There are some that like to brag about how many messages went thru their system monthly. How many of those messages was worth the time of day?
Joe, Some would say that most of my QSO's are not worth the time of day either (bada bing baada boom), but the question of what amount of spectrum is allocated to what sort of data content is approprate on Amateur bands is in my view what is important. While Winlink does provide a useful service to a segment of users, should it and it's offspring be allowed to become the dominant form of Amateur communications? I for one in am very opposed to this trend. The current system mostly works, there are issues with proprietary modulation techniques such as Pactor III being used, and the general wrong headedd concept of ownership of a frequency as evidenced by Robot stations broadcasting without listing, and those issues should be addressed by both the ARRL and the FCC. 73 Steve > Ham radio is world wide and needs to be set up the same world wide. Bandwidths, frequencies, modes and bands all need to be the same for all world wide. You are right about the Pactor 3, for that matter ALL modes should be released for all to have access to. > > Joe > W4JSI > > Age is mind over matter > If you don't mind, > it does not matter > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David H. Walker > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 3:35 PM > Subject: Re: [digitalradio] RM-11306 Rant > > > jivey wrote: > > There are two ways to settle all of the crap. > > 1. Just turn "ALL" the ham bands over to the e-mail jockeys and the rest > > not be allowed on the bands. > > 2. Set up frequencies for each band so all the e-mail jockeys could do > > their thing and let everyone else alone. > > > > Joe > > W4JSI > > > > Joe, I know that this subject is disturbing to many of us but the > problem lies in responsible operating practices. I have used and have > donated equipment to those that use PACTORlll. I don't find the problem > in the use of the the automatic control of stations. I find the problem > in that these stations are being used for things that are outside of the > framework of amateur radio. Certainly those that have a legitimate use > for such a system..IE HAMS ..should be able to communicate. I totally > agree that there is use of the system that is not relevant to HAM radio. > This should be abolished at once. Now how does one do this. The only > logical way at the moment is to make the PACTOR lll available to all. In > that way amateurs can see what is being sent and make good arguments > against such transmissions. Just my humble thoughts. > 73 > David > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > Other areas of interest: > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > a.. Visit your group "digitalradio" on the web. > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
