[Amps] Much heat, much smoke, zero light generated

[randy at verizon.net]

Referencing the post below, firstly and foremost, I am NOT picking on the poster.
Or anybody else, specifically, although I must ask that the reader try to bear that
in mind throughout this post, as, it may seem so. And it's possible that I'm a big,
fat liar too, so, bear that in mind if you think it's appropriate.

Firstly, I'm not nearly as old or as qualified as many of the old gummers battling
things out here, so if that loud clicking noise I'm hearing is the old gummers hitting
the delete key, right now, it's  OK w/me. I'll just wait for them to croak before
bashing them. I'm 47 and have been a ham 30+ years.... NO, the FCC database does NOT
reflect that, and a search for WD4CRP has thus far been fruitless for me, but that
was my Novice callsign. I did not mean to imply that everyone older than me is hitting
the delete key; just that I don't particularly care if intolerant folks of any learned
age want to delete me, especially if they think my lack of qualifications make my
opinion insignificant.

Nextly...the party of the first part sez he's cranked out about a bazillion 6M mod'ed
amps over the course of....X years. With performance figures of: X watts, Y IMD, w/part
number Zz-??? in the final dep't.

I'd point out that..."if" he'd sold items that failed to produce what he said that they
would produce...it is HIGHLY PROBABLE that, given the number of units stated and the
number of years involved... at least ONE unsatisfied customer would have found THIS forum
and said something like "He sold me a POS that failed to (fill in the blank). Even if
the Moderator wanted to protect him for some incomprehensible reason... there just ain't
no way of keeping a ham w/internet access from getting the word out.

FURTHERMORE: I "will" point out that, literally, since the first moment that Amateur Radio
came into existence, by *anybody's* definition, *WE* have...<GASP!> furthered technology
by steadfastly *ignoring* parameters of active devices, i.e. tubes (valves, deferring to
the English/English xlation). Tube mfr's engineers, early on, developed ratings for their
tubes, which "we" promptly ignored and defied and proved wrong...at one point the tube mfr's
allegedly turned tubes over to hams to figure out what they "really" were good for.
Same story with "us" getting stuck on wavelengths shorter than 200M. Imagine talking coast-to-
coast, in broad daylight.... hams...

As to the good-natured post about the Amateur's Code, and us not bashing us other around as
to what we've all witnessed hereabouts lately: To you, sir, I agree, and I commend you for
pointing that out. A very respectable way of trying to put an end to friction. 
Having said that, though....I got a bit nauseous the last X times I read that "Code" because
it insists (no idea if it still does or not, but it DID) that the good Amateur is "Loyal to
the League...".... huh? I can't be a good ham unless I pay dues or otherwise am "Loyal to the
League"? That "A" in ARRL is "American", and I *am* an American, and that offends me on its 
face. Can you imagine being some poor person in Country X, busting your rump to get some gear
on the air, squeezing enough moolah together to be able to order ONE book from the USA to try
to better yourself... and finding out that you gotta be Loyal to the League to be good? Huh?

What IS good about all this: We're NOT pee-ing all over each other on some MF/HF/VHF/Beyond
frequency.
What IS bad about all this: everybody is saying "put up or shut up"..... and.....nobody DOES
IT. For all the hours of consternation involved on the involved parties part...if everybody
just got a job at 7-11 and pooled the funds, bought the hardware and paid to have it tested..

Frankly, we all know that (fill in the blank... person, mfr's) while generally is good, has
certainly turned out some real CRAP, and, by that I'm specifically referring to (Mfr, person),
which had (something wrong, allegedly), which any jackass can see.

73,
Randy
KZ4RV
..

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 04:32:08 -0400
From: Gary Patterson <gpatterson53 at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] no mud wrestlers...SB200 IMD
To: <amps at contesting.com>
Message-ID: <BAY113-W16F6131C2C56B3235F4AA0DAB20 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"


I'll second that.  As one of the silent majority, for the most part I have enjoyed the discourse. Reviewing the traffic of the last week or so, one poster stands out as being rude, flippant and generally unhelpful.  Without me being specific, I'll bet all you are thinking of the same individual right now.
 
73

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------