Re: Radioreference.com forums comments

On Mon, 19 May 2008 02:45:15 +0100, MegaForce
<MegaForce.2769582@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

:>
:>Sarah Czepiel;630979 Wrote: 
:>> On Sun, 18 May 2008 06:46:57 -0400, *Bluto *@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
:>> 
:>> :I have been into scanners for 0ver 20 years I dont need nothing and
:>> :never claimed to know it all.
:>> :
:>> :You just admited you need software and rr.com because you are too
:>> :stupid to program it yourself.  Noobs like you need a scanner with
:>> :only and ON/OFF switch so you can understand it and program it.
:>> 
:>> Forgetting just for a moment your inability to construct a
:>> grammatically  correct sentence, would you kindly tell us what
scanners you own and
:>> then enlighten us as to the advantages you've found hand programming
:>> hundreds of  channels when you could use a computer and software to
accomplish the
:>> same  thing in a matter of minutes?  The one thing you revel in is
doing
:>> things the hard way.  You appear content to walk along a freshly
tarred road
:>> without wearing shoes while the rest of us stand around wondering why
:>> you like having burned and blistered feet.
:>
:>Sarah, I suggest you take your holier than thou attitude back over to
:>RR where you came from. ;)

To begin with my friend I didn't come from rr.com.    Secondly the person
you're defending is the one with the holier than thou speech.  He seems to
think it most unseemly to use a computer to program 1800 channels into a
scanner.   I'm still waiting for a rational explanation for why manual
programming is somehow advantageous in scanner operations, and why anyone
who chooses to use a computer and software to accomplish the task would
somehow be deemed less worthy.