quite a difference in CB sales
between 1976 (the year "Convoy" came out) and this year.<<
Maybe. Now if you would have said a year or two ago, I may be willing to
take that bet. The skip cycle and the 70s nostalgia kick and the swell
of population since 76 may have made the difference. In any event, it's
speculative on both parts.
> Which means there are less CB'ers on the air now that there were
then.<<
Nah, there are more. There are way more truckers and they all have cbs.
>Finally, current Title 47 CFR states that external CB amplifiers are
prohibited - and there are no exceptions to this rule, (not even for
police, fire, and public service).
<<
Ok. But you are wrong. If there is a true life or death emergency, I can
hook up the nearest Davemade, Noname, Skullcracka, Cookie, Texas Star,
Palomar, etc.....or whatever the hell I want to make my emergency known.
>Twist, we are not talking about "true life and death emergency". We are
talking about Lennie Stover telling a motorist which exit to take to
find the gas station. <<
Nowhere did you mention that in your reply to me until now. As a matter
of fact, you said there were NO exceptions, when in fact I just gave you
the most obvious.
>And he doesn't require a Skullcracka or an illegal Galaxy DX99V to do
it with. <<
During the day, depending on how far away he is, he may.
Many of us know from
experience what to expect from the FCC, IE: which behavior causes
problems and what type action the feds will take. Most cbers know that
the heavy hand of enforcement by the FCC is not what certain types on
this board would like it to be, despite the false and oft reiterated
claims to the contrary.
>As I said before, the FCC can't be everywhere at once. No one is
disputing that you'll probably be able to commit outrageous rule
violations and get away with it.<<
The majority present, as demonstrated, do not agree with your assessment
of what constitutes "outrageous rule violations" and luckily that term
is to be found nowhere among your dead sacred cb scrolls,,er,,rules.
>Complain, cry, bitch and moan all you want, it's your right.<<
No one here cries, bitches or moans except (of course) you and your
named trouble posse. Everyone knows that.
> But the US Government does not share your opinion that the Code Of
Federal Regulations are "dead sacred scrolls". <<
Nor do they share your skewered view that freebanding lowpower DXing
cbers are criminals. If they did, you just made the case that the
guv-mint is derelict in enforcement, which you clearly try to set forth
the opposite.
>But you have to wonder what kind of person enjoys the fact that he can
"get away with" breaking rules and federal laws that have been enacted
for the good of all.<<<
Actually, this is the first time I have entertained the thought of
experiencing an emotion due to the breaking of any rules since what I do
is such a mundane and trivial thing I. I have better things to do than
dwellon my psyche.
I would question the morality of someone who has named a troubled posse
of nocodes, one who has spammed the group, and ones who are interested
in personal lives of cbers who happen to be complete strangers on the
internet.
>We're talking about illegal amplifier use on CB. Want to shift the
subject to newsgroup behavior and etiquette? <<
You already did at the beginning of this post.
Your ego was once again bruised and damaged enough to cause you to go
frantically running to the archives and attempt a change of discussion
as soon as you realized you were again in over your head..
>We can go there.<<
Not "WE"....YOU. You already did. See aboe.
> I still have copies of your old "1mangang" posts. We can discuss
those. Let me know. <<
I can discuss anything. You, on the other hand, have a malady that
affects you holding a topic and refraining from insult, lies, deliberate
misinformation and obsessions for personal information on cbers and
usenet strangers.
>I certainly wouldn't want this kind of person to be a police officer
in my town.
-Aaron- <<
Which town is that? Ah, never mind.
>Why? Coming over to watch The Sopranos with me? Ahh, forgedaboudit.
-Aaron- <<
Nah. So far it sucks. Besides, I'm doing single late night trips this
weekend...the days are still screwed up from that damn storm.
Aaron H. Voobner
(contradictions and nonsense snipped)
>Title 47 US Code Of Federal Regulations.
It's not marlarkey, Twist. It's the law. <<
>
>
>
>Some laws are outdated and obsolete, such as the one on
>the books that
>says you can't hang laundry on a Sunday within 250 feet of a church
in
>certain parts of Kansas. There exist a ton of such laws still on the
>books.
Outdated? Drop "Rabbit Ears" a postcard and ask him which outdated
laws are responsible for his current problems. Or ask Frank Kluz, of
Lancaster, OH who got a $5,000 NAL in August from the Detroit, MI
District Office for using a CB linear which outdated laws took a bite
out of his bank account. Or cruise thru a list of folks whose wallets
are lighter thanks to these "outdated laws":
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Public_Notices/Welcome.html
No, there are not FCC agents on every street corner. Yes, in many
cases you'll be able to "get away" with violating CB rules and not get
caught. But when you foster the idea that people should not obey
federal regulations concerning CB because they are obsolete and
outdated -- that's misinformation, plain and simple.
This thread started with my response to Lennie' Stover's post . I
challenged his excuse that "we need linears to walk on people using
linears". You stepped in, and within a few exchanges have taken us
into the "Twistedhed Zone" where laws are obsolete because you say so.
Oh well, I should have known better, LOL.
-Aaron-
Richard Cranium
> "Lenny Stover" <mppd...@the-police.com> wrote in message news:<npZl9.1353$hQ6...@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com>...
> > "Aaron H. Voobner" <ahvo...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >
> > > i.e. "laws be damned"?
> >
> > I've also run more wattage than is legally allowed for a number of years. I
> > don't however, violate CB etiquette, use profanity, intentionally key on
> > others unless they are attempting to key over my communications, etc.
>
> Problem is, everyone thinks everone else is 'keying' over them, and is
> using linears 100% of the time. The need to "talk over" a million
> other people using illegal linears is poor justification for the use
> of an illegal linear.
Aanother unsupportable Aanal Aaron Aassumption. Most CBers do NOT use
amps. Can you prove otherwise, Aanal Aaron?
> >
> > Until *very* recently, I used the CB primarily to provide information and
> > respond to requests for assistance on Channel 9. Nothing is more
> > infuriating than attempting to give somebody directions and then to be keyed
> > on by some idiot chanting the same thing over, and over, and over, and over,
> > and over.....
>
> And he's probably using an amp because he thinks he needs it to "get
> over" interference.
Maybe, maybe not. Can you prove it Aanal Aaron?
> >With a flip of a switch, I could get the travelling
> > directions to the person requesting them.
> >One thing that they taught us in
> > the police academy
>
> Are you a police officer?
>
> > was that there is a difference between the "letter of the
> > law" and the "spirit of the law."
>
> I agree with the spirit of the law. And the spirit of the law in
> regard to CB is to avoid intentional interference and allow everyone a
> chance to communicate. That was why power limits were set. Put everone
> on an equal footing. No one station with "more watts" than any other.
BS. You agree with the "letter of the law" as your statement shows,
Aanal Aaron. The "spirit of the law" doesn't say nobody can use more
than 4 watts.
> > When the laws limiting CB to low wattage
> > were enacted, a license was required to operate a CB and radio traffic was
> > minimal compared to now. Today, it is almost impossible to communicate on a
> > CB in a major metropolitan area (read suburban Chicago) without a little
> > extra wattage and modulation.
>
> It's become impossible to communicate BECAUSE a majority of people are
> running extra wattage and modulation.
Prove it, Aanal Aaron. You can't. It has become difficult (but not
"impossible") to communicate on CB simply because of the sheer numbers
of operators trying to use the "legal 40".
Surely you can see that the
> wattage limit was enacted to allow everyone an equal chance to
> communicate. The spirit of the law is *equal access to communications
> for all*. If the FCC let everyone decide their own wattage -- they'd
> let only SOME people (the ones with extra power) communicate -- and
> not others (the ones with low power).
Once again you trumpet the "letter of the law", not the "spirit of the
law". Can't you grasp the difference? (rhetorical question; obviously
you cannot)
> As I previously stated, as long as proper
> > radio etiquitte is adhered to, I don't have a problem with it.
>
> Proper radio etiquette is about observing limits too. What if the 40
> legal channels became so polluted by high power and so unusable that
> the majority of CB'ers moved to unauthorized bands? Would you follow?
>
> -A
Why would it matter to you, who is allegedly a no-code Tech and cannot
legally use HF anyhow?
Richard Cranium
Precisely WHERE did he say that? I don't find that statement in any of
his posts. He said something about a "few extra watts", but nothing
about linears. Just another deliberate trolling misinterpretation from
our favorite TROLL, Aanal Aaron H. Voobnuts!
and CB is a free for all. I disagree, period.
>
> -A
But you have said it many times, Aanal Aaron. Now you disagree with
yourself? ;)
Timbo Nebo
used was a marine radio at his house which is illegal
>Why would it matter to you, who is allegedly a no-code Tech and cannot
>legally use HF anyhow?
>
Tim Nebo
ye...@removecet.com
(Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>since when is he a ham???? i wanna see that claim. last i knew the only txr he
>used was a marine radio at his house which is illegal
Haven't we been through this a long time ago? First, he never said he
used it. Second, even if he does use it, it's not illegal to use a
marine radio on shore if the communication is over water. In fact it's
done all the time. You can't lock through the Colombia River without
talking to shore, and I'll bet that they have marine radios on shore
just for that purpose, don'tcha think Timmy? Duh...
Timbo Nebo
>
>Haven't we been through this a long time ago? First, he never said he
>used it.
Tim Nebo
Timbo Nebo
you wernt even around back then wee you
Tim Nebo
Timbo Nebo
>You can't lock through the Colombia River without
>talking to shore, and I'll bet that they have marine radios on shore
>just for that purpose, don'tcha think Timmy? Duh...
Tim Nebo
ye...@removecet.com
(Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>your right frank, just like i dont use this amp thats always sitting around
That may very well be. I have lots of equipment sitting around that I
don't use. Interested in doing a little trading?
Spell Checker
Aaron H. Voobner
(classic trolling snipped)
Hi Steve. Told you you'd abandon the other thread. Trolling in this
one now?
--
From: jamey clark (jame...@juno.com)
Subject: The Big V followed me! Some of you may be infected by this
"troll" not w-w!
Newsgroups: alt.religion.w-w-church-god
Date: 2002-03-07 10:24:48 PST
Hi Jamey, My name is Woody Parr and I'm up the road in Cornelia. I'm
afraid that I'm indirectly responsible for this troll who is
badmouthing you at alt.religion.urantiabook. You see he was only there
in the first place to attack me.
This idiot is Steven J. Rogovich, 1612 Lake Christopher dr. Virginia
Beach, Va. 23464 He followed me to the UB usenet page from
alt.radio.pirate He and I (were) both formerly loosely associated
with each other in the shortwave pirate radio listening hobby. I USED
to be a shortwave pirate but my station has been permanently retired
for more than 2 years now. Stevie is still a pirate and is the
operator of the station Radio Free Speech. He is also the moderator of
a message board at the Free Radio Network < www.frn.net > and goes by
the handle of Pat Murphy there. I had a falling out with the people at
the FRN a couple of years ago as they became corrupt and were doing so
inappropriate things. I dared to open my mouth and openly complain
about there stupid activities which since they havn't yet ceased to
follow me around the internet anywhere they can and attack me.
Steve is also on the usenet trolling people under the name of Richard
Cranium (richar...@yahoo.com) He's far too much of a coward to
debate anyone using his real name.
--------------------------------------------------
QRZ LISTING:
KD4CXJ
STEVEN J. ROGOVICH
1612 LAKE CHRISTOPHER DR
VIRGINIA BEACH VA 23464
USA
Timbo Nebo
>That may very well be. I have lots of equipment sitting around that I
>don't use. Interested in doing a little trading?
Tim Nebo
ye...@removecet.com
(Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>what bridge does voobner operate from his home???
A better question would be what other kinds of ship-to-shore
communications are legal. An even better question would be if he
actually uses the radio. But you should probably ask him that
question, since I have no idea if he even uses it (he didn't say one
way or the other, a detail which you obviously don't remember).
ye...@removecet.com
(Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>>Haven't we been through this a long time ago?
