Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 10 May 2004 13:26:08 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 07 May 2004 03:39:02 GMT, "Landshark" wrote: "Leland C. Scott" wrote in message ... You forgot about these Lee: Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 Irrelevant. This is a CB newsgroup. The "bad apples" of the ham radio fraternity have no bearing on what happens here. Sure it does, Lee posts stuff about cb'rs getting busted, Jer does, N8 does, WA3MOJ does, so why can all these people put up things about cb'rs, but I can't post this about Hams? That's easy. THIS IS A CB NEWSGROUP. Articles which pertain to CB, including the publishing of the eventual consequences for thumbing one's nose at the FCC, are part and parcel of CB operations. A little one-sided don't you think? Naw, never mind. Not at all. If you want to go to the ham newsgroup and remind them about their bad apples, it would be perfectly appropriate. Why would you think that enforcement action against hams has a place on a CB newsgroup? Besides, two wrongs do not make a right. The fact that there are a fair percentage of bad hams, does not diminish the seriousness of illegal CB operation. Agreed, but the fact that this is a CB newsgroup that a couple of certain hams (N8WWM, WA3MOJ) are trolling this group and posting that just to inflame is ok? So reminding people of the consequences for illegal operation, is nothing more than "trolling"? If that is true, then wouldn't the best course of action to take in this case, would be to ignore those who troll? Trolls want attention. Responding just gives them what they want. I think not, anymore than if someone went onto the Ham groups and posted about Hams being busted and then making statements that most hams are illegal, I would think that would make them upset too. It's not my problem if the truth upsets you. The simple fact is that most people who operate on CB ARE running illegally to some degree. Conversely, the percentage of hams who are illegal is much less, but they have higher visibility, simply because the FCC is more serious about enforcement on the ham bands, due largely to the fact that the hams themselves asked for it. Hams, for the most part, want to be rid of troublemakers. Most hams did not go through the trouble to pass the test and earn their privileges, only to have to deal with idiots. When you earn something, you are more likely to want to protect it. If you want to post ham related enforcement logs on ham newsgroups, then by all means, go for it. At least they'll be on a relevant newsgroup. The original poster was not asking for information about "peaked and tuned" ham radios....... OK, so? This is a CB newsgroup. Not a Ham newsgroup. What does ham have to do with it? Operating modified radios on CB is illegal. I know such mundane details like FCC rules are a thorn in the ass of many people's fun, but the point needs to be made. Dave "Sandbagger" http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj |