Everyone, I want to appologize for the tone (using caps for emphasis which comes across as shouting!) of my message about asking the FCC for opinions. I had just come back off of a week off line while taking care of my mom and was surprised to see the pager debate still raging.
So nothing was directed at anyone in particular, it was just a rant to the walls.. Please do not be offended. Bob > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bob Bruninga > Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 7:53 PM > To: [email protected]; Ben Jackson > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and > Pagers (WAS Re: Re:dream) > > > Ben, I agree we need a ruling on this > > I think part 97 is vauge and vauge for a reason > > THIS IS INSANITY!!!! > > The FCC is nothing but a bunch of bureaucrats trying to sell > off spectrum to the highest bidder! There are no real > engineers left there, and no one there with OUR interest in > mind. It is ABSURD to go running to to the FCC to ask for a ruling!!! > > > What we need is to setup a conferance call or > > something so we can get a well written letter > > together and get it off to someone who can > > make a ruleing at the FCC > > ABSOLUTELY NOT. That is lunacy. Instead of laying out such > kind of completely open ended paperdrill and wasted effort, > spend our time developing a system using pagers in our > network. Geeze. We are licensed amateurs, we KNOW the > rules, we KNOW what amateur radio can do, and WE KNOW what > kind of benefits we can produce. We ALSO know what is not > legal when we hear it. And using Pagers as part of the > amateur radio text messaging system IS NOT ILLEGAL! > > > Define a system and descuss the possablities of > > doing call sign routing, sending the pages up > > to a satellite ect ect. But before "we" put a > > lot of time and effort and money into this > > I think we need a ruling > > NO!!! HARDLY ANY TECHNOLOGY in amateur radio has ever been > successfully developed that way. All that develops is a lot > of HOT AIR and useless paper. Progress has RARELY IF EVER > BEEN developed by committee. > > Progress in Amateur Radio is made by inspired individuals who > see a need, and go off and develop something using their own > money, time and effort. The best way to KILL any good idea > is to form a committee that squashes any initiative and > progress by overbearing hot air and "geeze wouldnt it be nice > if we did this.... where "WE" is some other guy who can > actually DO something. > > > I know for a fact that our local repeater is > > cabable of doing 2 tone paging - and was in > > use back when I was very young and not a ham > > - the elders of the local club say it was > > able to send alerts for weather, pages for > > people to get on the radio, ect. It was all > > done with tones at the time - "our" pagers > > are far more advanced and can display the > > text of whatever > > Using PAGING devices to communicate on amateur radio has > always been legal. If you want to make things illegal, then > look at the application and how they are used. If they are > used for the benefit of all the intents and benefits of legal > amateur communications, then they are legal. If they are > used for paging to violate the intents and meaning of amateur > radio, then such an application is illegal. It is the > APPLICATION AND USE that is legal or illegal, it is NOT THE DEVICE! > > > No one in the club can tell me why they > > stopped using pagers - > > Probably because some nit-picking obstructionist spent all > his time trying to find a way to convince others that it was > illegal... And everyone else gave up in disgust. > > > But at around the same time they stopped paging, > > kantronics also stopped modify pagers for 2 > > meters, > > <SNIP> > > > We need to setup something and get as many > > people as we can write up a well written > > paper and get a ruling. > > > PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE NO. > > > I think as we see here agurements can be > > made on both sides. > > Which you can get on any topic on any subjct whenever you > have more than one person in a room! > > > Which is why we need a ruling. > > No, which is exactly why we get a license and read the rules > and take good ideas for amateur radio and move out, and do > not waste time laying paper at the feet of a bunch of > bureaucrats who could care less. The motivation of most > bureaucrats is simply how is the best way to get this paper > off my desk, and the answer is to simply say NO rather than > say YES, which could only expand to other issues... > > > When rules are written this vague, some one > > needs to decide and stand by the decision > > HUh? They make it vague so that we can move forward without > being nit-picked by aremchair hams turning over rocks trying > to find ways to kill progress by playing bureaucrat. > > VAGUE IS GOOD! It means PROCEED!!! > > >------Original Message------ > >Subject: Re: OT: Universal Text Messaging and Pagers > > > > We'll agree to disagree regarding your take > > of the rules as almost everyone else did > > on APRSSIG. ;) > > > >> There is no reason to nit pick rules. When > >> one is broadcasting (one >> way) to the general > >> public or using amateur radio inappropriately, I > >> think everyone can tell when something is > >> blatanly illegal. I just don't see the FCC > >> cares one nit about some of these debates when > >> any one can see that hams are taking initiative > >> to better their use of the radio art. > > > > Considering that they've recently ruled on > > whether contesters should give blanket > > "5-by-9" signals, I'd think they'd be glad > > to rule on something interesting and relevant. > > THEY WILL RULE ON ANYTHING! And that is the LAST thing we > want or need. There is just no reason to be running to > bureaucrats with stupid questions, or you get stupid answers! > > >>> You just have to ignore the curmudgeons who > >>> have nothing better to do than nit-pick > >>> ways to prevent other hams from developing > >>> useful applications of technology. A pager > >>> is simply the text-to-user device integrated > >>> into the normal local 2-way amateur radio > >>> communications system. > > >> The issue is that, according to Part 97, > >> it can't be used beyond QSTs, telemetry, > >> or "necessary" emergency communications. > > WHAT IS THE "IT" here? The "IT" is "ONE WAY BROADCASTS". and > that has nothing to do with the hardware. STOP READING "IT" > AS PAGERS. They are separate entities. > > ONE WAY BROADCASTS beyond the scope of amateur radio are > clearly illegal. > > Making the stretch to declare all pagers to be ONE WAY > BROADCASTS is just as silly (in an amateur radio > communications network) as declaring that ALL TRANSMITTERS > are illegal because they are also ONE WAY!!! > > >>> Could I get away with setting up such a > >>> system? Likely. Do I foot to stand > >>> on when my local OO comes knocking? > >>> Not so much. > >> > >> Some OO's are part of the problem, > >> not the solution... > > > > Then the solution has presented itself. > > Get a ruling from the FCC regarding the > > use of transmissions to receive-only > > devices such as pagers. > > Oh, this is absurd. EVERY receiver is a receive-only > device!!! and every TRANSMITTER is a transmit only device. > It is NOT THE DEVICE that determines legality, it is the APPLICATION. > > > Then we can finally put this issue to rest > > and if anyone comes knocking regarding the > > legality of these transmissions, we can have > > something concrete to cite. > > Yes, and what you will site is some bureaucratic off the wall > decision made in the vacuum of engineering that exists at the > FCC made in the best interest of the FCC which is to decalare > most anything brought before it as illegal simply to clear > their desk of these stupid "requests for opinions". > > > Again, I'd love to set up something like this, > > but I'd be hard pressed to spend a chunk of > > money on a system that could be taken down if > > someone files a complaint to the FCC. > > Pagers are being sold for scrap metal. If someone cannot > afford maybe $10 for a crystal to put in a practically free > pager to get it on the air, then amateur radio is probably > not a good hobby for him. > > > Let's take any further discussion about this offline. > > LETS STOP DISCUSSING IT AND SPEND OUR TIME DOING IT! > > Again, nothing technical in amateur radio gets done by > nit-picking rules, and forming committees, and running off to > the FCC, it is individuals that see an opportunity and have > the ability to move out and accomplish it. > > THe worst part of amateur radio is all the nit-pickers and > ankle biters that hold back progress. Sometimes they win and > the guy in the lead just gives up. SOmetimes these guys with > an idea get far enough ahead of the nit-pickers and ankle > biters, that the great silent majority of amateurs begin to > think outside of their boxes and start to slowly get on board. > > Of course the nit-pickers and ankle biters will always be > there to the end, but hopefully they are in the minority and > the majority will continue to move forward. > > Bob, WB4APR > _______________________________________________ > Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of > the author. > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur > satellite program! > Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
