If you ever think about posting to the moderated group, don't ...

Here is an example of a censored post, of mine:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97. Please strike
reference on any resubmit. - K3FU



Your message has been rejected because it describes or advocates
activities that we reasonably believe to be in violation of United
States Law or Federal Communications Commission Regulations (or
similar laws and regulations in other countries, if you are not a
U.S. person).

Please read the charter of rec.radio.amateur.moderated at:

http://www.panix.com/~rram/usenet/rram/index.html

Please direct any queries to .

Thank you,

- Moderation Team.

============================================ Full text of your message
follows
From Mon Jul 28 22:55:40 2008
Return-Path:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on
mailcrunch3.panix.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED
autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
X-Original-To:
Delivered-To:
Received: from mail2.panix.com (mail2.panix.com [166.84.1.73])
by mailbackend.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64022DE2B
for ; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:55:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mail2.panix.com (Postfix)
id 7942E3480F; Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:55:40 -0400 (EDT)
Delivered-To:
Received: from pinatubo.switch.ch (pinatubo-2.switch.ch [130.59.1.10])
by mail2.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35D8C3480D
for ; Mon, 28 Jul 2008
22:55:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [78.46.73.112] (helo=schnuerpel.eu)
by pinatubo.switch.ch with esmtp (Exim 4.63)
(envelope-from )
id 1KNfND-0004GQ-Ae
for ; Tue, 29 Jul
2008 04:55:39 +0200
Received: by schnuerpel.eu (Postfix, from userid 9)
id 2B82F3427E22; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 04:55:38 +0200 (CEST)
To:
Path: news.albasani.net!not-for-mail
From: John Smith
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.moderated
Subject: Another BPL?
Organization: albasani.net
Message-ID:
References:




Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.albasani.net
kklDQD/EokIbDqwCEygRBiGoYjpTQTNy7Bnj34Wy+iKnJlTkAMQ4rP1Q6 p2FTsmVNy9VODVGdwsV6qvMvxnW2OFCBAxnVrjxCXzymgVbUYt cYC2EnBAIrN789QBMwd8w
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 02:55:38 +0000 (UTC)
X-User-ID: P1Dd21pPhUfImVLH3p3zfBQAFZjMk3spjKWIj0WMKD4=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NNzoW97xjmFZ1PA3aPy1LlXf9Aw=
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421)
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: jD8wRQp2wU7nmUmpmuf4j3zmw7wvERBchG2KU87PgQk=
X-Virus-Status: No

Phil Kane wrote:

...
There are still some of us who cling to the motto "When all else
fails...amateur radio". My concept of ham radio is to be free from
any non-ham intermediary transmission systems.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net


THAT is just too much of a romantics and dreamers vision for me. In
such times, where there is a "catastrophic failure of civilization" (I
mean, this is the only thing I can imagine which would hold the drama
you suggest)--trust me, if you can find someone to trade that rig
to for
a gun, a loaf of bread, some medicine for your family, shelter,
bedding,
etc., take them up on it! If you think food, medicine, fuel for
heat/cooling and shelter are going to be in demand--just try
hunting up
a hot 220V outlet ...

Amateur radio did little to alleviate human suffering, pain, needs and
rescue in the New Orleans disaster--I suspect the highly specific
disaster you envision will never come, but if it does, temporary cell
towers on trailers (you know they have them, right) will be more
suited--or, as I have stated before--truckers with CB's (heck, solar
powered lowfers and QRP'ers may look good!) But hey, I have seen
Hollywood writers make a fortune selling this line, many books have
contained these ideas also--rescue by radio! ... a lot of scifi flicks
have an amateur radio in the background also--yep, I have read 'em and
watched 'em ... :-)

But then, you never know, we could be invaded by Canada or Mexico
tomorrow and find we are fresh out of nukes!

Now, all that said, I DO plan on keeping my KW+ and 5KW amps ... ya
never know, ya just never know ... but power for them, in such a
disaster? :-(

I just hope a few feds/state-workers are left to see some temp cell
towers set up ...

Regards,
JS

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (NetBSD)

iJwEAQECAAYFAkiOkfgACgkQSO8RITXCfvtKOgP/VjyuTPjh8Hu6KWvLUxdJiAge
1F0H2h3TtRz3Gw1asdb5AppCsKQPOrjAXhEgQ+OnKvV18HZpE7 kANvD50AmZGLvj
+xrJJcJ08eF7/aU+hOSExXQ1wRxNm02iAr6X2NKkAs7ZDhygo4WBGN3w16eTIJo G
yIxj6dKe4346GF6N7NU=
=RU/f
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

It is none of K3FUs' business what equipment I own, or who I tell ...

That man, and I use that title VERY LIGHTLY, is beyond an idiot ...

JS

If you ever think about posting to the moderated group, don't ...

Here is an example of a censored post, of mine:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97. Please strike
reference on any resubmit. - K3FU



I'm pretty sure a ham CAN use a 5KW PA, as long as he limits the power
out to the maximum allowed under our FCC rules. Its not the hardware
that is not permited, its the actual power out that counts.

Ed K7AAT

Ed wrote:

...
I'm pretty sure a ham CAN use a 5KW PA, as long as he limits the power
out to the maximum allowed under our FCC rules. Its not the hardware
that is not permited, its the actual power out that counts.

Ed K7AAT


I am fairly confident that is true, and running such a rig at an "idle"
would certainly guarantee a loooooong lifetime for the finals! ... but,
with lawyers, you never know.

Anyway, a paranoid ham can certainly keep one in the basement for "The
Big One!"

But, my post which started this thread was rather cryptic in its'
intent; and, in my haste I failed to make that intent obvious. I meant
to show what can be accomplished with censorship and why it is a most
diabolical and evil weapon. Especially since the censor can "load the
dice." A bully, a biased media, a pseudo-government entity--such as the
arrl, etc., when, in the background, attempts to influence the public,
that publics' options and access to ideas, well, this has always managed
to get my blood to heat.

One thing I like about the r.r.a.antenna news thread is that we have
"nuts" here, and sometimes that is exactly what is needed to seed new
ideas, designs, etc. Or, to go where no mind has gone before (or is
that StarTrek? grin)

Someone, somewhere, quite possibly from this group, will go to bed one
night, much like John Kanzius. That someone will awake during the
night, perhaps, and end up constructing the "new antenna" from his wifes
pie plates. It may "change things."

Well, at least I think that much more plausible then someone from
r.r.a.m (hey, is that a pseudonym for arrl? wink) awaking and saving
the world with their rig and moderated newsgroup! ;-)

Regards,
JS

John Smith quoted someone:
"A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97."

Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a
surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output.
However, he never adjusted his input power to
more than the legal 1KW limit.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

The rules stipulate how much power can be run. They do not stipulate
how much power could -possibly- be run. It's up to the user to stay
legal. Simple as that.
- 'Doc

"Ed" wrote in message
. 192.196...

If you ever think about posting to the moderated group, don't ...

Here is an example of a censored post, of mine:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97. Please strike
reference on any resubmit. - K3FU



I'm pretty sure a ham CAN use a 5KW PA, as long as he limits the power
out to the maximum allowed under our FCC rules. Its not the hardware
that is not permited, its the actual power out that counts.

Ed K7AAT


--------------


Yep, you are right. We are regulated by emission standards. Not equipment
standards.

Ed, NM2K

Ed Cregger wrote:

...
Yep, you are right. We are regulated by emission standards. Not equipment
standards.

Ed, NM2K



But, we here, in r.r.a.a, can "cheat" that quite legally! It is called
high gain antennas ... (or, ERP)

However, those get more difficult with "distance" (i.e, meters) ... and
age. :-( (not to mention rules/regulations.)

Regards,
JS

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith quoted someone:
"A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97."

Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a
surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output.
However, he never adjusted his input power to
more than the legal 1KW limit.

Recently, over in r.r.a.m, the following exchange took place between me
and another:

EXCERPT FROM MY POST:

" These freqs, being opened up for the net, is a very exciting development
... I believe the opportunities and access provided will greatly expand
the availability to the net under adverse circumstances, and make
greater speeds available to those who were lacking the same ..."

HIS RESPONSE:

"I do believe that the thrust of this group is to further Amateur
Radio, not "the 'net".

Then there are those of us who are professionals in spectrum
regulatory management who believe that this is a harebrained idea
from the get-go that violates good professional practice."

My NSHPO." [Not So Humble Personal Opinion? -- by JS]

MY ANALYSIS OF THE ABOVE EXCHANGE:

This individual, apparently/obviously, has no real respect for the
Scientific Method (i.e., Scientific Thinking.) He would have the
citizens suffer the will(s) of "us who are professionals." snicker
(Is that like alcoholics, they are, when they say they are one? grin)

And, I feel I could easily make a 1:1 replacement of "regulatory
management" with "religious devotion/doctorine."

And, his use of, "... from the get-go that violates good professional
practice" simply restates his preference to a "religious devotion" to
"arrl doctorine" over any REAL use of the scientific methods/thinking.

The "Coup De Grace" of his "thrust" being "NSHPO", indications of a
rather large ego, and usually held by an ego-manic!

Anyway, this "mans'" complete ramblings can be read over in r.r.a.m ...
it is well worth your trouble--if you need a laugh today; they are, now,
a matter of public record. ;-)

Regards,
JS

In article ,
Cecil Moore wrote:

John Smith quoted someone:
"A 5 KW amplifier is not lawful for use under Part 97."

Back in the 60's, a ham friend of mine ran a
surplus AM transmitter capable of 10KW output.
However, he never adjusted his input power to
more than the legal 1KW limit.

Whom, ever "Someone" is, he isn't versed in 47CFR97, and doesn't
understand, or can't comprehend, the actual Rule that Part 97
operations are REQUIRED to operate under. Specifically Part
97.313. I wonder if "Said Person" has ever actually READ
47CFR90.313? Apparently NOT......

--
Bruce in alaska
add path after fast to reply

Bruce in alaska wrote:

...
Whom, ever "Someone" is, he isn't versed in 47CFR97, and doesn't
understand, or can't comprehend, the actual Rule that Part 97
operations are REQUIRED to operate under. Specifically Part
97.313. I wonder if "Said Person" has ever actually READ
47CFR90.313? Apparently NOT......


Your post is inspiring, and immediately brings a hypothetical question
to mind:

If an amateur is near a QRP'er on a field-day, they both have made
contact with the same ham, on the same freq/mode and within seconds of
ones' QSO ending, the other began ... and the QRP'er did it with 5w the
other ham with 100w ...

Is the 100w'er in violation of the law? grin

Or, and perhaps more importantly, do you know of any amateurs who would
"turn him in?" Or, call for his license to be revoked? -- I mean other
than those in r.r.a.m, apparently?

Or, who really enjoys contacts barely above the noise floor? Well,
sometimes ...

ROFLOL!

Regards,
JS