[BVARC] For Sale

[Travis Burgess via BVARC]

AlexLoop magnetic loop antenna.  This is one of the earlier ones that is

made of approx. 1/2 inch copper tubing soldered to the capacitor connections.

It works extremely well with a double gang air capacitor capable of up to 20 
watts.

Have made quite a few contacts in the park with it.  Tunes 10 meters to 30/40

meters.  It even works from inside my ground floor apartment.  Very directional.

$175.00


Travis

K5HTB


-

No trees were harmed in the production of this message, however, a great many 
electrons were

terribly inconvenienced.

___
BVARC mailing list
BVARC@bvarc.org
http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

[BVARC] ARRL / QST Antenna Design Competition

[Rick Hiller -- W5RH via BVARC]

*QST* Antenna Design Competition is Under Way!

ARRL members are invited to submit entries for the 2017 *QST* Antenna
Design Competition . You can
enter in one of three categories.

   -

   160 meters, LF, or VLF
   -

   80 through 10 meters
   -

   6 meters and higher bands


We can accept only one entry per person or team, so choose your category
wisely. Don't wait too long, though. The deadline is June 1, 2017!

First-place winners (individuals or teams) in each category will receive
$500 each. Second and third-place winners in each category will receive
$250 and $100, respectively. Winning designs will also be eligible for
publication in *QST*.

Entries must include:

   -

   Drawings with dimensions (hand drawings are acceptable).
   -

   A list of materials required to build the antenna.
   -

   A description and summary of any measurements taken (including SWR data).
   -

   Photographs of the installed antenna.
   -

   The entry category you've chosen for your design.
   -

   Your name, mailing address, and e-mail address.


Only one entry per individual or team will be accepted. Entrants must be
ARRL members. ARRL Headquarters staff and *QST* advertisers are not
eligible.

Send your entry to *QST*, Attn: Antenna Design Competition, 225 Main St.,
Newington, CT 06111. Or e-mail your entry to q...@arrl.org. The subject line
should include your call sign and the words "Antenna Design Competition"
(without quotes).

Complete rules  are on the
ARRL website.
Rick Hiller
*The Radio Hotel*  -- W5RH
___
BVARC mailing list
BVARC@bvarc.org
http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector

[Nizar Mullani via BVARC]

I think we should create a 'woodchuck' rule that puts a limit on the number of 
e-mails related to a topic like the famous woodchuck discussion we had on the 
reflector. 
NIZAR K0NM 

> On Apr 3, 2017, at 6:36 AM, K5HM via BVARC  wrote:
> 
> Right on
>  
> 73,
> Ron, K5HM
> k5hm@gmail.com
> www.qrz.com/db/k5hm
> 
> Excelsior!
>  
> From: BVARC [mailto:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org] On Behalf Of JP Pritchard via 
> BVARC
> Sent: Sunday, April 2, 2017 5:59 PM
> To: 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB' 
> Cc: JP Pritchard ; 'Jonathan Guthrie' 
> 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:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Guthrie 
> via BVARC
> Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2017 2:56 PM
> To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB 
> Cc: Jonathan Guthrie 
> 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 
> To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB  
> Cc: Rick Hiller -- W5RH 
> 

Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector

[Chris Boone via BVARC]

Uncle Lar!! Alright!! One of my hero DJs…(the best IMHO along with John Records 
Landecker…a personal friend of mine)…

Chris
WB5ITT

From: BVARC [mailto:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org] On Behalf Of Tom Watson via BVARC
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2017 12:34 PM
To: 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB' 
Cc: Tom Watson 
Subject: Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector

Speaking of woodchucks and humor, the following links to a Larry Lujack (WLS 
Chicago circa 1970) Animal Stories episode about same. My apologies to all.  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z_fBrQnVBU=RDOu26LPdBNEA=3

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
BVARC@bvarc.org
http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector

[Dwayne Jones via BVARC]

I will take the 21st spot.


Dwayne
KB5YTA

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Rick Hiller via BVARC 
wrote:

> Now 19.no 20!!!
> Hi
>
> Sent from my i-Thingamajig
>
> On Apr 3, 2017, at 9:07 AM, Jeffery MacMillian via BVARC 
> 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  wrote:
>
>> Right on
>>
>>
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Ron, K5HM
>>
>> k5hm@gmail.com
>>
>> www.qrz.com/db/k5hm
>>
>> [image: logo (2)][image: smaller Prize]
>>
>> *Excelsior!*
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* BVARC [mailto:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org] *On Behalf Of *JP
>> Pritchard via BVARC
>> *Sent:* Sunday, April 2, 2017 5:59 PM
>> *To:* 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB' 
>> *Cc:* JP Pritchard ; 'Jonathan Guthrie' <
>> ka8...@ka8kpn.org>
>> *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:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org ] *On
>> Behalf Of *Jonathan Guthrie via BVARC
>> *Sent:* Sunday, April 02, 2017 2:56 PM
>> *To:* BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB 
>> *Cc:* Jonathan Guthrie 
>> *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.
>>

Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector

[Rick Hiller via BVARC]

Now 19.no 20!!!
Hi

Sent from my i-Thingamajig

> On Apr 3, 2017, at 9:07 AM, Jeffery MacMillian via BVARC  
> 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  wrote:
>> Right on
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 73,
>> 
>> Ron, K5HM
>> 
>> k5hm@gmail.com
>> 
>> www.qrz.com/db/k5hm
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Excelsior!
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: BVARC [mailto:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org] On Behalf Of JP Pritchard via 
>> BVARC
>> Sent: Sunday, April 2, 2017 5:59 PM
>> To: 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB' 
>> Cc: JP Pritchard ; 'Jonathan Guthrie' 
>> 
>> 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:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Guthrie 
>> via BVARC
>> Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2017 2:56 PM
>> To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB 
>> Cc: Jonathan Guthrie 
>> 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 

Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector

[Jeffery MacMillian via BVARC]

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  wrote:

> Right on
>
>
>
> 73,
>
> Ron, K5HM
>
> k5hm@gmail.com
>
> www.qrz.com/db/k5hm
>
> [image: ARRL Logo][image: logo (2)][image: smaller Prize]
>
> *Excelsior!*
>
>
>
> *From:* BVARC [mailto:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org] *On Behalf Of *JP
> Pritchard via BVARC
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 2, 2017 5:59 PM
> *To:* 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB' 
> *Cc:* JP Pritchard ; 'Jonathan Guthrie' <
> ka8...@ka8kpn.org>
> *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:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org ] *On
> Behalf Of *Jonathan Guthrie via BVARC
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 02, 2017 2:56 PM
> *To:* BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB 
> *Cc:* Jonathan Guthrie 
> *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 

[BVARC] Museum Ships Weekend - update and reminder

[mark janzer via BVARC]

 I didn't get the following in the newsletter, so will air this here:
REMINDER - This Saturday, April 8th, from 9:00 to 9:30, at the Bayland Park 
Community Center, there will be an organizational meeting for the upcoming 
Museum Ships Weekend June 3-4 and for the next workday at the ships, Saturday 
April 22.
UPDATE - Check out the Museum Ships Weekend web page -  Battleship New Jersey 
ARS - Museum Weekend Event
  
|  
|   |  
Battleship New Jersey ARS - Museum Weekend Event
   |  |

  |

 
You'll see the Cavalla and the Stewart listed, along with a THIRD ship - the SS 
Selma.  This is the first year for the Selma, and it will be on a separate 
call. Effectively, we'll be operating three ships from roughly the same 
location.
73MarkK5MGJ
___
BVARC mailing list
BVARC@bvarc.org
http://mail.bvarc.org/mailman/listinfo/bvarc_bvarc.org
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: [BVARC] Trash on our Amateur Radio reflector

[K5HM via BVARC]

Right on 

 

73,

Ron, K5HM

  k5hm@gmail.com

  www.qrz.com/db/k5hm



Excelsior!

 

From: BVARC [mailto:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org] On Behalf Of JP Pritchard via
BVARC
Sent: Sunday, April 2, 2017 5:59 PM
To: 'BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB' 
Cc: JP Pritchard ; 'Jonathan Guthrie'

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:bvarc-boun...@bvarc.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Guthrie
via BVARC
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2017 2:56 PM
To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB  >
Cc: Jonathan Guthrie  >
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  

To: BRAZOS VALLEY AMATEUR RADIO CLUB  
 
Cc: Rick Hiller -- W5RH   
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