Now 19.....no 20!!! Hi Sent from my i-Thingamajig
> On Apr 3, 2017, at 9:07 AM, Jeffery MacMillian via BVARC <[email protected]> > wrote: > > WOW 18 email mails all about TRASH :) I find that to be very ironic, with a > wee bit of entertainment value. The longest topic of discussion on the > reflector, all about what NOT to post. All spurred by an Aprils Fools joke. > > The passion we have to make sure other people conform to our idea of what an > Email should or shouldn't be is amazing. > > The joke, well played! I usually just gaze a these email, but this one was a > Gem. > > I would offer my thoughts on what should or should not be posted, but that > would my version of the world (even though it's still in Beta) . I would > suggest more pictures though. This black and white threads is more like > reading an old news paper. > > > "Informed decision-making comes from a long tradition of guessing and then > blaming others for inadequate results." - Scott Adams > > Have Fun, > Jeff > KG5LRP > > > > > > >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:36 AM, K5HM via BVARC <[email protected]> wrote: >> Right on >> >> >> >> 73, >> >> Ron, K5HM >> >> [email protected] >> >> www.qrz.com/db/k5hm >> >> <image001.jpg> >> >> Excelsior! >> >> >> >> From: BVARC [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of JP Pritchard via >> BVARC >> Sent: Sunday, April 2, 2017 5:59 PM >> To: 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB' <[email protected]> >> Cc: JP Pritchard <[email protected]>; 'Jonathan Guthrie' >> <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector >> >> >> >> I enjoy BVARC (the club and the reflector) for more than one reason. Like >> Mr. Rodriguez, I look to the club for Elmers, and I have found many who are >> willing to help. All I had to do was ask. On the other hand, I find the >> fellowship of the group to be very important in my life. I learned a very >> long time ago that I need social connections with like-minded individuals, >> and I have turned to BVARC to meet this need at this time in my life. >> >> >> >> Every time a member posts something, whether it’s focused on amateur radio >> or something else, I learn something about a friend and sometimes I learn >> something new about one topic or another. So no, I am not offended and my >> day isn’t ruined if I encounter something off topic on the reflector. (And I >> am a person who receives more than a hundred emails a day, many of them off >> topic to anything and everything in my life.) >> >> >> >> So, for what little my opinion is worth, I think Mr Jonathan Guthrie has >> replied to this discussion in a most creative and appropriate way. I think >> he’s suggesting that we should all use good judgement in what we post, while >> at the same time we have the freedom, when the signal to noise ratio is all >> wrong, to turn on the noise blanker and the noise DSP if you have one, and >> then either live with the noise that’s left or shut off the receiver (delete >> and move on). >> >> >> >> JP Pritchard, >> >> KG3JPP >> >> >> >> From: BVARC [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Guthrie >> via BVARC >> Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2017 2:56 PM >> To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB <[email protected]> >> Cc: Jonathan Guthrie <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector >> >> >> >> Two things about the signal-to-noise ratio of an email list. >> >> First, conversations about the topicality of off-topic messages (by which I >> mean discussions like this very one that we're engaging in right at this >> moment) tend to generate vast quantities of frankly off-topic noise, >> especially when compared to the off-topic messages that are under >> discussion. Consider, for example, the number of "April Fools" messages to >> the number of messages talking about the "April Fools" messages. There have >> been at least twice as many in the meta discussion than were posted in the >> first place. These messages will also tend to be very contentious, which >> probably accounts for there being such a large number of them. >> >> Second, a low signal-to-noise ratio in an email list is nearly always due to >> a low amount of signal in the list rather than to an excess of noise. (The >> only exception I know of is on the SMOFs list, and that has to do with the >> characteristics of certain of the personalities on that list. I can explain >> more, if you want me to, but it probably works better in a private >> conversation.) So, the appropriate response to being unhappy with a low >> signal-to-noise ratio is to try to put more signal in the list rather than >> to put more noise on the list in an attempt to reduce the amount of noise on >> the list. On-topic messages tend to foster more on-topic discussion. >> >> One last point I'll make is that nobody concerned with a low signal-to-noise >> ratio finds comments like "you can always delete the messages you don't >> like" to be very helpful. If the noise is high enough, it is easiest to >> simply withdraw. >> >> On 04/02/2017 10:18 AM, John Chauvin via BVARC wrote: >> >> Au contraire. >> >> >> >> It is not that my, and hopefully anyone else's, whole day is consumed with >> the reflector. Rather it is that many of us have a busy schedule and have >> to sort through this BS to get to our only desire for the reflector - >> amateur radio. >> >> >> >> One exception, because of the nature of many amateur radio operators, an >> occasional "off topic" is required as a one-time question or similar, but >> not leading to a long e-mail trail. I would hope that those that respond to >> these occasional requests do so directly and not respond to the entire >> reflector. >> >> >> >> IMHO (to quote a internationally acclaimed orator and noble statesman). >> >> >> >> From: Rick Hiller -- W5RH via BVARC <[email protected]> >> To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB <[email protected]> >> Cc: Rick Hiller -- W5RH <[email protected]> >> Sent: Sunday, April 2, 2017 10:03 AM >> Subject: Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector >> >> >> >> >> >> Well now, let's see... >> >> >> >> No political comments -- then no discussion about HR555. >> >> >> >> No religious comments -- then no discussion about the propagation, sun >> spots, solar storms, because that is Mother Nature/God -- the ultimate OP, >> no matter what building you go into Friday, Saturday or Sunday. >> >> >> >> No humorous comments.....oh, no humor, sorry, I'll stop here then. >> >> >> >> C'mon folks, if your whole day is consumed by what comes across the BVARC >> reflector and you do not know what a delete key is, then you deserve to be >> miserable. Even Dr. Feinman had a sense of humor. >> >> >> >> 73 (sincerely) Rick -- W5RH >> >> >> >> ps...keep complaiing and I will start the wood chuck thread >> again....Oh..,,sorry, no humor allowed. My apologies. >> >> >> >> Rick Hiller >> >> The Radio Hotel -- W5RH >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Pat Cameron via BVARC <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I vote for that! ( and the code requirement :-) >> >> >> >> On Apr 2, 2017 8:56 AM, "K5HM" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I do not care for political or religious comments but if we ban humor, well, >> that is a step too far. >> >> >> >> There is precious little ham humor in our hobby. We all seen to take >> ourselves too seriously. Next thing you know, we will be bannibg the >> expressions of humor like words like Ha Ha or Hee Hee Heee. >> >> Come on April 1st. OK? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 73, >> >> Ron, K5HM >> >> [email protected] >> >> www.qrz.com/db/k5hm >> >> >> >> Excelsior! >> >> >> >> From: BVARC [mailto:[email protected] g] On Behalf Of Pat Cameron via >> BVARC >> Sent: Sunday, April 2, 2017 7:16 AM >> To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB <[email protected]> >> Cc: Pat Cameron <[email protected]>; Michael Monsour <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector >> >> >> >> Can we take a vote? >> >> >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Pat Cameron >> >> (832)885-2899 >> >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 6:08 AM, K5IZO via BVARC <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Michael, I agree. >> >> >> >> Let's keep this reflector for ham radio so we don't have to receive this >> garbage. Political views, sinkholes and April Fools trash isn't welcome here. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> On Apr 2, 2017, at 5:57 AM, Michael Monsour via BVARC <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> If you are going to do April 1st stuff then have the FCC turn ham radio into >> CB. No more calls and free for all and anything goes >> >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 10:51 PM, Jeff Davis via BVARC <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I enjoyed it, I’ve been hit with so many today that it was getting old. >> Then this one and man I swallowed it hook line and oh you know. >> >> >> >> it wasn’t till I went back to read it again and saw the date that I went, oh >> crap, I fell for one. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> KF5HQE Jeff >> >> >> >> On Apr 1, 2017, at 10:12 PM, gmuller885 via BVARC <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Just haveing fun michael. Don't take it so seriously. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy® Note 4. >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Michael Monsour via BVARC <[email protected]> >> Date: 4/1/17 9:42 PM (GMT-06:00) >> To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB <[email protected]> >> Cc: Michael Monsour <[email protected]>, JP Pritchard <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [BVARC] FCC action!! >> >> Enough with the April 1st junk >> >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 9:03 PM, JP Pritchard via BVARC <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I know this is crap since the federal government would never say in a press >> release that it had made a big mistake. Nice try Chris. You're an April fool. >> >> JP >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> > On Apr 1, 2017, at 8:45 PM, Chris Boone via BVARC <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > FCC to reinstate Morse Code test >> > >> > Washington, D.C. – April 1, 2017 – >> > >> > Today, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission or FCC) approved >> > Report and Order 14-987af which reinstates the Morse Code test for General >> > Class and Amateur Extra Class licensees. >> > >> > “It was a big mistake eliminating the Morse Code test,” admits Dotty >> > Dasher, the FCC’s director of examinations. “We now realize that being >> > able to send and receive Morse Code is an essential skill for radio >> > amateurs. As they say, it really does get through when other modes can’t.” >> > >> > Not only will new applicants have to take the test, but General Class >> > licensees who have never passed a code test will have one year to pass a >> > 5-wpm code test. Similarly, Amateur Extra class licensees that never >> > passed a code test will have one year to pass a 13-wpm test. Those >> > amateurs that fail to pass the test will face revocation of their >> > operating privileges. Materials for administering the examinations will be >> > distributed to Volunteer Examiner Coordinators by the end of April, so >> > that they can begin the testing on May 1, 2017. >> > >> > “This isn’t going to be one of those silly multiple-choice type tests,” >> > noted Dasher. “We’re going to be sending five-character random code >> > groups, just like we did in the old days. And, applicants will have to >> > prove that they can send, too, using a poorly adjusted straight key.” >> > >> > Technician Class licensees will not be required to take a Morse Code test, >> > nor will a test be required for new applicants. “We discussed it,” said >> > Dasher, “but decided that since most Techs can’t even figure out how to >> > program their HTs, requiring them to learn Morse Code seemed like cruel >> > and unusual punishment.” >> > >> > When asked what other actions we might see from the FCC, Dasher hinted >> > that in the future applicants taking the written exam may be required to >> > draw circuit diagrams, such as Colpitts oscillators and diode ring mixers, >> > once again. “We’re beginning to think that if an applicant passes an >> > amateur radio license exam it should mean that he or she actually knows >> > something,” she said. >> > ______________________________ __ >> > Cumulus Media Disclaimer >> > This message contains confidential information and is intended only for >> > the individual(s) named. If you are not the named addressee you should not >> > disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender >> > immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and >> > delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient >> > you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any >> > action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly >> > prohibited. >> > ______________________________ _________________ >> > BVARC mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://mail.bvarc.org/mailma n/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >> > Message delivered to [email protected] >> >> >> >> ______________________________ _________________ >> BVARC mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/ listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >> Message delivered to [email protected] >> >> >> >> ______________________________ _________________ >> BVARC mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/ listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >> >> Message delivered to [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________ _________________ >> BVARC mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/ listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >> Message delivered to [email protected] >> >> >> >> ______________________________ _________________ >> BVARC mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/ listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >> Message delivered to [email protected] >> >> >> ______________________________ _________________ >> BVARC mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/ listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >> Message delivered to [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________ _________________ >> BVARC mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/ listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >> Message delivered to [email protected] >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BVARC mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >> Message delivered to [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BVARC mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >> Message delivered to [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Jonathan Guthrie >> ARS KA8KPN >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BVARC mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org >> Message delivered to [email protected] >> > > _______________________________________________ > BVARC mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org > Message delivered to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ BVARC mailing list [email protected] http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org Message delivered to [email protected]