>
>you wernt even around back then wee you
You have already proven that smoking dope can lead to memory loss, so
there's no need to demonstrate any further.
Timbo Nebo
less what water he's near
>
>A better question would be what other kinds of ship-to-shore
>communications are legal. An even better question would be if he
>actually uses the radio. But you should probably ask him that
>question, since I have no idea if he even uses it (he didn't say one
>way or the other, a detail which you obviously don't remember).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Tim Nebo
ye...@removecet.com
(Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>maybe so, what ya got?
Depends on what you like. If you are into tubes I have that
Hallicrafter's CB-3A, modified with crystal sockets on the front
panel. For test equipment I still have my Hickok 121 cardmatic, but
shipping might be a bit too expensive. On the bench there are a couple
low-end sig-gens and an older single-trace O-scope. I also have piles
of old CB radios, take your pick. For serious DXing I have an Ameco
PT-2 preamplifier (manual is on the web). In consumer electronics, I
just picked up a nice Technics SA-GX670 surround-sound receiver (110
watts x 2 or 80 watts x 4), and I still have that portable JVC
AM/FM/PB/TV. Or maybe you are into antique broadcast radios -- I would
have to compile a list for all of those. Or maybe you would like
something educational...
I really don't think I have anything you would be interested in,
Timmy. Oh...wait! Silly me, I almost forgot you like illegal stuff.
Well, I still have that FM modulator, crystal controlled to 105.3 MHz.
Intersted in pirate TV? I also have a TV modulator for Ch. 11. How
about that?
Timbo Nebo
yeah i like tubes, mostly 572b's and up
>Well, I still have that FM modulator, crystal controlled to 105.3 MHz.
>Intersted in pirate TV? I also have a TV modulator for Ch. 11. How
>about that?
well 11 is occupied here in houston but i think 105.3 might be clear :)
Tim Nebo
Fred Flintstoned
"Richard Cranium" <richc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c5ecbb69.02100...@posting.google.com...
> Aanother unsupportable Aanal Aaron Aassumption. Most CBers do NOT use
> amps. Can you prove otherwise, Aanal Aaron?
Can you prove he is wrong? Dick head?
> Maybe, maybe not. Can you prove it Aanal Aaron?
Can you prove he is wrong, Dick Head?
> Prove it, Aanal Aaron. You can't. It has become difficult (but not
> "impossible") to communicate on CB simply because of the sheer numbers
> of operators trying to use the "legal 40".
Complete Bullshit, there are less Cb operators now then at any time ever
before, Can you prove otherwise?
Fred Flintstoned
"Timbo Nebo" <tim...@aol.com187> wrote in message
news:20021006143951...@mb-dd.aol.com...
> since when is he a ham????
Who Richard Cranuim I don't htink he is a ham either.
Timbo Nebo
he's recently licensed
>
>Who Richard Cranuim I don't htink he is a ham either.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Tim Nebo
tools
<ye...@REMOVEcet.com> wrote in message news:3da0994d...@news.cet.com...
ye...@removecet.com
(Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>>Depends on what you like. If you are into tubes I have that
>
>yeah i like tubes, mostly 572b's and up
Overpriced and overrated. If you want old tubes for RF, check out the
807 and 812.
Alan S.
@news.cet.com:
OK, I've been reading alot of posts lately that mention tubes. The numbers
(like 807 or 812) are like Greek to me. Would anybody care to point me in
the direction of something that would help me decipher what's what?
Honestly, I don't know how you guys remember all those numbers <g>
--
Alan Strawinski
http://alan.strawinski.net
rr...@strawinski.net
Timbo Nebo
come a dime a dozen and theres no shortage of good amps that run them. the
tubes he mentions might be good for a homebrewer but not for ready buying
>
>OK, I've been reading alot of posts lately that mention tubes. The numbers
>(like 807 or 812) are like Greek to me. Would anybody care to point me in
>the direction of something that would help me decipher what's what?
>Honestly, I don't know how you guys remember all those numbers <g>
>
>--
>Alan Strawinski
>http://alan.strawinski.net
>rr...@strawinski.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
Tim Nebo
Twistedhed
twist...@webtv.net (Twistedhed) wrote everything that showed "Aaron"
is mistaken.
It's not marlarkey, Twist. It's the law. <<
Some laws are outdated and obsolete, such as the one on the books that
says you can't hang laundry on a Sunday within 250 feet of a church in
certain parts of Kansas. There exist a ton of such laws still on the
books.
>Outdated?<<
Yea. You think one should still be arrested for hanging laundry on a
Suncday near a church?
>Drop "Rabbit Ears" a postcard and ask him which outdated laws are
responsible for his current problems. <<
"Rabbit Ears" wasn't merely talking DX or using lowpower on the freeband
between channel cb 40 and 10 meter, either.
>Or ask Frank Kluz, of Lancaster, OH who got a $5,000 NAL in August
from the Detroit, MI District Office for using a CB linear which
outdated laws took a bite out of his bank account. Or cruise thru a list
of folks whose wallets are lighter thanks to these "outdated laws":
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Public_Notices/Welcome.html
<
You post the exceptions, not the rule like you would prefer us to
believe.
I remind you to check and recalculate the odds...you have a better
chance of getting struck by lightning than the average freebander or low
power user does of getting an NAL, regardless the smoke and propaganda
you try to blow here. Cold hard facts and your opinion concerning the
few idiots that deserved to get popped mean nothing to the vast majority
of cbers.
>No, there are not FCC agents on every street corner. Yes, in many cases
you'll be able to "get away" with violating CB rules and not get caught.
But when you foster the idea that people should not obey federal
regulations concerning CB because they are obsolete and outdated --
that's misinformation, plain and simple.<<
Who fostered the idea that another should disobey? I certainly didn't,
but you claiming I did is definite misinformation, plain and simple.
>This thread started with my response to Lennie' Stover's post . I
challenged his excuse that "we need linears to walk on people using
linears". You stepped in, and within a few exchanges have taken us into
the "Twistedhed Zone" where laws are obsolete because you say so. Oh
well, I should have known better, LOL.
