Okay, it's official

[kl7aj]

Well, here's the introduction. I need W8JI, WB2WIK, W8ZNX and all our other elder statesmen to write a chapter. Or two. Or three. This is gonna be great.

Eric








Foreword

Amateur Radio from the Bottom Up




"If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."

--Sir Isaac Newton






Amateur Radio has been one of the few constants in my life. I owe my career, my discovery of Alaska, and a great deal of my sanity to the world's greatest hobby. I have violated the venerable ARRL Radio Amateur's Code on countless occasions by dedicating far too much time, energy, and devotion to this pursuit, with no regret whatsoever. I am who I am, largely due to Amateur Radio. My callsign is nearly as close to me as my own name; indeed, it is safe to say that far more people on this planet know the quintet of characters, KL7AJ, than recognize my face.
I have cowered beneath the bony, scolding finger of The Old Man, Hiram P. Maxim, if only from the grave. I have held the comforting, tattered pages of F.E. Handy's Handy Handbook against my bosom as a geeky teenager, when little else made sense. I have laughed and wept at the cartoons of Phil Gildersleeve. I have beheld the original Wouff Hong with my own eyes. I have built the circuits of William Orr, I have strung the wires of John Kraus, and I have sat at the feet of Jack Troster.
Indeed, these gentlemen were the Apostles of Amateur Radio, elder statesmen and witty sages, each and every one of them. I can never thank them enough for blazing the craggy trail through the wilderness of ignorance, so that the likes of my generation might stroll along a red carpet.
Inevitably, the Wouff Hong must be passed. Amateur Radio is nigh unto one hundred years old, and the methods, if not the mindset, must change with the times.
The biggest change I see is not so much a change in the technology, but rather the change in the hierarchy of knowledge. We no longer have to rely on gurus and sages for our knowledge. Because of the Internet, as much as anything, knowledge no longer trickles down from the top, but instead is "lateraled" from one peer to another, nearly free of any theocracy. In many ways, this shift in the way knowledge is transferred is quite analogous to the Protestant Reformation. The repository of knowledge, which had previously been the exclusive domain of "The Anointed," suddenly became readily available to anyone willing to open a book.
Naturally, there are hazards inherent in such a democratization of knowledge. This new paradigm assumes that every source is equally authoritative and reliable, which is certainly not the case. At times it's really comforting to have The Old Man looking over one's shoulder. Without the scolding, bony finger, it is almost inevitable that knowledge degenerates into an amorphous "blogosphere," which is nearly as distasteful as the authoritarian alternative.
And yet, there is a certain safety in numbers. This is the premise by which we prefer a jury by peers instead of a king, at least in America.
So with this in mind, we introduce a new kind of Amateur Radio reference book, the QRZ Manual of Amateur Radio Knowledge and Lore, a tome of wisdom gleaned from countless contributions by the hams of QRZ.com.


Eric Nichols, KL7AJ
August, 2006

[nq3x]

How the document is formatted will speak volumes about the document's value to the reader.

I suggest chapters like:

1. Getting Started
What is Amateur Radio?
Becoming a Radio Amateur
2. Station Building
Equipment
Station Layout (Ergonomics)
Your First Station (Step by step, piece by piece)
3. Antennas
Theory
Basic HF Aerials
Basic VHF/UHF Aerials
4. Operating Practices
How Not To Be A Lid http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

etc.

Put the chapters in logical order, and have the prose as compellingly-written as the introduction, and you'll have something to be proud of!

[kl7aj]

Hi Bob:

Excellent. I see from your photo you're a rather youthful feller. We need your energy, vision, and spunk to balance out our old geezerdom. I suppose I shall have to serve as the scolding, bony finger. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
I shall contribute some of my artwork as the need arises. I have studied Phil Gildersleeve's work for many years, and though I will never measure up to his brilliance, I believe I have absorbed a bit of his "feel." If you don't know who "Gil" is, you need to see if you can track down a copy of a book by the same name. It is now out of print, and I understand my copy is now somewhat rare. But someone near you might have a copy they can lend. If nothing else, you can look at some older QST's and handbooks. If you have some ideas for cartoons, pass them on to me, as well, and I'll see if I can bring them to life. Gil has been dead for 40 years, and there really hasn't been a replacement for him in all "hamdom." I'm going to try, though. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Eric

[N5KRC]

Lateraled? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[al7n]

What would be the criteria by which you'd define the
"Elder Statesmen" of amateur radio you are looking for?

