In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...

The parks argument is a good one. The spectum is a natural resource like

the forest and the shoreline, and like those it shouldn't be for
business
use only.

Thank you for saying that, Alun. Sincere thanks.

About six years ago (or so) in here I tried to point out that there is
a
good analogue between the hobby of amateur radio and the national
park service. The U.S. Park Service has a million acres (give or
take)
which is reserved for ALL the citizenry to enjoy for their recreation.

You did?

Google up the post for us, please, Len. Your experience in computer-modem
communications should make that an easy task for you.

Old-maid Jim is still into Googling bullemia syndrome, still trying to
argue old, old postings all over again. And again. And again. :-)

Spare me . . . more snake oil . . one more of your bogus "claims to
fame" eh Sweetums?

Tsk. I don't "claim any fame" to that analogue.

Then why did you mention it, Len?

Tsk. All WRONG again, Jimmie? :-)

Kellie brought up "claim to fame." I just repudiated it.

All you want to do is re-argue the PAST. :-)

Face the music (even if you are deaf), amateur radio is basically
a HOBBY. There should be absolutely nothing wrong with that
concept.

What's "wrong" is when someone denies that there are any "nonhobby" aspects to
amateur radio. Such as emergency and public service communications, education,
advancing the state of the art, etc.

Of course...like "advancing the state of the art" in home building
all-tube rigs in the 1990s. :-)

There is a lot of wrong with the political statements saying it is a
"vital need to the nation" such as for "emergency comms" as if
the time was prior to WW2 when two-way radios were scarce.

Who says amateur radio is a "vital need to the nation", Len?

ARRL. :-)

You seem to think that amateur radio plays no role in emergency or public
service communications, based simply on your experience watching TV after one
California earthquake. That's simply too limited a view.

Three earthquakes, not just one. :-)

Tsk. I was out there, not just "watching TV." Didn't see any "ham
emergency" crews at the disaster centers. Maybe they were all
home using CW on their rigs? [ "CW gets through when nothing else
will...even without electrical power!" ]

For example, when the space shuttle burned up on reentry, there were groups of
volunteers out looking for debris that survived the disaster. Some groups had
communications provided by amateur radio, others depended on cell phones.

Riiiiight, Jimmie...ONLY hams were any aid, right? Nobody else could
do the job? :-)

The Press has been negligent again, reporting false news...they should
have listened to the ARRL (who knows the "real" truth as opposed to
"wrong" truths spoken by the government, NASA, etc.).

The post-operation consensus was that cell phones were not well suited for
that
type of operation, and that amateur radio played a key role in the groups that
had hams providing the communications. That's all documented by people who
were there.

Nooooo...that's all documented by the ARRL. :-)

Were those hams participating in a HOBBY when they volunteered?

They were being good citizens. All those hams got their licenses so they
could later Hunt for Space Shuttle Debris?

Pretending that amateur radio is "vital" is a lot of POLITICAL
bull**** and you know it.

What does it take for something to be "vital", Len?

Constant reading and listening to the ARRL. :-)

Until relatively recently, we here in the USA got along very well without the
internet, personal computers, cell phones, cable TV, satellite TV, satellite
radio, PDAs, VCRs, flat-screen TVs, microwave ovens and a host of other
things.

...including ALL radio! [depends on your frame of reference and yours is
hanging a bit crooked...straighten it up...]

So none of those things are "vital" either, are they? They may have improved
our lives, but they are they "vital"?

Tsk. Nice try but the "reducto ad absurdum" approach is strictly
grade-school style "debate." :-)

"We here in the USA?" :-) Does that mean that only YOU are in the
USA and everyone else in other states are NOT in the USA? :-)

(I personally remember when all those things, and more, did not exist or were
not available to/practical for the average middle class American. And we
lived happy and successful lives without them, so they're not "vital".)

There we all have it!

If Jimmie "remembers what it was like" then That's It. :-)


Can't be me, because I'm neither old nor a maid. And my name is Jim, not
"Jim".