-Aaron-
<<
Yup, but you didn't...hence the loss of your voobner@yahoo addy. There
are a lot of things you should know better of but are still learning.
BTW, I like the "Twistedhed Zone" thing. May I have your permission to
use it on the air? Maybe I'll shorten it to the "Twisted
Zone"....yea,,,,that has a better ring to it....you are now entering the
"Twisted Zone". Sounds much better than "Twistedhed Zone". See, I can
always improve on what you set forth : )
Aaron H. Voobner
The 807 and 572 (beam power tubes) are just a tiny part of the big
picture. What Tim can't tell you is that vacuum tubes are used for
things besides RF amplifiers. Since "CB knowledge" begins and ends
with RF amplifiers, you'll always get a rather limited view of the
universe in rec.radio.cb. It's like knowing only the first verse of a
song. For example, you'll never hear of the famous 12AX7, the
ubiquitous 6AQ5, or the workhorse 6V6 found in audio and oscillator
stages of stuff from superhet receivers to mike preamps and CW rigs;
or rectifiers like the 5Z3 and 5R4, and voltage regulators like the
OA2 and OB2. So if you want more than just part of the picture, seek
higher ground, go on eBay and grab a 1960's copy of the ARRL Radio
Amateurs Handbook to get a snapshot of the classic tubes applied to
practical circuits, or poke around on sites like
http://www.ominous-valve.com/tubes1.html and
http://www.vacuumtube.com/
-A
Aaron H. Voobner
>Who fostered the idea that another should disobey? I certainly didn't.
Maybe you should re-read your freebanding article in SPORADIC WAVES. ROTFLMAO!
-A
Timbo Nebo
>
>The 807 and 572 (beam power tubes) are just a tiny part of the big
>picture. What Tim can't tell you is that vacuum tubes are used for
>things besides RF amplifiers. Since "CB knowledge" begins and ends
>with RF amplifiers, you'll always get a rather limited view of the
>universe in rec.radio.cb. It's like knowing only the first verse of a
>song. For example, you'll never hear of the famous 12AX7, the
>ubiquitous 6AQ5, or the workhorse 6V6 found in audio and oscillator
>stages of stuff from superhet receivers to mike preamps and CW rigs;
>or rectifiers like the 5Z3 and 5R4, and voltage regulators like the
>OA2 and OB2. So if you want more than just part of the picture, seek
>higher ground, go on eBay and grab a 1960's copy of the ARRL Radio
>Amateurs Handbook to get a snapshot of the classic tubes applied to
>practical circuits, or poke around on sites like
>http://www.ominous-valve.com/tubes1.html and
>http://www.vacuumtube.com/
>
>-A
>
>
>
>
>
>
Tim Nebo
Aaron H. Voobner
>hey voobner, since your here what bridge do you operate?
None. What drug are you on today?
-A
Timbo Nebo
home mean i'm on drugs? guess your an illegal and a troll too
>imn...@aol.com187 (Timbo Nebo) wrote
>>hey voobner, since your here what bridge do you operate?
>
>None. What drug are you on today?
>
>-A
Tim Nebo
ye...@removecet.com
(Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>thats franks attempt of trying to sound like he always knows better. the 572b's
>come a dime a dozen
Hardly. If you check a few sources like I have you will find the
Chinese 572B's going for an average of around $40 each, while you can
still find NOS 811A's and 812A's for less than $10 a pop. The
disparity is because of the popularity of 572B's with audiophiles.
Same deal with the 300B's. The 807's are almost literally a dime a
dozen, and in it's different configurations has been a very popular RF
tube over the years, much more popular than the 572B.
> and theres no shortage of good amps that run them. the
>tubes he mentions might be good for a homebrewer but not for ready buying
I'm not sure what you mean by that, but like I said, there has been
plenty of RF equipment manufactured that uses the 807 and the 812.
FYI, the 812 is the RF variation of the 811, another tube popular with
audiophiles.
Twistedhed
And who put it forth here among us?
I certainly didn't.
Among many other things that you need to learn, grasshopper, is the
difference is between objective and subjective poit of views..
Fred Flintstoned
"Twistedhed" <twist...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:21321-3DA...@storefull-2315.public.lawson.webtv.net...
From: ahvo...@yahoo.com (Aaron H. Voobner)
twist...@webtv.net (Twistedhed) wrote:
Who fostered the idea that another should disobey? I certainly didn't.
>Maybe you should re-read your freebanding article in SPORADIC WAVES.
ROTFLMAO!
-A
<<
>And who put it forth here among us?
Who cares who put it before us it is out there, you wrote.
lect .
>I certainly didn't.
Does that really matter you wrote it and put it out with the intention
others would see it, now they have and again you de
Aaron H. Voobner
>From: ahvo...@yahoo.com (Aaron=A0H.=A0Voobner)
>Who fostered the idea that another should disobey? I certainly
didn't.
>Among many other things that you need to learn, grasshopper, is the
>difference is between objective and subjective poit of views..
What POV are these? -A
---
From: Twistedhed (twist...@webtv.net)
Subject: DX Report (Freeband Fun)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 2001-10-15 08:16:40 PST
The freeband frequencies between 25.000 and 27.995 yield some great
DX. Below is a minor sampling of what one can expect.
(snip)
-----
From: Twistedhed (twist...@webtv.net)
Subject: Re: CB Still Alive and Kicking?
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 2001-12-17 15:46:49 PST
From: b1ww...@pop6.sympatico.ca (Chris_S)
>What's the state of CB these days?
(snip)
"Hi Chris, and welcome back. Jump back in, the DX is running heavy and
the radios are easier to get since back then..so is a little smoke, or
fire for your wire, just in case. The linears have become bigger and
better.
-----
Twistedhed
news:21321-3DA...@storefull-2315.public.lawson.webtv.net... From:
ahvo...@yahoo.com (Aaron H. Voobner) twist...@webtv.net (Twistedhed)
wrote: Who fostered the idea that another should disobey? I certainly
didn't.
Maybe you should re-read your freebanding article in SPORADIC WAVES.
ROTFLMAO!
-A
<<
And who put it forth here among us?
>Who cares who put it before us it is out there,>
It matters only as a point, which I will make commonplace in a moment.
>lect <
?
I certainly didn't.
>Does that really matter you wrote it and put it out with the intention
others would see it, now they have and again you de<<
I dunno what problems you are having today but they appear to be greater
than you are able to manage a grip on. Perhaps you should reread the
original article intact and complete and be so kind as to illustrate the
passage you feel is my advocation to others to break the law.
While you're at it, how was the crow concerning the Santa Cruz issue?
Did you chew it or just swallow it whole like Lelnad does?
Twistedhed
---
From: Twistedhed (twist...@webtv.net)
Subject: DX Report (Freeband Fun)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 2001-10-15 08:16:40 PST
The freeband frequencies between 25.000 and 27.995 yield some great DX.
Below is a minor sampling of what one can expect. (snip)
-----
From: Twistedhed (twist...@webtv.net)
Subject: Re: CB Still Alive and Kicking?
Newsgroups: rec.radio.cb
Date: 2001-12-17 15:46:49 PST
From: b1ww...@pop6.sympatico.ca (Chris_S)
What's the state of CB these days?
(snip)
"Hi Chris, and welcome back. Jump back in, the DX is running heavy and
the radios are easier to get since back then..so is a little smoke, or
fire for your wire, just in case. The linears have become bigger and
better.
-----
exception. Missing posts again? I know the rest of us aren't, or we
would have saw the post from that voo...@yahoo.com account you said you
would provide.
Another lie from you and this is the best you can do at another
attempted failed redirect? A post by me giving my personal opinion is
just that. Now about that yahoo addy you claimed you would post
from........
Aaron H. Voobner
>Who fostered the idea that another should disobey? I certainly
didn't.
>>SPORADIC WAVES.
>Among many other things that you need to learn, grasshopper, is the
>difference is between objective and subjective poit of views..
>>What POV are these?
(snip)
>They are replies to posts, as was noted in my previous post as the
>exception.
I sense a rapid descent into The Twistedhed Zone. Within three
exchanges, you've managed to turn another thread into meaningless
hallucinogenic babble. Oh well, I can't say Dave Hall didn't warn me
: )
-Aaron-
Busch'sMaster
From: legal...@hempseed.com (Fred Flintstoned)
"Twistedhed" <twist...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:21321-3DA...@storefull-2315.public.lawson.webtv.net... From:
ahvo...@yahoo.com (Aaron H. Voobner) twist...@webtv.net (Twistedhed)
wrote: Who fostered the idea that another should disobey? I certainly
didn't.
Maybe you should re-read your freebanding article in SPORADIC WAVES.
ROTFLMAO!
-A
<<
And who put it forth here among us?
>Who cares who put it before us it is out there,>
It matters only as a point, which I will make commonplace in a moment.
>lect <
?
I certainly didn't.
>Does that really matter you wrote it and put it out with the intention
others would see it, now they have and again you de<<
I dunno what problems you are having today but they appear to be greater
than you are able to manage a grip on.
George was grounded from the puter and Mom came in and caught him mid
sentence. He just hit the send button and yanked the cord outta the wall
right before she caught him. Then again it could be that A.D.H.D. thing he
has yet to get a handle on.
Twistedhed
quoted...could it be that my answer was in proper context to a fellow
freebander and you merely tried but failed to make it look as if I was
encouraging one to do so? But of course......unedited and in it's
entirety, the post appears below in it's original context...but you
spend way too much time in the archives trying to dig up "something"
(chuckle) on me....sorta like Nad did for so long, huh?
From: b1ww...@pop6.sympatico.ca (Chris_S)
What's the state of CB these days? I haven't been into it since the
early 90s when I had a Uniden HR2510 and an Antron vertical. Worked lots
of European freebanders back then.
But what's it like these days? My scanner tells me many truckers have
switched to 2 meters. Has this plus cellphones and FRS really put a dent
in the CB population or not?
thanks,
Chris
-
"Hi Chris, and welcome back. Jump back in, the DX is running heavy and
the radios are easier to get since back then..so is a little smoke, or
fire for your wire, just in case. The linears have become bigger and
better. Seeing as you have been a freebander in the past, no sense in
mentioning legalities since you are already aware of them...BUT...please
do not become upset with the jumping up and down of the nocodes that I
own here...,you will recognize them by the constant attention lavished
upon me by them.... I have this effect on losers like that when I speak
of the freeband..all the blood rushes to their ass and they attempt to
form sentences from their rectum...KC8LDO, Lelnad C. Scott appointed
himself head of my fan club and tattooed his forehead with a "T" as a
tribute to me...he also forges me as a last desperate attempt to get
attention because no one pays him attention anymore. On often occasions
he resorts to attacks from anonymous email addys whenever one speaks of
cb in a manner not consistent with his views...IE: freeband, linears,
even other hams that question him. He also lies. About everything,..cb
enforcement included. He is our resident rat, along with N8WWM....Watch
him.
Now that you were properly indoctrinated to the ways and means of this
here group, I would be glad to point you in the direction of anything
that may assist you in your return to cb should you care to do so. If
you wish to skip the crying and howling of the dogs concerning
legalities, email me if i can be of any assistance. Most all of the regs
in here are friendly happy, helpful folk.
A killfile will do wonders for you once the dogs try to hump your leg.
If you are in the need for a radio or other gear, lots of techs and
dealers hang here and can take good care of you. Merry Christmas.
--
And it's all accurate and still pertinent. And it's the "Twisted Zone",
not "Twistedhed".
That pulled yahoo addy has you sore, eh?
Aaron H. Voobner
>Well, "Arron",,let's see why you clipped the rest of the post you
>quoted...
Because it was a tantrum where you blame Doug and Leland Scott for all
your problems. It made you look like a certified loony. I figured I
did you a favor by snipping it. Oh well.
>could it be that my answer was in proper context to a fellow
>freebander and you merely tried but failed to make it look as if I
was
>encouraging one to do so?