I dunno...maybe I are one ? Been licensed for some over 49 years...

Started as a novice, maybe
I can cook up something worthwhile for your
project....I'll think on it.....

[WA2ZDY]

I like this idea, just not sure how much I might contribute, if anything. I'm open to suggestions and will keep watching in case I see some nitch I can fill.

So far, so good. Keep up the good work.

[kf4lne]

Sounds good to me. There needs to be a chapter on how to build a dipole, the importance of having a solid, clean signal and why when its OK to have a QSO on a "calling" frequency. Also, things like how to build, install and maintain your own antennas, materials to use and where to buy those materials and how not to get killed while doing it.

[nq3x]

Pure administrivia for moderator consumption:

Can we combine the Tome of Compendious Knowledge threads into one and make it a Sticky?

This one and this one (http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=7;t=129350) should be sufficient unto the Cause.

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (N5KRC @ Aug. 10 2006,11:45)]Lateraled? #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
It's a football term ^_^

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ Aug. 10 2006,12:25)]I like this idea, just not sure how much I might contribute, if anything. # I'm open to suggestions and will keep watching in case I see some nitch I can fill.

So far, so good. #Keep up the good work.
Appreciate it, OM. Be assured, we will find a niche for you. You are one of the Elder Statesmen I forgot to list. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
\
Eric

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 10 2006,13:17)]Pure administrivia for moderator consumption:

Can we combine the Tome of Compendious Knowledge threads into one and make it a Sticky?

This one and #this one (http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=7;t=129350) should be sufficient unto the Cause.
A capital idea. (Even with lower case!)

eric

[W5MEJ]

Ouch. Judging from the introduction, you must be going for a prize in the Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest. The only thing missing is the "Dark and stormy night". Throw your thesaurus in the fireplace and try again! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Have fun!
Chuck

[WA2ZDY]

Quote[/b] (W5MEJ @ Aug. 10 2006,18:19)]#The only thing missing is the "Dark and stormy night". #
That was to be the opening line for MY chapter. Now you've gone and spoilt it. Whatever shall I write now???

Eric, me, elder? Just because I'm coming up towards 32 years on the air . . . I'm ONLY 44! But thanks for the compliment.

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ Aug. 10 2006,16:59)]Quote[/b] (W5MEJ @ Aug. 10 2006,18:19)] The only thing missing is the "Dark and stormy night".
That was to be the opening line for MY chapter. Now you've gone and spoilt it. Whatever shall I write now???

Eric, me, elder? Just because I'm coming up towards 32 years on the air . . . I'm ONLY 44! But thanks for the compliment.
Well, I've learned there's a narrow window between grizzled sagacity and total senility. Strike while the iron's hot. HI!


Eric the grizzled, sageless one.

[WA9SVD]

It was a dark and stormy night. Suddenly a bolt of lightning rent the sultry nighttime air... (to be continued.)

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 10 2006,17:19)]It was a dark and stormy night. Suddenly a bolt of lightning rent the sultry nighttime air... (to be continued.)
But were there lightning suppressors in the shack?

[KA4DPO]

What a great idea you have. A handbook for amateur radio. Gee, I wonder why no one thought of it before? Oh well, no matter.

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 10 2006,18:00)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 10 2006,17:19)]It was a dark and stormy night. Suddenly a bolt of lightning rent the sultry nighttime air... (to be continued.)
But were there lightning suppressors in the shack?
This might come as a shock to you, but that's in the second chapter... (Hint: The butler didn't do it.)

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 10 2006,22:14)]Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 10 2006,18:00)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 10 2006,17:19)]It was a dark and stormy night. Suddenly a bolt of lightning rent the sultry nighttime air... (to be continued.)
But were there lightning suppressors in the shack?
This might come as a shock to you, but that's in the second chapter... (Hint: The butler didn't do it.)
Lightning comes as a shock to MOST people. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[nq3x]

Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ Aug. 10 2006,20:12)]What a great idea you have. A handbook for amateur radio. Gee, I wonder why no one thought of it before? Oh well, no matter.
Nice snark. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

I trust you've noticed that there can be different perspectives on things. ARRL has a handbook, RSBG have a handbook - both of which are in my library - and there's no reason QRZ lurkers can't put together a handbook. There's enough experience and knowledge here to make it possible, so why not put it together?

But since you think it's a waste of time, ignore it from here on out, okay?

[w5alt]

To keep in tune with much of what is posted on QRZ, the QRZ Handbook could be up to about 30% believable. That should make it fairly easy to put together.

There should also be a chapter on how we can all be kinder, gentler amateurs more in touch with our inabilities. That should include politically correct ways to say HW?, CUL, 73, OM, etc., along with "handle", "roger," and how to introduce your XYL without getting slapped up the side of the head the first time she figures it out.

In the same vein, a nice summary of the Code/No Code arguments would be nice - so then we could quote chapter and verse instead of just arguing.

As far as electronics, propagation and other esoteric things, you'll need to find a good "New Age" explanation for a few things, like why connecting an antenna makes the noise level rise, why a dummy load has good match and is a bad antenna, how sun spots affect some propagation modes, but not all, etc. You can probably blame lots of problems on magical swers jumping out of ether and things like that. The really neat thing is, that with a New Age slant, you can use up a whole chapter to explain the best time of day and year to use Echolink, too.

Be sure to include a guide to purchasing the right dipole, the pro's and con's of using CB SWR meters, why the J-pole is the best antenna ever invented, and discussions of how many meters your rigs should really have. (I think it's obvious that it should have 1: a person with 1 SWR meter always knows his SWR, but a person with 2 SWR meters is never quite sure. We don't need to confuse things here.) An explanation of why no one should ever particiapte in contests, how upgrading to Extra makes one a hindrance to NCT's and keys to getting DXCC without learning anything should prove interesting. You can try an innovative experiment with a section that proves that if you don't join the ARRL you're either the cause of the downfall of amateur radio or part of the majority of amateurs, depending on which day you read that part. If that works out, then you can do the same thing with the QRP chapter - one day it's the savior of amateur radio and the next day it's inconsiderate to expect people to actually listen to QRP signals. And don't forget to explain why LOTW is too hard to use, except for the few thousands of hams who use it, and why eQSL is being discriminated against since it's not accepted for ARRL awards. In fact you can also explain why ARRL awards are meaningless, yet people still apply for them and collect cards.

Good luck! I look forward to reading the results.

73,
Walt, W5ALT

[WA9SVD]

Walt:

You mean my dummy load isn't a good antenna? After all, the SWR's are all way low, next to nuthin'! Surely, that must mean SOMETHING?
Maybe I should be using an inverted dipole?

And don't forget, besides including instructions on choosing the right dipole, just as important is choosing the left dipole. Er, I mean correct left dipole... or would that be the right left dipole? (Or am I suffering from dipolar disorder...?)

(Sorry KL7AJ, I couldn't resist, and no insult meant. It's a noble cause, but Walt has a good point.)

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 11 2006,17:01)]Walt:

You mean my dummy load isn't a good antenna? After all, the SWR's are all way low, next to nuthin'! Surely, that must mean SOMETHING?
Maybe I should be using an inverted dipole?

And don't forget, besides including instructions on choosing the right dipole, just as important is choosing the left dipole. Er, I mean correct left dipole... or would that be the right left dipole? (Or am I suffering from dipolar disorder...?)

(Sorry KL7AJ, I couldn't resist, and no insult meant. It's a noble cause, but Walt has a good point.)
This is why my function as the bony, scolding finger of truth is so crucial. (See my intro).

Eric

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

I dont see a mention of PICTURES in this new manual / book / diary .

Is some one going to provide any pictures / drawings in this publication ?

Hey, this aint no insult...a real question...!!

[KI4ENY]

This is an excellent idea. #I am not sure if there is anything that I could contribute, but I will, as this thread progresses, make a PDF document of a polished version of this "book" available for either email or download to those who may be interested.

