Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[AMPS\]\s+Rich\s+is\s+back\,\s+now\s+how\s+about\s+KM1H\s+\?\?\?\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: rjohnson@ici.net (Bob Johnson)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 14:03:55 -0500
Now that Rich Measures has been "UNCENSORED", how about letting Carl, KM1H back on the list ??? It seems to me that the same "Group" that dumped Rich also dumped Carl and for about the same reason, N
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00435.html (8,396 bytes)

2. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: rakefet@rakefet.com (Vic Rosenthal)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 11:10:04 -0800
Good idea. I would also like to see Tom, W8JI, too. Perhaps these guys would agree not to try to kill each other! I remember reading an article in which someone said that a software company could onl
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00438.html (8,588 bytes)

3. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: k6ndv@contesting.com (Will, K6NDV)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 12:31:26 -0800
Hello all, I gave my apology and explanation what happened. There seems to be a few who want more. Let me explain this: NOBODY! is locked out on the AMPS reflector (at least not as long I have been r
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00449.html (9,894 bytes)

4. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: w6ru@lightspeed.net (Terry Gaiser - W6RU)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 14:48:05 -0800
I agree ! Carl has been most helpful over the years. Terry W6RU -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampsfaq.html Submissions: amps@contesting.com Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00453.html (9,935 bytes)

5. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 18:10:51 -0600
While, it would be great to have these guys back it won't work for long. Mr. Measures cannot stand anyone who disagrees with him and all points of view that contradict his are wrong. And he will need
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00454.html (10,330 bytes)

6. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: jimsmith@gotnet.net (Jim Smith)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 16:20:27 -0800
Rich wasn't censored. He was removed from the list for what the list owner considered inappropriate behavior. I don't unserstand why everyone's been talking about freedom of speech. It had nothing t
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00455.html (10,013 bytes)

7. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: rjohnson@ici.net (Bob Johnson)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 21:22:01 -0500
Yes, I want those who contributed their knowledge to the list back !!! Yes, that is correct as far as I can see.? You took over fron Paul Hellenberg, K4JA someware around 9/29/99.? Carl's, KM1H, last
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00457.html (12,038 bytes)

8. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: rjohnson@ici.net (Bob Johnson)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 21:40:02 -0500
Hi Will: I agree on YOUR list no one is locked out. But what about KM1H and W8JI ??? It appears that they were locked out PRIOR to you taking over !!! We need them back and need to make sure this kin
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00458.html (11,920 bytes)

9. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: jono@enteract.com (Jon Ogden)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 21:32:46 -0600
I think W8JI is not here because he's locked out, but because he doesn't want to be. Tom can't be on this list without Rich going after him tooth and nail and never leaving him alone. So Tom chooses
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00462.html (10,991 bytes)

10. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: 2@vc.net (measures)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:28:10 -0700
Carl called the reflector owner the N-- word. This is not a free speech issue. There was little disruption. The AMPS-bypass mail server delivered my disappeared posts until Will reinstated me. . . c
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00466.html (9,296 bytes)

11. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: 2@vc.net (measures)
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:28:13 -0700
Tom chose to leave. Tom needs to deal with statements he made that do not wash;. Tom and Carl get along fairly ok. Tom did not claim to be a guru. He claimed to be a recognized amplifier "expert". c
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00467.html (9,288 bytes)

12. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: 2@vc.net (measures)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 01:19:09 -0700
? (a guy was quite familiar with the crybaby con) I was under the impression that C. T. Rauch, Jr. chose to leave. Amen, however, Chronic bellyachers would much rather complain in secret than click
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00475.html (10,162 bytes)

13. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: 2@vc.net (measures)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 01:19:11 -0700
at applies ? It has always been my policy to use embarrassments as a weapon. Tom's fateful post of 28 November is still hanging around his neck like an albatross. ''The only things that defile a man
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00476.html (10,425 bytes)

14. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: 2@vc.net (measures)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 01:24:58 -0700
Agreed ? Tom can be here if he deals with his 28 November post, confesses that AC Circuit Analysis does apply to VHF parasitic suppressors, and withdraws his assertion that the RF-R of nichrome wire
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00477.html (10,148 bytes)

15. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: nj4f@erols.com (Steve Bookout)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 08:59:29 -0500
Hello all, Been catching up on the mess here since I was busy in the contest over the weekend. As long as people conduct themselves in a CIVIL manner, let everyone post his view or position. I do thi
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00480.html (11,736 bytes)

16. [AMPS] Rich is back, now how about KM1H ??? (score: 1)
Author: 2@vc.net (measures)
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 08:14:59 -0700
a different kind of mess. Indeed. However, a pure diet of technostuff is as dry as Saturday's toast. So now we gotta worry about ''sensitivity''? I think I'm gonna puke. . Agreed. The explanation di
/archives//html/Amps/2000-02/msg00489.html (12,633 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu