Re: Topband: Private thanks to you on your posting vs W0BTU RE topband Leaving - FT8
Hi, Those digital modes don't take up a lot of spectrum. Quite a few QSOs can take place in the spectrum passed by an SSB filter. Having them bunched together makes it easier for them to find one another and makes it easier for the rest of us to avoid them QRMing us AND us QRMing them. I am not about the content or format of FT-8 (yes I tried it) but I can see no reason to try to run them (or anybody else) off the band or the list. Having those FT-8 stations all in one place makes a good propagation forecast tool. Cruise on up to "that" place and see how many of them you can hear. Lots of them? Good propagation. One or two? Try a different band :) I think somebody mentioned thick skin and automotive collector lists. I am not surprised it could get dense on an automotive list. Who in his right mind would pay good money for a *FORD*! Just kidding of course. 73, Bill KU8H On 09/05/2018 02:35 PM, Bryon Paul Veal NØAH wrote: I think the problem is due to limited high Q antennas on top band, every one is more concerned about 30Khz of usable DX bandwidth. I find a lot of topband and is fully underutilized, much like 80M. So we hear a lot QRM for digital ops both on the air and reflectors. I do feel digital modes could be using available underused spectrum to avoid run ins but that never seemed to be in the cards due to region IARU issues. 73. Paul. N0AH Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> From: Topband on behalf of chacuff Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 8:21:52 AM To: Richard (Rick) Karlquist; Mark K3MSB Cc: topband; Tree Subject: Re: Topband: Private thanks to you on your posting vs W0BTU RE topband Leaving Not Helpful... But quite revealing...earning them stripes! CecilK5DL Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" Date: 9/5/18 8:20 AM (GMT-06:00) To: Mark K3MSB Cc: topband , Tree Subject: Topband: Private thanks to you on your posting vs W0BTU RE topband Leaving Off the reflector: Thanks Mark for posting this "rebuttal?" to W0BTU. His rules are way too stifling for my tastes. On another reflector, some bozo was going off on me saying I didn't know what I was talking about, etc. when I was trying to give him some friendly advice. The moderator asked me if I wanted to have him kick this guy off the reflector because he offended me. I told him, heck no, he just makes himself look stupid. I'll let the readers decide which one of us is the fool. You know the saying, don't argue with a fool... Anyway, your comments are very well received here. I'm going to save your "rules" for future reference. I'm a self confessed "never-FT8'er", but I wouldn't dream of forcing the FT8 enthusiasts off the reflector. I don't get where the beef is here. 73 Rick N6RK I had to go rummage around my Trash folder to find the original post that started this: “From the FT8 arguments in addition to the "millennials causing the WWV shutdown" argument, it appears that the parts of the hobby that I enjoy do not cross paths with those on the topband reflector. Although I wish you all many CW DX, it appears that I am no longer welcome and that I must take my leave.” I've no idea what the millennial and WWV comment is about as I did not follow that thread. So we're back to the old FT8 vs CW argument.Was this person specifically harassed and hunted down for his views? Shame on the moderators if that's what happened.Or, did “the leaver” just not feel welcomed because others expressed contrary views and wouldn't back off? If that's the case, then there's the door, don't let it hit ya where the Good Lord split ya. I've been on this reflector for a number of years and from how I observe the moderators actions, I doubt any harassment and hunting down of heretics occurred; I like to see the moderators shoot a warning shot across the bow to get the ship of discourse turned away from the rocks, and overall I think they do a good job of it. In today's society people believe they have a right not to be offended. Really? I don't think so. Nobody, including myself, has the right to have their opinions respected.You do have the right to express your opinions freely, and without fear of persecution. In reality, that's not really true for a reflector as it's a private venue, but most reflectors operate as a benign dictatorship and hold to these principles. Mark's Principles of Discourse: #1: You don't have the right to not be offended. You don't have the right to have your views favorably accepted.You don't have the right to expect people with contrary view to back down because you're offended. Accept the fact that people will not agree with you. #2: Only you can decide to take offense. Sometimes the offenses are real, a lot of times imaginary. When I've felt offended
Re: Topband: Private thanks to you on your posting vs W0BTU RE topband Leaving
I think the problem is due to limited high Q antennas on top band, every one is more concerned about 30Khz of usable DX bandwidth. I find a lot of topband and is fully underutilized, much like 80M. So we hear a lot QRM for digital ops both on the air and reflectors. I do feel digital modes could be using available underused spectrum to avoid run ins but that never seemed to be in the cards due to region IARU issues. 73. Paul. N0AH Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> From: Topband on behalf of chacuff Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 8:21:52 AM To: Richard (Rick) Karlquist; Mark K3MSB Cc: topband; Tree Subject: Re: Topband: Private thanks to you on your posting vs W0BTU RE topband Leaving Not Helpful... But quite revealing...earning them stripes! CecilK5DL Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" Date: 9/5/18 8:20 AM (GMT-06:00) To: Mark K3MSB Cc: topband , Tree Subject: Topband: Private thanks to you on your posting vs W0BTU RE topband Leaving Off the reflector: Thanks Mark for posting this "rebuttal?" to W0BTU. His rules are way too stifling for my tastes. On another reflector, some bozo was going off on me saying I didn't know what I was talking about, etc. when I was trying to give him some friendly advice. The moderator asked me if I wanted to have him kick this guy off the reflector because he offended me. I told him, heck no, he just makes himself look stupid. I'll let the readers decide which one of us is the fool. You know the saying, don't argue with a fool... Anyway, your comments are very well received here. I'm going to save your "rules" for future reference. I'm a self confessed "never-FT8'er", but I wouldn't dream of forcing the FT8 enthusiasts off the reflector. I don't get where the beef is here. 73 Rick N6RK > I had to go rummage around my Trash folder to find the original post that > started this: > > “From the FT8 arguments in addition to the "millennials causing > the WWV shutdown" argument, it appears that the parts of the hobby that I > enjoy do not cross paths with those on the topband reflector. Although I > wish you all many CW DX, it appears that I am no longer welcome and that I > must take my leave.” > > I've no idea what the millennial and WWV comment is about as I did not > follow that thread. > > So we're back to the old FT8 vs CW argument.Was this person > specifically harassed and hunted down for his views? Shame on the > moderators if that's what happened.Or, did “the leaver” just not feel > welcomed because others expressed contrary views and wouldn't back off? > If that's the case, then there's the door, don't let it hit ya where the > Good Lord split ya. > > I've been on this reflector for a number of years and from how I observe > the moderators actions, I doubt any harassment and hunting down of heretics > occurred; I like to see the moderators shoot a warning shot across the > bow to get the ship of discourse turned away from the rocks, and overall I > think they do a good job of it. > > In today's society people believe they have a right not to be offended. > Really? I don't think so. Nobody, including myself, has the right to > have their opinions respected.You do have the right to express your > opinions freely, and without fear of persecution. In reality, that's not > really true for a reflector as it's a private venue, but most reflectors > operate as a benign dictatorship and hold to these principles. > > Mark's Principles of Discourse: > > #1: You don't have the right to not be offended. You don't have the > right to have your views favorably accepted.You don't have the right to > expect people with contrary view to back down because you're offended. > Accept the fact that people will not agree with you. > > #2: Only you can decide to take offense. Sometimes the offenses are > real, a lot of times imaginary. When I've felt offended by people on a > reflector, or in email, or other electronic mediums, I privately email the > potential offender for clarification. The vast majority of times there > was no offense intended. Remember, with electronic mediums you loose > about 93% of the intended message (body language, tone of voice etc – look > this one up if you don't believe me.Google is your friend.). > > #3: If you don't respect the source of the insult, don't let it bother > you. > > #4: If you're new to the sandbox, welcome. Unfortunately, if you want to > be respected for your views, then you have to first earn your stripes. > “Respect is something earned, not something given”. I have no idea who > said that, but it's true.
Re: Topband: Private thanks to you on your posting vs W0BTU RE topband Leaving
Not Helpful... But quite revealing...earning them stripes! CecilK5DL Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" Date: 9/5/18 8:20 AM (GMT-06:00) To: Mark K3MSB Cc: topband , Tree Subject: Topband: Private thanks to you on your posting vs W0BTU RE topband Leaving Off the reflector: Thanks Mark for posting this "rebuttal?" to W0BTU. His rules are way too stifling for my tastes. On another reflector, some bozo was going off on me saying I didn't know what I was talking about, etc. when I was trying to give him some friendly advice. The moderator asked me if I wanted to have him kick this guy off the reflector because he offended me. I told him, heck no, he just makes himself look stupid. I'll let the readers decide which one of us is the fool. You know the saying, don't argue with a fool... Anyway, your comments are very well received here. I'm going to save your "rules" for future reference. I'm a self confessed "never-FT8'er", but I wouldn't dream of forcing the FT8 enthusiasts off the reflector. I don't get where the beef is here. 73 Rick N6RK > I had to go rummage around my Trash folder to find the original post that > started this: > > “From the FT8 arguments in addition to the "millennials causing > the WWV shutdown" argument, it appears that the parts of the hobby that I > enjoy do not cross paths with those on the topband reflector. Although I > wish you all many CW DX, it appears that I am no longer welcome and that I > must take my leave.” > > I've no idea what the millennial and WWV comment is about as I did not > follow that thread. > > So we're back to the old FT8 vs CW argument. Was this person > specifically harassed and hunted down for his views? Shame on the > moderators if that's what happened. Or, did “the leaver” just not feel > welcomed because others expressed contrary views and wouldn't back off? > If that's the case, then there's the door, don't let it hit ya where the > Good Lord split ya. > > I've been on this reflector for a number of years and from how I observe > the moderators actions, I doubt any harassment and hunting down of heretics > occurred; I like to see the moderators shoot a warning shot across the > bow to get the ship of discourse turned away from the rocks, and overall I > think they do a good job of it. > > In today's society people believe they have a right not to be offended. > Really? I don't think so. Nobody, including myself, has the right to > have their opinions respected. You do have the right to express your > opinions freely, and without fear of persecution. In reality, that's not > really true for a reflector as it's a private venue, but most reflectors > operate as a benign dictatorship and hold to these principles. > > Mark's Principles of Discourse: > > #1: You don't have the right to not be offended. You don't have the > right to have your views favorably accepted. You don't have the right to > expect people with contrary view to back down because you're offended. > Accept the fact that people will not agree with you. > > #2: Only you can decide to take offense. Sometimes the offenses are > real, a lot of times imaginary. When I've felt offended by people on a > reflector, or in email, or other electronic mediums, I privately email the > potential offender for clarification. The vast majority of times there > was no offense intended. Remember, with electronic mediums you loose > about 93% of the intended message (body language, tone of voice etc – look > this one up if you don't believe me. Google is your friend.). > > #3: If you don't respect the source of the insult, don't let it bother > you. > > #4: If you're new to the sandbox, welcome. Unfortunately, if you want to > be respected for your views, then you have to first earn your stripes. > “Respect is something earned, not something given”. I have no idea who > said that, but it's true. The corollary is that even if you don't > respect a persons position, courtesy still remains. > > So Mike W0BTU, this is the 2nd thread in which you've posted your > stackexchange etiquette manifesto: > > “but I gar-run-tee you that none of this bickering and (fill in your own > definition of inappropriate behavior here) is tolerated there. ” > Respectfully Mike, it seems you've had it with this “bickering” and > “inappropriate behavior” and recommend putting the proverbial hammer down > to set thing straight (you “gar-run-tee” it). That's concerns me. > > Is it really bickering that's occurring, or might it be just a healthy > discourse on issues you might not feel need discuss
Topband: Private thanks to you on your posting vs W0BTU RE topband Leaving
Off the reflector: Thanks Mark for posting this "rebuttal?" to W0BTU. His rules are way too stifling for my tastes. On another reflector, some bozo was going off on me saying I didn't know what I was talking about, etc. when I was trying to give him some friendly advice. The moderator asked me if I wanted to have him kick this guy off the reflector because he offended me. I told him, heck no, he just makes himself look stupid. I'll let the readers decide which one of us is the fool. You know the saying, don't argue with a fool... Anyway, your comments are very well received here. I'm going to save your "rules" for future reference. I'm a self confessed "never-FT8'er", but I wouldn't dream of forcing the FT8 enthusiasts off the reflector. I don't get where the beef is here. 73 Rick N6RK I had to go rummage around my Trash folder to find the original post that started this: “From the FT8 arguments in addition to the "millennials causing the WWV shutdown" argument, it appears that the parts of the hobby that I enjoy do not cross paths with those on the topband reflector. Although I wish you all many CW DX, it appears that I am no longer welcome and that I must take my leave.” I've no idea what the millennial and WWV comment is about as I did not follow that thread. So we're back to the old FT8 vs CW argument.Was this person specifically harassed and hunted down for his views? Shame on the moderators if that's what happened.Or, did “the leaver” just not feel welcomed because others expressed contrary views and wouldn't back off? If that's the case, then there's the door, don't let it hit ya where the Good Lord split ya. I've been on this reflector for a number of years and from how I observe the moderators actions, I doubt any harassment and hunting down of heretics occurred; I like to see the moderators shoot a warning shot across the bow to get the ship of discourse turned away from the rocks, and overall I think they do a good job of it. In today's society people believe they have a right not to be offended. Really? I don't think so. Nobody, including myself, has the right to have their opinions respected.You do have the right to express your opinions freely, and without fear of persecution. In reality, that's not really true for a reflector as it's a private venue, but most reflectors operate as a benign dictatorship and hold to these principles. Mark's Principles of Discourse: #1: You don't have the right to not be offended. You don't have the right to have your views favorably accepted.You don't have the right to expect people with contrary view to back down because you're offended. Accept the fact that people will not agree with you. #2: Only you can decide to take offense. Sometimes the offenses are real, a lot of times imaginary. When I've felt offended by people on a reflector, or in email, or other electronic mediums, I privately email the potential offender for clarification. The vast majority of times there was no offense intended. Remember, with electronic mediums you loose about 93% of the intended message (body language, tone of voice etc – look this one up if you don't believe me.Google is your friend.). #3: If you don't respect the source of the insult, don't let it bother you. #4: If you're new to the sandbox, welcome. Unfortunately, if you want to be respected for your views, then you have to first earn your stripes. “Respect is something earned, not something given”. I have no idea who said that, but it's true. The corollary is that even if you don't respect a persons position, courtesy still remains. So Mike W0BTU, this is the 2nd thread in which you've posted your stackexchange etiquette manifesto: “but I gar-run-tee you that none of this bickering and (fill in your own definition of inappropriate behavior here) is tolerated there. ” Respectfully Mike, it seems you've had it with this “bickering” and “inappropriate behavior” and recommend putting the proverbial hammer down to set thing straight (you “gar-run-tee” it). That's concerns me. Is it really bickering that's occurring, or might it be just a healthy discourse on issues you might not feel need discussed any longer even though they may be of import to list members? “fill in your own definition of inappropriate behavior here”. Wow. I suspect you may not agree with mine. So, lets use mine and you follow them, OK ? “*Unacceptable Behavior - Even if you don’t intend it, this can have a negative impact on others ” So, if I offend someone I get a “warning” from the moderators as Enforcement step #1? I guess it's don't offend anyone for any reason or the hammer comes down! Sorry Mike, I think the moderators are doing a fine job as it is. Do I agree with their actions all the time? No. But I'll cut them some slack; it's a thankless job and you're always going to upset someone. So, in the end, we really don't know why
