|
The Death of Amateur Radio
The Death of Amateur Radio
By Todd Daugherty N9OGL I've been asked on the newsgroup rec.radio.amateur.policy to back up my statements regarding the death of amateur radio and the FCC's suppression of free speech on the radio. Therefore, I've deiced to write this paper on the subject. Now, I know there are amateur radio operators who will not read this article or will write it off as the writes by some crack pot. But one must remember everyone has an opinion; this happens to be mine. Amateur radio is slowing dying; now many amateurs would disagree with that statement however, this is a harsh reality. Now as I stated above I have been asked to "prove it" so that what I'm attending to do. Amateur radio is dying because it is unable to keep up with commercial services. On February of 2000 I participated in a discussion entitled "What the heck is Packet radio go for anyway" which was started by someone named "Inquisitor" anyway I pointed out that Packet Radio didn't have the variety as the internet. If packet was to grow packet would have to basically compete with the internet. One amateur radio operator Charles Brabham N5PVL made this statement in responds to mine: N9OGL:" My point is Packet does not have the variety like the internet and when a person comes up with a new idea for packet or a new program idea for packet it is seemed to be frowned upon by other operators. So packet radio will remain in last place behind the Internet, and Wireless systems." N5PVL: "I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Packet Radio is not a commercial communications network, and so does not "compete" with commercial communications networks in any way. Packet is for Amateur Radio operators who enjoy digital communications *independent* of commercial communications networks and the Internet. Of course it's different... It's supposed to be, for a number of reasons. If it offered exactly the same thing as the commercial nets, there would be no reason for it to exist at all. Try thinking this stuff through, every once in a while." N9OGL "Variety does not have to be a new idea or program but a BBS with it's own stuff in it and not some Forwarded stuff from other places have BBS systems for just for sale stuff and another BBS for Digital communication idea or one with General Amateur radio stuff but leave all the for sale stuff in the for sale BBS." N5PVL "That's up to the individual BBS SYSOP. My BBS has offered a good variety of info above and beyond the daily bulletins for over a decade now... So what?" N9OGL "Give the BBS a variety and its own individualism. Stuff on BBS doesn' t have to be just "For Sale" and jokes On Amateur radio you can talk about anything not just radio. But again you have Amateurs who don't want change whether it packet or anything in the Amateur radio service. So Packet will be like ancient modes of communication it will die out because those people will not accept changing the system" N5PVL "Blah blah blah... Yah yah yah... Too lazy and stupid to do anything yourself, but you have plenty of energy at hand for the purpose of denigrating the efforts of others. Maybe you should just stick your head in the toilet...Flush twice! It's a long way to Washington D.C.! -- 73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl Now the reason I bring this up is simply that this misguided amateur radio operator WAS trying to prove a point which he could not; simply for two reasons. The first is that most of the BBS systems on packet were on the forwarding system and the vast majority of messages on the BBS systems were all the same. Regardless to what Mr. Brabham said this was a harsh reality. What Mr. Brabham didn't realize was at the time of that post I had been running TWO BBS systems on packet. Most packet operators didn't want no "individuals" running a BBS system and not use the forwarding system. Today, here in Illinois packet radio is nothing more then a vast memory. All the Nodes and BBS systems are gone. Gone for two reasons the first is the BBS operators were running their forwarding system on the user frequency. The second reason is as I stated in my post that there was no variety and all amateur radio operators went to the internet. Packet Radio was a prelude of what will happen to amateur radio. Like N5PVL stated "I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Packet Radio is not a commercial communications network, and so does not "compete" with commercial communications networks in any way." This seems to be the attitude of all amateur radio operators when it comes to competing with other services. For amateur radio to survive they are going to have to compete with the internet or there will be no amateur radio in near future. As I stated on the newsgroup rec.radio.amateur.policy look at it this way. Go to streets of your town as ask the average person on the street if they had a choice between the Internet and Amateur radio which one would they pick? The vast majority of people would pick the internet. The reason is the internet provides a vast variety of information unlike amateur radio. People can talk via email, chat rooms, voice communication and other systems over the internet. With Internet 2 coming out the Internet with grow ever more. Why should someone take the time to get a license to talk to people all over the world via radio when they can do it on the internet? For amateur radio to grow amateur radio operators are going to have to get out of this not competing attitude. One of the problems that helps propagate this no competing attitude is both the amateur and FCC's view on content control. Section 326 of the Communication Act of 1934 prohibits the FCC for controlling the content of ANY radio station. This also applies to the amateur radio service. However, this seems NOT to be the case. When I announced on the newsgroup about my Information bulletin I received a post from Riley Hollingsworth the FCC chief enforcer of the amateur radio service. Telling me to let him know when I go on the air so he can send me a "QSL CARD". The QSL card he was of course talking about was a warning letter. This of course is not the first time Mr. Hollingsworth who works for the FCC tried to suppress Free Speech. One of the most known FCC free speech suppression cases is the Liberty Net. Here's an article from Newsline: "FCC vs. The Liberty Net Riley Hollingsworth and the FCC are questioning if a controversial 75 meter SSB net really has any place on the ham bands. The group is called the Liberty Net. It operates nightly at 3.950 MHZ and is primarily an open discussion or right wing politics and conservative causes. But, in a May 7th letter to Victor Misek, W1WCR,Hollingsworth requests that the Hudson NewHampshire ham review the Basis and Purpose of Amateur Radio as outlined in Section 97.1 of the Commissions rules. He then tells Misek to explain to the Commission how the operation of the Liberty Net can be justified. But it's another Hollingsworth statement that draws the proverbial line in the sand between the FCC and the Liberty Net. Hollingsworth tells Misek - and we quote -- "We are unable to determine how transmissions of this group met the standards of, or contribute to the purpose of, the allocation of frequencies for the Amateur Radio Service." In other words, the FCC appears to be questioning whether the content of communications by those involved in the Liberty Net meet the minimum requisite requirements to be transmitted in the ham radio bands.And Hollingsworth goes even further. He suggests that the Liberty Net might want to consider moving to the Internet or wait to wait and see if the Commission creates a low power FM broadcast service. If it does, the net might then want to apply for a broadcasting license grant. (FCC) The part one should look at is the part in which Hollingsworth stated that the Liberty Net should look at the internet or apply for a low power FM license. Apparently Mr. Hollingsworth never heard of Section 326. Now Mr. Hollingsworth isn't the only FCC official that has done this; in 1990 the FCC sent letters out to 19 Net and Bulletin stations on 20 meters and of course the ARRL a.k.a. The Amateur Radio Nazi Party deiced to stick their Gestapo free speech suppression nose in it. Stating in ARRL Letter and World Radio "The League maintains that the disputes can resolved by enforcing existing FCC regulations: One-way Broadcast, if they go beyond the accepted norms for such transmissions on the Amateur bands their illegal." So who's to say is the "ACCEPTED NORM"?? The ARRL, why not the FCC could give the ARRL the power and therefore Free speech could be suppressed. The first Amendment bars the government from stomping on free speech, but it doesn't apply to the ARRL which is a national organization from doing it. Who's the one pushing to K1MAN off the air?? The ARRL and its members. I was asked on the newsgroup to prove how I'm being suppressed. Well, when you have a FCC official threaten you with a warning letter over your Information bulletin which hadn't even begun. Then the idea if suppression of Free Speech by a Federal agency is a primary example of my right to voice my opinion is being suppressed by the FCC. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