I commend you on your idea of pooling the knowledge of the hams here on QRZ.com into a book that we can all benefit from.

73,
de Chris, KI4ENY

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Aug. 11 2006,19:37)]http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

I dont see a mention of PICTURES in this new manual / book / diary .

Is some one going to provide any pictures / drawings in this publication ?

Hey, this aint no insult...a real question...!!
Indeed. Bob and I have discussed this already. And we're also going to include cartoons. We're looking for latter-day Phil Gildersleeves to carry on the tradition.

eric

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (KI4ENY @ Aug. 11 2006,21:36)]This is an excellent idea. I am not sure if there is anything that I could contribute, but I will, as this thread progresses, make a PDF document of a polished version of this "book" available for either email or download to those who may be interested.

I commend you on your idea of pooling the knowledge of the hams here on QRZ.com into a book that we can all benefit from.

73,
de Chris, KI4ENY
Thank you, Chris. Well, we have had a lot of good feedback on this. Of course, we've had some criticism too, though, for the life of me I can't see why anyone would object to this project. It's not like they're being asked to foot the bill. Oh well, I learned a long time ago that the best indication that you're doing something meaningful is that lesser minds will point out all the flaws, and then try to get the credit when it actually succeeds. I think George Orwell wrote an allegory about this once. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Eric

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 11 2006,17:13)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 11 2006,17:01)]Walt:

You mean my dummy load isn't a good antenna? After all, the SWR's are all way low, next to nuthin'! Surely, that must mean SOMETHING?
Maybe I should be using an inverted dipole?

And don't forget, besides including instructions on choosing the right dipole, just as important is choosing the left dipole. Er, I mean correct left dipole... or would that be the right left dipole? (Or am I suffering from dipolar disorder...?)

(Sorry KL7AJ, I couldn't resist, and no insult meant. It's a noble cause, but Walt has a good point.)
This is why my function as the bony, scolding finger of truth is so crucial. (See my intro).

Eric
AH! The " bony, scolding finger of truth."

Is that anything like the "Fickle Finger of Fate," from Rowan and Martin?

While a noble cause, you will also need an editorial team, AND a highly experienced technical team, and that won't be easy to achieve, at the current pay scale.

Now if the web site (aka Fred) were to actively support the notion of an "on-line handbook," there might be greater possibilities in your endeavour. But you will still need an (unbiased, perhaps even disinterested) editor who will critically review submissions, and not merely accept comments from others.

[kf6rdn]

Might I suggest a Wiki for this type of project? (Mediawiki)

I've setup a couple of these here for DVD authoring and coding documentation.
Course would require someone hosting of a wiki.

On another note, someone had mentioned the need for humor. #I think I'm one of the resident wiseasses. (Is that a word?)

As to the illustrations, I'm really good
At drawing stick figures.

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (kf6rdn @ Aug. 11 2006,23:44)]Might I suggest a Wiki for this type of project? (Mediawiki)

I've setup a couple of these here for DVD authoring and coding documentation.
Course would require someone hosting of a wiki.

On another note, someone had mentioned the need for humor. I think I'm one of the resident wiseasses. (Is that a word?)

As to the illustrations, I'm really good
At drawing stick figures.
Old Polish proverb (ala Banacek, a Czech name...) "It's better to be a smart-a** than just a stupid old donkey."

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 11 2006,23:41)]Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 11 2006,17:13)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 11 2006,17:01)]Walt:

You mean my dummy load isn't a good antenna? After all, the SWR's are all way low, next to nuthin'! Surely, that must mean SOMETHING?
Maybe I should be using an inverted dipole?

And don't forget, besides including instructions on choosing the right dipole, just as important is choosing the left dipole. Er, I mean correct left dipole... or would that be the right left dipole? (Or am I suffering from dipolar disorder...?)

(Sorry KL7AJ, I couldn't resist, and no insult meant. It's a noble cause, but Walt has a good point.)
This is why my function as the bony, scolding finger of truth is so crucial. (See my intro).

Eric
AH! The " bony, scolding finger of truth."

Is that anything like the "Fickle Finger of Fate," from Rowan and Martin?

