[R-390] Gentlemen Please stop or end it!

Mon Aug 5 11:05:11 EDT 2013

 Gentlemen, No need to address the Fine Lady from this list as she ALWAYS takes the high road,

Please, can we stop the, you said, he said, they said junk or the he said back in 2011 and get back to RADIO.
Remember the movie, Good Morning Vietnam where  Adrian Cronauer said;
Look, tweedledee, it's an actual event. .... And this is JUST RADIO.

We are all on the SAME team here in that we all enjoy these very fine vintage receivers.
As I see it, the arguments should be left off of the list. I wonder what the newcomers think
of this bickering? I wonder how many have decided to just read the documents and not deal with the
BITCHING? 
Do we ever give thought to what the engineers, technicians and others who originally designed these receivers 
and got them out the door(s), would think about the discourse often put to text here? 

Most of the long time list contributors here are extremely knowledgeable and I have learned 
much from the thoughts and suggestions of others as is the case for most of us, present and past
There is room for ALL and ALL should stay. Lets all strive to always take the path kindness and professionalism .

Of course, there is door number Two.. 

Yes that's right folks, behind Door Number Two
is a Pair of brand New, Double barrel, sawed off, 12 gauge Dueling-shotguns loaded with buck shot.
Here is SC it's still legal, in a few counties, to pick up arms, walk 10 paces, turn and fire at your opponent.
Normally, pistols are used and someone survives. In this case only the readers of this list get that advantage.

Kidding aside, PLEASE, very intelligent people read and contribute to this list. It's a true 
Win Win resource for all of us if we eliminate the mean spirited comments. Lets leave child play where
it belongs, OFF OF THIS LIST! Or come to SC and take advantage of Door Number Two!!!!!!! I offer my service of
Professional Pace Counter!!  One, Two, Three......

Regards,
Glenn Scott WA4AOS
DSM Labs  (dot com) 

-----Original Message-----
From: r-390-request <r-390-request at mailman.qth.net>
To: r-390 <r-390 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sun, Aug 4, 2013 11:38 pm
Subject: R-390 Digest, Vol 112, Issue 5

Send R-390 mailing list submissions to
	r-390 at mailman.qth.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-390
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	r-390-request at mailman.qth.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
	r-390-owner at mailman.qth.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of R-390 digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Self-inflicted wounds? (Roger Ruszkowski)
   2. RF deck alignment (Tisha Hayes)
   3. Re: Some more  Self-inflicted wounds? (b_hagen at sbcglobal.net)
   4. Re: Self-inflicted wounds? (wli)
   5. Re: Self-inflicted wounds? (2002tii)

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

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 17:05:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Roger Ruszkowski <flowertime01 at wmconnect.com>
To: r-390 at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [R-390] Self-inflicted wounds?
Message-ID: <8D05F6D7DCDB358-1F44-26926 at webmail-d274.sysops.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Dennis,

Amen to style, Tisha has that.

Roger

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

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 16:23:07 -0500
From: Tisha Hayes <tisha.hayes at gmail.com>
To: R390A <r-390 at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: [R-390] RF deck alignment
Message-ID:
	<CAACTF11TxcdTFGCHmQ-YXySAaAtJmnLnxbph=U7LVuDqWEk44Q at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I know that this generally falls under the "leave it alone" category but
has anyone ever gone through the process of aligning the RF deck stages and
bands for linearity?

Generally I know that we pick a few spots on each band and peak through the
RF stages for performance but what happens when a slug has been replaced,
repaired or the spring was accidentally stretched? That one slug will have
a different peak than the other in the string when the band selector switch
is lined up that way.

The only way I could think to do it would be to inject a known RF signal
level and to use a RF microvoltmeter (like a Boonton 92) at test points to
walk through the stages.

Am I wrong-headed to think that the more selective the RF stages are the
better the desired response would be at the IF?

Ideas?

-- 
Ms. Tisha Hayes/ AA4HA

"Objective considerations of contemporary phenomena compel the conclusion
that success or failure in competitive activities exhibits no tendency to
be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of
the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account." -- George Orwell

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

Message: 3
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 19:20:46 -0400
From: <b_hagen at sbcglobal.net>
To: "'Roger Ruszkowski'" <flowertime01 at wmconnect.com>,
	<r-390 at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [R-390] Some more  Self-inflicted wounds?
Message-ID: <79C0925CDA0F42E7931DF08184347439 at bruce>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

A+

Bruce

-----Original Message-----
From: r-390-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:r-390-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of Roger Ruszkowski
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 17:04
To: r-390 at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [R-390] Some more Self-inflicted wounds?

Fellows,

If had to reply to every critic of my spelling, grammar, miss use of words,

humor that went clean over your heads, humor that feel flat in the mail
before

arrival and just dumb wrong statements I have posted, I would never get to
close a thread.

I will be honest with you all, you are my writing skills feed back team.
Back when Wanda said

to me Roger your writing skills suck you need to practice. Back in 73 an
English teacher in 

Okinawa commented to me that every paper I did in his class was on the R390A
receiver.

And ask was it the only thing I could write about. I said not but it is the
subject I can write

about and get an assignment done on time with only a couple of drafts. I am
still writing

R390 papers as impromptu exercising in writing skills. You Fellows are
reading them and

giving me good feed back. I thank each and every one of you who have sent me
an

e mail that commented on my writing. I do wish some of you would work on
your

critical feed back skills. 

After 20 years at Hughes Aircraft as a systems test engineer I can also now
write a

coherent test procedure test step and do well with boiler plate test
reports.

Not much market for these limited skills.

But people own R390's and have problems with their R390's and did not
receive 18 months

of training on their R390's maintenance. I love these receivers and do not
want to ever

hear that one got junked. Just do not even bother to post the story. I can
live the rest of

my life and never need to know. 

So these people come to the reflector and ask questions. Not knowing R390
jargon, and not knowing

exactly what the problem is they some times offer up some very vague
questions. Mostly you Fellows 

are very knowledgeable  and do a super job of being very helpful to quickly
offer up a diagnostic process 

to isolate the problem for them. Then  you go on to help them fix the
problem and if necessary find parts.

If the solution was to tell them to download a copy of the TM and read the
book, I think we would be not

mentoring well. We have the R390.net page and we have the Pearls of Wisdom
and we have the Y2K

manual and we have the reflector archives. And the solution is still not to
tell your readers with questions

go read the web pages.

We are mentors. We know where this stuff is. Your job is to distil your
readers question so we can 

provide them a correct solution that solves their problem and not our
perceived problem of their problem.

Success is determined by our reader. If we are not solving someone's problem
we are wasting everyone's time.

This brings us back to mentoring. We were asked a question because some one
though we would help them 

with a quick solution. Making a careers of repairing R390's is not out
readers most important objective. As

good mentors I see we need to utilize the resources we have compiled over
the years to assist our readers.

We do this by cutting and pasting the best response back into an e mail and
posting it. So what if we answer

the exact same question 6 time sin six years for 6 readers. These are six
new readers who are just having the

same repeated problem with their receiver and we know its a common problem.
But out new reader does not

know this.

We are Ann and Abby Landers writing advice to our readers. Ann and Abby
write on a different topics 

than we do as we try stay on the topic of R390's and off the topics of Ann,
Abby, Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz.

We are none the less just column writers. And as we deal with a very
specific technical topic 

(the care and feeding of R390's and R390A's and their near relatives R388's
R389's and a couple more)

[some one will post the exact nomenclature and remind me I missed them] I
think we provide a more

important service and certainly to a much smaller audience. But we should
not underestimate what

we are doing and the value of the service we provide to others who share an
interest we have in

Amateur radio, antique radio and electronics. 

We do not see Ann Landers or Abby writing that gee Dr. Phil, I so disagree
with the last personal view

you posted. 

We have an open reflector here so questions can get in. Any one can also
take a shot at doing

a Ann landers or dear Abby response to any question.  We can all practice
our writing skills

an entertain a group of readers along the way.

As long as I am up on this soap box, I think many of us forget the long
shadow this reflector 

has. Every post I have ever made is still on line. Every post any one makes
to this reflector 

is on line. You can get rude crude and off topic today but it will be on
line forever. In these days

where more than 30 percent of employers do web searches on prospective
employees think

about what you post. You are not anonymous in what goes into the R390
archives. 

You have to ask your self do I want a future employer and co workers,
reading my posts and analyzing

the comments I make about some one, thus getting yourself tagged as mean,
disrespectful,

insensitive, not a team player, a potential source of discontent,
indiscreet, and plain crass.

Or do you understand and see that every post you put on the R390 reflector
is just like

graffiti on the building wall. Its your tag. Its your art. It says a lot
about you, your gang

and your standing in the gang. Your post are a display of your writing
skills. Your subject

matter says a lot about personality. 

A lot of people would like to post a lot of things on this reflector. But I
ask you to

stop and think about what you write. Maybe you should just hit the delete

key instead of the send key, go get another cold brew, and remain employable

by not having an e mail post limit your employment opportunities for the
rest of your life.

I am happy Don does not moderate this list tightly. I get to express my
self.

Just my three cents worth.

Roger Ruszkowski  AI4NI 33C4H  68 - 73  Vietnam, Korea, Okinawa, Ft Devens
Mass. not in exact  order.

______________________________________________________________

R-390 mailing list

Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-390

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm

Post: mailto:R-390 at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net

Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

  _____  

I am using the Free version of SPAMfighter <http://www.spamfighter.com/len>
.
SPAMfighter has removed 7096 of my spam emails to date.

Do you have a slow PC? <http://www.spamfighter.com/SLOW-PCfighter?cid=sigen>
Try a free scan! 

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

Message: 4
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 18:47:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: wli <wli98122 at yahoo.com>
To: "r-390 at mailman.qth.net" <r-390 at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [R-390] Self-inflicted wounds?
Message-ID:
	<1375667241.54606.YahooMailNeo at web125302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Well, this has been a real interesting thread. Roger, Rich, and Tisha have been 
very observant. In reality, this group functions on two levels: like a bunch of 
*Elmers* to the newbies, and like a bunch of *experts* puzzling over a complex 
or controversial area. Just admit that no-one knows everything. Diplomacy and 
common courtesy go a long way. 

Roger makes a very good point in reminding us that anything we post is there 
FOREVER on the Web servers. Folks can troll back though years of e-mail posts. 
Do not think for a minute that *delete* means it is erased forever. The recent 
flap over data-mining employing text strings is all too true and has been in 
existence for years and years.

One way to look at this forum, is to imagine it as a virtual coffee break area 
in an unheated Quonset hut. We gather to gossip about our latest exploits inside 
the R390's as the new guys and gals listen in. And that is my three cents 
worth.???? W. Li 

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

Message: 5
Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2013 23:32:06 -0400
From: 2002tii <bmw2002tii at nerdshack.com>
To: 390 list <r-390 at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [R-390] Self-inflicted wounds?
Message-ID: <20130805033832.6296E11BBCF at karen.lavabit.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Perry wrote:

>Because of using CAPS I was mocked and ridiculed by a list member 
>not once, but twice.  When I wrote online that I believed he owed me 
>an apology I was ridiculed again. A real butt reaming.

Since I was the person who allegedly "mocked" and "ridiculed" you, 
and since you have mischaracterized the facts, I'll take this 
opportunity to set the record straight.

I have included links to the actual posts for anyone who isn't bored 
to tears by this nonsense already and who wants to see the complete 
posts for themselves.

1.  You posted :  "Ceramic [capacitors] are for RF ONLY and film 
capacitors are for AUDIO 
ONLY."  <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/r-390/2012-January/050146.html>

2.  You did not qualify this with "I think," or with "In my opinion," 
or with "As a general matter," or in any other way -- you proclaimed 
it as A Universal Truth.  What was problematic was the content of 
this statement, not the fact that you underscored it with capital letters.

3.  I replied, "As I have repeated tirelessly over the years, 
ceramics are much superior as bypass caps and I strongly recommend 
using them when recapping any boatanchor," but that "it is an 
unwarranted overstatement to say that ODs are the 'wrong choice' or 
that they are 'for audio only'" -- and gave reasons for my 
view. 
<http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/r-390/2012-January/050147.html> You 
apparently interpret this as mocking and ridiculing you.

4.  You took umbrage at my use of the term "unwarranted 
overstatement," called it "personal denigration," asked what 
"unwarranted" meant, and said you thought I owed you an 
apology.  <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/r-390/2012-January/050172.html>

5.  I disagreed.  Calling something an "unwarranted overstatement" is 
not mocking or ridiculing.  It is merely stating that an assertion is 
not fully supported by available evidence.  I could not believe 
anyone on an e-mail reflector was so thin-skinned that they could 
possibly think calling something an "unwarranted overstatement" 
amounted to an affront of any kind, much less to "personal 
denigration," and said as 
much. 
<http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/r-390/2012-January/050173.html> 
Several other list members posted, seemingly sharing this opinion 
(follow the "unwarranted overstatement" thread in the archives).  You 
apparently interpret this as "[a] real butt reaming."

The two posts identified above were my only posts regarding this matter.

Looking further into the list archives, I found other examples of 
Perry taking umbrage where no reasonable person would think offense 
had been given.  Here is one example (I used this one because when I 
read it I found that I had participated at the time -- anyone who 
cares to search can find others):

A list member posted that he was looking for parts.  Based on a 
number of things, most of which had nothing to do with the list, 
Perry took it upon himself to "call him out" on the list (Perry's 
words). 
<http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/r-390/2008-July/043555.html>  His 
laundry list of perceived offenses was:  (i) the member posted only 
when he needed parts to repair equipment that he then sold; (ii) the 
member did not respond to Perry's e-mail suggesting that he should 
sell radios to list members instead of parting them out; (iii) the 
member didn't want to pay the price Perry was asking for tube 
shields; and (iv) the member described some knobs Perry bought on an 
auction site as in great condition while Perry thought they were only 
average, then he blocked Perry from bidding on his auctions when 
Perry left him neutral feedback.

Among these, the only possible reflection on the member's ethics as a 
seller was that Perry thought he overstated the condition of some 
knobs Perry bought (and even Perry himself didn't seem to think it 
was all that bad -- he apparently did not return the knobs for a 
refund, he did not leave negative feedback, and he was mad that the 
seller blocked him because he wanted to bid on more of the seller's auctions).

I posted that I didn't think any of the perceived offenses was the 
sort of seller fraud that warranted public remarks on the 
list.  <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/r-390/2008-July/043564.html> 
  Perry defended his 
position. 
<http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/r-390/2008-July/043565.html>  I 
made a final post to clarify why I thought he was out of 
order.  <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/r-390/2008-July/043573.html>

At the end of that message, I asked:  "Could it be that you take 
offense quite easily, and turn every perceived slight into a hanging 
offense?"

Apparently, we now have the clear answer to that.

Best regards,

Don

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

_______________________________________________
R-390 mailing list
R-390 at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/r-390

End of R-390 Digest, Vol 112, Issue 5
*************************************