We definitely don't need another boy broadcaster. We have had to put
up with K1MAN for far too long. Think back to the beginnings of ham radio. Everyone wanted to be a broadcaster, so off they went to the broadcast band, and the ham bands were saved for 2-way ham radio communications. No one cares about your opinion. If you insist upon expressing it, engage someone in a normal QSO. Is it that you don't want someone refuting your stupid ideas? Sure, let's get 100,000 hams broadcasting to no one all the time on every frequency. blah blah blah. Do something useful and volunteer at your local kindergarten and express your opinions there. Better yet, do something more useful than that and help the janitor clean the restrooms. |
Todd Daugherty wrote:
The Death of Amateur Radio By Todd Daugherty N9OGL It is interesting that what you propose to do would hasten your "Death of Amateur Radio" in my opinion. If we get a few hundred more such as yourself that believe that they need to broadcast their opinions over the amateur bands, more and more Amateurs will find something else to do with their leisure time, as they have no room to transmit as the bands fill up with "bulletin free speech transmissions. All the while transforming the Amateur bands into some sort of mutant version of the AM broadcast band. You note that you look for a free space to transmit in. So what? K1MAN doesn't. He opens up on whoever is on the frequency and threatens those who don't move. How many more "free speech advocates" will decide that anyone on "their frequency" is an infringement on their free speech? I wonder if wattage limits are an infringement on a persons free speech? Limiting it limits the number of people who can be reached. Suggestion that Lib net members use an alternative method of getting their views out is not infringement of their free speech, it is a suggestion. And not a bad one at that. No one is forcing them off the air, just suggesting a better venue for their views. Death of Amateur Radio? Perhaps you have a bigger part than you realize........ - Mike KB3EIA - |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
... Todd Daugherty wrote: The Death of Amateur Radio By Todd Daugherty N9OGL It is interesting that what you propose to do would hasten your "Death of Amateur Radio" in my opinion. If we get a few hundred more such as yourself that believe that they need to broadcast their opinions over the amateur bands, more and more Amateurs will find something else to do with their leisure time, as they have no room to transmit as the bands fill up with "bulletin free speech transmissions. All the while transforming the Amateur bands into some sort of mutant version of the AM broadcast band. No where in my paper do I state that amateurs should broadcasting. There are some including the FCC who wishes to keep the service to where all you do is give a signal report, location, ect. As I stated in my paper a good example of this was packet radio. Packet is pretty much died around here because all of the content on them was "For Sale" stuff. Packet would of survive if BBS's were set up to cater to certain topics or discussion groups. You note that you look for a free space to transmit in. So what? K1MAN doesn't. He opens up on whoever is on the frequency and threatens those who don't move. How many more "free speech advocates" will decide that anyone on "their frequency" is an infringement on their free speech? Information Bulletins are legal no matter what you or anyone believes. Interference which K1MAN is doing is not legal. I wonder if wattage limits are an infringement on a persons free speech? Limiting it limits the number of people who can be reached. Suggestion that Lib net members use an alternative method of getting their views out is not infringement of their free speech, it is a suggestion. And not a bad one at that. No one is forcing them off the air, just suggesting a better venue for their views. The FCC shouldn't even suggest it. Again the FCC is barred from controlling the content of any station. Again if they can have alternative perhaps ALL amateurs should move off the radio spectrum and uses the alternative....the Internet. Death of Amateur Radio? Perhaps you have a bigger part than you realize........ - Mike KB3EIA - Todd N9OGL ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Todd Daugherty wrote:
No where in my paper do I state that amateurs should broadcasting. There are some including the FCC who wishes to keep the service to where all you do is give a signal report, location, ect. You have some facts to back up that dumb statement? Have some official quotes from the FCC? |
Suggestion that Lib net members use an alternative method of getting their views out is not infringement of their free speech, it is a suggestion. And not a bad one at that. No one is forcing them off the air, just suggesting a better venue for their views. Actually, packet BBS messages would be a better method. It's store and forward, and won't clog HF. Anyone (on packet and any gateways to the 'net) can read your messages if they so choose. Just no pecuniary interest and no dirty words. |
Todd Daugherty wrote:
Try thinking this stuff through, every once in a while." I have a suggestion for you, just try thinking once in a while. |
It seems that SOME amateur radio operators misunderstood my original post. Somehow this crap about information bulletins and broadcast came up. This paper had NOTHING to do with Information Bulletins, K1MAN or Broadcasting. The main theme of that paper is that if Amateur Radio doesn't change the service will die. Amateur radio operators, The ARRL, and The FCC think that certain things shouldn't air. This can be proven by the FCC action against the Liberty Net, The FCC actions against 19 NETS and BBS back in 1990 as well as cases of the FCC going after people over content back in the 80's. As well as the death of packet radio. The death of Packet radio was just a prelude of things to come. Amateur's who can't see the facts are blind by their own stupidity. Amateur radio is going to die, regardless to what anyone think. The reason amateur radio is going to die is because Amateur radio has nothing to offer. The FCC can change the system to where all a person has to do is apply for a license and pay a fee but THAT will not save ham radio unless amateur radio has something to offer. The point of this paper is that amateur operators are going to have to get their heads out of their asses and realize they are going to have to compete against the other service like the internet. If amateur radio is to survive they are going to have to compete. To do that amateur radio is going to have to get rid of some of this idea's regarding different things. As I stated before Packet radio died because of that. People used packet for a long time but like all thing the novelty of it wore off. The reason was packet radio didn't have anything more to offer so people got rid of their TNC's and went to do something else. The same is happening to amateur radio as a whole. The vast majority of stuff amateurs can do is now capable through other services like the internet. Amateur radio is going to have to come up new stuff to offer people to get them into the service. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
I do might do that too...Do you know if there are any BBS programs for the
MAC?? Todd "robert casey" wrote in message k.net... Suggestion that Lib net members use an alternative method of getting their views out is not infringement of their free speech, it is a suggestion. And not a bad one at that. No one is forcing them off the air, just suggesting a better venue for their views. Actually, packet BBS messages would be a better method. It's store and forward, and won't clog HF. Anyone (on packet and any gateways to the 'net) can read your messages if they so choose. Just no pecuniary interest and no dirty words. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Todd Daugherty wrote:
