[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Why do we need to change a largely successful existing > system of frequency allocation by mode to accommocate > another mode?
I sense that there are hams who want to "control" the existing modes in various ways, and they are using the opportunity presented by the new modes to crack-down on the old ones. These control-enthusiasts always see new-is-better and also ignore any mode they don't personally use. There is also a group that wants to sell equipment for new modes, and if those modes can be "intrusive" in nature, or are attractive to new operators without experience, they want reserved spectrum for them. And many of these folks also do not like the fact that skill is needed to build and operate a ham radio station. They want simpler, channelized operation with controlled bandwidths, automatic serial-number identification, etc. The goal seems to be spend $5000, get a carton, unpack it, connect to computer, and you are a "ham". The main reason I get this impression is in the responses from supporters of the Region 2 bandplan, or regulation-by-bandwidth, I hear the term "chaos" used to describe our present operations, and the term "channel" comes up often, and "we must do this for the future growth of ham radio", and the like. Steve WD8DAS ************************************** See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) ______________________________________________________________ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:[email protected] To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
