If you can really hear these stations, why does it irritate you so much
to find out that others hear them as well, via their shortwave
receivers? And didn't you earlier say that, because you live out West,
you can't hear very much?

I think you need to get your story straight.

Steve

wrote in message
oups.com...
No, no. I'm just a guy who's constantly stumbling onto your off-topic
posts.

Steve


SHHH Steve. Don't let on. Maybe we can scare him off. lol

B.H.

On 21 Jun 2005 16:52:38 -0700, wrote:

If you can really hear these stations, why does it irritate you so much
to find out that others hear them as well, via their shortwave
receivers? And didn't you earlier say that, because you live out West,
you can't hear very much?

I think you need to get your story straight.

Steve

**** you, you goddam psychopath. I posted a little notice about a new
radio service coming to the States and you get all ****ing phallic on
me. Just ****ing die!

On 21 Jun 2005 16:46:27 -0700, wrote:

Oh come on. I was just out in Reno and I heard plenty using no more
than my 7600GR off its whip. You really do have antenna problems,
receiver problems, or some combination thereof.

Steve

What did you hear?

R. Australia is bull**** these days, just rebroadcasts of domestic
radio (although Nocturnes is the best music show on the radio but at
8:30 local on Saturday morning not too convenient. Better on the
Web). RNZI's nice, but just when you start getting in the habit of
listening to them, their 1962 transmitter craps out for 6 months.

****ing Paul Crouch? Japan? China? Voice of the Andes? Woohoo!

If you don't enjoy shortwave, why are you posting here?

Steve

"David" wrote in message
...
On 21 Jun 2005 16:52:38 -0700, wrote:

If you can really hear these stations, why does it irritate you so much
to find out that others hear them as well, via their shortwave
receivers? And didn't you earlier say that, because you live out West,
you can't hear very much?

I think you need to get your story straight.

Steve

**** you, you goddam psychopath. I posted a little notice about a new
radio service coming to the States and you get all ****ing phallic on
me. Just ****ing die!


Psychopath? You got room to talk. Take your meds tard.

B.H.

"Dan" wrote in message
oups.com...

| David wrote:

| SNIP

| Don't care.. This is about Shortwave Radio..

Maybe on your side. So delete the crosspost, and keep it all for yourself.
We're interested in all kinds of radio here.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty
by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious
encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." --
Justice Brandeis
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!-

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 12:52:02 -0500, "JLewis"
wrote:

People always try and hold on to 'old technology' - myself included...I
personally think the BBC was wise to pull the plug when it did, instead of
sinking more money into a sinking ship...

Shortwave, Ham Radio, CB, etc. (all of which I still use and enjoy) - are
just buggy whips - soon to be outdated and displaced - except for the few
who cling to them for their own personal satisfaction - not for real
communication.

YMMV

This is a logically good argument, but it falls short when portability
comes into play.

The whole reason why radio (per se; not specifically shortwave)
remains so popular despite TV and the Internet is because you can take
a portable radio with you wherever you go; into the garden, in your
car, in the bathroom, on holiday, in a tent, in a caravan (trailer),
in a motorhome...

I can't do this with a computer. Firstly a laptop costs twenty or more
times more money than a radio, secondly the battery life is
considerably less, but mostly there just isn't universal affordable
wifi or mobile broadband yet.

I used to be able to take a small shortwave whip-antenna radio on
holiday to America and listen to the BBC back home. Now I can't.

Now either I have to carry around thirty metres of random wire and
some very detailed frequency charts, or I have to lug my laptop which
can't stay away from the mains electricty for more than 3 hours and
requires me to subscribe to expensive mobile internet connections (or
worse, expose my security to the prospect of hijacking someone else's
open network).

I can't overstate how ****ed off I am about this. The BBC made their
overseas radio services difficult, expensive and non-portable. I miss
my radio.

And to top it all, my TV licence, paying the BBC, has gone up again!
If it wasn't for Doctor Who I'd be picketting Bush House.

--
Andrew Oakley andrew/atsymbol/aoakley/stop/com

"Andrew Oakley" wrote in message
...

[snip]


I used to be able to take a small shortwave whip-antenna radio on
holiday to America and listen to the BBC back home. Now I can't.

Now either I have to carry around thirty metres of random wire and
some very detailed frequency charts, or I have to lug my laptop which
can't stay away from the mains electricty for more than 3 hours and
requires me to subscribe to expensive mobile internet connections (or
worse, expose my security to the prospect of hijacking someone else's
open network).

The World Service is still often heard very well in the US, but, you're
generally correct. The World Service isn't as reliable here as it used to
be.


I can't overstate how ****ed off I am about this. The BBC made their
overseas radio services difficult, expensive and non-portable. I miss
my radio.

And to top it all, my TV licence, paying the BBC, has gone up again!
If it wasn't for Doctor Who I'd be picketting Bush House.

In theory, you could give up TV and avoid the license fee. However, the
World Service is funded by a "government grant".

"BBC World Service is funded by Government grant and not your TV licence.
Profits from separate BBC commercial services help to keep the licence fee
low. "

http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/licencefee/

I take it that "Government grant" is a polite way of saying "You're paying
for it, whether you like it or not".


Frank Dresser

If it wasn't for Doctor Who I'd be picketting Bush House.

My wife absolutely loved that show -

Is it still on over there? Here in the U.S. we used to watch it via our PBS
station, but they dropped it several years ago...

If it's still on, don't tell my wife - she'll probably start dropping hints
about moving to England.

YMMV

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"Andrew Oakley" wrote in message
...

[snip]


I used to be able to take a small shortwave whip-antenna radio on
holiday to America and listen to the BBC back home. Now I can't.

Now either I have to carry around thirty metres of random wire and
some very detailed frequency charts, or I have to lug my laptop which
can't stay away from the mains electricty for more than 3 hours and
requires me to subscribe to expensive mobile internet connections (or
worse, expose my security to the prospect of hijacking someone else's
open network).

The World Service is still often heard very well in the US, but, you're
generally correct. The World Service isn't as reliable here as it used to
be.


I can't overstate how ****ed off I am about this. The BBC made their
overseas radio services difficult, expensive and non-portable. I miss
my radio.

And to top it all, my TV licence, paying the BBC, has gone up again!
If it wasn't for Doctor Who I'd be picketting Bush House.

In theory, you could give up TV and avoid the license fee. However, the
World Service is funded by a "government grant".

"BBC World Service is funded by Government grant and not your TV licence.
Profits from separate BBC commercial services help to keep the licence fee
low. "

http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/licencefee/

I take it that "Government grant" is a polite way of saying "You're paying
for it, whether you like it or not".


Frank Dresser