The Death of Amateur Radio By Todd Daugherty N9OGL I've been asked on the newsgroup rec.radio.amateur.policy to back up my statements regarding the death of amateur radio and the FCC's suppression of free speech on the radio. Therefore, I've deiced to write this paper on the subject. Now, I know there are amateur radio operators who will not read this article or will write it off as the writes by some crack pot. Well, Todd, I've read the entire thing and I've not written it off "as the writes by some crack pot". I've written it off "as the writes by some" special crackpot. But one must remember everyone has an opinion; this happens to be mine. ....and you aren't one to allow reality to stand in your way. Amateur radio is slowing dying; now many amateurs would disagree with that statement however, this is a harsh reality. Many radio amateurs would disagree with your statement because it has no basis in fact. Now THAT is harsh reality. Now as I stated above I have been asked to "prove it" so that what I'm attending to do. Amateur radio is dying because it is unable to keep up with commercial services. Amateur radio isn't a commercial service and isn't in competition with commercial services. It has no reason to "keep up". On February of 2000 I participated in a discussion entitled "What the heck is Packet radio go for anyway" which was started by someone named "Inquisitor" anyway I pointed out that Packet Radio didn't have the variety as the internet. If packet was to grow packet would have to basically compete with the internet. Packet radio is not the internet. It has no reason to become like the internet. For amateur radio to survive they are going to have to compete with the internet or there will be no amateur radio in near future. Sure, Todd--and amateur astronomy is going to have to compete with roller blading or there will be no amateur astronomy in the future. As I stated on the newsgroup rec.radio.amateur.policy look at it this way. Go to streets of your town as ask the average person on the street if they had a choice between the Internet and Amateur radio which one would they pick? The vast majority of people would pick the internet. The reason is the internet provides a vast variety of information unlike amateur radio. People can talk via email, chat rooms, voice communication and other systems over the internet. With Internet 2 coming out the Internet with grow ever more. Ask the average man on the street to choose between the stamp collecting and the internet and he'll likely choose the internet. He knows more about the internet and stamp collecting has no provision for downloading pirated music or pornography. Amateur radio has variety of information unlike the internet. People can talk via their voices, via morse, via keyboard modes, via television. The two are not the same thing. That's why I'm introducing Amateur Radio II, aka Amateur Radio Lite. It'll be like amateur radio but without all of the icky stuff like "RF", "IF", fomulae and morse code. It'll draw those folks who are "otherwise qualified" and mildly interested. Why should someone take the time to get a license to talk to people all over the world via radio when they can do it on the internet? Why would someone take up tightrope walking when there are perfectly good sidewalks? Why would anyone walk when they can drive a car? One of the problems that helps propagate this no competing attitude is both the amateur and FCC's view on content control. Ahhhh. This is where Todd gets into his favorite rant. Section 326 of the Communication Act of 1934 prohibits the FCC for controlling the content of ANY radio station. This also applies to the amateur radio service. However, this seems NOT to be the case. You've been given free advice from a professional in the field. You've chosen to ignore the advice because it conflicts with your rather uneducated view of the regulations. When I announced on the newsgroup about my Information bulletin I received a post from Riley Hollingsworth the FCC chief enforcer of the amateur radio service. Telling me to let him know when I go on the air so he can send me a "QSL CARD". The QSL card he was of course talking about was a warning letter. This of course is not the first time Mr. Hollingsworth who works for the FCC tried to suppress Free Speech. A smarter fellow would have taken the hint which Mr. Hollingsworth dropped. In 1990 the FCC sent letters out to 19 Net and Bulletin stations on 20 meters and of course the ARRL a.k.a. The Amateur Radio Nazi Party deiced to stick their Gestapo free speech suppression nose in it. I doubt that the ARRL "deiced" anything. Your choice of nicknames further marks you as a very special crackpot. I was asked on the newsgroup to prove how I'm being suppressed. Well, when you have a FCC official threaten you with a warning letter over your Information bulletin which hadn't even begun. Then the idea if suppression of Free Speech by a Federal agency is a primary example of my right to voice my opinion is being suppressed by the FCC. You were repeatedly asked which things you were being prevented from saying over the air via amateur radio. You never bothered to reply. You've provided the FCC enough ammunition through your public statements here, to nail your hide to the barn door if you decide that you want to play boy broadcaster. Dave K8MN |
Todd Daugherty wrote:
Amateur radio operators, The ARRL, and The FCC think that certain things shouldn't air. More correctly, most amateur radio operators, the ARRL, the FCC and most of the public think that certain things shouldn't air. Your choice: To air or to err. Amateur's who can't see the facts are blind by their own stupidity. People who can't spell or construct a sentence should be wary of calling others "stupid". Amateur radio is going to die, regardless to what anyone think. That's your rant and you're sticking with it, despite what the facts say. The reason amateur radio is going to die is because Amateur radio has nothing to offer. There are thousands and thousands who disagree with you, Todd. Maybe what you really mean is that amateur radio has nothing to offer you. Feel free to move on. Find another interest. The FCC can change the system to where all a person has to do is apply for a license and pay a fee but THAT will not save ham radio unless amateur radio has something to offer. The point of this paper is that amateur operators are going to have to get their heads out of their asses and realize they are going to have to compete against the other service like the internet. I find it difficult to carry on a discussion with one who feels that because his cranium is inserted into his rectum, everyone else is in the same fix. Every few months, some boy genius like you shows up in one of the amateur radio newsgroups like a shooting star, only to burn up on enty into Earth's atmosphere. Dave K8MN |
For more than 50 years, some hams have been yelling "Ham Radio is
Dying!" "Ham Radio is Dying!" They came up with all kinds of bright ideas. Incentive licensing...school clubs...extra-easy study guides...dumbing down the licensing tests...no code licenses...on and on. Why do some hams believe ham radio is dying? They are bored with the hobby themselves! They put together some equipment, strung up antennas, exchanged signal and weather reports, chased certificates, collected QSL cards and after a few years or more of this they ask: "Is this all there is?" Bah Humbug...yup that's about all it is. So what? What more do you want it to be? |
Instead of predicting "The Death Of Amateur Radio" and hashing over useless
statistics -- How about we promote Amateur Radio and mentor new folks? How many doom sayers here help the hobby with training, elmering, and emergency services ? In Southern Calif -- we have three classes running at elementary and high schools, lots of Emergency training as well. I can tell you that Amateur Radio was highly valuable and praised during the Southern Calif fires a few years back -- despite the generalization below of "boring stuff". Its only boring if you are a bore. -- Caveat Lector (Reader Beware) Help The New Hams Someone Helped You Or did You Forget That ? "Bathrooman" wrote in message ups.com... For more than 50 years, some hams have been yelling "Ham Radio is Dying!" "Ham Radio is Dying!" They came up with all kinds of bright ideas. Incentive licensing...school clubs...extra-easy study guides...dumbing down the licensing tests...no code licenses...on and on. Why do some hams believe ham radio is dying? They are bored with the hobby themselves! They put together some equipment, strung up antennas, exchanged signal and weather reports, chased certificates, collected QSL cards and after a few years or more of this they ask: "Is this all there is?" Bah Humbug...yup that's about all it is. So what? What more do you want it to be? |
Well lets see if these Ham Radio QSO's that I have had -- would be of
interest to you: 1. A QSO with a Navy dirigible crew member -- flew in the 1930's airships. 2. A QSO with an archeologist in the Central America -- just discovered new ruins. 3. A WWII Luftwaffe pilot - flew a ME-109 4. QSO with a Swedish Ham -- we talked about Soloman Andre's balloon flight to the North pole -- in 1897 5. A QSO with a British soldier in the Falklands -- we talked about Shackletons ordeal in 1908 and the Falkland war 6. An anthropologist in New Guinea -- we talked about a tribe there that was virtually in the stone age 7. A missionary in the Amazon -- we talked about the tribe he was helping 8. A chap in Australia that was in the outback studying the aborigines 9. A Russian officer in an arctic weather station --- brrr -- we talked about the incredible working conditions there Lots more "boring stuff" If the above is of no interest to you I suggest you have very limited interests. -- Caveat Lector (Reader Beware) Help The New Hams Someone Helped You Or did You Forget That ? "Bathrooman" wrote in message ups.com... For more than 50 years, some hams have been yelling "Ham Radio is Dying!" "Ham Radio is Dying!" They came up with all kinds of bright ideas. Incentive licensing...school clubs...extra-easy study guides...dumbing down the licensing tests...no code licenses...on and on. Why do some hams believe ham radio is dying? They are bored with the hobby themselves! They put together some equipment, strung up antennas, exchanged signal and weather reports, chased certificates, collected QSL cards and after a few years or more of this they ask: "Is this all there is?" Bah Humbug...yup that's about all it is. So what? What more do you want it to be? |
