National Geographic and amateur radio.

[KE5FRF]

The BS7H DXpedition has made me think of all the interesting National Geographic, PBS, Discovery channel documentaries and articles I've seen and read over the years. I know ham radio isn't as "glamorous" or awe inspiring for many as it once was, but I still think DXpeditions to the remotest locations have entertainment value and are modern small scale feats kind of like climbing Everest or Antarctic exploration.

I was wondering, has any major non-ham publication ever covered major DXpeditions like Scarborough Reef? National Geographic? Science? Life? Has PBS, BBC, or another network ever produced an aired documentary? Have hams been recognized in any museums like the Smithsonian for such endeavors?

I even think a DXpedition would make a great plot in a movie. Our QRZ resident ham movie producer 'BBS, here's an idea for you!

[KE5FRF]

I guess a lack of response in 45 views means there hasn't been any major documentaries done on amateur DXpeditions? At least not recently, I suppose. That's such a shame. There are supposedly 6 million hams in the world, probably 3 million who are active. There are so many interesting things that we do, and we are barely a blip on anyone's radar. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[K3STX]

Heath, there are videos made by 9V1YC who goes along on many of these DXpeditions, from what I am told they are excellent quality. Essentially documentaries, but probably of interest primarily to Hams.

paul

[n2zn]

Paul is right; the 9V1YC videos are real good. #I have seen most all of them and I own the FO0AAA DVD. #I would say they focus on radio about 60-75% of the time, while devoting the rest of the time to the actual place they are visiting. #In the Clipperton video, there is lots of footage devoted to the history of the island, shipwrecks, deranged lighthouse keeper, features of the island, etc. #The Bhutan video has a lot of info on the Bhutanese people and their culture, in additon to history, notable attractions, etc. #They seem like the would be of interest to non hams. #The parts devoted to the DXpedition itself are quite entertaining and give a good look into what goes on during a large scale DXpedition. #They could easily fit on some kind of National Geographic or Discovery Channel program. #If you ever get a chance to see them, take it.

As far as media coverage goes, sometimes DXpeditions do get some mentions. I think I saw a few blurbs on news sites and on TV about the Peter I expediton last year. Some of them focused more on the "world's most traveled man" they had with them and his adventures more than they did on radio, though.

[KE5FRF]

Yep, I've seen the 9V1YC videos advertised in QST and on the web. One of these days I may order a few of them just for the entertainment and educational value.

It is kind of disappointing though that such activities have never garnered much attention in the media at large. So many other hobbies, interests, and activities do get recognized in video documentary. Skydivers, scuba divers, mountain climbers, fossil hunters, war reinacters, mysticists, etc. DXpeditions are probably the most prestigious aspect of being a ham, for those fortunate enough to participate. So much planning and behind the scenes coordination and effort. I would think that even non-hams would be fascinated by the collective expeditions that have been coordinated over the years. Even a documentary that highlighted all "The big ones" would be good.

Is it the ARRL that is failing us in that respect? I don't want to be an ARRL basher in this thread, but I feel like they have the clout and recognition as an organization to coordinate a series of documentaries about amateur radio with a big time media outlet such as TLC, Discovery, or National Geographic. It would be a boone for the hobby as well as the ARRL to document the last 100 years of amateur radio and some of the niches of the hobby like DXpeditions.

One of my early observations as a ham when I first got my license was that the ARRL is really inept at promoting our hobby to the community.

I think they have forged the "emcomms" image and let that be what defines us to non-hams. I'm not mentioning this as a means of stirring up new licenses so much as bringing our existance back into the public imagination. I think a documentary of those Scarborough Reef hams sitting on scaffolds with sprays of saltwater crashing against the rocks logging contact after contact while rotating shifts would be a good place to start. Radio Sport is definately the thing that would capture the interest of the public. And in this ever shrinking world we live in, the International aspect of a DXpedition is also a good human interest angle.

ARRL, take note of my suggestion. I think it really would be good for the hobby.

[N5KRC]

Google on 'dxpedition dvd'. I see several on the first page in addition to several from 9V1YC.

[KE7DKN]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ May 02 2007,08:13)]I guess a lack of response in 45 views means there hasn't been any major documentaries done on amateur DXpeditions? At least not recently, I suppose. That's such a shame. There are supposedly 6 million hams in the world, probably 3 million who are active. There are so many interesting things that we do, and we are barely a blip on anyone's radar. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
Patience, grasshopper.

What is interesting about some guys going to a remote location just for the sake of going and operating their radios there? So it gives hams the opportunity to work a rare entity... great. Who else would care? Dxpeditions don't answer any questions about history, culture, biology, or anything else. In order for a publication like National Geographic to be interested in it, you're going to have to tie it in with something like a solocircumnavigation or a trip to observe orangutans. Even then, communication is still going to be a secondary (perhaps tertiary) issue to the main story. "We went to this remote island to communicate with people who weren't on that island and who probably have never been to the island... and.. uh... MORSE CODE!" isn't going to cut it for the main topic.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (KE7DKN @ May 02 2007,21:30)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ May 02 2007,08:13)]I guess a lack of response in 45 views means there hasn't been any major documentaries done on amateur DXpeditions? At least not recently, I suppose. That's such a shame. There are supposedly 6 million hams in the world, probably 3 million who are active. There are so many interesting things that we do, and we are barely a blip on anyone's radar. # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
Patience, grasshopper.

What is interesting about some guys going to a remote location just for the sake of going and operating their radios there? So it gives hams the opportunity to work a rare entity... great. Who else would care? Dxpeditions don't answer any questions about history, culture, biology, or anything else. In order for a publication like National Geographic to be interested in it, you're going to have to tie it in with something like a solocircumnavigation or a trip to observe orangutans. Even then, communication is still going to be a secondary (perhaps tertiary) issue to the main story. "We went to this remote island to communicate with people who weren't on that island and who probably have never been to the island... and.. uh... MORSE CODE!" isn't going to cut it for the main topic.
No, I disagree. National Geographic does articles and documentaries all the time about people who push the boundaries of endurance or personal safety to accomplish things. They especially like stories that involve hostile environments where few men ever trek.

Why are you so sure people wouldn't be interested? The aviation hobby is not much more or less common than the amateur radio hobby, but documentary television devotes hours upon hours of programming on the history and technology of aviation. Granted, there is a broader appeal with military types and history buffs....but why wouldn't the same be true of communication history?

I grant you that such a documentary on ham radio wouldn't reach quite the broad appeal that some topics do, but I think if it is done correctly, incorporating the history of amateur radio's development and characters like H. Percy Maxim, the history of its contribution to war and disaster comms, the development of electronic technologies from tubes to transistors, the science of radio propogation, the traditions of ham radio and the role of early telgraphers, the modern state of the art coexisting with the traditional...the boatanchor enthusiasts and the historical companies like Vibroplex and Drake, and the DXpedition phenomenon and the radio sports like contesting and fox hunting.

I really think a broader segment of people would find it interesting than you might believe!

If I had the money and know-how, I'd take a proposal to a broadcaster myself.

What is interesting is knowing how many broadcast professionals with in-ties there are in the hobby, even in New York and LA, and yet we don't promote ourselves very well. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[KE5FRF]

I'll add that one of the most interesting and educational documentaries I ever saw was on Salmon fishing in the North Pacific. Footage after footage of grown men doing their JOB, the thing they get paid to do. There was no special cultural significance other than the subculture of fishermen who go out for weeks/months at a time in dangerous and exhausting conditions to make their small fortunes. Why was that interesting to ME? Because it sparked my imagination and caught the romantic/macho side of my attention.

I wholeheartedly disagree that the many facets of our hobby wouldn't be interesting, if presented properly.

[KE7DKN]

I don't think the typical dxpedition is a journey that pushes "the boundaries of endurance and personal safety." If one ever does, the story will be about the trek itself and amateur radio will be an extremely minor point.

Aviation has a much greater appeal with the general population, period. Do hamfests have the same draw on the general population as airshows? No, and I doubt it's from a lack of exposure in the media. Watching an airplane fly is a thing of excitement and beauty. Watching someone communicate over the radio is a simple curiosity.

So, you liked a documentary on fishing where men defied the odds and cheated death on a daily basis for months at a time to make a living. I'm sure many people would find that interesting. Commercial fishing is like amateur radio in what way?

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (KE7DKN @ May 02 2007,23:30)]I don't think the typical dxpedition is a journey that pushes "the boundaries of endurance and personal safety." If one ever does, the story will be about the trek itself and amateur radio will be an extremely minor point.

Aviation has a much greater appeal with the general population, period. Do hamfests have the same draw on the general population as airshows? No, and I doubt it's from a lack of exposure in the media. Watching an airplane fly is a thing of excitement and beauty. Watching someone communicate over the radio is a simple curiosity.

So, you liked a documentary on fishing where men defied the odds and cheated death on a daily basis for months at a time to make a living. I'm sure many people would find that interesting. Commercial fishing is like amateur radio in what way?
Wow, how negative. Are you always this negative?

[WA2ZDY]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ May 02 2007,15:37)]Is it the ARRL that is failing us in that respect? I don't want to be an ARRL basher in this thread, but I feel like they have the clout and recognition as an organization to coordinate a series of documentaries about amateur radio with a big time media outlet such as TLC, Discovery, or National Geographic.
As much as I love bashing Winlink HQ in Newington, we can't put this one on them.

TLC, National Geographic, etc are not going to put something out that isn't profitable. You correctly point out there are six million hams in the world. That's out of over four Billion residents. That makes hams somewhat more than one one millionth of the world's population. That is a drop in the bucket. Those networks have no reason to believe such a show would be profitable.

Ham radio is a niche market and it's hams that buy the stuff. 9V1YC and ARRL's own videos serve that market quite well.

DKN is not being negative, he's being realistic. When so few folks even know what shortwave or ham radio are anymore, we truely have no market except ourselves.

[KE5FRF]

With all due respect, you guys are right that amateur radio would not be a ratings booster like a documentary on the life of Jesus or the signing of the Declaration of Independance, but I disagree that it has to be in order to be aired. Cable TV has a dozen different educational type channels for everything from Tech/gadgets to home gardening, arts and crafts, antiques, to history and science. Many of the shows they air are just "filler" programs. It is my belief that outside of the homemaker and her gardening shows, there is a certain type who watches educational programming. At least, the science and history stuff. Most of those people will watch educational programing regardless of the topic over the mindless "reality" programs on network TV (BTW, the success of reality programming proves right there that substance isn't required for ratings).....

Maybe a documentary on Dxpeditions or amateur radio history and activities alone wouldn't be enough. Maybe it would have to be presented from the broader significance of radio history...but a week long presentation or 2 hour documentary oon radio communications history and technology by TLC or Discovery, IMHO, would be as legitimate a topic as any. And even if only 30 minutes was dedicated to amateur history, telegraphy, and some footage of DXpeditions or field day participants, it would be of value and interesting to more people than you guys give credit.

After all, what demographic do you think watches educational TV the most? I would say mostly educated people (smart high school grads or better)...the biggest age bracket would be thirties and up, with a lot of baby boomers.

The wireless era hasn't ended per-se, but the traditional concept of wireless media died out in the late 70's when cable TV became commonplace. I am old enough myself to remember listening to AM radio broadcasts rolling in at night. Many people from generation X through the WWII generation have fond memories of radio. From crystal sets to big HIFI console stereos with turntables in the living room, we grew up with radio a central part of our lives. Even TV, after all, is radio when transmitted via RF.

I've met many people who may not be interested in being hams themselves, but will recount fond memories of a grandparent's short wave set or an uncle who was a ham.

So, I disagree that documentary programming that spotlights ham radio activities wouldn't carry good enough ratings, at least if presented from a certain angle. Ham radio can be science, adventure, antiquity, history, and craftsmanship all rolled into one package if presented intelligently.

MHO and I'm sticking to it.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[KE7DKN]

It sounds like you want an infomercial. You could probably get one of those on TLC, Discovery, or NGC (at two in the morning).

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (KE7DKN @ May 03 2007,22:47)]It sounds like you want an infomercial. You could probably get one of those on TLC, Discovery, or NGC (at two in the morning).
Wow, another negative comment.

Why don't you go turn in your ticket, OM, if you think ham radio is so dull?

[KE7DKN]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ May 03 2007,19:54)]Quote[/b] (KE7DKN @ May 03 2007,22:47)]It sounds like you want an infomercial. You could probably get one of those on TLC, Discovery, or NGC (at two in the morning).
Wow, another negative comment.

Why don't you go turn in your ticket, OM, if you think ham radio is so dull?
Ahahaha! Fine. I'm positive your idea is unrealistic. Is that better?

I don't think ham radio is dull - I just know it's not going to be able to stand on its own as a topic with the general public.

[KE5FRF]

Actually, criticism without unneccessary sarcasm IS better. You are certainly free to disagree with me, as I am free to dismiss your argument. The fact is if nobody has ever done such a thing, we have no benchmark by which to argue. So, you "knowing" it wouldn't succeed is no more credible than me "knowing" it would.

Agree to disagree.

I really never thought this subject would be controversial! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif I thought it much better than some of the other tripe I see around here.

[KE7DKN]

In your mind, both opinions may be equally credible. On the other hand, I believe my opinion is far more credible than yours.

If you wanted people to just agree with you, that might have been a good thing to put down in the original post. No guarantees that people wouldn't say you're mistaken, though.

[AE6IP]

The Human Race (http://blip.tv/file/50068/) is one such documentary.

[KI4NGN]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ May 03 2007,21:11)]The fact is if nobody has ever done such a thing, we have no benchmark by which to argue.
Maybe no one has ever done it for one or more reasons, several of which have been pointed out to you but which you don't accept?

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (KE7DKN @ May 03 2007,23:36)]In your mind, both opinions may be equally credible. On the other hand, I believe my opinion is far more credible than yours.

If you wanted people to just agree with you, that might have been a good thing to put down in the original post. No guarantees that people wouldn't say you're mistaken, though.
You are certainly free to disagree with me, as I am free to dismiss your argument. The fact is if nobody has ever done such a thing, we have no benchmark by which to argue. So, you "knowing" it wouldn't succeed is no more credible than me "knowing" it would.

Agree to disagree.

Where do you get the idea I wanted people to agree with me? No, I don't expect everyone to agree with me. I just didn't realize I would get such smartass responses with such a non-controversial, pleasant subject.

Quote[/b] ]On the other hand, I believe my opinion is far more credible than yours.


And I believe my opinion is far more credible than yours, so nanner nanner nanner.

Actually, I'd like to know why yours would be far more credible than mine. Are you an advertising executive, a film producer, or a professional TV critic? If not, then your opinion most certainly ISN'T qualifiably any more credible than mine.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (KI4NGN @ May 04 2007,05:20)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ May 03 2007,21:11)]The fact is if nobody has ever done such a thing, we have no benchmark by which to argue.
Maybe no one has ever done it for one or more reasons, several of which have been pointed out to you but which you don't accept?
So just because another person states an oipinion that is contrary to my own, I must accept it as fact? Wow, I didn't know this was the case.

If this is the case, then the reasons I laid out for why it WOULD be interesting to the type of person who watches documentary television should be accepted by YOU....if indeed that is the way it works.

Dudes, I'm not asking anyone to accept my thesis. I'm simply debating reasoning that I find inadequate. I've watched many, many programs on educational television that would bore most people to tears, but the programming was aired because it was INTERESTING ENOUGH. I do not believe that ratings records would be set by an amateur radio documentary. I'm not even sure that ham radio on its own merits would be "enough"...as I said, it might have to be in the broader context of radio communications with ham radio as a sidebar. But after years of watching documentaries on television (my favorite programming) I can say with absolute certainty that one must NOT be a participant in an activity to find a show about it interesting. After all, educational TV is about EDUCATING yourself. People looking to educate themselves look for things they DON'T know much about to learn. So, the argument that educational TV public wouldn't find amateur radio an interesting subject doesn't hold water.

Another example. I do not rodeo, and I've never been to Angola State Penatentiary here in Louisiana other than to see the rodeo once. The number of people who come to see that rodeo every year is much smaller than the ham radio population of the US. I had never heard of Angola Rodeo up until a few years ago, a few years before I moved to Louisiana when I was in the Army. I learned about it through a documentary. One of the most interesting I've ever seen. Did I have any interest in Angola or rodeos BEFORE I saw that documentary? Absolutely NOT. Other than watching the show once, and later seeing the rodeo, have I spent any time before or since thinking about rodeos or prisons? Hardly. But, it was an interesting few hours of entertainment to learn about the history of it and the reason for its existance.


No, the opposing argument falls flat when you look at the programming on educational TV. Discovery, History, and TLC, etc only gear their shows for ratings during prime time hours on certain days of the week or holidays. The rest of the programming is "filler". They know their regular viewing audience will watch their programming regardless of the subject, within reason.


Anyway, the crux of my argument, again, is that we have no benchmark by which to say for certain that nobody would be interested. I tend to believe the reason that no documentary has been aired by major media is because nobody has ever suggested it. With the literally hundreds of thousands of potential topics for film, I find it far more likely that nobody has really ever considered it, or it hasn't been presented to the media in a legitimate way.

This is why I call upon the ARRL to put something together and sell it to the media. I'm going to write an e-mail in that regard to the League this weekend.

My opinion, for what its worth, opposed to the naysayers, but rightfully so.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ May 04 2007,00:44)]The Human Race (http://blip.tv/file/50068/) is one such documentary.
Look, Marty found an example of a promo video at least.

I'm going to look further into that one when I get home this evening.

[KI4NGN]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ May 04 2007,06:00)]So just because another person states an oipinion that is contrary to my own, I must accept it as fact? Wow, I didn't know this was the case.

If this is the case, then the reasons I laid out for why it WOULD be interesting to the type of person who watches documentary television should be accepted by YOU....if indeed that is the way it works.

Dudes, I'm not asking anyone to accept my thesis. I'm simply debating reasoning that I find inadequate. I've watched many, many programs on educational television that would bore most people to tears, but the programming was aired because it was INTERESTING ENOUGH. I do not believe that ratings records would be set by an amateur radio documentary. I'm not even sure that ham radio on its own merits would be "enough"...as I said, it might have to be in the broader context of radio communications with ham radio as a sidebar. But after years of watching documentaries on television (my favorite programming) I can say with absolute certainty that one must NOT be a participant in an activity to find a show about it interesting. After all, educational TV is about EDUCATING yourself. People looking to educate themselves look for things they DON'T know much about to learn. So, the argument that educational TV public wouldn't find amateur radio an interesting subject doesn't hold water.

Another example. I do not rodeo, and I've never been to Angola State Penatentiary here in Louisiana other than to see the rodeo once. The number of people who come to see that rodeo every year is much smaller than the ham radio population of the US. I had never heard of Angola Rodeo up until a few years ago, a few years before I moved to Louisiana when I was in the Army. I learned about it through a documentary. One of the most interesting I've ever seen. Did I have any interest in Angola or rodeos BEFORE I saw that documentary? Absolutely NOT. Other than watching the show once, and later seeing the rodeo, have I spent any time before or since thinking about rodeos or prisons? Hardly. But, it was an interesting few hours of entertainment to learn about the history of it and the reason for its existance.


No, the opposing argument falls flat when you look at the programming on educational TV. Discovery, History, #and TLC, etc only gear their shows for ratings during prime time hours on certain days of the week or holidays. The rest of the programming is "filler". They know their regular viewing audience will watch their programming regardless of the subject, within reason.


Anyway, the crux of my argument, again, is that we have no benchmark by which to say for certain that nobody would be interested. I tend to believe the reason that no documentary has been aired by major media is because nobody has ever suggested it. With the literally hundreds of thousands of potential topics for film, I find it far more likely that nobody has really ever considered it, or it hasn't been presented to the media in a legitimate way.

This is why I call upon the ARRL to put something together and sell it to the media. I'm going to write an e-mail in that regard to the League this weekend.

My opinion, for what its worth, opposed to the naysayers, but rightfully so.
First, I said "Maybe".

Second, no one suggested that you have to accept any of the reasons as fact. It is only suggested that they could they be valid reasons.

Yes, there are ~6 million hams world-wide. However you are discussing programming targeted at the US where there are only ~750K hams.

Yes, there are lots of documentaries done in subject areas that bore many to tears. For every one one of those areas there are probably a hundred or a thousand just as boring that have not been documented on film for the general public.

Most people looking to educate themselves look for things that they are interested in, not just things that they know nothing about.