While a noble cause, you will also need an editorial team, AND a highly experienced technical team, and that won't be easy to achieve, at the current pay scale.

Now if the web site (aka Fred) were to actively support the notion of an "on-line handbook," there might be greater possibilities in your endeavour. But you will still need an (unbiased, perhaps even disinterested) editor who will critically review submissions, and not merely accept comments from others.
This already has the endorsement of Fred. In fact, he's already agreed to write the introduction. And the aforementioned editors, etc are already assembling themselves. We have all the expertise we need, right here in River City!


Eric

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (kf6rdn @ Aug. 11 2006,23:44)]Might I suggest a Wiki for this type of project? (Mediawiki)

I've setup a couple of these here for DVD authoring and coding documentation.
Course would require someone hosting of a wiki.

On another note, someone had mentioned the need for humor. I think I'm one of the resident wiseasses. (Is that a word?)

As to the illustrations, I'm really good
At drawing stick figures.
A wiki is an excellent idea. When I was with the Nupedia project (the predecessor to Wikipedia) we used one of the first ever wiki servers. Eventually, that took over! I'm sure we can find someone here to administer a wiki for us.

And n3oya is the de-facto general editor/layout dude. People are coming out of the woodwork for this...it's really cool!

eric

[N4AUD]

I don't know if I could help in any way, but if I can I will do so. This is a great idea.

[WA9SVD]

Good luck. I hope it works out, for the benefit of all.

[nq3x]

Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 12 2006,02:09)]A wiki is an excellent idea. When I was with the Nupedia project (the predecessor to Wikipedia) we used one of the first ever wiki servers. Eventually, that took over! I'm sure we can find someone here to administer a wiki for us.

And n3oya is the de-facto general editor/layout dude. People are coming out of the woodwork for this...it's really cool!
I wish I was more of a web-guy than a print-guy. I might be of more use to the Wiki idea in that case. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

There was raised above a very good point. My editing will be restricted to Strunk & White; i.e., grammar, organization and proper citation. I am by no means capable of technically editing a submission. There must be a technical review.

Now that caveat is out of the way, those who wish to submit should follow a few simple guidelines.

First, follow the grammar rules you learned in grade school. Here's the basics:

How to write good
1. Avoid alliteration. Always.
2. Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
3. Avoid cliches like the plague. (They're old hat.)
4. Employ the vernacular.
5. Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
6. Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary.
7. It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.
8. Contractions aren't necessary.
9. Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
10. One should never generalize.
11. Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
12. Comparisons are as bad as cliches.
13. Don't be redundant; don't use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
14. Be more or less specific.
15. Understatement is always best.
16. One-word sentences? Eliminate.
17. Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
18. The passive voice is to be avoided.
19. Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
20. Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
21. Who needs rhetorical questions?
22. Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.

Second, use accepted academic practice. If you say something is gospel, cite your source. I prefer MLA citation format (found here (http://www.liu.edu/CWIS/CWP/library/workshop/citmla.htm)), though Chicago Manual of Style (http://library.osu.edu/sites/guides/chicagogd.php) citation format is also fine. Choose one, then stick to it. Don't flip from MLA to CMS in the middle of your document.

Example:

We now know that 120 radial wires are unnecessary in HF vertical ground-mounted installation. [1]

1. Sevick, Jerry. "The Ground Image Vertical Antenna." QST July 1971: 16-19.

We'll figure out the best person to receive submissions and let everyone know. The format, as far as I'm concerned for editing and formatting, should be RTF with high-resolution images (JPG, TIFF) attached as seperate files. Do not embed your images into the document. They cannot be removed, and the quality will suck. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Gosh, this is exciting! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[WA2ZDY]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 12 2006,11:24)]First, follow the grammar rules you learned in grade school. #Here's the basics:

How to write good
1. Avoid alliteration. Always.
2. Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
3. Avoid cliches like the plague. (They're old hat.)
4. Employ the vernacular.
5. Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
6. Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary.
7. It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.
8. Contractions aren't necessary.
9. Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
10. One should never generalize.
11. Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
12. Comparisons are as bad as cliches.
13. Don't be redundant; don't use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
14. Be more or less specific.
15. Understatement is always best.
16. One-word sentences? Eliminate.
17. Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
18. The passive voice is to be avoided.
19. Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
20. Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
21. Who needs rhetorical questions?
22. Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.