Okay, your name is "Jim," not "Jim." :-)

Perhaps you are angry that W3RV pointed out your mistake. You should thank him
for the new information. Don't you like new information?

Kellie no got "new" information. :-)

Kellie wanna practice mental bullemia and barf up old postings.


W3RV pointed out that the concept is much older than six years. Now you're
trying to weasel out because you've lost that point. Doesn't work.

"Weasel out?!?" :-)

Tsk. You morsemen weren't able to successfully argue your cases
for anything in the past...now you disguise your later comments on
old things as some kind of "truth" of "new things?"

That's NOT "weaseling out." That's just plain nuts, morseman.

Don't fib Sweetums, you know I'm out here doing my homework.

I could care less, "Sweetums."

Then why are you arguing, Len? Just say you were wrong and move on. Thank
W3RV for the correction and live in the present.

I could care less, "Jim" (or would you rather be called "Jim?")

:-)

Whoever originated it, the park analogy has some merit. It also has a bunch of
problems.

A long time ago, Teddy Roosevelt thought so...but managed to get the
National Park Service going... :-)

For example, the above FCC comments weren't about the definition of amateur
radio at all. They were a way of saying why amateurs wouldn't get special
protection from BPL interference. That's a political decision, not a technical
one. In fact, it admits that interference can/will happen, but that ham radio
isn't important enough to merit special consideration.

Thank you for the re-interpretation, Holy Father. Blessed be...

If ham radio is promoted as a HOBBY, why should it get special protection?

Why should ANY of the recreational hobby radio things get ANY
protection, "Jim?" Especially those evil, wicked, mean and nasty
CB types? :-)

Part 95 has a definite section on the Radio Control Radio Service. Pure
hobby activity.

Also, you say the park service has a million acres, give or take. What
percentage of the USA is that? Hams in the USA currently have access to about
3.55 MHz of HF (3-30 MHz) spectrum. That's a little more than 13% of HF, and
most of it is worldwide exclusive amateur. On VHF, UHF and above we have
similar levels of allocation.

Tsk. All you know is about HF. Typical PCTA extra. :-)

Would you want to see those allocations reduced?

Why do you ask? :-) You seem to NEED a redirection in the thread
so you imply some "fault" by MANUFACTURING some thing I've NOT
stated.

What allocations do you think hams should have, as a "hobby"?

What allocations do YOU think should be there? :-)

Someone (I think it was you) mentioned the 75 MHz RC hobbyists. They got a few
channels of VHF at low power, using only approved radios. Is that sort of
allocation adequate for hams?

Yup. You are vainly trying to MISDIRECT with a MANUFACTURED
"dispute." :-)

I used it as an example of POLITICAL manuevering by a purely HOBBY
activity. The AMA was successful. They got LOTS of channels, not just
"a few."

The AMA also has about 170 thousand members. Curiously, that's
about equal to members of the ARRL. :-)

One main reason they got those channels was that the classic 27.255 MHz RC
channel was overrun by illegal cb use.

Tsk! WRONG! ONE frequency at any large flying site (or pond or waterway
or car racing place) is NOT ENOUGH for more than a few people. :-)

Like all PCTA extras, you are getting off on "illegal CB" again. :-)

What's wrong with promoting amateur radio *now* as a combination of *all* its
contributions - recreation, public service, technical innovation, education,
emergency communications, and more?

Tsk. More wrong "wrongness!" :-)

I've never said what you've claimed about "promotion." But, you've gotten
so
thick about hollering "wrong" all the time, I don't suppose you can stop.

The ARRL propaganda is - consistently - the SAME. It also seems to be
ineffective OUTSIDE of amateur radio. ARRL is constantly doing SELF-
PROMOTION and the government can see that as easily as anyone not in
amateur radio. ARRL has apparently begun to Believe itself in all that
propaganda and self-glorification.

ARRL just hasn't gotten into mainstream media with any of that noble and
glorious "technical innovation, education, emergency communications," let
alone the "recreation" part. The "public service" part is notably lacking,
everywhere but at the ARRL and its output.


