RadioBanter - View Single Post - Policy Issue: Canadian Amateurs to Lose 220-222 MHz

January 17th 06, 11:50 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Jeff Hermann say use it or lose it is hogwash.

Really?

How much is 220-222 used in Canada?

Will 222-225 be overcrowded because
of the loss of 220-222?

What justification can there be for hams having
5 MHz of prime VHF spectrum if those 5 MHz
aren't being fully utilized?

Hey clown,

Brian,

I'm not a "clown".

not in brains opinion and not in my own

He is performing tricks.

What's with the name-calling? Are you desperate for
attention? Or do you think such behavior is somehow
justified because I disproved your claim?

nah it is your blah sey attitude about it

you get into a lather at suggesting you neeed what you see as your BW
in HF but you blithely talk about giving away VHF as if it wee nothing

Apparently he doesn't value VHF.

He cuts my post, and in agreeing with me, he demands I answer questions
making it appear as if we have an argument. Hi!

Strange little clown tricks.

I asked significant, relevant questions about the use
of 220-222 MHz by Canadian hams. Try answering
them - if you can.

no you did not

The facts:

1. Use it or lose it.

2. We lost it a long time ago.

3. Canada catches up and mimics our 220 allocations exactly.

In case you didn't know, 220-225 is not worldwide
exclusive amateur territory. If hams don't use it
enough, why shouldn't it be reassigned to
services that *will* use it?

more of your lectureing attitute try to hope from clown to asshole?
cut

Since 220 is not a worldwide allocation, Canada had no reason to
exactly mimic our plan.

That Jim sure is a smart feller.