Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "K4YZ" wrote in message oups.com... an_old_friend wrote: given the whining from Steve and Jim about I do come to a conclusion that if adpted it will result in a set rules that is largely ignored and/or incorrectly applied till the FCC decides to drop the whole and leave the matter in our hands (whcih is whee it wshould have been in the first place More Markie Mularkie. thus it seems thta regulation by bandwidth my be a good intermedaite step toward ending FCC mandates and exclsuive presere for Morse code It wasn't about a "preserve" for "Morse code", Markie. It's about establishing operating parameters based upon bandwidth. meaning it sounds like a decent idea if we can't go the end result in one step Trying to decode that now. Anyone got a Cray I can borrow? Steve, K4YZ Steve, Since I've got to read his post (since you replied to it and sent it with your reply), rather than trying to decode it, could we simply take up a collection and buy him a spell checker? That would help a bit, but would not help in understanding the ramblings very much ![]() For a second, I thought he was talking about theta regulation. That left me puzzled for a couple of seconds ![]() 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions | Policy | |||
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions | General | |||
Could sniffers provide way for low bandwidth broadcasting over the Internet? | Broadcasting | |||
Bandwidth in German and France for inverse GPS | Policy | |||
CCIR Coefficients METHOD 6 REC533 // AUCKLAND --> SEATTLE | Shortwave |