RadioBanter - View Single Post

August 24th 04, 05:24 PM

From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:10:51 -0400, (Twistedhed)
wrote:
From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:21:10 -0400, (Twistedhed)
wrote:
You are entitled to see things from the other

side of the glass, as it were. But there is a big

difference. Us "snobby" hams are not

interfering with other hams while pursuing our

fringe activities, and insisting that our "right" to
pursue it, overrides everyone else rights to

enjoy their piece of the hobby.

Neither do I, but you continue to try and pigeonhole me as such for
merely posting of freeband activity and dx, yet, nothing in my posts has
ever had a remote relation to what you falsely promote.

You like to accuse me of making things

personal, but in this case (as in many) you

mistake my general summation for a direct

critique of your personal habits.

No mistake and you have made much more than "general summations"
directed toward myself over the years. There was nothing general
concerning your posts.

I'm sure your operation is fairly low impact, but
there are others who are not so cognizant of

their impact on others (or worse, they don't

care).

Yep,,,there rare indeed. Many with licenses, many without.

Yes, there are hams who do, but I do not

associate with them.

What "hoops" are there to just acting in a

civilly responsible manner?

Read again: "same hoops you must jump through regarding hammie radio".
That you responded with hammie radio as an example in acting civilly
responsible is not the best example you could have chosen,,in fact, it's
a poor one

Again, like on CB, this is largely

geographically dependant.

Despite your belief of it being geographically dependendent (it's
not,,,,there are good and bad everywhere in both services)it doesn't
validate your contrived gaffe.

So now you deny that geography and

demographics play a major part in determining
the percentage of Good/Bad operators in a

particular location?

Absolutely not. Eliminate "particular location". A more accurate
statement would be "Good and bad people exist everywhere and are not
bound by geography." I don't for one minute subscribe to the fact that
there are more bad people in one big city than in another big city of
the same size.

That's a direct contrast to your comments

about the people who "infest" Philthy.

Hehehe,,,I don't think I used the term "infest", but "nest" would be a
word I would use to describe their sub-existing. I do think people from
Philthy and NY tend to wear their heart on their sleeve a bit more than
the rest of the country,,IE: very vocal. Now apply the malcontents from
these cities and add a radio...it seems like a city of idiots,..no?
But it doesn't make them any worse than the worst any other city has to
offer, but as they are more vocal, add a device that furthers what is
already a very vocal opinion, and it can sem worse than other cities.
I'm not the one that holds cb as a reflection of society.

But I will say, that I've personally witnessed far
more rule abuses on CB than on ham radio.

Again, your personal views and beliefs have been demonstrated to be in
the minority,,,,,

They have not been "demonstrated" to be

anything of the sort. Because YOU claim them
to be does not make them so.

They have been demonstrated. Example #1: You feel anonymity should not
be afforded internet participants. The mere fact that the laws (crafted
by the moral majority) reflect just the opposite, illustrtates you are
in the minority with your belief. Example #2: No one here erroneously
considers talking dx a felony. Again, it is your right to engage in
whimsical beliefs, but you are alone in such belief. That you have been
informed such is not a felony merely served to confuse you, not being
able to distinguish between civil and criminal court proceeedings. This
is with the minority, as the majority are clued in and educated
regarding the hobby of which they are engaged. It is not a good idea to
participate in anything that has the potential for legal repercussions
unless one is informed of the risks and understands the penalties
involved and is willing to accept such parameters. But having a concise
comprehension of the law is necessary. Clearly, you do not.

I can hear more rule violations after listening

to 5 minutes on CB channel 6 than I can hear

in a week's worth of ham radio. That's the

plain truth, and for you to deny or spin it is

clearly a bias on your part.

I have no problem with what you believe, as long as you don't attempt to
pass it off as fact or representative of the majority, as you attempted
with the much contrived statement that there are more rule violators on
cb than hammie radio. Reminding you of how incorrect this statement
actually is had you qualify your remarks to now say *you* can hear more
rule violations on cb than on hammie radio. Again, way too many
variables and factors involved for you to say "cb has more rule
violators than hammie radio".

_
Then what is preventing from you from getting on that channel and
speaking your mind to those people as you do on here concerning your
radical and minority beliefs.

Nothing. I've done it already. But what good

will it do?

I've asked that of you concerning here and your answer was always along
the lines of "you have got to start somewhere" and "someone has got to
take a stand". It appears you shy aways from live real-time
confrontation you claimed would take place in the same manner in which
you conduct yourself on usenet.

I don't "shy away" but at some point you have

to realize that it's an unwinnable situation,

At the risk of being called a cad and yelling "na na nee nee boo
boo,toldjaso"....you'e been told that for years by myself and others.
What point was the epiphany you experienced??

The point where I realized that you can't make
an idiot into a normal person. It's

counterproductive to try. It's better to seek out

little oasis' of sanity in the cesspool, than

trying to clean it up.

Well, that didn't take but a few years now, did it? And that was the
gist of what I and others have been trying to tell you for years.

you realize that you can put a 3 piece suit on a
pig, and he's still a pig.

Yes. Look at the well dressed pigs running the country.

Even if I convince the

idiots that their echo boxes and distorted class
"C" amplifiers sound like crap, they're still

idiots.

All it does it cause further arguments.

In all fairness and I'm not being cruel or mean or malicious, but coming
from one who holds talking dx is technically a felony, and that roger
beeps are illegal on cb, that doesn't mean much.

Roger beeps were at one time classified as an
"amusement" device, and as such was

prohibited in 95.413 (6).

I doubt roger beeps were ever classified as such and as a result,
illegal on cb, but even if that were so,,,many things "used" to be a
certain way,,,,,it's no longer. It's a brave, new world*.
_

While it is true that I cannot find a rule which

specifically addresses these devices, I can

neither find any information which specifically

allows them, along the same lines as selective
call tones are specifically outlined in 95.412

(b).

Since there isn't a definitive rule in place, you

can make the case that they are, in fact, legal

(or at the very least not worthy of

consideration). But it seems funny that this

feature has not appeared on most mainstream
legal radios.

-
I do believe some of the newer legal radios most certainly have them.

I have been informed of some. But I remain

skeptical of their type acceptance, and

whether the FCC will allow it to continue. But

time will tell.

Echo boxes are a totally different issue. They

fall clearly into the classification of

"amusement or entertainment" devices and as
such are specifically prohibited by 95.413.

I disagree, but let's assume you right on this item. I would challenge
the validity of this on several counts,,,the most obvious being the fact
that sound and broadcast engineers use echo (not repeat, but slight
reverb echo) on FM broadcasts for many commercials and ads for a
specific reason,,,,it gets noticed and is often more recognizeable and
often louder. As such, one could make the argument, it is an audio
"enhancer", not entertainment device, and with the myriad of broadcast
sound engineers backing my case, I would feel extremely confident
handling my own situation, if this were it. As you now are most astutely
aware, what you consider enhancement and what I consider enhancement is
now very much subjective. Again, ask Phil Kane what must take place now
(once this case is challenged). The FCC would have to rule (FIRST, and
before any further prosecution) what constitutes "amusement devices" and
specifically address the echo issue, just as they recently ruled what
constitutes broadcast obscenity.
-

Ok, I like the way you've presented this. You

make a good argument that a certain amount

of reverb enhances audio quality and adds

"depth". I totally agree with you on this point. If
the current batch of "echo toys" were sold as

devices which ONLY added enough reverb to

accomplish the effect you've described, then I

would agree that the device was an

"enhancement" device in much the same way

as an audio compressor. But that would

eliminate "repeater" type echos.

Interesting. Where would the line be drawn? At one complete repeat? Two?

But you and I both know that is not the intent

of the users of the majority of these devices.

Maybe.....I have heard the folks messing with them and repeating over
and over...but then again, like my fave AM audio, it has barely a tinge,
almost the "double voiceover" effect, but no repeat. In fact, one can
barely tell.

Most have them set way beyond the point of

"audio enhancement" and well into the point of
audio distortion. They run them for the "cool"

effects, and not as a range extender.

Yea,,well truckers have the right to play and entertain themselves on
those long trips, at least until they outlaw such items.

Intent is the key point here.

There is also a burden of proof issue as well.

The FCC can make a broad determination as

to any device which is "added" to a CB radio.

It is up to the makers of the device to

demonstrate that the device does not cause or
promote illegal operation.
-
=A0You can't make an idiot into a normal person,

so why try? Birds of a feather stick together. -

Which is why you have defended Dogie and attempted to present an
incredibly spaced out and fantasized case for Keith framing him, even
though the FCC busted him for jamming.

I never accused Keith of framing Doug. I wish

you would look back on your links and realize

that. I postulated that it was possible that he

might have been framed, but I never accused

any one person of doing it.
=A0
I stand corrected,

Thank you. My respect for you just went up a

few notches.

The fact remains, you hold the FCC as an entity whose rules should be
blindly followed, but then question the same agency's integrity when
they enforce those rules.
This is getting long, again.
Going to Part Deux.