How do we do this and avoid the pitfalls such as "OK, you hams get the same
spectrum percentage as the park service has land area" or "you hams get the
same channelized, low power equipment as the RC folks"?

Use CW. "CW gets through when nothing else will..."










sound of raucous laughter omitted...

On 09 Nov 2004 12:26:50 GMT, PAMNO (N2EY) wrote:

In article , Leo
writes:

On 5 Nov 2004 17:31:32 -0800, (Brian Kelly) wrote:

snip

Here, from the FCC R&O, is what that money bought us:

"We similarly do not find that Amateur Radio
frequencies warrant the special protection afforded
frequencies reserved for international aeronautical
and maritime safety operations. While we
recognize that amateurs may on occasion assist
in providing emergency communications," it described
typical amateur operations as "routine communications
and hobby activities."

Oh oh. We've been caught. The FCC said the dreaded "hobby" word.

Then we should grab that ball and run with it!

Run with what? To paraphrase Orwell, the FCC sees all license holders
as equal, but some are more equal than others.....amateur radio
apparently being on the 'less than equal' side of the
equation......non-essential, per se.


Most of what goes over the internet is "routine communications and hobby
activities" isn't it?

....which has what relevance to the topic of amateur radio and BPL?


Jim, it looks like your "it's an avocation, not a hobby" arguement
didn't work - they seem to have seen right through it and figured out
what Amateur Radio is anyway! Nice try, though.

I say we go forward on all fronts - hobby, avocation, public service,
education, emergency comms, tinkering, advancing SOTA, etc. If they're gonna
call us hobbyists, then make it a badge of honor, same as was done with the
title "ham operator".

Nice flag waving, Jim, but is there a strategy behind that lofty
statement? Go forward how, with what, to whom, and to what goals and
objectives? Or was that just a "one for the Gipper" thing that you
thought sounded real cool?

The regulatory folks have made it pretty clear - do you have a plan to
have them overruled somehow? By whom? - the decision on BPL is
entirely within their sphere of control.


And this goes beyond the BPL battle. Take CC&R struggles - would they try to
ban other "hobbies"?

CC&Rs are outside the jurisdiction of the FCC, I believe.....


I like the term "antenna-hugger" myself.

Great! Just wait until the FCC helps the ARRL complete the sequel to
their most popular book (entitled "2 Meters And Down - Amateur Radio
In The 21st Century"). The little antennas for our only remaining
bands will be much easier to hug!


---

The phrase I object to is "*just* a hobby" - which denies the components of
public service, education, etc.

Which, unfortunately, is what the FCC R&O quoted above boils down to -
no special protection warranted, it's just a hobby activity. The
emergency communications aspect was dismissed pretty neatly in their
statement.....the condescending "while we recognize..." line.



73 de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...

The parks argument is a good one. The spectum is a natural resource
like

the forest and the shoreline, and like those it shouldn't be for
business
use only.

Thank you for saying that, Alun. Sincere thanks.

About six years ago (or so) in here I tried to point out that there
is
a
good analogue between the hobby of amateur radio and the national
park service. The U.S. Park Service has a million acres (give or
take)
which is reserved for ALL the citizenry to enjoy for their
recreation.

You did?

Google up the post for us, please, Len. Your experience in computer-modem
communications should make that an easy task for you.

Old-maid Jim is still into Googling bullemia syndrome, still trying to
argue old, old postings all over again. And again. And again. :-)


You brought it up, Len. Now you're tap-dancing all over the place because you
*know* you're wrong.

(N2EY) wrote in message . com...
Alun wrote in message . ..
(Brian Kelly) wrote in

I bought him a copy of the ARRL primer on
ham radio, a copy of Passport and I need to dredge up a half-decent
rcvr for cheap, toss some wire up and I'll see what happens.

Christmas is coming, do it soon!

Just don't get him some "worldband" POJ.

.. . . groan . . I am not a newbie to HF radios . . .

He might actually enjoy an older receiver (!) simply because it's
different and not like everything else in RatShack. He sounds like the
kind of kid who may be specifically attracted to the uniqueness of HF
radio.

Twelve-year-olds have two new hot buttons per day on average and I
learned a long time ago to be very selective about financing those hot
buttons. I'll *loan* him my TS-50 for awhile and see where he takes
it.

Hams still do *public service* comms (covers emergency comms and more)
and also "advance the state of the art" in some ways. But that view is
way too limited.

The HF spectrum is a
protected and regulated natural resource

*THAT* is the hard sell to the antiscience folks. It's clear from the
comments of BPL folks that they just don't understand HF radio.

The "BPL folks" understood quite well what HF radio is all about going
into the brawl. They set us up like ducks at a boardwalk shooting
gallery which meshed beautifully with the agenda of the current
"antiscience" leadership at the FCC and up.

Point 2: The coming of BPL is exactly analogous to the timber
companies clear-cutting anywhere they choose to do so. We're now in a
position to get clear-cut ourselves, that's WRONG and it's coming from
the same bunch of politicians who have the worst environmental record
and big-biz "connections" in recent times. The environmentalists have
beaten back the timber companies by leaning on the politicians and the
courts and now it's our turn.

Yup. And it's not just timber companies; all sorts of commercial
interests want to "develop" the "wilderness". Remember Storm King.

No. What matters is *now*, as in drilling in the wilderness preserves
in Alaska.

Brian, you're right!

The issue is not that we are relevant or up to date. We're not.

I disagree!

We *are* relevant, simply because we are "the public"! And we are as
"up to date" as we need to be.

Agreed here. Sort of.

There should be a place for folks to enjoy radio for its own sake. As
its own justification. That does *not* mean there should be no rules
or standards, however.

Yup.


CB and FRS are parts of the same thing,

Not really.

Those services are meant for specific comms purposes. That's why
they're channelized, used only approved equipment (in theory anyway)
and are restricted in other ways (you're not going to work the world
on FRS or CB).

I realize that we're all "bred" to diss the CBers but when it comes to
passing real emergency traffic to the authorities over the years they
have us beat by probably a couple orders of magnitude. As far as
"working the world" is concerned there was a local CBer here (recent
SK) who worked all 22 Swiss cantons which I have yet to pull off for
the Helvitia 22 award and the sucker had the cards to prove it. All of
it with a big quad and a perfectly legal 10W type-accepted CB ssb
xcvr. Yeah, I know, his DXing wasn't legal. Neither are Henry 3K amps
and pairs of 4-1000As with their plate meter needles pinned to the
right side.

I agree with Alun, all not-for-profit personal comms bands need to
fall under the same basic protective umbrella or we'll wind up in a
divide & conquer maneuver.

First off, amateur radio is more than "just a hobby" because of the
public service comms, technical innovation, and educational angles. We
must not lose those things - we're adding, not subtracting.

That's EXACTLY the kind of entrenched 'wayback thinking which needs to
put behind us because most of it's BS.

Second, although millions of acres are preserved as parks in the USA,
the total percentage of area in that system isn't very large, compared
to how big the USA is. If we try to sell ham radio on the park idea
alone, we might find ourselves with a tiny percentage of the spectrum
we now have.

There wouldn't be any need to do that sort of number-juggling, just
edit the opening paragraphs of Part 97 and leave details like the band
edges alone.

Recreational technology usually doesn't exactly compare to commercial
or military technology. Sailing ships are all but gone from the
commercial shipping and fishing venues,

Try commercial crabbing in the Chesapeake Bay with a power boat . .

and from the world's navies as
well. But they are all over the place in recreation.

.. . . .

Here's another concept to add to the pie - sports. Look at the London,
Boston and New York City marathons (just to name three) - they involve
the use of public facilities (roads) for a use that is basically
recreational for 99+% of the participants. Some folks would rather
that all those marathoners just run on treadmills rather than tying up
traffic for a day. Radiosport is a big part of amateur radio.

Now - how do we sell that package?

The usual. Get the ARRL to support it and petition the FCC for an
NPRM.

73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv

(Steve Robeson K4YZ) wrote in message ...
Subject: They just don't get it!
From: Dave Heil
Date: 11/8/2004 11:16 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

Don't fib Sweetums, you know I'm out here doing my homework.

I could care less, "Sweetums."

You are NOT interested in the subject at all, just want to FIGHT
in words. Too bad. You are already self-penalized by having
both typing hands tied behind your somewhere. Tsk.

Try living in the PRESENT, not the past and not in Google.

"Pay no attention to those archives. They'll only confuse the issue".

If you never wrote some of the things you write, you wouldn't have to
defend them. If you never claimed originality for something which you
were not the first to use, you'd not be tap dancing now, desperate to
change the subject. Geez, Leonard, fess up and have done with it.
It'll be good for your soul.

Not to mention the fact that that scumbag has dumped tons of "...back in
1953.." crap on this NG, and then has the temerity to TRY and lambaste Amateurs
over "living in the past".

And then has the EXTRA temerity to suggest anyone else is living "in the
past".

Leonard H. Anderson is a two faced putz. Period.

Now, now Steve, Christmas is coming, it's time to get into the spirit
and put these sorts of things behind us. Motion from the floor: "I
propose that we pass the hat to fund a gift certificate for Sweetums
for two hours of couch time at his shrink's office."

Do I hear a second?


73

Steve, K4YZ

w3rv

(Brian Kelly) wrote

Encouraging innovation isn't tough --- in my engineering group I ask
each engineer to spend 10% of their time (4 hours per week) as "PBI"
time ("Partially Baked Idea"). This is time to pursue personally
selected pet projects unrelated to their primary tasking, even unrelated
to our groups tasking. Once a quarter we hold a one day "off site in
blue jeans" meeting where individuals can grab the spotlight and "show
and tell" their PBI to the rest of the group. The effect on creativity
is marvelous, and also a great tool for identifying "up and comers"
whose creativity might be otherwise masked by the day-to-day drudge of
assigned tasking.

And they get paid for every minute they spend on their brainfarts.


Brian sees them as "brainfarts" and our company sees the program as a
particularly effective source of new product ideas. So much so that
in the past three fiscal years 18% of our new-product revenues had
their origins in the PBI-incubator.

Damned RIGHT they get paid for every minute, and it's money well
spent.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Len Over 21 wrote:

"Bringing up old postings again and again is just a mental form
of bullemia."

"Old-maid Jim is still into Googling bullemia syndrome..."

Leonard, with due respect to your claimed professionalism as a writer,
among other things, do you mean "bulimia"? :-) :-) :-)

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

If you never wrote some of the things you write, you wouldn't have to
defend them.

Tsk. You keep bringin up OLD postings of mine.

I do. Others do. It is done because things you currently write are in
direct contradiction.

Tsk, tsk. You should have done better AT THAT TIME to defend
your own positions.

But, Leonard, the contradictions have been written recently.

Bringing up old postings again and again is just a mental form
of bullemia. Or just plain bull.

I know of "bulimia". Is that what you mean? If so, you may consider
that others are now sticking their fingers down your throught in hopes
that you'll gag up a hunk of truth.

Keep on trying, though, eventually you'll make everyone sick and
tired of you trying to win one of those "discussions."

The discussion is won just as soon as your earlier words are compared to
your recent words. Both can't be correct. In this case, we have you
claiming credit for an idea someone else introduced. So you see, this
time doesn't really deal with an old post of yours, but an old post of
someone else's. :-)

If you never claimed originality for something which you
were not the first to use, you'd not be tap dancing now, desperate to
change the subject.

"I've never claimed originality?!?" :-)

....for something which you were not the first to use... :-) :-)

"Dave," just because someone writes YOUR postings for you
doesn't mean everyone else does the same...

Did you have an appropriate response, or not?

Geez, Leonard, fess up and have done with it.
It'll be good for your soul.

Yes, Holy Father, it would mean SO much to you gods of radio
to have an NCTA capitulate to your divine words.

If you mean, that you'd eat humble pie over the issue of claiming credit
for what someone else wrote--yeah, that'd be nice.

Tell ya what, Holy Father, I'll kiss your ring but you have to kiss my
a**. :-)

With which end do we start? :-) :-)

Dave K8MN

Brian Kelly wrote:

Alun wrote in message . ..

(N2EY) wrote in
.com:


Alun wrote in message
...

(Brian Kelly) wrote in
le.com:


"KØHB" wrote in message
s.earthlink.net...

"Brian Kelly" wrote


The environmentalists have
beaten back the timber companies by leaning on the politicians
and the courts and now it's our turn.

Good luck on that one now!

You bet . . #@!MF*#% sumbitches . . .

Would you believe I'm a REPUBLICAN for Gawd's sake?!

. . . to a point . . "they" crossed the #@!MF*#% point with BPL . .


See you in the contest this weekend.

I don't do SS. Couldn't do it anyway, 9 + 20 neighborhood QRN here
7-29 Mhz and I don't have the room for 80/160 antennas.

Go for it and GL Hans, I'll seeya 19-20 Feb. in that bash come hell
or high water even if I gotta do it from a #@!MF*#% tent somewhere
quiet.


73, de Hans, K0HB

w3rv

I beleive that you are a Republican, but I have my doubts as to
whether George Bush is one.

It's all about getting elected no matter what. The Republicans have
learned how to do it, the Democrats have apparently forgotten:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Nov3.html

73 de Jim, N2EY
73 de Jim, N2EY


Let me explain myself. I'm not a Republican by any stretch of the
imagination,


With all due respect Alun nor is any other Brit a Republican. But
that's OK, I'll take Tony any day vs. The Clod, you folk done better
than we did.


but I think that the GOP has been hijacked by ... well, I
can''t think of any nice names for them. They seem to call themselves
compassionate conservatives. This seems to mean extreme social consrvatism
combined with a fiscally liberal policy, except that all their compassion
is directed towards the Fortune 500!


I look at it as an opportunity to be suffered thru. After four years
of their reign this country will have had an overdose of their BS and
they'll permanently bury themselves never to be heard from again. At
which time us real Republicans will move back into the scene and get
back to sane jousting with the Democrats.

Well put, Brian. Give me a *good* conservative candidate to vote
for.... puleeze!

The Republicans ahve been every bit as hijacked by the pseudo-religious
right as tha Democrats have been by the lesbian/gay alliance for blah,
blah,blah.

Makes me a little twitchy when one of the party platforms is to grease
the skids for the bibilical Armageddon...... 8^0

- Mike KB3EIA -

N2EY wrote:

In article , Leo
writes:


On 5 Nov 2004 17:31:32 -0800, (Brian Kelly) wrote:


snip

Here, from the FCC R&O, is what that money bought us:

"We similarly do not find that Amateur Radio
frequencies warrant the special protection afforded
frequencies reserved for international aeronautical
and maritime safety operations. While we
recognize that amateurs may on occasion assist
in providing emergency communications," it described
typical amateur operations as "routine communications
and hobby activities."

Oh oh. We've been caught. The FCC said the dreaded "hobby" word.


Then we should grab that ball and run with it!

Most of what goes over the internet is "routine communications and hobby
activities" isn't it?

Is surfing porn a hobby?


Jim, it looks like your "it's an avocation, not a hobby" arguement
didn't work - they seem to have seen right through it and figured out
what Amateur Radio is anyway! Nice try, though.


I say we go forward on all fronts - hobby, avocation, public service,
education, emergency comms, tinkering, advancing SOTA, etc. If they're gonna
call us hobbyists, then make it a badge of honor, same as was done with the
title "ham operator".

Ain't nuthin wrong wit it bein a hobby!

And this goes beyond the BPL battle. Take CC&R struggles - would they try to
ban other "hobbies"?

I like the term "antenna-hugger" myself.

Just watch which part you hug when its operating....


---

The phrase I object to is "*just* a hobby" - which denies the components of
public service, education, etc.

Correct. Calling it Just a hobby is like calling Nascar racing "just a
bunch of people in cars. Self illuminated ignorance.

- Mike KB3EIA -