![]() |
Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (Brian) Date: 8/25/2004 3:10 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (N2EY) wrote in message ... But for me the important question is: Should there be CW-only subbands? I say yes - about the lowest 15-20% of each HF/MF hamband. Including 160. Why not? Would it really bother anyone if 3500-3575 and 7000-7050 were CW only? Only if it were to include all other "digital" (hi,hi) modes... As it is, CW is allowed in ALL MF/HF -amateur- spectrum. As it is, Brian, do you understand WHY it's allowed? 73 Steve, K4YZ |
Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (Brian) Date: 8/25/2004 3:15 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (William) writes: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... SOMEONE DIAL 9-1-1 IN PICKERINGTON OHIO AND FIND OUT WHO KIDNAPPED BRIAN BURKE! ! ! ! ! ! ! Len, that would be just like crazy Steve to try to get someone else to make a false distress call. Maybe that's how they train them in the CAP? Gunnery nurse Yellyell wants to "make calls." He threatened! Obey him or get committed! He has the Power! Must be the corps trains them that way. Ptui. LHA / WMD Since we know he not brave enough to do hisself, he want other to do what he chiken to do. He like Lex Luther on Superman cartoon, "Greatest Criminal Mastermind!" Baby banter, Brian... Are you really not better than that? I think you are. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
In article ,
(gunnery nurse Yell-yell, shouting from an emotional high) writes: Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation From: (Brian) Date: 8/25/2004 3:10 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (N2EY) wrote in message ... But for me the important question is: Should there be CW-only subbands? I say yes - about the lowest 15-20% of each HF/MF hamband. Including 160. Why not? Would it really bother anyone if 3500-3575 and 7000-7050 were CW only? Only if it were to include all other "digital" (hi,hi) modes... As it is, CW is allowed in ALL MF/HF -amateur- spectrum. As it is, Brian, do you understand WHY it's allowed? NURSIE ask a no-brainer question. Easy answer: Olde-Tyme Hammes at ARRL lobby for morsemanship, get it. FCC not care much, takes easy way out and gives in to ARRL. That was in the past (where "Quitefine" hangs out...). Things are changing with more and more citizens able to lobby the FCC without having to join special interest groups. Changes are coming.... Will NURSIE be able to change with the times? Will NURSIE be able to change anything...including uniforms? :-) Will NURSIE ever get proper credentials as a homo sapiens? |
In article , (Simple
Steve at da gunnery nurse barracks) writes: Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation From: (Brian) Date: 8/25/2004 3:15 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (William) writes: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... SOMEONE DIAL 9-1-1 IN PICKERINGTON OHIO AND FIND OUT WHO KIDNAPPED BRIAN BURKE! ! ! ! ! ! ! Len, that would be just like crazy Steve to try to get someone else to make a false distress call. Maybe that's how they train them in the CAP? Gunnery nurse Yellyell wants to "make calls." He threatened! Obey him or get committed! He has the Power! Must be the corps trains them that way. Ptui. LHA / WMD Since we know he not brave enough to do hisself, he want other to do what he chiken to do. He like Lex Luther on Superman cartoon, "Greatest Criminal Mastermind!" Baby banter, Brian... Are you really not better than that? I think you are. Good thinking. Of course we are. NURSIE not realize we use "simple spoken English" so that NURSIE can understand words, not have to look up so many in dictionary...or in federal regulations such as Department of Defense directives. :-) We have to try to fit in to flow of conversation of some in here... baby talk for baby minds. Was that a good pacifier for you, NURSIE? |
|
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation From: (Brian) Date: 8/25/2004 3:10 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (N2EY) wrote in message ... But for me the important question is: Should there be CW-only subbands? I say yes - about the lowest 15-20% of each HF/MF hamband. Including 160. Why not? Would it really bother anyone if 3500-3575 and 7000-7050 were CW only? Only if it were to include all other "digital" (hi,hi) modes... As it is, CW is allowed in ALL MF/HF -amateur- spectrum. As it is, Brian, do you understand WHY it's allowed? 73 Steve, K4YZ It legasee mode frum when only mode was CW. Dey outlaw sparc. Member? |
William wrote: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Baby banter, Brian... Are you really not better than that? I think you are. 73 Steve, K4YZ You rasis! I just hafta ask, Brian. What on earth is a rasis? You stop make fun my Hop Sing mask. Go pik on Qitefeind if you got big enoff chopstik. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Len Over 21 wrote:
Things are changing with more and more citizens able to lobby the FCC without having to join special interest groups. Changes are coming.... You've lobbied. I don't see any changes in your status vis a vis amateur radio. You're still not a participant after decades of self-declared interest. You're still not involved despite a boast of getting an "Extra right out of the box" years back. Some changes must come very slowly. Dave K8MN |
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:54:19 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote: I just hafta ask, Brian. What on earth is a rasis? It's the female sibling of a raisin. John Kasupski, Tonawanda, New York Amateur Radio (KC2HMZ), SWL/Scanner Monitoring (KNY2VS) Member of ARES/RACES, ARATS, WUN, ARRL http://www.qsl.net/kc2fng E-Mails Ignored, Please Post Replies In This Newsgroup |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:08 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com