Todd Daugherty wrote: The Death of Amateur Radio By Todd Daugherty N9OGL I've been asked on the newsgroup rec.radio.amateur.policy to back up my statements regarding the death of amateur radio and the FCC's suppression of free speech on the radio. Therefore, I've deiced to write this paper on the subject. Now, I know there are amateur radio operators who will not read this article or will write it off as the writes by some crack pot. But one must remember everyone has an opinion; this happens to be mine. OK, let's see what you've got, Todd. Amateur radio is slowing dying; now many amateurs would disagree with that statement however, this is a harsh reality. OK - how is it "dying"? Now as I stated above I have been asked to "prove it" so that what I'm attending to do. Amateur radio is dying because it is unable to keep up with commercial services. How do you define "keep up with"? On February of 2000 I participated in a discussion entitled "What the heck is Packet radio go for anyway" which was started by someone named "Inquisitor" anyway I pointed out that Packet Radio didn't have the variety as the internet. If packet was to grow packet would have to basically compete with the internet. Why? The internet is pretty much ubiquitous in the USA and other developed countries, if you live where there is reliable telephone service. Broadband access is expanding rapidly and so is mobile access. There's no way hams can match the infrastructure of any internet provider. One amateur radio operator Charles Brabham N5PVL made this statement in responds to mine: N9OGL:" My point is Packet does not have the variety like the internet and when a person comes up with a new idea for packet or a new program idea for packet it is seemed to be frowned upon by other operators. So packet radio will remain in last place behind the Internet, and Wireless systems." N5PVL: "I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Packet Radio is not a commercial communications network, and so does not "compete" with commercial communications networks in any way. He's right! Packet is for Amateur Radio operators who enjoy digital communications *independent* of commercial communications networks and the Internet. Exactly! Of course it's different... It's supposed to be, for a number of reasons. If it offered exactly the same thing as the commercial nets, there would be no reason for it to exist at all. Try thinking this stuff through, every once in a while." Sounds like good advice. Now the reason I bring this up is simply that this misguided amateur radio operator WAS trying to prove a point which he could not; simply for two reasons. Looks to me like he proved his point. If you want packet radio to be something other than it is, lead the way by example. The first is that most of the BBS systems on packet were on the forwarding system and the vast majority of messages on the BBS systems were all the same. Regardless to what Mr. Brabham said this was a harsh reality. What Mr. Brabham didn't realize was at the time of that post I had been running TWO BBS systems on packet. Most packet operators didn't want no "individuals" running a BBS system and not use the forwarding system. Today, here in Illinois packet radio is nothing more then a vast memory. All the Nodes and BBS systems are gone. Gone for two reasons the first is the BBS operators were running their forwarding system on the user frequency. The second reason is as I stated in my post that there was no variety and all amateur radio operators went to the internet. Which proves the point about competition. Packet Radio was a prelude of what will happen to amateur radio. Like N5PVL stated "I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Packet Radio is not a commercial communications network, and so does not "compete" with commercial communications networks in any way." This seems to be the attitude of all amateur radio operators when it comes to competing with other services. Because it's true. Amateur radio, or *any* radio service, can only survive by offering what other services cannot. I remember a time, perhaps 20 years ago, when a good number of new hams got their licenses for "honeydo" purposes. Today the same communications needs are handled by cell phone. Some of those hams are gone, others discovered that ham radio is more than the reason they were originally licensed. For amateur radio to survive they are going to have to compete with the internet or there will be no amateur radio in near future. Why? I'm both on the air and online. Each medium offers things the other does not. Go to streets of your town as ask the average person on the street if they had a choice between the Internet and Amateur radio which one would they pick? The vast majority of people would pick the internet. Of course. Think about *why*. Also - why must it be one or the other? Why not both? The reason is the internet provides a vast variety of information unlike amateur radio. People can talk via email, chat rooms, voice communication and other systems over the internet. With Internet 2 coming out the Internet with grow ever more. That's one reason. Here are some mo 1) Most people already know about the internet and what it can do. Many people do not know amateur radio exists, or have only a vague idea of what it is. 2) Most people access the internet via a personal computer or a wireless-enabled PDA-type device like a Blackberry. Those devices have uses far beyond those of internet access. 3) No license. No antenna. Worldwide access 24/7. Why should someone take the time to get a license to talk to people all over the world via radio when they can do it on the internet? Because it's different. And only because it's different. For amateur radio to grow amateur radio operators are going to have to get out of this not competing attitude. Why? One of the problems that helps propagate this no competing attitude is both the amateur and FCC's view on content control. Section 326 of the Communication Act of 1934 prohibits the FCC for controlling the content of ANY radio station. This also applies to the amateur radio service. Where, exactly, does it prohibit the FCC from controlling content? If so, why does Howard Stern have such problems? Why was there such a flap about Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction"? The various courts have repeatedly ruled that content control *is* part of FCC's authority. The arguments today are over where the line is, not whether FCC can draw a line. However, this seems NOT to be the case. When I announced on the newsgroup about my Information bulletin I received a post from Riley Hollingsworth the FCC chief enforcer of the amateur radio service. Telling me to let him know when I go on the air so he can send me a "QSL CARD". The QSL card he was of course talking about was a warning letter. That was nice of him. He could have just let you break the rules and then started an enforcement proceeding. This of course is not the first time Mr. Hollingsworth who works for the FCC tried to suppress Free Speech. Sorry, unlimited free speech protection does not extend to the radio spectrum. One of the most known FCC free speech suppression cases is the Liberty Net. Here's an article from Newsline: "FCC vs. The Liberty Net Riley Hollingsworth and the FCC are questioning if a controversial 75 meter SSB net really has any place on the ham bands. The group is called the Liberty Net. It operates nightly at 3.950 MHZ and is primarily an open discussion or right wing politics and conservative causes. But, in a May 7th letter to Victor Misek, W1WCR,Hollingsworth requests that the Hudson NewHampshire ham review the Basis and Purpose of Amateur Radio as outlined in Section 97.1 of the Commissions rules. He then tells Misek to explain to the Commission how the operation of the Liberty Net can be justified. But it's another Hollingsworth statement that draws the proverbial line in the sand between the FCC and the Liberty Net. Hollingsworth tells Misek - and we quote -- "We are unable to determine how transmissions of this group met the standards of, or contribute to the purpose of, the allocation of frequencies for the Amateur Radio Service." In other words, the FCC appears to be questioning whether the content of communications by those involved in the Liberty Net meet the minimum requisite requirements to be transmitted in the ham radio bands.And Hollingsworth goes even further. He suggests that the Liberty Net might want to consider moving to the Internet or wait to wait and see if the Commission creates a low power FM broadcast service. If it does, the net might then want to apply for a broadcasting license grant. (FCC) How is he wrong? I can't do routine business communications on the ham bands, either. The part one should look at is the part in which Hollingsworth stated that the Liberty Net should look at the internet or apply for a low power FM license. Apparently Mr. Hollingsworth never heard of Section 326. I think he knows more about it than you do, Todd. Now Mr. Hollingsworth isn't the only FCC official that has done this; in 1990 the FCC sent letters out to 19 Net and Bulletin stations on 20 meters and of course the ARRL a.k.a. The Amateur Radio Nazi Party deiced to stick their Gestapo free speech suppression nose in it. Ding! Godwin's Law violated. You lose, Todd. Stating in ARRL Letter and World Radio "The League maintains that the disputes can resolved by enforcing existing FCC regulations: One-way Broadcast, if they go beyond the accepted norms for such transmissions on the Amateur bands their illegal." So who's to say is the "ACCEPTED NORM"?? FCC, of course. And the accepted norm is pretty well-defined for one-way transmissions: 1) Non-commercial in nature (ever notice how ARRL doesn't use W1AW to solicit memberships or publication sales?) 2) Of *specific* interest to the *amateur radio* community 3) On a published schedule of transmissions (so everybody has a chance to know where and when) Would your transmissions meet all of those criteria? The ARRL, why not the FCC could give the ARRL the power and therefore Free speech could be suppressed. What is it that you want to say? The first Amendment bars the government from stomping on free speech, but it doesn't apply to the ARRL which is a national organization from doing it. Who's the one pushing to K1MAN off the air?? The ARRL and its members. Nope. It's FCC. I was asked on the newsgroup to prove how I'm being suppressed. Well, when you have a FCC official threaten you with a warning letter over your Information bulletin which hadn't even begun. Then the idea if suppression of Free Speech by a Federal agency is a primary example of my right to voice my opinion is being suppressed by the FCC. What is it that you want to say in your bulletin, Todd? How does it meet the criteria listed above? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Todd Daugherty wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Todd Daugherty wrote: The Death of Amateur Radio By Todd Daugherty N9OGL It is interesting that what you propose to do would hasten your "Death of Amateur Radio" in my opinion. If we get a few hundred more such as yourself that believe that they need to broadcast their opinions over the amateur bands, more and more Amateurs will find something else to do with their leisure time, as they have no room to transmit as the bands fill up with "bulletin free speech transmissions. All the while transforming the Amateur bands into some sort of mutant version of the AM broadcast band. No where in my paper do I state that amateurs should broadcasting. All they have to do is define their activities as bulletins. There are some including the FCC who wishes to keep the service to where all you do is give a signal report, location, ect. I haven't heard any of that. As I stated in my paper a good example of this was packet radio. Packet is pretty much died around here because all of the content on them was "For Sale" stuff. Packet would of survive if BBS's were set up to cater to certain topics or discussion groups. Packet was/is so incredibly slow compared to other digital transmissions. When I became a Ham, I looked at it and decided that at it's transmission speed, there wasn't a lot of use for it. You note that you look for a free space to transmit in. So what? K1MAN doesn't. He opens up on whoever is on the frequency and threatens those who don't move. How many more "free speech advocates" will decide that anyone on "their frequency" is an infringement on their free speech? Information Bulletins are legal no matter what you or anyone believes. Interference which K1MAN is doing is not legal. So I guess we just define everything as an information bulletin! 8^) I wonder if wattage limits are an infringement on a persons free speech? Limiting it limits the number of people who can be reached. Suggestion that Lib net members use an alternative method of getting their views out is not infringement of their free speech, it is a suggestion. And not a bad one at that. No one is forcing them off the air, just suggesting a better venue for their views. The FCC shouldn't even suggest it. Hollingsworth has often commented on situations that are detrimental to Ham radio. Certainly the Lib Net is one of those. A parent listening in on that bunch is not likely to want their children having anything to do with the hobby. Again the FCC is barred from controlling the content of any station. Again if they can have alternative perhaps ALL amateurs should move off the radio spectrum and uses the alternative....the Internet. Why the one extreme or the other outlook? Suggesting that people make the Ham bands a pleasant place to operate doesn't make for elimination of free speech. Death of Amateur Radio? Perhaps you have a bigger part than you realize........ - Mike KB3EIA - Todd N9OGL ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Todd Daugherty wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Todd Daugherty wrote: The Death of Amateur Radio By Todd Daugherty N9OGL It is interesting that what you propose to do would hasten your "Death of Amateur Radio" in my opinion. If we get a few hundred more such as yourself that believe that they need to broadcast their opinions over the amateur bands, more and more Amateurs will find something else to do with their leisure time, as they have no room to transmit as the bands fill up with "bulletin free speech transmissions. All the while transforming the Amateur bands into some sort of mutant version of the AM broadcast band. No where in my paper do I state that amateurs should broadcasting. "amateurs should broadcasting"? There are some including the FCC who wishes to keep the service to where all you do is give a signal report, location, ect. That's simply not true! I've had many long and enjoyable QSOs on a variety of subjects, with never a problem on content from FCC. The only limits on content were "no pecuniary interest" and keeping it "G-rated". As I stated in my paper a good example of this was packet radio. Packet is pretty much died around here because all of the content on them was "For Sale" stuff. Packet would of survive if BBS's were set up to cater to certain topics or discussion groups. Such as? You note that you look for a free space to transmit in. So what? K1MAN doesn't. He opens up on whoever is on the frequency and threatens those who don't move. How many more "free speech advocates" will decide that anyone on "their frequency" is an infringement on their free speech? Information Bulletins are legal no matter what you or anyone believes. If the bulletins meet the specific criteria I outlined in another post, they're legal. Interference which K1MAN is doing is not legal. Agreed! I wonder if wattage limits are an infringement on a persons free speech? Limiting it limits the number of people who can be reached. Suggestion that Lib net members use an alternative method of getting their views out is not infringement of their free speech, it is a suggestion. And not a bad one at that. No one is forcing them off the air, just suggesting a better venue for their views. The FCC shouldn't even suggest it. Yes, they should, if they see the content and behavior as detrimental to the ARS. Which they do. Again the FCC is barred from controlling the content of any station. That's simply not true. Again if they can have alternative perhaps ALL amateurs should move off the radio spectrum and uses the alternative....the Internet. For certain subjects, that's the right medium. Death of Amateur Radio? Perhaps you have a bigger part than you realize........ Interesting! In fact, we're starting to see what may be the "death of the internet" - or at least the death of its potential. Viruses, popups, identity theft and other shenanigans are causing many people I know to become disenchanted with it. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
wrote in message oups.com... Todd Daugherty wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Todd Daugherty wrote: The Death of Amateur Radio By Todd Daugherty N9OGL It is interesting that what you propose to do would hasten your "Death of Amateur Radio" in my opinion. If we get a few hundred more such as yourself that believe that they need to broadcast their opinions over the amateur bands, more and more Amateurs will find something else to do with their leisure time, as they have no room to transmit as the bands fill up with "bulletin free speech transmissions. All the while transforming the Amateur bands into some sort of mutant version of the AM broadcast band. No where in my paper do I state that amateurs should broadcasting. "amateurs should broadcasting"? There are some including the FCC who wishes to keep the service to where all you do is give a signal report, location, ect. That's simply not true! I've had many long and enjoyable QSOs on a variety of subjects, with never a problem on content from FCC. The only limits on content were "no pecuniary interest" and keeping it "G-rated". As I stated in my paper a good example of this was packet radio. Packet is pretty much died around here because all of the content on them was "For Sale" stuff. Packet would of survive if BBS's were set up to cater to certain topics or discussion groups. Such as? A BBS with discussion on antenna designing, Another BBS with discussion on on experimenting. Another BBS with amaeur policy. These are just to name a few there was a issue CQ VHF that went into greater detail about the set up. The point is to have all the for sale stuff on one BBS and a diverse of other BBS on other subjects. I tried years ago to set something up like that however a few local amateurs threated to go to the FCC and claim that the system is interferning with their system. You note that you look for a free space to transmit in. So what? K1MAN doesn't. He opens up on whoever is on the frequency and threatens those who don't move. How many more "free speech advocates" will decide that anyone on "their frequency" is an infringement on their free speech? Information Bulletins are legal no matter what you or anyone believes. If the bulletins meet the specific criteria I outlined in another post, they're legal. The problem is however, that there are amateur radio operators who feel that information bulletins which deal with amateur radio issues shouldn't be opinionated and it is those same amateurs operators when the bulletin is transmitting then begin jamming the Information bulletin because they feel the transmission is illegal. Interference which K1MAN is doing is not legal. Agreed! I wonder if wattage limits are an infringement on a persons free speech? Limiting it limits the number of people who can be reached. Suggestion that Lib net members use an alternative method of getting their views out is not infringement of their free speech, it is a suggestion. And not a bad one at that. No one is forcing them off the air, just suggesting a better venue for their views. The FCC shouldn't even suggest it. Yes, they should, if they see the content and behavior as detrimental to the ARS. Which they do. Again the FCC is barred from controlling the content of any station. That's simply not true. yes and no Under Section 326 of the Communication Act the FCC is barred to control the content of any station. The only content the FCC is allowed to control is obscene and indecent material and that's it. Again if they can have alternative perhaps ALL amateurs should move off the radio spectrum and uses the alternative....the Internet. For certain subjects, that's the right medium. Death of Amateur Radio? Perhaps you have a bigger part than you realize........ Interesting! In fact, we're starting to see what may be the "death of the internet" - or at least the death of its potential. Viruses, popups, identity theft and other shenanigans are causing many people I know to become disenchanted with it. I really dout the internet will die. As a matter of fact Internet 2 is now out (well right now only some Universities (206 to be exact) and government agencies have it...it will probably be commercialized in about two to three years.). Internet 2 will have a lot more applications and downloading will be faster. (people will be able to download a full length movie within minutes instead of days) so I really dout the Internet will die anytime soon. Todd N9OGL 73 de Jim, N2EY ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:23:29 -0500, Michael Coslo
wrote: As I stated in my paper a good example of this was packet radio. Packet is pretty much died around here because all of the content on them was "For Sale" stuff. Packet would of survive if BBS's were set up to cater to certain topics or discussion groups. Packet was/is so incredibly slow compared to other digital transmissions. When I became a Ham, I looked at it and decided that at it's transmission speed, there wasn't a lot of use for it. What's better than packet then? Tony |
Dave Heil wrote: Todd Daugherty wrote: The reason amateur radio is going to die is because Amateur radio has nothing to offer. There are thousands and thousands who disagree with you, Todd. Maybe what you really mean is that amateur radio has nothing to offer you. Feel free to move on. Find another interest. Heil actually has a point, smug as it is. I think what we are seeing is the start of this decade's chicken little dance. If only we could introduce Todd to WA8ULX. |
Tony VE6MVP wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:23:29 -0500, Michael Coslo wrote: As I stated in my paper a good example of this was packet radio. Packet is pretty much died around here because all of the content on them was "For Sale" stuff. Packet would of survive if BBS's were set up to cater to certain topics or discussion groups. Packet was/is so incredibly slow compared to other digital transmissions. When I became a Ham, I looked at it and decided that at it's transmission speed, there wasn't a lot of use for it. What's better than packet then? Most everything else about Ham radio! ;^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
"bb" wrote in message ups.com... Dave Heil wrote: Todd Daugherty wrote: The reason amateur radio is going to die is because Amateur radio has nothing to offer. There are thousands and thousands who disagree with you, Todd. Maybe what you really mean is that amateur radio has nothing to offer you. Feel free to move on. Find another interest. Heil actually has a point, smug as it is. I think what we are seeing is the start of this decade's chicken little dance. If only we could introduce Todd to WA8ULX. Oh, Lord. That would be a sight and a half! Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 16:17:56 -0600, Todd Daugherty wrote:
. I tried years ago to set something up like that however a few local amateurs threated to go to the FCC and claim that the system is interferning with their system. I fail to see what the content of your erstwhile BBS had to do with interference, which is a spectrum-sharing problem. As all experienced lawyers know all too well, folks threaten to go to "the authorities" or to "file suit" with no basis in their claim whatsoever. Ah, the American legal system!! -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane |
Packet was/is so incredibly slow compared to other digital transmissions. When I became a Ham, I looked at it and decided that at it's transmission speed, there wasn't a lot of use for it. When packet first came out, it was fun to do. That's when dial up modems did 1200 baud. But that was 15 years ago. If the packet BBSes now did 56K or faster (not by modulation of the audio feeding an FM rig, but skillful modulation of the carrier itself (an RF modem)) it might still be interesting. Again the FCC is barred from controlling the content of any station. They have the "no pecuniary interest" rule, which is a regulation on content. Not that I think that that rule is bad; it protects the ham bands from being taken over by taxi cab and pizza delivery traffic and such. But somehow it doesn't have 1st amendment issues. |
......Has been greatly exaggerated.
Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php |
"Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... Hollingsworth has often commented on situations that are detrimental to Ham radio. Certainly the Lib Net is one of those. A parent listening in on that bunch is not likely to want their children having anything to do with the hobby. The Lib Net are a bunch of aging lightweight crackerheads compared to something called The Eastern Regional Patriot Net. You can catch these ultra-goofballs right now, every evening at 7:00 PM Central Time (8 PM Eastern) on 3.860 LSB. This bunch is your genuine core-group of ultra-paranoid misfits what seems to believes in chemtrails, colloidal-silver, the Protocols of Zion, Planet X and Aryan purity among other such longtime short-wave radio crapola, what everyone else knows is both pure bull**** and the rantings of screwballs. The ERPN itself was started by noneother than famous UPR Radio goofball Steve Anderson (..currently incarcerated for firing a fully automatic AK-47 at a Kentucky State Police officer during a MVA stop) who once broadcast from his home in Northern Kentucky. Steve's eventual arrest and conviction has not stopped these fruits and nuts which still meet nightly on 3.860 for passing of Militia-related "traffic" on a nightly basis, some check-in's of which have included known Militia members and several others using both bootleg or invalid made-up ham callsigns. Of late however check-in's to the ERPN have been sparse or made up of valid ham radio callsign holders, as the word was out that both RH and a certain "Homeland Security" type Agency of the US Govt. (hint) has taken recent 'interest' in some of the traffic being passed on this so-called net, or so it was alleged at a midwestern ham club recently........... Then again, that's is the consistent & nice thing about your average right-wing Domestic Kookinschlong...every one of em LOVES to blabber their openly Seditious and Insurrectionist incitement either thru a telephone to a kook call-in short-wave radio show, (..like Alex Jones' daily hit parade of paranoia) or from behind a ham radio microphone live and nightly like they've been doing on the ERPN for several years now. What a bunch of sloop head dopes, poebuckers and moe-rons! SWL them now boys while you can, before they operate "dx" later at Guatananamo Bay or some other similar 'amusing' place. ; ) [viktor-lima-bravo-two...grin....grin...] |
Todd Daugherty wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... Todd Daugherty wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Todd Daugherty wrote: The Death of Amateur Radio It is interesting that what you propose to do would hasten your "Death of Amateur Radio" in my opinion. If we get a few hundred more such as yourself that believe that they need to broadcast their opinions over the amateur bands, more and more Amateurs will find something else to do with their leisure time, as they have no room to transmit as the bands fill up with "bulletin free speech transmissions. All the while transforming the Amateur bands into some sort of mutant version of the AM broadcast band. No where in my paper do I state that amateurs should broadcasting. "amateurs should broadcasting"? There are some including the FCC who wishes to keep the service to where all you do is give a signal report, location, ect. That's simply not true! I've had many long and enjoyable QSOs on a variety of subjects, with never a problem on content from FCC. The only limits on content were "no pecuniary interest" and keeping it "G-rated". As I stated in my paper a good example of this was packet radio. Packet is pretty much died around here because all of the content on them was "For Sale" stuff. Packet would of survive if BBS's were set up to cater to certain topics or discussion groups. Such as? A BBS with discussion on antenna designing, Another BBS with discussion on on experimenting. Another BBS with amaeur policy. These are just to name a few there was a issue CQ VHF that went into greater detail about the set up. The point is to have all the for sale stuff on one BBS and a diverse of other BBS on other subjects. Sounds good in theory. But in practice, how would that work? Could hams all over the world, or even all over the USA, access that particular BBS? If so, how? I tried years ago to set something up like that however a few local amateurs threated to go to the FCC and claim that the system is interferning with their system. How many years ago? And would it have interfered? It seems to me that one of the limitations of amateur packet radio is that it hasn't evolved much past the 1200 baud/BBS mindset of 20+ years ago. Heck, even trailingedge computer types like me have been running 56k dialup modems for almost a decade! Wasn't amateur packet originally set up for 1200 baud because you could use a voice FM 2 m radio without any mods? You'd think that by now packet would have moved to much higher speeds and much higher bands...but that would mean someone would actually have to build a radio to do it... You note that you look for a free space to transmit in. So what? K1MAN doesn't. He opens up on whoever is on the frequency and threatens those who don't move. How many more "free speech advocates" will decide that anyone on "their frequency" is an infringement on their free speech? Information Bulletins are legal no matter what you or anyone believes. If the bulletins meet the specific criteria I outlined in another post, they're legal. The problem is however, that there are amateur radio operators who feel that information bulletins which deal with amateur radio issues shouldn't be opinionated and it is those same amateurs operators when the bulletin is transmitting then begin jamming the Information bulletin because they feel the transmission is illegal. Jamming is an enforcement issue. Interference which K1MAN is doing is not legal. Agreed! I wonder if wattage limits are an infringement on a persons free speech? Limiting it limits the number of people who can be reached. Suggestion that Lib net members use an alternative method of getting their views out is not infringement of their free speech, it is a suggestion. And not a bad one at that. No one is forcing them off the air, just suggesting a better venue for their views. The FCC shouldn't even suggest it. Yes, they should, if they see the content and behavior as detrimental to the ARS. Which they do. Again the FCC is barred from controlling the content of any station. That's simply not true. yes and no Under Section 326 of the Communication Act the FCC is barred to control the content of any station. I'll ask again: What exact verbiage says that? The only content the FCC is allowed to control is obscene and indecent material and that's it. How about commercial content on the ham bands? How about using radio to help with the commission of crimes? Are those things allowed under 326? Again if they can have alternative perhaps ALL amateurs should move off the radio spectrum and uses the alternative....the Internet. For certain subjects, that's the right medium. Death of Amateur Radio? Perhaps you have a bigger part than you realize........ Interesting! In fact, we're starting to see what may be the "death of the internet" - or at least the death of its potential. Viruses, popups, identity theft and other shenanigans are causing many people I know to become disenchanted with it. I really dout the internet will die. Me too. But I see its potential dying. As a matter of fact Internet 2 is now out (well right now only some Universities (206 to be exact) and government agencies have it...it will probably be commercialized in about two to three years.). Internet 2 will have a lot more applications and downloading will be faster. (people will be able to download a full length movie within minutes instead of days) so I really dout the Internet will die anytime soon. If "internet 2" catches on, it will replace the original. If you want different content than what is found on current amateur packet, why not provide it yourself? Not in competition with the forsale folks, but on a different frequency or even band. With much higher speed and more features? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Someone wrote; Q codes are for morse only. People who use Q codes on voice or text are boring. I agree that generally there is no reason to use Q-codes on voice. But there are 600,000 + hams in the USA most using Q-Codes on voice even VHF, and ya ain't gonna change that, so I suggest you know the basic ones when they come at you. Example: New folks coming on repeaters will hear about 5 or 6 commonly used Q-codes - best learn them or wonder what the hell they are talking about. QSL, QSY, QTH, QRM, QRN, QRX, etc Q-Signals are brevity codes as is the 10 codes. They are useful to increase thruput and clarity, that is why the police and RACES use them on voice. With Hams it is mostly jargon and tradition. Just like the rest of our language -- if ya get my drift - OK. You will have an impossible task trying to eliminate Q-signals on Ham radio voice modes --- QSL ? P.S. Do you still say DMV instead of Department Of Motor Vehicles ------ IMI -- 73 de Caveat Lector (Reader Beware) Help The New Hams Someone Helped You Or did You Forget That ? |
There are many ham radio operators who misunderstand this paper so I'll give a little example. Say I run a store, and in this store is empty boxes for sale. Now often I would get someone to come into my store but no one would buy my boxes. The reason for that is all I offer..the boxes. Now if I had a variety of stuff to offer the business would pickup and I would be able to compete with other stores. The same is true with amateur radio. If amateur radio is to survive in the digital age outdated modes of communication won't cut it. For amateur radio to survive they are going to have to offer something besides an easy way to get a license. Amateurs will have to compete in the sense that they are going to have to offer something that would get people to join the service. Like I said for amateurs to compete in the digital era out dated modes of communication and half ass forms of communication aren't going to cut. Amateur radio will die because amateur radio will have nothing to offer except those half ass modes and outdated communications Todd N9OGL ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
You are a FREAKING moron!!!
|
Hmmm I read something like this in about 1950
Hasn't happened yet in fact increased enormously Please give a date for the The Death of Amateur Radio And we will take a dollar for every year it continues --- OK Interesting that we have dozens of new hams that got a license to beat the cell phone rates -- Caveat Lector (Reader Beware) Help The New Hams Someone Helped You Or did You Forget That ? "Todd Daugherty" wrote in message ... There are many ham radio operators who misunderstand this paper so I'll give a little example. Say I run a store, and in this store is empty boxes for sale. Now often I would get someone to come into my store but no one would buy my boxes. The reason for that is all I offer..the boxes. Now if I had a variety of stuff to offer the business would pickup and I would be able to compete with other stores. The same is true with amateur radio. If amateur radio is to survive in the digital age outdated modes of communication won't cut it. For amateur radio to survive they are going to have to offer something besides an easy way to get a license. Amateurs will have to compete in the sense that they are going to have to offer something that would get people to join the service. Like I said for amateurs to compete in the digital era out dated modes of communication and half ass forms of communication aren't going to cut. Amateur radio will die because amateur radio will have nothing to offer except those half ass modes and outdated communications Todd N9OGL ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Caveat Lector wrote: Someone wrote; Q codes are for morse only. People who use Q codes on voice or text are boring. I agree that generally there is no reason to use Q-codes on voice. But there are 600,000 + hams in the USA most using Q-Codes on voice even VHF, and ya ain't gonna change that, so I suggest you know the basic ones when they come at you. I don't use Q-codes on voice. But it's a good idea to know them anyway. Example: New folks coming on repeaters will hear about 5 or 6 commonly used Q-codes - best learn them or wonder what the hell they are talking about. QSL, QSY, QTH, QRM, QRN, QRX, etc Yes. Q-Signals are brevity codes as is the 10 codes. They are useful to increase thruput and clarity, that is why the police and RACES use them on voice. Except in may cases they are *longer* on voice than the equivalent words. For example, "QSL" is three syllables but "roger" is only two. "QRX" is three but "wait" is one. Etc. With Hams it is mostly jargon and tradition. Just like the rest of our language -- if ya get my drift - OK. Exactly. I don't use 'em on voice but I'm not going to get upset with someone who does. You will have an impossible task trying to eliminate Q-signals on Ham radio voice modes --- QSL ? roger! The best way to eliminate their use on voice is simply to set an example. What a concept, huh? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Caveat Lector wrote:
Someone wrote; Q codes are for morse only. People who use Q codes on voice or text are boring. I agree that generally there is no reason to use Q-codes on voice. But there are 600,000 + hams in the USA most using Q-Codes on voice even VHF, and ya ain't gonna change that, so I suggest you know the basic ones when they come at you. It is jargon, just like RAM, ROM, HDD, CD, DVD, and all the computer alphabet soup. THe only one that bothers me is when someone says HI HI. The CW use is obviously needed, but if you can't actually laugh at what somone said in conversation, it couldn't be very funny. - Mike KB3EIA - |
"robert casey" wrote in message nk.net... Packet was/is so incredibly slow compared to other digital transmissions. When I became a Ham, I looked at it and decided that at it's transmission speed, there wasn't a lot of use for it. When packet first came out, it was fun to do. That's when dial up modems did 1200 baud. But that was 15 years ago. If the packet BBSes now did 56K or faster (not by modulation of the audio feeding an FM rig, but skillful modulation of the carrier itself (an RF modem)) it might still be interesting. Again the FCC is barred from controlling the content of any station. They have the "no pecuniary interest" rule, which is a regulation on content. Not that I think that that rule is bad; it protects the ham bands from being taken over by taxi cab and pizza delivery traffic and such. But somehow it doesn't have 1st amendment issues. That's because there are other venues for that. Freedom of speech doesn't even enter into it. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
|
Caveat Lector wrote:
Hmmm I read something like this in about 1950 Hasn't happened yet in fact increased enormously Please give a date for the The Death of Amateur Radio And we will take a dollar for every year it continues --- OK Interesting that we have dozens of new hams that got a license to beat the cell phone rates That is why I got my ticket. At least because one of my hobbies is off road 4WD'ing. More often than I care to admit, I get stuck in the woods, and have to call my XYL to let her know I'm going to be late for dinner. Eventually I found out what fun the hobby is, and went from there. p.s. Don't you have a name besides your screen name? Seems kinda odd calling you "caveat"! 8^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
From: "Weebus RF Meter" Organization: voord Reply-To: "Weebus RF Meter" Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.shortwave Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:26:38 -0500 Subject: The Death of Amateur Radio "Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... Hollingsworth has often commented on situations that are detrimental to Ham radio. Certainly the Lib Net is one of those. A parent listening in on that bunch is not likely to want their children having anything to do with the hobby. The Lib Net are a bunch of aging lightweight crackerheads compared to something called The Eastern Regional Patriot Net. You can catch these ultra-goofballs right now, every evening at 7:00 PM Central Time (8 PM Eastern) on 3.860 LSB. This bunch is your genuine core-group of ultra-paranoid misfits what seems to believes in chemtrails, colloidal-silver, the Protocols of Zion, Planet X and Aryan purity among other such longtime short-wave radio crapola, what everyone else knows is both pure bull**** and the rantings of screwballs. The ERPN itself was started by noneother than famous UPR Radio goofball Steve Anderson (..currently incarcerated for firing a fully automatic AK-47 at a Kentucky State Police officer during a MVA stop) who once broadcast from his home in Northern Kentucky. Steve's eventual arrest and conviction has not stopped these fruits and nuts which still meet nightly on 3.860 for passing of Militia-related "traffic" on a nightly basis, some check-in's of which have included known Militia members and several others using both bootleg or invalid made-up ham callsigns. Of late however check-in's to the ERPN have been sparse or made up of valid ham radio callsign holders, as the word was out that both RH and a certain "Homeland Security" type Agency of the US Govt. (hint) has taken recent 'interest' in some of the traffic being passed on this so-called net, or so it was alleged at a midwestern ham club recently........... Then again, that's is the consistent & nice thing about your average right-wing Domestic Kookinschlong...every one of em LOVES to blabber their openly Seditious and Insurrectionist incitement either thru a telephone to a kook call-in short-wave radio show, (..like Alex Jones' daily hit parade of paranoia) or from behind a ham radio microphone live and nightly like they've been doing on the ERPN for several years now. What a bunch of sloop head dopes, poebuckers and moe-rons! SWL them now boys while you can, before they operate "dx" later at Guatananamo Bay or some other similar 'amusing' place. ; ) [viktor-lima-bravo-two...grin....grin...] Now wait, are you saying there really is no Planet X? |
"Greg" wrote in message ... Now wait, are you saying there really is no Planet X? Unfortunatly.....yes. We were hoping that there was a Planet X. This way if there was, when it appears there would be another group like the Heaven's Gate cultists that would go and perform some kind of a mass suicide for our mutual viewing and reading enjoyment of the same. (see http://www.csicop.org/si/9703/hale.html ) Untill then however, we'll just have to settle for right wing militialoons that get their sorry ass shot out from under them or tossed into jail, along with the occasional loon who goes apeshi+ and shoots up a suburban shopping mall someplace. (I don't think we'll be seeing another 9/11 for a very long time to come) Oh well, as Andy Warhol said - "15 Minutes of Fame is our mutual allocation" Ciao baby! xoxoxo ---------------- "I like to go to Wal-Mart, find some doofus guy shopping alone, wait until he isn't looking, toss a Summers Eve douche bag in his cart, get behind him in line and wait to see the look on his face when the cashier scans it at the checkout" - Mollie in alt.sex.lesbians "You finally found your pacifier; keep sucking on it. Like your hero Alexander the Homo, the spreader of Greek Syphilisization, you will be rewarded soon with a mouthfull." - Susan Cohen the spammer in soc.culture.greek Funny Network News Moment of the day: Dan Rather,Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw couldn't keep a straight face when telling the world that Michael Jackson had to go to the ER today because he's got the runs and shi+ his pants in court. (I nearly died laughing at this one folks) |
Dee Flint wrote:
"bb" wrote in message ups.com... Dave Heil wrote: If only we could introduce Todd to WA8ULX. Oh, Lord. That would be a sight and a half! Dee D. Flint, N8UZE ULX would chew toddyboy up and spit him out in a Nu York minute. |
Todd Daugherty wrote:
There are many ham radio operators who misunderstand this paper so I'll give a little example. Say I run a store, and in this store is empty boxes for sale. Now often I would get someone to come into my store but no one would buy my boxes. The reason for that is all I offer..the boxes. Now if I had a variety of stuff to offer the business would pickup and I would be able to compete with other stores. The same is true with amateur radio. If amateur radio is to survive in the digital age outdated modes of communication won't cut it. For amateur radio to survive they are going to have to offer something besides an easy way to get a license. Amateurs will have to compete in the sense that they are going to have to offer something that would get people to join the service. Like I said for amateurs to compete in the digital era out dated modes of communication and half ass forms of communication aren't going to cut. Amateur radio will die because amateur radio will have nothing to offer except those half ass modes and outdated communications Todd N9OGL ????????? How does empty boxes relate to Amateur Radio. I do know of stores that make quite a bit of money selling empty boxes, so you must be doing something terribly wrong toddyboy. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:26 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com