| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
March 22nd 06, 12:46 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
The ARS NOT to move to Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
, N0IMD, Brian P Burke wrote: wrote: On 20 Mar 2006 15:34:35 -0800, wrote: nobodys old friend wrote: wrote: From: The ARRL Letter Vol. 25, No. 11 nice to have somethng to discuss OTOH WE are NOT seen as a public saety function. I wonder how hard the ARRL worked to get us classified with PS&HSB? did they work toward that gol at all? you are still a memebr you might ask? The first I heard of it was their announcement that we aren't being reclassified. That tells me that they were working on it. No...it means someone may have THOUGHT about it...At best the article appears to simply say that it's not on the table for whatever reasons and that it's not on anyone's agenda to do otherwise. HMMMM not good for the safety of ARS freqs id say Perhaps. sorry you areit isn't "preahps it is "not Good" it may also be not bad but surely being classiefied with EMS and therefore above taxi cabs would have been good for us in the long run both here and in our neighboor Canada where vhf bandwidth is also at rsik Had we been reclassed, there might be actual demands that the ARS would have to live up to other than "goodwill.". More assinine, unfounded BS from Brain P Burke. There's not ONE bit of media release about Amatuer Radio as it pertains to the most recent disaster response in Louisiana that is anything BUT positive vis-a-vis Amateur Radio. WHERE do you come up with these assinine assertions, Burke? Two years ago you started in on this line about how ARES/RACES/MARS would not be able to respond or sustain a disaster relief communications, yet there's been one significant disaster after another, none the least of which being Katrina, and in every case where those agencies responded there's been nothing but positive press...And I am NOT talking about ARRL stuff...Real, mainstream media...CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc. The Amateur Radio Serivce, under the banners of MARS, ARES, RACES, etc, has more than lived up to it's claims of disaster communications support, yet you continue to make a fool out of yourself claiming otherwise. Burke, WHY do you continue this silly behaviour when you've been proven wrong over and over and over...?!?! Idiot. Steve, K4YZ |
|
#3
March 22nd 06, 03:06 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
The ARS NOT to move to Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
wrote: wrote: On 20 Mar 2006 15:34:35 -0800, wrote: an old friend wrote: wrote: From: The ARRL Letter Vol. 25, No. 11 nice to have somethng to discuss OTOH WE are NOT seen as a public saety function. I wonder how hard the ARRL worked to get us classified with PS&HSB? did they work toward that gol at all? you are still a memebr you might ask? The first I heard of it was their announcement that we aren't being reclassified. That tells me that they were working on it. likely i agree HMMMM not good for the safety of ARS freqs id say Perhaps. sorry you areit isn't "preahps it is "not Good" it may also be not bad but surely being classiefied with EMS and therefore above taxi cabs would have been good for us in the long run both here and in our neighboor Canada where vhf bandwidth is also at rsik Had we been reclassed, there might be actual demands that the ARS would have to live up to other than "goodwill.". and we do just do it in an disorganized keystone copish way I'm just dumbfounded why we're wasting spectrum on high-definition TV? yep but that is money and if the money for it comes to the FCC at al it might do some good by acident Somebody will make some money. Anyone who wanted better TV has cable or dish. yep |
|
#4
March 22nd 06, 11:11 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
The ARS NOT to move to Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
an old friend wrote: wrote: wrote: On 20 Mar 2006 15:34:35 -0800, wrote: an old friend wrote: wrote: From: The ARRL Letter Vol. 25, No. 11 nice to have somethng to discuss OTOH WE are NOT seen as a public saety function. I wonder how hard the ARRL worked to get us classified with PS&HSB? did they work toward that gol at all? you are still a memebr you might ask? The first I heard of it was their announcement that we aren't being reclassified. That tells me that they were working on it. likely i agree HMMMM not good for the safety of ARS freqs id say Perhaps. sorry you areit isn't "preahps it is "not Good" it may also be not bad but surely being classiefied with EMS and therefore above taxi cabs would have been good for us in the long run both here and in our neighboor Canada where vhf bandwidth is also at rsik Had we been reclassed, there might be actual demands that the ARS would have to live up to other than "goodwill.". and we do just do it in an disorganized keystone copish way Sometimes, maybe. I'm sure there are times when the ARS support is superb. But that is as "volunteers." Things are a lot different when your volunteer status changes to responsibilities you have taskings. |
|
#5
March 22nd 06, 11:15 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
The ARS NOT to move to Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
wrote: an old friend wrote: wrote: wrote: On 20 Mar 2006 15:34:35 -0800, wrote: sorry you areit isn't "preahps it is "not Good" it may also be not bad but surely being classiefied with EMS and therefore above taxi cabs would have been good for us in the long run both here and in our neighboor Canada where vhf bandwidth is also at rsik Had we been reclassed, there might be actual demands that the ARS would have to live up to other than "goodwill.". and we do just do it in an disorganized keystone copish way Sometimes, maybe. I'm sure there are times when the ARS support is superb. indeed esp in smaller dsasters But that is as "volunteers." Things are a lot different when your volunteer status changes to responsibilities you have taskings. indeed but we could have been classed as voloteers under public safety it would helpful to reconized above taxi drivers |
|
#6
March 23rd 06, 12:59 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
The ARS NOT to move to Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
an old freind wrote: wrote: an old friend wrote: wrote: wrote: On 20 Mar 2006 15:34:35 -0800, wrote: sorry you areit isn't "preahps it is "not Good" it may also be not bad but surely being classiefied with EMS and therefore above taxi cabs would have been good for us in the long run both here and in our neighboor Canada where vhf bandwidth is also at rsik Had we been reclassed, there might be actual demands that the ARS would have to live up to other than "goodwill.". and we do just do it in an disorganized keystone copish way Sometimes, maybe. I'm sure there are times when the ARS support is superb. indeed esp in smaller dsasters But that is as "volunteers." Things are a lot different when your volunteer status changes to responsibilities you have taskings. indeed but we could have been classed as voloteers under public safety it would helpful to reconized above taxi drivers And that's just it. The chest-thumpers got snubbed by this announcement. |
|
#7
March 23rd 06, 01:02 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
The ARS NOT to move to Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
wrote: an old freind wrote: wrote: an old friend wrote: wrote: But that is as "volunteers." Things are a lot different when your volunteer status changes to responsibilities you have taskings. indeed but we could have been classed as voloteers under public safety it would helpful to reconized above taxi drivers And that's just it. The chest-thumpers got snubbed by this announcement. Yes I see your point, sadly it is a valid one pity it will surely fly over there head at rf speeds |
|
#8
March 23rd 06, 10:46 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
The ARS NOT to move to Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
an Old friend wrote (Tweedle Dumb): wrote (Tweedle Dumber): an old freind wrote: wrote: an old friend wrote: wrote: But that is as "volunteers." Things are a lot different when your volunteer status changes to responsibilities you have taskings. indeed but we could have been classed as voloteers under public safety it would helpful to reconized above taxi drivers And that's just it. The chest-thumpers got snubbed by this announcement. Such as who? Yes I see your point, sadly it is a valid one What point? That he's making even MORE unfounded, baseless suggestions of poor performance of ARES? Because that's ALL Miss Burke is doing. Miss Burke's "condition" here is clear. He's been making these "ARES can't do it" suggestions for 2 years now despite the onslaught of data to the contrary. Furthermore, when tasked to back up some of his allegations with SOME example or evidence, all he can do is disappear for a while and hope no one remembers what a fool he made of himself LAST time. (That seems to be an inherent trait for Feeble Fivers...Morkie, take notice...)) pity it will surely fly over there head at rf speeds Mutt and Jeff patting each other on the back. How comical. Steve, K4YZ |
|
#9
March 23rd 06, 05:10 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
The ARS NOT to move to Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
wrote: an old freind wrote: wrote: an old friend wrote: wrote: \ it would helpful to reconized above taxi drivers And that's just it. The chest-thumpers got snubbed by this announcement. yep and steve choose to prove your points in spades he thinks we are better (safety of frequency wise) on the same leel as NYC taxi drivers sad his attitude make me suspect what I don't want to believe that the FCC is right are no more impartant that than Taxis drivers of NYC in a disater the FCC could hardly have showed it comptemtpt for usmore lcearly |
|
#10
March 24th 06, 12:48 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy
|
|||
|
|||
|
The ARS NOT to move to Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
an_old_friend wrote: wrote: an old freind wrote: wrote: an old friend wrote: wrote: \ it would helpful to reconized above taxi drivers And that's just it. The chest-thumpers got snubbed by this announcement. yep and steve choose to prove your points in spades I'm sure it was completely unintentional. he thinks we are better (safety of frequency wise) on the same level as NYC taxi drivers sad his attitude make me suspect what I don't want to believe that the FCC is right are no more impartant that than Taxis drivers of NYC in a disater the FCC could hardly have showed it comptemtpt for usmore lcearly The FCC has spoken. That it does not sit well with the chest thumpers is not my problem. |
Hybrid Mode
