Hi Bob, Well, yes I did see your earlier reply comments and thanks for the dittos. Just my latest modest attempt to inject some sanity into the discussion. It seems that in today's society whenever we discover something that we enjoy or that is worthwhile, someone else is trying to take it away. I certainly enjoy AM and vintage radio, but it is sad to see it constantly attacked by the misguided technology zealots and detractors. Seems like they would have more constructive things to do than trying to tear down activities that are enjoyed and appreciated by many hams who truly love the hobby. The percentage of total avalable bandwidth utilized by AMers at any instant is very small. It seems, however, that the detractors want it all!
73, Jack, W9GT -------------- Original message -------------- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > In a message dated 1/12/2006 8:13:33 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > Clay, > > Your proposal makes perfect sense. That is why it probably stands little or > no chance of being accepted. It seems that common sense and cooperative > coexistence of diverse interests within the hobby are fast disappearing. > > While I have a great deal of respect for anyone with a PE. I am very > suspicious of anyone, including Mr. Tannehill, who insists upon flaunting > their > professional credentials to intimidate or otherwise overpower others who have > a > difference of opinion. We a talking about Amateur radio here! > > Here is hoping that, in spite of recent fiascos such as BPL, that some sort > of reason prevails at the FCC. > > 73, Jack, W9GT > > > Hi Jack, > > I sent a reply to you and the list this morning and never saw it come thru. > At this point it is moot. > > I did think the same thing as you mentioned in your reply. i threw in > "narrow vision" as one of his strong points also. > > 73's Bob AB3L > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > AMRadio mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html > Post: mailto:[email protected] > AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net > AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami, Paul Courson/wa3vjb From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jan 13 09:34:40 2006 Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Original-To: [email protected] Delivered-To: [email protected] Received: from node1.mis.net (node1.mis.net [12.162.191.1]) by mailman.qth.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BBFE859C32 for <[email protected]>; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:34:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from polarbase4.mikrotec.com (adsl-1102.mis.net [12.162.183.88]) by node1.mis.net (8.12.5/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k0DESAXV001096 for <[email protected]>; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:28:11 -0500 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:36:02 -0500 To: Discussion of AM Radio <[email protected]> From: "Anthony W. DePrato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [AMRadio] Your recent comments on AM (Tannehill) In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Mikrotec-MailScanner-Information: X-Mikrotec-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Mikrotec-MailScanner-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-BeenThere: [email protected] X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list Reply-To: Discussion of AM Radio <[email protected]> List-Id: Discussion of AM Radio <amradio.mailman.qth.net> List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio>, <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> List-Archive: <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/private/amradio> List-Post: <mailto:[email protected]> List-Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio>, <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 14:34:40 -0000 > > Outstanding Tom 73 Tony WA4JQS > >Tom Adams, W9LBB > >