You asked for an example of you encouraging someone to break the
rules. So now it doesn't count because it was a "fellow freebander"?
OMG. LOL. Twist, you are a precious commodity, you make me laugh so
hard.
>That pulled yahoo addy has you sore, eh?
If wishes could come true, huh, Twist? I've never been pulled. That's
because I've never posted anything to be pulled for. Maybe you're
thinking of "Special Delivery Jones". Two of his google accounts were
pulled for threats.
>And it's the "Twisted Zone", not "Twistedhed".
More like the "Twilight Zone". But I'm done visiting now. Buh bye.
-A
Richard Cranium
> richc...@yahoo.com (Richard Cranium) wrote:
> (classic trolling snipped)
>
> Hi Steve. Told you you'd abandon the other thread. Trolling in this
> one now?
Just following you around and making sure you don't mislead people. I
note YOU abandoned the other thread, coward.
Where's your PROOF?? Har de har.
Richard Cranium
> In <20021006143951...@mb-dd.aol.com>, tim...@aol.com187
> (Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>
> >since when is he a ham???? i wanna see that claim. last i knew the only txr he
> >used was a marine radio at his house which is illegal
>
> Haven't we been through this a long time ago? First, he never said he
> used it. Second, even if he does use it, it's not illegal to use a
> marine radio on shore if the communication is over water. In fact it's
> done all the time. You can't lock through the Colombia River without
> talking to shore, and I'll bet that they have marine radios on shore
> just for that purpose, don'tcha think Timmy? Duh...
So you're answering for Aanal Aaron aagain, Frankie? Why don't you let
him answer for himself?
Richard Cranium
> In <20021006155447...@mb-fx.aol.com>, tim...@aol.com187
> (Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>
> >what bridge does voobner operate from his home???
>
> A better question would be what other kinds of ship-to-shore
> communications are legal. An even better question would be if he
> actually uses the radio. But you should probably ask him that
> question, since I have no idea if he even uses it (he didn't say one
> way or the other, a detail which you obviously don't remember).
And as you know quite well, Aanal Aaron won't aanswer aany questions
aat aall. So that's a cop out as usual, Frankie.
Richard Cranium
> "Richard Cranium" <richc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:c5ecbb69.02100...@posting.google.com...
>
> > Aanother unsupportable Aanal Aaron Aassumption. Most CBers do NOT use
> > amps. Can you prove otherwise, Aanal Aaron?
>
> Can you prove he is wrong? Dick head?
>
No need. If he expects people to believe him, it's up to him to prove
he's correct.
>
> > Maybe, maybe not. Can you prove it Aanal Aaron?
>
> Can you prove he is wrong, Dick Head?
>
No need. If he expects people to believe him, it's up to him to prove
he's correct.
>
> > Prove it, Aanal Aaron. You can't. It has become difficult (but not
> > "impossible") to communicate on CB simply because of the sheer numbers
> > of operators trying to use the "legal 40".
>
> Complete Bullshit, there are less Cb operators now then at any time ever
> before, Can you prove otherwise?
No need. Can you prove me wrong? I doubt it. You couldn't prove your
way out of a wet paper bag, Georgie-girl.
Aaron H. Voobner
>ye...@REMOVEcet.com (ye...@REMOVEcet.com) wrote in message news:<3da08fae...@news.cet.com>...
>> In <20021006143951...@mb-dd.aol.com>,
tim...@aol.com187
>> (Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>>
>> >since when is he a ham???? i wanna see that claim. last i knew the
only
>txr he
>> >used was a marine radio at his house which is illegal
>>
>> Haven't we been through this a long time ago? First, he never said
he
>> used it. Second, even if he does use it, it's not illegal to use a
>> marine radio on shore if the communication is over water. In fact
it's
>> done all the time. You can't lock through the Colombia River
without
>> talking to shore, and I'll bet that they have marine radios on
shore
>> just for that purpose, don'tcha think Timmy? Duh...
>
>So you're answering for Aanal Aaron aagain, Frankie? Why don't you
let
>him answer for himself?
-Aaron- <presses button on can of RAID>
----------------------------------------------------------------
rb...@hotmail.com (Radio Bob) wrote in message news:<3d34cfcd.0202...@posting.google.com>...
> Hi Everyone, Can't we all just get along? Apparently not. Pat Murphy
> (Steven J. Rogovich) just can't leave well enough alone.
> Be warned!!! don't a one of you dare to open your mouth and complain
> about problems at or the operation of John Cruzan's Free Radio Network
> at frn.net You will be visciously attacked and a great attempt will
> be made to run you off the face of the earth......By resident attack
> dog, internet troll and coward extrodinare...Pat Murfy. You can make
> up all fake names and create all the false email addresses you want
> Patricia but you don't hide your manner of speech or the garbage you
> spew. You only know how to throw rocks from behind shadows like the
> pathetic scared little boy that you are. Godless coward.
> Well I'm going to give you your stupid little victory and hope that
> you will be proud of yourself. John Cruzan himself suggested that I
> come here to post my messages but even you dare to defy your glorious
> leader. Well, unlike you, I have a life and don't need to have you
> crawling around chasing me around. I have lots of other things to busy
> myself with so I'll leave the Usenet all to you and your many
> alternate personalities. Richard Cranium suits you quite well and that
> other identity that you stole from a real person will soon enough be
> taken away from you by the proper authorities. Geesh, no one ever
> thought that the title of Pirate Radio's Number 1 Asshole could be
> taken away from jta but low and behold you have mangaged to do it.
> Congratulations Steve! You da man! Have ya a great life buddy! see ya
> later
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jamey clark (jame...@juno.com)
Subject: The Big V followed me! Some of you may be infected by this
"troll" not w-w!
Newsgroups: alt.religion.w-w-church-god
Date: 2002-03-07 10:24:48 PST
Hi Jamey, My name is Woody Parr and I'm up the road in Cornelia. I'm
afraid that I'm indirectly responsible for this troll who is
badmouthing you at alt.religion.urantiabook. You see he was only there
in the first place to attack me.
This idiot is Steven J. Rogovich, 1612 Lake Christopher dr. Virginia
Beach, Va. 23464 He followed me to the UB usenet page from
alt.radio.pirate He and I (were) both formerly loosely associated
with each other in the shortwave pirate radio listening hobby. I USED
to be a shortwave pirate but my station has been permanently retired
for more than 2 years now. Stevie is still a pirate and is the
operator of the station Radio Free Speech. He is also the moderator of
a message board at the Free Radio Network < www.frn.net > and goes by
the handle of Pat Murphy there. I had a falling out with the people at
the FRN a couple of years ago as they became corrupt and were doing so
inappropriate things. I dared to open my mouth and openly complain
about there stupid activities which since they havn't yet ceased to
follow me around the internet anywhere they can and attack me.
Steve is also on the usenet trolling people under the name of Richard
Cranium (richar...@yahoo.com) He's far too much of a coward to
debate anyone using his real name.
--------------------------------------------------
QRZ LISTING:
KD4CXJ
STEVEN J. ROGOVICH
1612 LAKE CHRISTOPHER DR
VIRGINIA BEACH VA 23464
USA
Busch'sMaster
He is.
Sir Circumference
Twistedhed wrote:
>
> Well, "Arron",,let's see why you clipped the rest of the post you
> quoted...could it be that my answer was in proper context to a fellow
> freebander and you merely tried but failed to make it look as if I was
> encouraging one to do so? But of course......unedited and in it's
> entirety, the post appears below in it's original context...but you
> spend way too much time in the archives trying to dig up "something"
> (chuckle) on me....sorta like Nad did for so long, huh?
Twisthead is just another illegal 'freebander', not even worthy to
be called a cber.
ye...@removecet.com
richc...@yahoo.com (Richard Cranium) wrote:
He can and does. But it seems that YOU can't read his replies -- case
in point: Where, in any post, did he say that "all 10 meter radios are
illegal"? And if you troll him because you think he is anti-CB, then
why did you totally ignore "Bob" that was CLEARLY anti-CB? Still don't
have answers for those simple questions, Clyde? I didn't think so.
BTW, who am I this week, Clyde?
ye...@removecet.com
richc...@yahoo.com (Richard Cranium) wrote:
You won't answer any of MY questions so quit whining.
ye...@removecet.com
(Timbo Nebo) wrote:
>being hooked up implies usage,
Yes it does. I have my Swan hooked up and I use it daily. It's an
excellent receiver. But I don't transmit with it -- yet.
> hell voobie wont even say where he lives much
>less what water he's near
Try this: "Hey Voob, do you live near a navigable waterway?" Or this:
"Hey Voob, do you own a boat?" Of course it's just easier to jump to
the conclusion that he operates the radio illegally, isn't it? I
suppose when you are stoned all the time you need to keep things
simple and not clutter your brain with logic and reason...
Smoke Stack
know he's sure implied it before. so what?
>Where, in any post, did he say that "all 10 meter radios are
>illegal"?
Tim Nebo
Smoke Stack
doesnt give you the right to illegally use a marine radio. i own to boats
explain to me what rf rights it gives me
>Try this: "Hey Voob, do you live near a navigable waterway?" Or this:
>"Hey Voob, do you own a boat?" Of course it's just easier to jump to
>the conclusion that he operates the radio illegally, isn't it? I
>suppose when you are stoned all the time you need to keep things
>simple and not clutter your brain with logic and reason...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Tim Nebo
ye...@removecet.com
<antikeyclown...@insanity.com> wrote:
<snip>
>> So you're answering for Aanal Aaron aagain, Frankie? Why don't you let
>> him answer for himself?
>
>He is.
You're gonna have to find a new alias, Randy. BTW, I saw you on TV
today in a commercial with Donald Trump. Looks like you have been
working out!
<<*-PLONK-*>>
ye...@removecet.com
(Smoke Stack) wrote:
>you like repeating yourself dont you? i dont know if he's ever said it but i
>know he's sure implied it before. so what?
Then I'll ask you: Where? Show me a quote. Because I haven't seen any
post by him that expresses OR implies anything of the sort. So if he
really did and I missed that post, please quote it.
Smoke Stack
never said he did say it, did i? i said he's implied it for sure and MAY have
said it. dont put this bullshit on me like you have this other mystery fellow.
the only way you can be sure what aaron has or hasnt said since day one is if
you are him.
>Then I'll ask you: Where? Show me a quote. Because I haven't seen any
>post by him that expresses OR implies anything of the sort. So if he
>really did and I missed that post, please quote it.
Tim Nebo
Aaron H. Voobner
>you like repeating yourself dont you? i dont know if he's ever said
it but
>i
>know he's sure implied it before. so what?
>
>>10 meter radios are illegal"?
Gosh Tim, "what Aaron Voobner said" weighs heavily on your mind (or
what's left of it) lately, eh? OK, pay attention, because here it is
from the horse's mouth. For the record, I don't think all 10 meter
radios are illegal and certainly have never said or implied this.
Without a doubt, the ones on the FCC hit list are illegal to import
(even by licensed hams), and they can't legally be used on CB (by hams
or CBers). Everyone knows that licensed amateurs can use non-type
accepted gear as long as it is used legally on ham bands. Everyone
also knows that hams are not the target market for phony "10 meter"
roger-beep, echo-miked, rebel flagged radios. Sleazy manufacturers
have hijacked the phrase "10 meter radio" in order to attempt to
sidestep the CB type-acceptance regulations and get these rigs into
the hands of freeloaders like you. So your sudden interest in the
technicalities of legal 10 meter radio usage and what I said or didn't
say regarding it comes off as nothing less than sheer desperation. You
might as well be trying to discredit me on the basis of spelling
errors. Waht the hecke, heres a bunch of them for youe; have funn. :
)
-A
ye...@removecet.com
(Smoke Stack) wrote:
>yes its his own tactic used against him. whats the problem? ps owning a boat
>doesnt give you the right to illegally use a marine radio. i own to boats
>explain to me what rf rights it gives me
Let's see now, don't you think that the use of a marine radio is more
likely to be legal if it's used for it's intended purpose? <sound of
me hitting myself on the head with a boot> What was I thinking? Of
COURSE you wouldn't think THAT!!!
ye...@removecet.com
(Smoke Stack) wrote:
>frank, aaron was here before you. there was alot you missed my friend.