My wife and I watch Discovery, History, History International, TLC, Science...many of those television broadcasts that may be considered educational. There is much that I watch that I know nothing about but that I AM interested in. There are many other areas that I know nothing about but I have no interest in, and the channel gets changed immediately.

Your basic thesis is that it has not been done, you think it would be interesting, and collectively this should be a good reason to do it. My opinion, and apparently that of others, is that there would not be enough interest to get the attention of a producer.

You are in fact asking us to accept your thesis because you are refuting the reasons given for not accepting your thesis.

[KE5FRF]

No, I'm not asking anyone to accept my thesis. And I hardly think three or four internet posters who disagree with me make any kind of a #"case" yeah or neah.

I assure you, there are probably as many people who would agree with me as disagree, who just don't "care" enough to voice their opinion. I have several local friends with whom this topic has been discussed who think my thoughts are good, just through casual conversations on our repeater.

My point of posting this was not to start a debate. I really never thought it would start one. And I'm definately not angry that someone disagrees or wants to argue. This is your right. You assume that because #I counter your argument that I'm upset. Hardly. Internet debates, gotta love'em!

Marty just cited a documentary that in fact WAS produced. I'm going to find out if it was presented in any kind of major media outlet when I get home this evening.

As I said, agree to disagree.

Oh, BTW, there may only be 750,000 hams in the US...but I don't understand why this is supposed to be such a small number? Add Short Wave listeners and scanner enthusiasts, and you have probably well over a million radio hobbyists. Even throw CBers in the mix, another few hundred thousand. Add astronaut/NASA/astronomy/space enthusiasts to the list who might find ham radio interesting if a segment is devoted to our NASA hams and satellites. Add the DXpedition mix in and some who enjoy footage of exotic locales would be interested. Discuss the science of radio propogation, and you bring some physicist and science types to the table. Discuss the history of radio and telegraphy, including Samuel Morse, and you get history buffs and military/war buffs to take notice. Add the new digital technologies in ham radio, and some computer techy folks might tune in.

The key is how you put it together, package it, and advertise it. The actual substance is largely irrelevant.

Gone shopping lately? People will blow their money on all kinds of things they don't need if the marketing people package it a certain way.

[KE7DKN]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ May 04 2007,04:31)]You are certainly free to disagree with me, as I am free to dismiss your argument. The fact is if nobody has ever done such a thing, we have no benchmark by which to argue. So, you "knowing" it wouldn't succeed is no more credible than me "knowing" it would.

Agree to disagree.
Yes yes, I saw that before. It was stupid the first time around.

Quote[/b] ]And I believe my opinion is far more credible than yours, so nanner nanner nanner.

Actually, I'd like to know why yours would be far more credible than mine. Are you an advertising executive, a film producer, or a professional TV critic? If not, then your opinion most certainly ISN'T qualifiably any more credible than mine.
What happened to "agree to disagree"? Didn't take you long to forget about that, did it? You have your opinon and I have mine. Well, your opinion seems to have changed on the equity-of-credibility issue.

I don't care if you think your opinion is any more, less, or equal in credibility to mine. I said "I believe" and that means it's my opinion. Each person reading can judge for themselves which is more credible based on whatever criteria they want. I personally don't believe someone has to be affiliated with the entertainment industry in order to recognize if something is going to be likely picked up by National Geographic or some other entity. Maybe other people think "turn in your ticket if you think ham radio is dull" and "boo-hoo, you made a negative comment" are compelling arguments.

Quote[/b] ]The key is how you put it together, package it, and advertise it. The actual substance is largely irrelevant.

Gone shopping lately? People will blow their money on all kinds of things they don't need if the marketing people package it a certain way.
Yeah, you really do want an infomercial.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (KE7DKN @ May 04 2007,20:25)]Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ May 04 2007,04:31)]You are certainly free to disagree with me, as I am free to dismiss your argument. The fact is if nobody has ever done such a thing, we have no benchmark by which to argue. So, you "knowing" it wouldn't succeed is no more credible than me "knowing" it would.

Agree to disagree.
Yes yes, I saw that before. It was stupid the first time around.

Quote[/b] ]And #I believe my opinion is far more credible than yours, so nanner nanner nanner.

Actually, I'd like to know why yours would be far more credible than mine. Are you an advertising executive, a film producer, or a professional TV critic? If not, then your opinion most certainly ISN'T qualifiably any more credible than mine.
What happened to "agree to disagree"? Didn't take you long to forget about that, did it? You have your opinon and I have mine. Well, your opinion seems to have changed on the equity-of-credibility issue.

I don't care if you think your opinion is any more, less, or equal in credibility to mine. I said "I believe" and that means it's my opinion. Each person reading can judge for themselves which is more credible based on whatever criteria they want. I personally don't believe someone has to be affiliated with the entertainment industry in order to recognize if something is going to be likely picked up by National Geographic or some other entity. Maybe other people think "turn in your ticket if you think ham radio is dull" and "boo-hoo, you made a negative comment" are compelling arguments.

Quote[/b] ]The key is how you put it together, package it, and advertise it. The actual substance is largely irrelevant.

Gone shopping lately? People will blow their money on all kinds of things they don't need if the marketing people package it a certain way.
Yeah, you really do want an infomercial.
You keep making yourself look more and more like an ass dude. Quit while you are ahead.

[KE7DKN]

I was going to say the same thing, but I don't mind if you continue.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (KE7DKN @ May 04 2007,20:35)]I was going to say the same thing, but I don't mind if you continue.
Hmm. 11 posts, and you think I lack credibility. I've made a few enemies here on QRZ, but most people, even people I disagree with often, I still would consider a friend and have a beer or three with. You decided from the word go that you wanted to mock this post, geez, I'm lucky to be one of your first mockeries here on QRZ. Thanks, I'm honored.

I don't know who you are, or what your issues are. I honestly am glad to have your honest comments about my thoughts. I can even grant that you "may" be right. But also think it really doesn't matter, and that you copped a smartas attitude from the giet go....so feeding your troll isn't worth my energy anymore.

Byebye.

[KE7DKN]

The number of posts correlates with someone's credibility? Well... for some people (you included), perhaps it does. When the topic becomes something like: "Use of the QRZ 'Add Reply' Button," then I will agree that a low post count might not be the best credibility-wise. Until then, you could judge each post by its own merits. Or not.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (KE7DKN @ May 04 2007,22:25)]The number of posts correlates with someone's credibility? Well... for some people (you included), perhaps it does. When the topic becomes something like: "Use of the QRZ 'Add Reply' Button," then I will agree that a low post count might not be the best credibility-wise. Until then, you could #judge each post by its own merits. Or not.
Nope...I figured you wouldn't grasp the concept.

You implied that my post was dumb, and that I look like an ass. Credibility with people comes with familiarity. I'm on a first name basis with a couple hundred people on this forum. I probably have a dozen who don't like me.

Nobody knows who you are. You are a recently upgraded general who has never posted on this forum. For all we know, you are a CBer with a grudge. You gain credibility by the history of your posts. You haven't gained that yet.

Many of the guys who responded in this thread, even in disagreement, would probably say I'm a credible guy, and that though they disagree, my idea has merit and deserves sensible discussion.

You, instead, introduce yourself to QRZ as a smartass. Credibility hole from the start.

Nothing in my post is so meritless as to lack credibility, except perhaps in the mind of a habitual smartass who likes to go around picking arguments.

Oops...I just wasted some more of my time.

Let me go back to working some CW.

[KE7DKN]

From the posts I've read in this thread, I think you've got an acute case of cranial-rectosis. So yeah, you lack credibility with me. I don't care how many people love you, so save it for someone else.

Yes yes, credibility by familiarity works for you... I already got that. Some other people (such as myself) couldn't care less how many posts you have - especially when the topic has NOTHING to do with the QRZ message board itself. One well-written post can give a person more credibility than a thousand messages of inane banter.

I don't know about other people, but yeah, I found plenty of things in your posts that I thought were detrimental to your credibility. I'm still reeling over a couple of winners, but that's just me.

With 11 posts, I have most certainly had posted before this thread. What happens to your credibility when you say I haven't? When you say "byebye" and don't go byebye, what does that say? Probably nothing, but it's difficult to imagine the errors helping you.

If you want to work CW, go byebye (for real this time).

[k9zmd]

http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t91/ga0735/Animations/setupz.gif

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (k9zmd @ May 05 2007,01:45)]http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t91/ga0735/Animations/setupz.gif
LMAO http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif