Re: OT or is it on topic?
- From: kb9rqz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:39:17 -0500
On 30 Jan 2006 15:19:33 -0800, hot-ham-and-cheese@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>N7ZZT - Eric Oyen wrote:
>> well well well...
>>
>> it seems that after my filter got done with this group, only 15 postings of
>> the estimated 6000 in the last month alone rated as relevant (to
>> rec.radio.amateur.POLICY).
>>
>> of the rest, it devolved into: backstabbing, name calling, accusations of
>> child porn or other illegal activities and various other non-relevant junk.
>>
>> is anyone going to discuss any REAL policy issues dealing with Amateur
>> radio?
>>
>> --
>> DE N7ZZT
>> Eric Oyen
>> Phoenix, Arizona
>> e-mail: n7zzt(at)hotmail(dot)com
>> the difference between intelligence and stupidity is that intelligence
>> has its limits.
>
>Well, well, well...
>
>It seems Eric missed the posting wrt the FCC claiming to define Morse
>Code.
>
>Thanks for participating.
his ideas on discsion seem much like Steves as well. Youare raking the
law" "you surrednered al legal right when you acepted your license or
words that effect are from his post
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OT or is it on topic?
- From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen
- Re: OT or is it on topic?
- References:
- OT or is it on topic?
- From: N7ZZT - Eric Oyen
- Re: OT or is it on topic?
- From: hot-ham-and-cheese
- OT or is it on topic?
- Prev by Date: Re: Steve is Confused, was: Re: More Markie Mularkie
- Next by Date: more***
- Previous by thread: Re: OT or is it on topic?
- Next by thread: Re: OT or is it on topic?
- Index(es):