"Pikey Gob****e who resorts to crude abusive behaviour when exposed"
wrote in message
...

Now now Bill, let's not be silly.
Who rattled your bars? We don't want you hanging around here like a
leper. This is a group of affable and sensible people, all well-
adjusted and socially normal. Your presence is a downer, like a smelly
old tramp tapping on the window at Christmas begging for food. I know
we should try to be kind to the disadvantaged and disabled, but there
are limits. Why don't you ring Samaritans and irritate them?

The imaginary source you fabricated
'The bit I made up'?

to make
these people
That'll be the people less perceptive or intelligent than yourself,
who you find it necessary to represent since they can't speak for
themselves.

think you have friends in high places cannot be described as "very
very good" because, as a product of your own imagination, it knows no more
than
you do.

Any sensible person would realise what I meant by a very very good
source, and would pry no further. It's hardly a case of having friends
in high places, just a matter of chatting with friends in the
industry. I have a lot of friends in the industry because I've been in
it a long time and because I am able to make friends. I mention that
because I realise that you might have a bit of a problem with it
yourself due to being a thoroughly obnoxious little turd, so might not
be fully aware that people do that.


Unfortunately I can only give you C+ for this.
Such a dripping ****towel of unpleasantness should always be topped and tailed
with at least two shining examples of "the typical arsehole's apology". For
those unfamiliar with this term, it's the apology that isn't an apology, the
brother of "I'm not being funny right, but...". What it means is: "I deeply
regret doing or saying what I'm about to do or say, but not enough to actually
refrain from doing or saying it. I'm basically a complete failure of a human
being with an overinflated sense of social status, entitlement and
self-importance; nonetheless, I shall deign to consider your pathetic feelings
by prefixing the following ****ery with the word 'sorry', then you, my
boneheaded readers, can all go 'that Bill Wright is harsh but unfailingly
correct. And I tell you what, he's certainly magnanimous in victory. I wish I
could be more like him, rather than considerate and well-liked'.

So Jamie the homeless leper, consider yourself told, right? ****ing smelly,
penniless old tramp!"

Get the idea?

On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 14:04:25 +0100, "Graham" wrote:



"jamie powell" wrote in message ...

"Pikey G" wrote in message ...

I notice CPC are selling versions by Labgear, Triax, Televes and Antiference
now.
I was told by a very very good source that Antiference are running
those things side by side with their proper high gain aerials 'so as
not to lose out on the ignorant punter market'.

Now now Bill, let's not be silly. The imaginary source you fabricated to make these people think you have friends in high places
cannot be described as "very very good" because, as a product of your own imagination, it knows no more than you do.


Interesting. Is anyone else reading this group via Eternal September, and *not* seeing
Jamie's post? I can see it on other news servers but not e-s.

I see he made a post on 7/7 on the "BBC left/liberal..." thread and that wasn't carried
on e-s either

Now I know some would argue that a server-side kill-file might be an advantage
in Jamie's case, but I am for freedom of speech and I would never kill-file Jamie,
his posts, and the ensuing arguments are far too entertaining.

I don't see the arsewipes posts because I killfiled the obnoxious
little **** - let's be honest, I've wiped better than him from the
sole of my shoe
--
Cheers

Peter

(Reply to address is a spam trap - pse reply to the group)

"Petert" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 14:04:25 +0100, "Graham" wrote:



"jamie powell" wrote in message
...

"Pikey G" wrote in message
...

I notice CPC are selling versions by Labgear, Triax, Televes and
Antiference
now.
I was told by a very very good source that Antiference are running
those things side by side with their proper high gain aerials 'so as
not to lose out on the ignorant punter market'.

Now now Bill, let's not be silly. The imaginary source you fabricated to
make these people think you have friends in high places
cannot be described as "very very good" because, as a product of your own
imagination, it knows no more than you do.


Interesting. Is anyone else reading this group via Eternal September, and
*not* seeing
Jamie's post? I can see it on other news servers but not e-s.

I see he made a post on 7/7 on the "BBC left/liberal..." thread and that
wasn't carried
on e-s either

Now I know some would argue that a server-side kill-file might be an advantage
in Jamie's case, but I am for freedom of speech and I would never kill-file
Jamie,
his posts, and the ensuing arguments are far too entertaining.

I don't see the arsewipes posts because I killfiled the obnoxious
little **** - let's be honest, I've wiped better than him from the
sole of my shoe

Petert was forced into a hasty retreat, after he accidentally let slip his
desire to rape me in Manchester's back alleys.

On Jul 8, 2:19*pm, "jamie powell" wrote:
Unfortunately I can only give you C+ for this.
Such a dripping ****towel of unpleasantness should always be topped and tailed
with at least two shining examples of "the typical arsehole's apology". For
those unfamiliar with this term, it's the apology that isn't an apology, the
brother of "I'm not being funny right, but...". What it means is: "I deeply
regret doing or saying what I'm about to do or say, but not enough to actually
refrain from doing or saying it. I'm basically a complete failure of a human
being with an overinflated sense of social status, entitlement and
self-importance; nonetheless, I shall deign to consider your pathetic feelings
by prefixing the following ****ery with the word 'sorry', then you, my
boneheaded readers, can all go 'that Bill Wright is harsh but unfailingly
correct. And I tell you what, he's certainly magnanimous in victory. I wish I
could be more like him, rather than considerate and well-liked'.

So Jamie the homeless leper, consider yourself told, right? ****ing smelly,
penniless old tramp!"

Can anyone be bothered to decipher this?

Bill

On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:30:58 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

So Jamie the homeless leper, consider yourself told, right? ****ing smelly,
penniless old tramp!"

