|
Walt Davidson wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 21:16:05 +1100, "Martin, VK2UMJ" wrote: If we show little interst in this, you can be assured the bands will fall into disarray and the authorities will start to regard us as no more than CBers with more frequencies. That is exactly what has already happened in the UK, due to liberal attitudes such as those that have been aired in this thread. Alas, we have passed the point of no return. And a wonderful thing this liberalization is, it has been a breathe of fresh air to the mouldy oldy attitudes that have been also aired in this thread. Newly licensed amateurs with fresh approaches to old problems instead of "me grandad was a spark operator... me dad was a spark operator... I'm a spark operator... who do youse Con tin you oz Wave people think you are?!?!" LOL G-S VK3DMN |
"Chris Kirby" wrote in message ... "nana" wrote: The IRLP CANNOT be accessed by others. It is STRICTLY designed for radio to radio access only. ECHOLINK can be accessed by others and is NOT the topic of conversation. Just for the record, everyone on Echolink (links and individuals alike) have been validated by one of the Echolink validation team. I'm not sure that it is really necessary, but it happens. So, like it or not, there's very little chance of a non-licenced person using Echolink. ... and (lest we forget) what does it really matter anyway? ... This is a hobby. There are authorities whose job it is to ensure only those with licences transmit. We are just end users of the service. I for one don't really care whether the chap at the other end actually has a licence or not providing he sounds and behaves like a radio amateur. I will not hesitate to talk to someone who gives a callsign and sounds like an amateur. I pay my licence, and leave it to the authorities to sort out if he is bona fide or not. Here, we pay to renew our licences every year. How is someone supposed to know whether someone who was a bona fide amateur has paid for the forthcoming year. Of course, we don't know, but if he behaves like an amateur, we assume he is licenced. 73, -- Chris Now that is a fine attitude. You basically don't give a dang if the guy/gal has a ticket, eh? Well I do. Course I must be wrong, right? Dan/W4NTI |
"Walt Davidson" wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 09:56:31 +0000, Chris Kirby wrote: Just for the record, everyone on Echolink (links and individuals alike) have been validated by one of the Echolink validation team. I'm not sure that it is really necessary, but it happens. So, like it or not, there's very little chance of a non-licenced person using Echolink. How can you possibly do that? The Echolink validation team, as you call them, do not have privileged access to licensing records ... and we are talking about worldwide records, not just the UK. If someone appeared under a callsign randomly selected from the callbook, or even just made up an unallocated M3 callsign and came on Echolink, how would you know he wasn't a pirate? How do you know my licence hasn't expired? 73 de G3NYY -- Walt Davidson Email: g3nyy @despammed.com Sick em Walt. Dan/W4NTI |
"Martin, VK2UMJ" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ink.net... [SNIP] You *MUST* be a licensed Amateur to use IRLP, you *MUST* use a radio to access IRLP. Therefore it is getting *LICENSED AMATEURS* on air. It in *NO* way interferes with your on air activities so leave it alone and enjoy your hobby without *INTERFERING* with others. -- The views I present are my own and NOT of any organisation I belong to. 73 de Simon, VK3XEM. http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/cli...IENT_NO=157452 VoIP http://www.TALKonIP.com.au/ How is that "LICENSE" proven? Who or what checks it? How is that done? Dan/W4NTI The same way any valid licence is checked when you use any ham frequency - by "self regulation". Using IRLP is no different than firing up on your local repeater that is linked to some other repeater in the distance. There is the exact same potential for unlicensed users on IRLP as there is on any other amateur frequency, no more, no less. Yet you don't seem to be claiming that 2m is open to CBers, or that 40m is not a valid ham band..... If you accept that linking amateur repeaters via land line is OK, then you have no basis upon which to reject IRLP - it is the same, linking repeaters via land lines, except it uses internet technology to make that affordable for anyone rather than the expense of a dedicated leased line.. Without the VOiP linking repeaters by landline can be rather costly, so the number of repeaters you could link would be limited. Now that expense has been removed so that any local club, or local ham, can establish a node and allow the repeater to be linked to any one of thousands of other ham repeaters worldwide. Seems that all they have done is expand existing technology - isn't that what ham radio is all about?????? Then again, we faced this kind of narrow minded, arrogant discrimination when they proposed access to amateur frequencies by operators that hadn't learnt CW... Seems it is just another example of the old timers stomping their feet because times are changing - must've been real hard when valves were replaced! -- Martin, VK2UMJ To reply by e-mail, replace ".invalid" with ".com.au" "I cannot help but notice that there is no problem between us that cannot be solved by your departure." You may indeed be correct....I am confusing IRLP with echolink......I think I'll go on google and see what others have to say about it. Dan/W4NTI |
How do you know my licence hasn't expired?
73 de G3NYY -- Walt Davidson Email: g3nyy @despammed.com Sick em Walt. Dan/W4NTI You missed the point there Dan. We DON'T know that Walt's licence hasn't expired. Sadly, we have to TRUST him, and that trust is fading! Brad. |
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message
k.net... "Chris Kirby" wrote in message ... "nana" wrote: The IRLP CANNOT be accessed by others. It is STRICTLY designed for radio to radio access only. ECHOLINK can be accessed by others and is NOT the topic of conversation. Just for the record, everyone on Echolink (links and individuals alike) have been validated by one of the Echolink validation team. I'm not sure that it is really necessary, but it happens. So, like it or not, there's very little chance of a non-licenced person using Echolink. ... and (lest we forget) what does it really matter anyway? ... This is a hobby. There are authorities whose job it is to ensure only those with licences transmit. We are just end users of the service. I for one don't really care whether the chap at the other end actually has a licence or not providing he sounds and behaves like a radio amateur. I will not hesitate to talk to someone who gives a callsign and sounds like an amateur. I pay my licence, and leave it to the authorities to sort out if he is bona fide or not. Here, we pay to renew our licences every year. How is someone supposed to know whether someone who was a bona fide amateur has paid for the forthcoming year. Of course, we don't know, but if he behaves like an amateur, we assume he is licenced. 73, -- Chris Now that is a fine attitude. You basically don't give a dang if the guy/gal has a ticket, eh? Well I do. Course I must be wrong, right? Dan/W4NTI No, that is one point I will fully agree with you on. Every amateur has a right, and duty, to help keep the hobby 'pirate free'. Anyone that thinks their respective authority (FCC, OffComm, ACA, etc) has the resources to keep a watch on amateur bands for unlicensed operators (or on any other frequency) is dreaming - they rely on reports from licensed stations to track down such users. This is why amateur radio has always been "self regulating" in most countries. -- Martin, VK2UMJ To reply by e-mail, replace ".invalid" with ".com.au" Windows 95 was unable to detect a keyboard. Press F1 to continue, or F3 to exit. |
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message
k.net... "Martin, VK2UMJ" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ink.net... [SNIP] You *MUST* be a licensed Amateur to use IRLP, you *MUST* use a radio to access IRLP. Therefore it is getting *LICENSED AMATEURS* on air. It in *NO* way interferes with your on air activities so leave it alone and enjoy your hobby without *INTERFERING* with others. -- The views I present are my own and NOT of any organisation I belong to. 73 de Simon, VK3XEM. http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/cli...IENT_NO=157452 VoIP http://www.TALKonIP.com.au/ How is that "LICENSE" proven? Who or what checks it? How is that done? Dan/W4NTI The same way any valid licence is checked when you use any ham frequency - by "self regulation". Using IRLP is no different than firing up on your local repeater that is linked to some other repeater in the distance. There is the exact same potential for unlicensed users on IRLP as there is on any other amateur frequency, no more, no less. Yet you don't seem to be claiming that 2m is open to CBers, or that 40m is not a valid ham band..... If you accept that linking amateur repeaters via land line is OK, then you have no basis upon which to reject IRLP - it is the same, linking repeaters via land lines, except it uses internet technology to make that affordable for anyone rather than the expense of a dedicated leased line.. Without the VOiP linking repeaters by landline can be rather costly, so the number of repeaters you could link would be limited. Now that expense has been removed so that any local club, or local ham, can establish a node and allow the repeater to be linked to any one of thousands of other ham repeaters worldwide. Seems that all they have done is expand existing technology - isn't that what ham radio is all about?????? Then again, we faced this kind of narrow minded, arrogant discrimination when they proposed access to amateur frequencies by operators that hadn't learnt CW... Seems it is just another example of the old timers stomping their feet because times are changing - must've been real hard when valves were replaced! -- Martin, VK2UMJ To reply by e-mail, replace ".invalid" with ".com.au" "I cannot help but notice that there is no problem between us that cannot be solved by your departure." You may indeed be correct....I am confusing IRLP with echolink......I think I'll go on google and see what others have to say about it. Dan/W4NTI IRLP - www.irlp.net EchoLink - www.echolink.org They are two totally different concepts. IRLP only links radio/repeater to radio/repeater. Echolink lets you link PC to PC, PC to radio/repeater or radio/repeater to PC. |
"Walter Raleigh" wrote:
: : "ZZZPK " .es.it.net wrote : in message ... : DEOTH : : Ah yes, one typo, on an unfamiliar lap-top keyboard, quickly corrected in a unfamiliar... ye gods! another excuse. |
Walt Davidson wrote:
: On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 10:34:54 -0000, "Walter Raleigh" : wrote: : : This thread has just run and run has it not? : : Well, it's a Bank Holiday ... and "idle hands will mischief make"! : ;-) operating /A ???? |
"Walter Raleigh" wrote:
: "ZZZPK " .es.it.net wrote : in message ... : DEOTH : : Ah yes, one typo, on an unfamiliar lap-top keyboard, quickly corrected in a : follow up post, as opposed to a decade of pseudo-dyslexic repetitive : drivel. I think you've beaten me there....sigh!. Incidentally, I don't use : a spell-checker, perhaps you need to try it. Dear Dear Dear "Walter" or whatever your real name is ... Since we are on the subject of SPELLCHECKERS which seems to be the only item that you and several others can have a go at me over... And given that those who previously had a go also fell on their faces by mis-spelling something themselves.... I decided that it was time to go back in to the archives of google to see for myself just how good you really are... And of course... right away... your ability to make mistakes came up without too much filtering. So you see "Walter" dear chap.... even those who think their spelling is brilliant can make mistakes... As a second time winnner of the 12wpm morse TEST, I know i'm not perfect. And on this newsgroup as elesewhere, I never claimed that I was. But you won't see me running away from a morse test or encouraging others to run away either and you certainly will not see me congratulating people for running away. Please note that these postings are from MAY 2004 ONLY !! I shudder to think what other glaring spelling mistakes I might find and to save you the embarressment, I decided to only point out a few. here we go... ( Ref: COLLINS ENGLISH DICTIONARY ) = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From: "Walter Raleigh" Date: Sat, 8 May 2004 20:30:58 +0100 Message-ID: "jim.gm4dhj" wrote in message news:y09nc.100$44.91@newsfe1-win... Why would I joke about THAT?..... Well Captain Hook and the Finsbury Park brigade have a lot to answer for,next you know they'll be banning Christmas and Easter on the grounds that they alienate the ethnic minorities doncha know... SPELLING MISTAKE: DONCHA SPELT PHONETICALLY - SOMETHING YOU SAID YOU DONT DO. as in ... From: "Walter Raleigh" Message-ID: Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:53:30 -0000 I don't type phonetically. Your answer? -- 73s de Walter R. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From: "Walter Raleigh" Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 20:55:28 +0100 Message-ID: "zpk" s.it.net wrote in message ... The foul-mouthed CBer reveals himself at every turn. Originality? ,Wassthat? It's bad enough others plagiarizing all Gareth's little venomous soundbites without you too :) -- Walter R. SPELLING MISTAKE: SOUNDBITES SPELT WITHOUT 'SPACE' SPELLING MISTAKE: PLAGIARIZE SPELT WITHOUT AN 'S' You have already claimed your origin so this is an error = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From: "Walter Raleigh" Message-ID: Date: Sun, 16 May 2004 10:12:08 +0100 "Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... Indeed, her tirade was a rather silly and infantile outburst of sneering 'n' jeering in the best traditions of the uneducable CBers, indistinguishable from pigs grunting in the manure. Really? Define (a) Your basis for referring to me as "she". Are you a mysognist as well? Have you been rejected by women? Is XXXXXXXXX aware of this? -- Walter R. SPELLING MISTAKE: MYSOGNIST = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From: "Walter Raleigh" Message-ID: Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 10:41:08 +0100 such people would seem to be of a retarded mentality. Another gentlemanly remark from the bastion of incoherence, inconsistency, paranioa that is the REAL_RADIO_(HAM???) xxxxxx xxxxx lmao! -- Walter R. SPELLING MISTAKE: PARANIOA = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From: "Walter Raleigh" Subject: Intermediate Mock Exam Papers Message-ID: Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 16:50:27 +0100 "Brian Reay" wrote in message ... [snip] same thing. It is sympotmatic xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [snip] Hope your not questioning my sanity, I'm new here :))))))))))) No more that the rest of us ;-) LOL! Spot on! 73s to you and yours -- Walter R. SPELLING MISTAKE: SYMPOTMATIC - ERROR NOT SLAGGED OFF BY "WALTER" = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From: "Walter Raleigh" Message-ID: Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 20:42:50 +0100 "Geoff" wrote in message ... [snip] Certainly it would appear that Mr. xxxxx threw in the towel with me noteably early. Apparently I made his sin bin