If you check the archives, I was here before him.
> but i
>never said he did say it, did i? i said he's implied it for sure and MAY have
>said it.
Well then where did he imply it?
> dont put this bullshit on me like you have this other mystery fellow.
Nobody forced you to take Clyde's position, Timmy. Don't blame anyone
else for your statements except yourself.
>the only way you can be sure what aaron has or hasnt said since day one is if
>you are him.
Try here:
I suggest using 'advanced search' and that should make your search a
little easier. No longer do you have any reason to avoid the question:
Where did Voobner imply that all 10 meter radios are illegal?
Richard Cranium
You lie like a rug, Aanal Aaron. As usual. Or do you call it
"selective recall" so you won't embarass yourself?
Try looking through the excessively long thread about "Legal? ... at
eButt". You said and/or implied many times that ten meter radios were
illegal before you were drowned out by people who knew better. One,
Tom Sevart N2UHC, practically had to hit you over the head by
repeating that licensed amateurs could use any radio they want in the
ham bands, something you vehemently disagreed with.
The entire point of that thread was you crowing that the FCC had
declared all those ten meter radios somehow "illegal", and did you
ever crow. Until you were proven wrong.
You did NOT know that hams were exempt from type acceptance. You did
NOT know that Novices and Tech+ license holders had 10 meter
priviledges. There are so many things you didn't know that I cannot
list them all. Nobody has to try to discredit you; YOU have totally
discredited yourself.
Richard Cranium
> >ye...@REMOVEcet.com (ye...@REMOVEcet.com) wrote in message news:<3da08fae...@news.cet.com>...
> >> In <20021006143951...@mb-dd.aol.com>,
> tim...@aol.com187
> >> (Timbo Nebo) wrote:
> >>
> >> >since when is he a ham???? i wanna see that claim. last i knew the
> only
> txr he
> >> >used was a marine radio at his house which is illegal
> >>
> >> Haven't we been through this a long time ago? First, he never said
> he
> >> used it. Second, even if he does use it, it's not illegal to use a
> >> marine radio on shore if the communication is over water. In fact
> it's
> >> done all the time. You can't lock through the Colombia River
> without
> >> talking to shore, and I'll bet that they have marine radios on
> shore
> >> just for that purpose, don'tcha think Timmy? Duh...
> >
> >So you're answering for Aanal Aaron aagain, Frankie? Why don't you
> let
> >him answer for himself?
>
>
So, where's your alleged PROOF, Aanal Aaron? You got none, so you
continue to resort to lame repetition. Put up or shut up, dimbulb. I'm
still here and I'm still waiting.
Twistedhed
And you're merely another nocode just pissed off at cbers cause we have
a better time on radio than you.
Twistedhed
internet) whined with:
Try this: "Hey Voob, do you live near a navigable waterway?" Or this:
"Hey Voob, do you own a boat?" Of course it's just easier to jump to the
conclusion that he operates the radio illegally, isn't it? I suppose
when you are stoned all the time you need to keep things simple and not
clutter your brain with logic and reason...
Try this.
How do freebanders or pirates affect your "work" as you claimed?
Oh, never mind.
Twistedhed
(Smoke Stack) wrote:
you like repeating yourself dont you? i dont know if he's ever said it
but i know he's sure implied it before. so what?
Then I'll ask you: Where? Show me a quote. Because I haven't seen any
post by him that expresses OR implies anything of the sort. So if he
really did and I missed that post, please quote it.
You said RF piracy affects your work and ignored several who asked you
to elaborate yet you ask of others something you refuse yourself.
Hypocrisy at it's finest hour.
Twistedhed
Well, "Arron",,let's see why you clipped the rest of the post you
quoted...
>Because it was a tantrum where you blame Doug and Leland Scott for all
your problems. >>
Mmmmmmph....you're missing posts agin...I have no problems...everything
is just right!
What was posted was all true. Lelnad forges and lies and, well, everyone
knows all about your posse of trouble consisting of Frank Gilliland,
Lelnad KC8LDO the forger and obessive collector of mens undergarments,
Dave Hall the socialistic commie, and Dogie who is pissed off cause he
can't find any gay cbers.
>It made you look like a certified loony. I figured I did you a favor by
snipping it. <
"Figuring" and "thinking" by you should be carefully selected, maybe
even ran by a freebander for permission before you post, this way you
won't continue to libel your troubled nocode friends anymore.
>Oh well. <
S'ok. As I demonstrated yesterday, you are still in the learning
process.
could it be that my answer was in proper context to a fellow freebander
and you merely tried but failed to make it look as if I was encouraging
one to do so?
>You asked for an example of you encouraging someone to break the rules.
So now it doesn't count because it was a "fellow freebander"? <<
I encouraged no one. I merely stated my opinion. We know you have
difficulties telling the difference.
>OMG. <
Yes?
>LOL. Twist, you are a precious commodity, you make me laugh so hard.<<
I aim to please.
That pulled yahoo addy has you sore, eh?
>If wishes could come true, huh, Twist? <
If that were true, we would all be weraing the same uniform and Dave
Hall would be the exalted dictator with you his ministry of foolishness
and Dogie the jester and LElnad the knight that is in drag.
>I've never been pulled. <
You're the one that said you would post from there..we're still waiting.
A quick change of the subject didn't make us forget your promise.
>That's because I've never posted anything to be pulled for. Maybe
you're thinking of "Special Delivery Jones". Two of his google accounts
were pulled for threats.<<
No, I',m speaking of voo...@yahoo.com
And it's the "Twisted Zone", not "Twistedhed".
>More like the "Twilight Zone". But I'm done visiting now. Buh bye.
-A<<
Yea, I figured as much, as that usually happens whenever you get your
tail slammed in the door.