Can anyone be bothered to decipher this?

Not really, but I tried and it seems to sum up The Runt and his obnoxious
behaviour quite well. Thankfully I don't see his drivel normally.

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
snip
If you have a B now, why not knobble it as per Bill's instructions. I
tweaked a B to an E in that way, and get perfect results on sudbury.

Just being thick, I guess. The penny hadn't dropped that Bill was talking
about modifying my existing aerial.

However my current Band B is pretty puny compared to the Band E and Wideband
aerials being recommended/advertised.
Especially the reflector which is tiny.
So presumably I could modify the aerial to capture the extra muxes, but
possibly not make it an 'extra high gain' one.

Worth considering, though :-)

--
No plan survives contact with the enemy.

Helmuth von Moltke the Elder

"Paul Ratcliffe" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 10:30:58 -0700 (PDT), "Cowboy"
wrote:

So Jamie the homeless leper, consider yourself told, right? ****ing smelly,
penniless old tramp!"

Can anyone be bothered to decipher this?

Not really, but I tried and it seems to sum up The Runt and his obnoxious
behaviour quite well. Thankfully I don't see his drivel normally.


whoosh; it obviously went over your heads, which is entirely unsurprising of
course.

On Jul 8, 9:54*pm, "David WE Roberts"
wrote:
"John Rumm" wrote in message

...
snip

If you have a B now, why not knobble it as per Bill's instructions. I
tweaked a B to an E in that way, and get perfect results on sudbury.

Just being thick, I guess. The penny hadn't dropped that Bill was talking
about modifying my existing aerial.

However my current Band B is pretty puny compared to the Band E and Wideband
aerials being recommended/advertised.
Especially the reflector which is tiny.
Large reflectors are an advertising gimmick. Reflectors need to be
half a wavelength across on the lowest frequency. Any longer is
poinless. What's more, the outer reflector elements on these massive
reflector assemblies do absolutely nothing except catch the wind. I've
experimented many times with this.

So presumably I could modify the aerial to capture the extra muxes, but
possibly not make it an 'extra high gain' one.
If you have a normal 18 ele aerial tuned correctly for chs 48-68 it
will work better than a lot of the wideband 'high gain' ones. However,
the latter tend to have their gain peak round about ch62 so this
argument applies more to Gp A.

Bill


Worth considering, though :-)

--
No plan survives contact with the enemy.

Helmuth von Moltke the Elder

Mark Carver wrote:
David WE Roberts wrote:

Is there any chance that when digital switchover occurs (which the
official web site says will still not provide a service to Felixstowe)
the channels will be changed so that I need a Wideband instead of a
Group E?

Sudbury will still require a Group E aerial after DSO.

The Felixstowe relay will carry the three PSB muxes post DSO, if that's
any help ?

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bin...nce/Anglia.pdf


How confusing for Sandy Heath.

In most areas there are two changes - the first where BBC2 goes and is
replaced by the BBC mux, and the second where the other analogue channels go
and DSO is complete.

At Sandy Heath, we have

Pre-DSO:-

* UHF Ch.21 (474 MHz) - Channel 4 (erp 1000kW)
* UHF Ch.24 (498 MHz) - ITV1 (erp 1000kW)
* UHF Ch.27 (522 MHz) - BBC Two (erp 1000kW)
* UHF Ch.31 (554 MHz) - BBC One (erp 1000kW)
* UHF Ch.39 (618 MHz) - Five (erp 10kW)

* UHF Ch.40 (626.167 MHz) - Multiplex C (Arqiva)
* UHF Ch.42 (641.833 MHz) - Multiplex 1 (BBC)
* UHF Ch.43 (650.167 MHz) - Multiplex A (SDN)
* UHF Ch.45 (665.833 MHz) - Multiplex 2 (ITV)
* UHF Ch.46 (674.167 MHz) - Multiplex D (Arqiva)
* UHF Ch.67 (842.000 MHz) - Multiplex B (BBC)

On Wednesday 30th March 2011, BBC TWO C27 closes. PSB1 starts on C27.

Then Wednesday 13th April 2011, post DSO we should have

* UHF Ch.21 (474 MHz) - Public Service Broadcaster multiplex
* UHF Ch.24 (498 MHz) - Public Service Broadcaster multiplex
* UHF Ch.27 (522 MHz) - Public Service Broadcaster multiplex
* UHF Ch.48 (690 MHz) - Arqiva B
* UHF Ch.51 (714 MHz) - SDN
* UHF Ch.52 (722 MHz) - Arqiva A

HOWEVER,

The commercial multiplexes at Sandy Heath will remain on their pre-switchover
channels and powers for a period after digital switchover.

SDN will then temporarily move to channel 31 (at 20kW ERP) during the third
quarter of 2011, before adopting its final allocation of channel 51 (170kW
ERP) in mid 2012.

Arqiva A will adopt its final allocation of channel 52 (170kW ERP) in late 2011.

Arqiva B will temporarily move to channel 67 (at 20kW ERP) during the third
quarter of 2011, before adopting its final allocation of channel 48 (170kW
ERP) in late 2011.

And this is in addition to the two retunes on 30th March 2011 and 13th April
2011. This is going to generate an insane number of retunes. Even
non-technical people will probably get the hang of it after all this!

Mark

On Thu, 8 Jul 2010 14:19:43 +0100, "jamie powell"
wrote:

"I deeply
regret doing or saying what I'm about to do or say, but not enough to actually
refrain from doing or saying it. I'm basically a complete failure of a human
being with an overinflated sense of social status, entitlement and
self-importance