after only two posts! Must be something of a record:-) -- Walter R. SPELLING MISTAKE: NOTEABLY - SPELT WRONG = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From: "Walter Raleigh" Message-ID: Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 19:48:02 +0100 "Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... "Gender based insult" ? When one has no info on the sex of the person one is intercourse with, it is no longer politically correct to assume masculine. It is PC to assume feminine. Absolute rubbish and squirming of the highest order! You do it merely as a feeble attempt at insult,and a sexually descriminatory one at that. The very fact that you seek to justify it only enhances the validity of your intent. [snip] -- Walter R. SPELLING MISTAKE: DESCRIMINATORY SPELT WRONG = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From: "Walter Raleigh" Subject: Attachments on a News Group Message-ID: Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 19:56:08 +0100 "Dave D" wrote in message [snip] Thanks Dave,seems Walt has just discovered this trick,or something similiar perhaps as no attachment showed up from your post. He's a mischevious one I'll give him that ;) I too find OE good enough for me Microsoft or not! Pays to keep the antivirus bang up to date too though -- Seachtó a trí Walter R. SPELLING MISTAKE: SIMILIAR SPELT WRONG SPELLING MISTAKE: MISCHEVIOUS SPELT WRONG = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = I doubt that you will be able to claim that every one of these mistakes was as a result of an unfamiliar keyboard but I expect you might! If you have been on this newsgroup for as long as you claim you would remember others falling foul of their own mistakes too and by criticising my spelling but you obvously dont remember which leads me to doubt your length of presence here. The list of exposed failed-spellcheckers gathers another member to its tail. So, as you see "Walter" or whatever your name is (hiding in the shadows), slagging off someone for their spelling errors isn't very nice. Do have a really really really nice day. ======================================= Your ever friendly and supportive ZZPK END |
"ZZZZPK " .es.it.net wrote in message ... ye gods! another excuse. You'd better start writing yours now. At the rate you come up with critical errors, even if you started posting corrections now, you wouldn't finish within your lifetime. -- 73s de Walter R. |
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:10:47 +0000, Walt Davidson wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 20:05:46 +1100, "Martin, VK2UMJ" wrote: Yes, as a matter of fact, because the correct name for IRLP is Internet Radio Linking Project. See www.irlp.net Note that is a USA website describing IRLP, not an Aussie site... A quote from the irlp.net website: "The aim of this project is to reliably and inexpensively link amateur radio systems without the use of RF links, leased lines, or satellites." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "Without the use of RF links". The full name for "RF" is "Radio Frequency". So that rules out radio, then. Only if there's no radio link anywhere. Otherwise, by your own logic, any amateur using a microphone connected to a radio (ie a non-RF link) isn't really engaged in Amateur Radio. An absurd argument to prop up absurd logic. VK2TUM Next question? So, next question? 73 de G3NYY -- Stephen Quigg |
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message et... "Simon VK3XEM" wrote in message ... Get over it! Go back to your CW if you want, who bothers you or bags you for using it, I know I certainly don't. -- The views I present are my own and NOT of any organisation I belong to. 73 de Simon, VK3XEM. http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/cli...IENT_NO=157452 VoIP http://www.TALKonIP.com.au/ Thanks for bringing this up Mate!. My major problem is folks refering to interconnecting "hams" over the internet as "ham radio". Ham radio is R A D I O . Not INTERNET connected to Nodes then to a radio somewhere. Call it whatever you want, but it is NOT ham radio. Dan/W4NTI does this also mean we cannot place the receiver for 10M some distance away(1Km) to stop desensitisng the receiver as the of set is narrow, the receiver and transmitter are connected by landline ?????????. Alf VK5ZKL |
"wonderer" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message et... "Simon VK3XEM" wrote in message ... Get over it! Go back to your CW if you want, who bothers you or bags you for using it, I know I certainly don't. -- The views I present are my own and NOT of any organisation I belong to. 73 de Simon, VK3XEM. http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/cli...IENT_NO=157452 VoIP http://www.TALKonIP.com.au/ Thanks for bringing this up Mate!. My major problem is folks refering to interconnecting "hams" over the internet as "ham radio". Ham radio is R A D I O . Not INTERNET connected to Nodes then to a radio somewhere. Call it whatever you want, but it is NOT ham radio. Dan/W4NTI does this also mean we cannot place the receiver for 10M some distance away(1Km) to stop desensitisng the receiver as the of set is narrow, the receiver and transmitter are connected by landline ?????????. Alf VK5ZKL Dans' main problem was that he did not fully (or even partly) understand the operation of IRLP and the security systems designed to prevent access. I don't think he understood Echolink either and had the two confused as being one and the same animal. Walt was just plain ignorant. Brad. |
"nana" wrote in message ... "wonderer" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message et... "Simon VK3XEM" wrote in message ... Get over it! Go back to your CW if you want, who bothers you or bags you for using it, I know I certainly don't. -- The views I present are my own and NOT of any organisation I belong to. 73 de Simon, VK3XEM. http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/cli...IENT_NO=157452 VoIP http://www.TALKonIP.com.au/ Thanks for bringing this up Mate!. My major problem is folks refering to interconnecting "hams" over the internet as "ham radio". Ham radio is R A D I O . Not INTERNET connected to Nodes then to a radio somewhere. Call it whatever you want, but it is NOT ham radio. Dan/W4NTI does this also mean we cannot place the receiver for 10M some distance away(1Km) to stop desensitisng the receiver as the of set is narrow, the receiver and transmitter are connected by landline ?????????. Alf VK5ZKL Dans' main problem was that he did not fully (or even partly) understand the operation of IRLP and the security systems designed to prevent access. I don't think he understood Echolink either and had the two confused as being one and the same animal. Walt was just plain ignorant. Brad. Correct....in fact I think IRLP is the best choice if one is going to use any form of internet with ham radio. Dan/W4NTI |
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message k.net... "nana" wrote in message ... "wonderer" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message et... "Simon VK3XEM" wrote in message ... Get over it! Go back to your CW if you want, who bothers you or bags you for using it, I know I certainly don't. -- The views I present are my own and NOT of any organisation I belong to. 73 de Simon, VK3XEM. http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/cli...IENT_NO=157452 VoIP http://www.TALKonIP.com.au/ Thanks for bringing this up Mate!. My major problem is folks refering to interconnecting "hams" over the internet as "ham radio". Ham radio is R A D I O . Not INTERNET connected to Nodes then to a radio somewhere. Call it whatever you want, but it is NOT ham radio. Dan/W4NTI does this also mean we cannot place the receiver for 10M some distance away(1Km) to stop desensitisng the receiver as the of set is narrow, the receiver and transmitter are connected by landline ?????????. Alf VK5ZKL Dans' main problem was that he did not fully (or even partly) understand the operation of IRLP and the security systems designed to prevent access. I don't think he understood Echolink either and had the two confused as being one and the same animal. Walt was just plain ignorant. Brad. Correct....in fact I think IRLP is the best choice if one is going to use any form of internet with ham radio. Dan/W4NTI Yayyyy!!!!!!!!! Brad. |
"Walter Raleigh" wrote:
: : "ZZZPK " .es.it.net wrote : in message ... : DEOTH : : Ah yes, one typo, on an unfamiliar lap-top keyboard, quickly corrected in a : follow up post, as opposed to a decade of pseudo-dyslexic repetitive : drivel. I think you've beaten me there....sigh!. Incidentally, I don't use : a spell-checker, perhaps you need to try it. Dear Dear "Walter" ( or whatever your real name is ) Since we're on the suject of SPELLCHECKERS = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = From: "Walter Raleigh" Subject: Ham Radio Deluxe v1.4 build425b now available Message-ID: Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 17:00:05 +0100 "Starr" wrote in message ... Your welcome but i have something that doesn't seem to work but it's probably something i'm doing wrong. when you user the mapper, you can add stations to the database. I open the box, type the callsign in and click, "add" then the text wntry box clears and i close the box. when i go to edit stations thiere are none in the database. Other than that, lovely software. Did you write it in Visual Basic? (if you don't mind me asking) Did your teachers ever visualise you posessing basic spelling/grammar skills? -- Seachtó a trí Walter R. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=posessing No entry found for posessing. No doubt it was ANOTHER keyboard problem ( or some other squirmy excuse ) BWWWWWwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhh !!! Have a really really nice day "Walter" ( or whatever your name is ) **_END_** |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:26 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com