Thread: K1MAN
View Single Post
  #12   Report Post  
Old June 28th 05, 04:15 AM
N9OGL
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"N9OGL" wrote in message
oups.com...


Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"N9OGL" wrote in message
oups.com...
K1MAN PT2
FROM http://n9oglvice.blogspot.com

[13. Section 97.101(d) of the Rules states that ``[n]o
amateur operator shall willfully or maliciously interfere
with or cause interference to any radio communication or
signal.''12 On November 27, 2004, December 8, 2004, and
March 31, 2005, Baxter's Amateur station K1MAN commenced
transmitting on top of existing communications on 3.890 MHz
in apparent willful and repeated violation of 97.101(d) of
the Commission's rules.]

OH, and the ARRL W1AW don't?? I don't see amateurs bitch and cry about
W1AW, nor, do I see the FCC sending warning letters to them. Hey,
interfernce is interfernce, and it doesn't matter who's causing it the
rules should apply to all.



The difference is Baxter does it in a intentional manner. He has said on
his 24/7 broadcasts that he does not bother to listen on his intended
frequency of operation. Because we all should "know" he is coming on
there.


but neither does W1AW, I've heard amateurs complaining about W1AW
transmitting ontop of them. It really shouldn't matter if they
transmitting 24/7 or for 15 min, interfernce is interfernce on any
level.


Then file a complaint. You know why folks don't file against W1AW? Because
the provide a service. Not a bully pulpit like your soon to be shot down
hero.


It don't matter if they [W1AW] is providing a service, interfernce is
interfernce.


The W1AW information bulletins are well published, as per FCC rules,
Baxter has a few paragraphs on an obscure web page.


First off Information bulletins do not have to be published, only if
they are on a certain amount of time which is 48 hr a week for the
purpose of compesation. As for baxter's website I will admit that a
five year old could do a better job making a website, then what he did.


Then why does Blapster make such a big deal about his "published schedule"
and uses that as his PRIMARY reason to claim he is being interfered with ?
Sorry, can't have it both ways. Face it...Blapster is a sham. He should
be standing in a circus tent hawking hair growth cream.


the FCC has even told K1MAN that his published schedule didn't mean
squat, and that his published schedule was no excuse for interfernce.


W1AW is a real organization. K1MAN is a one man pony show.


A information bulletin is NOT limited to clubs, anyone can run an
Information Bulletin

etc.


That is correct. Maybe one day Baxter will actually transmit a
"information bulletin". What you think?


the main problem that I see is that amateur believe an information
bulletin cannot be opinionated, yet there is no rule on it. Many
amateur believe that those who run information bulletins should only
run "newscast" however, if the FCC wanted it to be only newscast then
they would specify that it should be only a newscast, the FCC has the
ability and power to specify what an information bulletin is. The FCC
has the power to limit what an information bulletin is, provided that
it is the least restrictive mean necessary to promote govenment
intrest, the problem is they don't.

[14. Section 97.113(a)(3) of the Rules prohibits an Amateur
station from transmitting any communications in which the
station licensee or control operator has a pecuniary
interest. On November 25, 2004 and March 30, 2005, Mr.
Baxter's station repeatedly transmitted references to his
website, which offers various products for sale, including a
monthly newsletter published by Glenn Baxter and offered for
sale for forty-five dollars per year. In addition, on
December 1, 2004, Station K1MAN transmitted a seventy-minute
interview with a person who was considering whether to
retain Baxter Associates, an employment-search firm owned by
Mr. Baxter. During the transmission, Mr. Baxter discussed
fees, investments, and franchising opportunities. We find
that Mr. Baxter apparently willfully and repeatedly violated
Section 97.113(a)(3) of the Rules on each of these occasions
by transmitting communications regarding matters in which he
has a pecuniary interest.]


Oh, the ARRL doesn't do that??? the rule states that pecuniary interest
applies to direct and indirect. K1MAN is doing direct, while the ARRL
doesn't indirect.


No the ARRL does NOT SOLICITE on its bulletins. K1MAN does. End of
subject.


They don't, the word is DIRECT AND INDIRECT. K1MAN does in his bulletin
[DIRECT] while the ARRL has a website that has stuff forsale and offer
a credit card [INDIRECT] and although they don't promote their website
in their news bulletins they still run a site that offers goods
[INDIRECT]

No but the rules state a station can't make money direct or indirect.
K1MAN does do it DIRECT, while the ARRL is doing it INDIRECT. but the
rules does state a station can't make money direct or indirect.


Reference and show me how the ARRL is soliciting on the air.

They don't but the do own a site that offers goods which is [indirect]

Get ready to suck it up Toad.


[16. Section 97.113(b) of the Rules prohibits, with limited
exceptions not applicable here, an Amateur station from
engaging in any form of broadcasting or transmitting one-way
transmissions. Section 97.3(a)(10) of the Rules defines
broadcasting as ``transmissions intended for reception by
the general public.'' 14 We find that the pre-recorded
seventy-minute interview with a person interested in
retaining Baxter Associates, during which there was no
station identification, constitutes a ``broadcast'' and an
impermissible one-way transmission. Therefore, Mr. Baxter
apparently willfully violated Section 97.113(b) of the
Rules.]

and the question I have for the FCC is where does this and how does it
apply to section 326 of the communication act. after all isn't it up to
the station to deiced what is of intrest to amateur radio??


Ohhhhhh.....Baxter is the one that determines what I want to hear? That
is
really funny Toad.


Under the FCC rules it states it is up to station transmitting the
bulletin, the FCC even states that on their website. If you don't want
to hear him then that's what a VFO is for.


Not when that SOB sits down on top of me and those I am in QSO with. All
that idiot would have had to do was use this little phrase "Is this freq in
use". And follow that up with "I am intending to use 14.275 to send my
bulletin, would you guys mind standing by for it". You know what Toad?
To a man we would all agreed to move. But oh no....not the mighty MAN. He
comes on and DEMANDS we clear HIS frequency. And yes I am ONE OF THOSE
that sent in the multitude of reports, and proud of it.

True, I pick a frequency that is not in use and ask if the frequency is
in uses, and if I don't hear anyone I start my bulletin.

Why isn't he on 14.275 any longer ?????? I'll tell you why....he got his
arse whipped like a mangy dog thats why.



finally I would like to tell all my fans that this sick joke of a NAL
does not effect my station or the N9OGL SHOW

TODD N9OGL
THE N9OGL SHOW
14.321.00 MHz


sick joke? I don't consider a 21000 NAL a sick joke. If you do.....you
have a mental problem.

It is a sick Joke in the sense that one of the Issues in the NAL was
overturned once already by the Commission in DC back in 2004. (it dealt
with the content of his station)as for the other stuff I don't think
really think it's sick but it does raise some questions. You have to
remeber this was a district office that sent the NAL, and it's not a
FINAL ORDER, there is a Looooooong process before the final ruling is
set, including a hearing before an Administrative Law Jugde (ALJ) and
if he don't like that ruling he can go to the US Court of Appeal and
then just maybe, if they want to hear it the Supreme Court When the FCC
goes around controling the content of the station that is transmitting
it then it is a violation of Section 326 of the Comunication Act of
1934 as Amended.

Todd N9OGL

Dan/W4NTI



It was from the district office the wanabee boy broadcaster stated. Where
do you think the order to do so came from nitwit? Right....FCC
headquarters.

No, according to the NAL at the bottom it was from the district office
in boston, I read the NAL from the FCC's site. I really suggest on how
the FCC is set up before commenting on something like this. (see below)

from http://www.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2...-259301A1.html


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


Dennis V. Loria
District Director
Boston Office
Northeastern Region
Enforcement Bureau



Wake up me boy. When the FCC comes down on you like this.....you are
history. This isn't anything new, its been in the works since the mid 80s.
It just took a bunch of dedicated hams that were willing to stand and fight
to get the ball rolling. And your talking to one of them right now.

I suggest you forget your little broadcasting career, or get ready for a
history repeat. Understand? And no Toad...its not a threat....its a
promise. Ham radio is sick of you children trying to mess up our play pen.

No thanks DAN, My problem is since your little BITCHWHORES at the FCC
don't want to consider my application or waiver, for a broadcast
license, my opinion is you and themn can go **** yourself.





Todd N9OGL
Dan/W4NTI