[Amps] Drivel

[Mark Bitterlich]

I think we can end this about now.  My point has been made, and so has 
yours.

As far as discussions go, there never was one.

As far as the topic went, you changed it to meet your debating points, which 
is why I jumped in to begin with.  I.E. "The discussion was about ham radio 
in an emergency".  No, my discussion was about you saying that using CW in 
an emergency would get you killed.  I gave you examples where it was still 
in use to prevent emergencies, and was used on a regular basis as primary 
communication for a fleet of warships.  Those examples did not "count" so 
you dismissed them, changed the topic, and then accused me of not sticking 
to it.

It's impossible to have a discussion with any person that does that on a 
regular basis.   I fully well admit to all present that I intended for that 
aspect to be made obvious.  For that I accept any condemnation from the AMPS 
list.  Guilty as charged.

I'll leave it for Bill to have the last word, or not.

Much to the happiness of all present .....   dit dit dit dah dit dah

Mark Bitterlich
WA3JPY


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Turner" <dezrat at outlook.com>
To: "Amps group" <amps at contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2017 8:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Amps] Drivel


> ------------ ORIGINAL MESSAGE ------------(may be snipped)
>
> On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 16:03:58 -0400, Mark wrote:
>
>>
>>So to reply in kind: Before I can evaluate your ability to even begin to
>>assess my own, I would need to know whether or not you are a pilot, how 
>>many
>>hours you have, whether you are instrument rated or have a Commercial or 
>>ATP
>>ticket.  Then I would need to know when the last time you served aboard a
>>U.S. Naval Ship, which ones, for how long, and in what capacity, because
>>that is what I *DID* talk about.
>
> REPLY:
>
> The discussion was about ham radio in an emergency, not aircraft
> beacons or Navy ships. Stick to the topic.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT