OK, so let's idolize K1DUDE and follow his example. We'll all start ignoring
the rules and do as we please as long as we can get away with it. Before
long, all amateur bands would be reduced to a bunch of "Citizen's Bands."

"N9OGL" wrote in message
ups.com...

Wayne P. Muckleroy wrote:
It's never a good idea to use vigilante tactics to solve a problem. There
are rules for which all of us must abide. One of those rules is that we
must
not intentionally block or interfere with another transmission that is in
progress. We must all share the frequencies in an orderly fashion.

These are the rules. If we were to all ignore these rules and transmit
whenever, however, and wherever we pleased, there would be mass chaos on
most bands. The rules are structured and enforced by the FCC. I cannot
condone any other approach to eliminating unruly examples like K1MAN--as
frustrating as that approach may be.

Wayne P. Muckleroy
(KC8UIO)

The rules should also apply to W1AW who has also caused malicious
interference. The problem is W1AW is allowed to interfere with on going
transmissions and K1MAN isn't. the rules should apply to all. One final
note, rules are only valid until a court says otherwise.

Todd N9OGL
THE N9OGL SHOW
14.321.00

What's a "top post" and what section of the FCC codes is that rule found?
Once I know this information, I will comply fully with the regulation.

"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:11:13 GMT, "Wayne P. Muckleroy"
wrote:

It's never a good idea to use vigilante tactics to solve a problem. There
are rules for which all of us must abide.

One of those rules is that we must never top post.

One of those rules is that we must
not intentionally block or interfere with another transmission that is in
progress. We must all share the frequencies in an orderly fashion.

These are the rules. If we were to all ignore these rules and transmit
whenever, however, and wherever we pleased, there would be mass chaos on
most bands. The rules are structured and enforced by the FCC. I cannot
condone any other approach to eliminating unruly examples like K1MAN--as
frustrating as that approach may be.

A: Top posting
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?



Wayne P. Muckleroy
(KC8UIO)

"AMEN" wrote in message
news:j5iYe.357189$_o.126093@attbi_s71...

"N9OGL" wrote in message
oups.com...
It is FAR from over, after the FCC makes it's decision it goes to Court
of Appeal where he can challenge the FCC rules and or decision. If he
transmits, he will be unlicensed which can speed the process to the
court systems like I said it's FAR from over.

Todd N9OGL
The N9OGL Show
14.321.00 Mhz


Wayne Green had by far the best solution to the problem back in 1992:


Wayne Green W2NSD/1
WGI Center
Peterborough NH 03458

Sep. 13, 1992

"While I can appreciate your frustration with Baxter, which I share,
your
approach to disenfranchising him seems to indicate that you either do
not
read my editorials or at least don't remember them. I've God knows how
many
times been quite blunt about NOT annoying the FCC with our problems.
That's
not only a waste of time, it's downright dangerous... and can cause far
more
trouble than poor little Baxter. Please remember that we keep trying to
convince the FCC that we are self-regulating. Note the term "self."

If a few hams ever want to get rid of Baxter that's not all that
difficult... and you don't even have to pay a hit man to clean off
14,275.
All it takes is a little creativity and some coordinated effort.

As a matter of fact it would be fun to wipe out Baxter. And you wouldn't
even have to have a small group of like-minded hams drive to Maine with
hack
saws for his coax and tower or a concentrated campaign to turn his
neighbors
against him with propaganda. No, all it would take is a few hams with
good
signals and some coordination.

I'm sure you can come up with much more fitting tortures for Baxter than
anything I could dream up, but my mind turns to getting the channel
about
ten minutes before his broadcasts with my own anti-IARN broadcasts. I'll
bet
I could come up with some material which would burn Baxter, yet would
not
quite be actionable. Or I might tape one of his broadcasts and just
repeat
it as a "service" right on top of him and wipe him out. I've got as good
a
signal as anyone and I'm only a couple hundred miles from him. Knowing
the
love they have for him in Maine I'm sure you can find one, two or even
three
strong stations fairly near him to join in the effort to "help" him get
his
broadcasts out.

Of course if you don't know anyone capable of outsmarting Baxter, then
you
have no choice but to give up and take up stamp collecting. Baxter may
be
loud, but I haven't yet seen any signs of a three digit IQ behind the
mess
he's been making for several years.

If you do decide to actually do something instead of wasting your time
on
the FCC and ARRL, please let me know. "

Cheers ...
Wayne





Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og

Thanks, Barry, for the reminder.

"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:11:13 GMT, "Wayne P. Muckleroy"
wrote:

It's never a good idea to use vigilante tactics to solve a problem. There
are rules for which all of us must abide.

One of those rules is that we must never top post.

One of those rules is that we must
not intentionally block or interfere with another transmission that is in
progress. We must all share the frequencies in an orderly fashion.

These are the rules. If we were to all ignore these rules and transmit
whenever, however, and wherever we pleased, there would be mass chaos on
most bands. The rules are structured and enforced by the FCC. I cannot
condone any other approach to eliminating unruly examples like K1MAN--as
frustrating as that approach may be.

A: Top posting
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?



Wayne P. Muckleroy
(KC8UIO)

"AMEN" wrote in message
news:j5iYe.357189$_o.126093@attbi_s71...

"N9OGL" wrote in message
oups.com...
It is FAR from over, after the FCC makes it's decision it goes to Court
of Appeal where he can challenge the FCC rules and or decision. If he
transmits, he will be unlicensed which can speed the process to the
court systems like I said it's FAR from over.

Todd N9OGL
The N9OGL Show
14.321.00 Mhz


Wayne Green had by far the best solution to the problem back in 1992:


Wayne Green W2NSD/1
WGI Center
Peterborough NH 03458

Sep. 13, 1992

"While I can appreciate your frustration with Baxter, which I share, your
approach to disenfranchising him seems to indicate that you either do not
read my editorials or at least don't remember them. I've God knows how
many
times been quite blunt about NOT annoying the FCC with our problems.
That's
not only a waste of time, it's downright dangerous... and can cause far
more
trouble than poor little Baxter. Please remember that we keep trying to
convince the FCC that we are self-regulating. Note the term "self."

If a few hams ever want to get rid of Baxter that's not all that
difficult... and you don't even have to pay a hit man to clean off 14,275.
All it takes is a little creativity and some coordinated effort.

As a matter of fact it would be fun to wipe out Baxter. And you wouldn't
even have to have a small group of like-minded hams drive to Maine with
hack
saws for his coax and tower or a concentrated campaign to turn his
neighbors
against him with propaganda. No, all it would take is a few hams with good
signals and some coordination.

I'm sure you can come up with much more fitting tortures for Baxter than
anything I could dream up, but my mind turns to getting the channel about
ten minutes before his broadcasts with my own anti-IARN broadcasts. I'll
bet
I could come up with some material which would burn Baxter, yet would not
quite be actionable. Or I might tape one of his broadcasts and just repeat
it as a "service" right on top of him and wipe him out. I've got as good a
signal as anyone and I'm only a couple hundred miles from him. Knowing the
love they have for him in Maine I'm sure you can find one, two or even
three
strong stations fairly near him to join in the effort to "help" him get
his
broadcasts out.

Of course if you don't know anyone capable of outsmarting Baxter, then you
have no choice but to give up and take up stamp collecting. Baxter may be
loud, but I haven't yet seen any signs of a three digit IQ behind the mess
he's been making for several years.

If you do decide to actually do something instead of wasting your time on
the FCC and ARRL, please let me know. "

Cheers ...
Wayne





Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og

but has anyone actually heard k1man on the air in the last few months????

"KØHB" wrote in message
nk.net...
Thanks, Barry, for the reminder.

"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:11:13 GMT, "Wayne P. Muckleroy"
wrote:

It's never a good idea to use vigilante tactics to solve a problem. There
are rules for which all of us must abide.

One of those rules is that we must never top post.

One of those rules is that we must
not intentionally block or interfere with another transmission that is in
progress. We must all share the frequencies in an orderly fashion.

These are the rules. If we were to all ignore these rules and transmit
whenever, however, and wherever we pleased, there would be mass chaos on
most bands. The rules are structured and enforced by the FCC. I cannot
condone any other approach to eliminating unruly examples like K1MAN--as
frustrating as that approach may be.

A: Top posting
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?



Wayne P. Muckleroy
(KC8UIO)

"AMEN" wrote in message
news:j5iYe.357189$_o.126093@attbi_s71...

"N9OGL" wrote in message
oups.com...
It is FAR from over, after the FCC makes it's decision it goes to
Court
of Appeal where he can challenge the FCC rules and or decision. If he
transmits, he will be unlicensed which can speed the process to the
court systems like I said it's FAR from over.

Todd N9OGL
The N9OGL Show
14.321.00 Mhz


Wayne Green had by far the best solution to the problem back in 1992:


Wayne Green W2NSD/1
WGI Center
Peterborough NH 03458

Sep. 13, 1992

"While I can appreciate your frustration with Baxter, which I share,
your
approach to disenfranchising him seems to indicate that you either do
not
read my editorials or at least don't remember them. I've God knows how
many
times been quite blunt about NOT annoying the FCC with our problems.
That's
not only a waste of time, it's downright dangerous... and can cause far
more
trouble than poor little Baxter. Please remember that we keep trying to
convince the FCC that we are self-regulating. Note the term "self."

If a few hams ever want to get rid of Baxter that's not all that
difficult... and you don't even have to pay a hit man to clean off
14,275.
All it takes is a little creativity and some coordinated effort.

As a matter of fact it would be fun to wipe out Baxter. And you
wouldn't
even have to have a small group of like-minded hams drive to Maine with
hack
saws for his coax and tower or a concentrated campaign to turn his
neighbors
against him with propaganda. No, all it would take is a few hams with
good
signals and some coordination.

I'm sure you can come up with much more fitting tortures for Baxter
than
anything I could dream up, but my mind turns to getting the channel
about
ten minutes before his broadcasts with my own anti-IARN broadcasts.
I'll
bet
I could come up with some material which would burn Baxter, yet would
not
quite be actionable. Or I might tape one of his broadcasts and just
repeat
it as a "service" right on top of him and wipe him out. I've got as
good a
signal as anyone and I'm only a couple hundred miles from him. Knowing
the
love they have for him in Maine I'm sure you can find one, two or even
three
strong stations fairly near him to join in the effort to "help" him get
his
broadcasts out.

Of course if you don't know anyone capable of outsmarting Baxter, then
you
have no choice but to give up and take up stamp collecting. Baxter may
be
loud, but I haven't yet seen any signs of a three digit IQ behind the
mess
he's been making for several years.

If you do decide to actually do something instead of wasting your time
on
the FCC and ARRL, please let me know. "

Cheers ...
Wayne





Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og

your the one who's ****ing stupid asshole

"Dave" wrote in message
...
but has anyone actually heard k1man on the air in the last few months????

You will - for ten more sad years, if the FCC ever renews his license.

I don't sponge of my parents, try again asshole

i haven't heard him in quite a while, either on 75 or 20m... has anyone
else???

"AMEN" wrote in message
news:9zYYe.359783$x96.294182@attbi_s72...

"Dave" wrote in message
...
but has anyone actually heard k1man on the air in the last few months????

You will - for ten more sad years, if the FCC ever renews his license.

N9OGL wrote:

The rules should also apply to W1AW who has also caused malicious
interference.


Todd,

If you substitute "incidental" or "unintentional" for your use of
*malicious*, I might agree with your premise, at least on the surface.
However...

N9OGL wrote:

The problem is W1AW is allowed to interfere with on going
transmissions and K1MAN isn't.

....the only other thing that can be said in defense of W1AW is that it
is a *national* organization representing tens of thousands of hams that
is presumably "broadcasting" for the common good (and follows a regular,
*published* schedule, allowing others to dodge the "interference" if
they so wish), while K1MAN is a --single--private--individual-- who has
had some peculiar (shady ?) pecuniary interests associated with his
"broadcasts" in the past.

-73-
Carter
K8VT

N9OGL wrote:
your the one who's ****ing stupid asshole


Aw toddieboy, you hurt my feelings. NOT!!! Still using your jr.
high-school kewel language I see. Can you get any more stupid?
Think you will ever grow up and stop sponging off your mommy and daddy?