Second, use accepted academic practice. If you say something is gospel, cite your source. #I prefer MLA citation format (found here (http://www.liu.edu/CWIS/CWP/library/workshop/citmla.htm)), though Chicago Manual of Style (http://library.osu.edu/sites/guides/chicagogd.php) citation format is also fine. #Choose one, then stick to it. #Don't flip from MLA to CMS in the middle of your document.
Ummmm . . . Mommy taught me to write well. I think I do fairly well with that. I do it well because I know from reading thousands of books what sounds correct.

I can honestly say though that I never effectively learned grammar. In other words, I don't know a single thing about nearly all of your points above.

Whatdidjasay?

I DO know when something is wrong by the sound though and I can say that "Here's the basics" is wrong. Here IS the basicS. You're mixing singular and plural. "How to write good." Good is an adjective. Good what? Or it's a noun. "He did good" as in a good deed. "How to write well" works.

But then again I'm thinking that whole post was a chain yanker . . .

But I am deadly serious, I know very little grammer "by the rules." It's like knowing how to read music versus playing by ear. I play be ear, fly by the seat of my pants and write only what sounds good (not well!)

Thanks for indulging me.

[w4rot]

I will support this project under one condition.
I want my copy autographed.
I'll pay shipping to and fro and all over the place.
Neat stuff gents and good luck.
Books are a good thing.
rot

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 12 2006,08:24)][

First, follow the grammar rules you learned in grade school. Here's the basics:

How to write good
1
Umm, Umm, no offense, but shouldn't that be:

"How to write WELL?"

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ Aug. 12 2006,01:15)]I don't know if I could help in any way, but if I can I will do so. This is a great idea.
Drop n3oya a line. He has a preliminary list of chapters. Pick a topic you'd like to write about. Don't worry about spelling, grammar, formatting, etc. Just get the idea "down on paper" and we'll polish it.

This is the whole point of my preface "amateur radio FROM THE GROUND UP."

Thanks for your input,


Eric

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (w4rot @ Aug. 12 2006,10:11)]I will support this project under one condition.
I want my copy autographed.
I'll pay shipping to and fro and all over the place.
Neat stuff gents and good luck.
Books are a good thing.
rot
We can certainly arrange that. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Incidentally, I am in the midst of attempting to get my second novel, "Steel Stonehenge" published, and by the end of August I'll know if I have a new agent. If I do, I'll have a new set of New York publishing contacts to work with. This could be useful even for a non-fiction work.

Eric

[kl7aj]

By the way, if you are looking for a writing assignment, N3OYA is passing them out. His email address is: bob@planetbob.org. Until we get a wiki up and running, that will be a good place to submit finished materials. (Until Bob's email gets full and sends us elsewhere!)



Eric

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 12 2006,08:24)]Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 12 2006,02:09)]A wiki is an excellent idea. When I was with the Nupedia project (the predecessor to Wikipedia) we used one of the first ever wiki servers. Eventually, that took over! I'm sure we can find someone here to administer a wiki for us.

And n3oya is the de-facto general editor/layout dude. People are coming out of the woodwork for this...it's really cool!
I wish I was more of a web-guy than a print-guy. I might be of more use to the Wiki idea in that case. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

There was raised above a very good point. My editing will be restricted to Strunk & White; i.e., grammar, organization and proper citation. I am by no means capable of technically editing a submission. There must be a technical review.

Now that caveat is out of the way, those who wish to submit should follow a few simple guidelines.

First, follow the grammar rules you learned in grade school. Here's the basics:

How to write good
1. Avoid alliteration. Always.
2. Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
3. Avoid cliches like the plague. (They're old hat.)
4. Employ the vernacular.
5. Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
6. Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary.
7. It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.
8. Contractions aren't necessary.
9. Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
10. One should never generalize.
11. Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
12. Comparisons are as bad as cliches.
13. Don't be redundant; don't use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
14. Be more or less specific.
15. Understatement is always best.
16. One-word sentences? Eliminate.
17. Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
18. The passive voice is to be avoided.
19. Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
20. Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
21. Who needs rhetorical questions?
22. Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.

Second, use accepted academic practice. If you say something is gospel, cite your source. I prefer MLA citation format (found here (http://www.liu.edu/CWIS/CWP/library/workshop/citmla.htm)), though Chicago Manual of Style (http://library.osu.edu/sites/guides/chicagogd.php) citation format is also fine. Choose one, then stick to it. Don't flip from MLA to CMS in the middle of your document.

Example:

We now know that 120 radial wires are unnecessary in HF vertical ground-mounted installation. [1]

1. Sevick, Jerry. "The Ground Image Vertical Antenna." QST July 1971: 16-19.

We'll figure out the best person to receive submissions and let everyone know. The format, as far as I'm concerned for editing and formatting, should be RTF with high-resolution images (JPG, TIFF) attached as seperate files. Do not embed your images into the document. They cannot be removed, and the quality will suck. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Gosh, this is exciting! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Your irrepressible enthusiasm reinforces my conviction that you are the right man for this job. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

I also eschew obfuscation.

eric

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 12 2006,11:53)][

I also eschew obfuscation.

eric
Gesundheit!

[n0jaa]

If you radio-type dudes REALLY want to write a handbook, I would suggest you all get together and start an entry at Wikipedia. That would be a good place to start.

[n0jaa]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 12 2006,16:18)]Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 12 2006,11:53)][

I also eschew obfuscation.

eric
Gesundheit!
This thread is not only obfuscated, it has been floccinaucinihilipilified!

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (n0jaa @ Aug. 11 2006,16:12)]If you radio-type dudes REALLY want to write a handbook, I would suggest you all get together and start an entry at Wikipedia. #That would be a good place to start.
Unlikely.

I really like Wikipedia. But the project wishes to remain encyclopedic, which of course, is a perfectly appropriate goal. I get the sense that what these guys want to do will be filled with a lot of fact and probably almost as much opinion. I'm not being critical, I just doubt that it will meet the wikipedia standard of being encyclopedic.

Of course, there is already an entry for amateur radio which anyone is free to modify.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur_radio

...

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (kc9jqm @ Aug. 11 2006,22:53)]Since this is going to be the QRZ handbook of amateur radio,
Chapter 5: Code/No Code? will be 10000 pages of tired arguments,
name-calling, and insults. Same for chapter 6: Echolink.
only 10000?

[WA9SVD]

If the project is to succeed, it will need to provide FACTS, not mere opinions (which I believe is the basis for Wikipedia; anyone can add comments, regardless how far-fetched or outright inaccurate the comment may be.) And THAT is a daunting task. (The ARRL Handbook itself isn't exempt from the problem.) I DO hope it will become an on-line success. But with all due respect, it has to be first-class, respectable, and as free of errors as possible, so a disinterested senior editor would be a definite plus, to oversee the whole project, and catch the glaring (to everyone but the individual authors) gramma-tickle or teck-nickle errors..

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 11 2006,23:28)]If the project is to succeed, it will need to provide FACTS, not mere opinions (which I believe is the basis for Wikipedia; anyone can add comments, regardless how far-fetched or outright inaccurate the comment may be.) #And THAT is a daunting task. #(The ARRL Handbook itself isn't exempt from the problem.) #I DO hope it will become an on-line success. # But with all due respect, it #has to be first-class, respectable, and as free of errors as possible, so a disinterested senior editor would be a definite plus, to oversee the whole project, and catch the glaring (to everyone but the individual authors) gramma-tickle or teck-nickle errors..
It's not fair to say that Wikipedia is merely opinions. Anyone can edit it, true, but in reality only those knowledgeable tend to edit the majority of pages. Just because I know something does not make it opinion. I know, for example, that 1+1=2. That is a factual statement. I can provide a reference if necessary.

Moreover, there is no denying the encyclopedic tone of the Wikipedia. Perhaps I'm wrong but I had the distinct impression that folks here wanted something less encyclopedic.

I also disagree that it needs to be free of opinion to be useful. I think a lot of what are traditions in amateur radio are nothing but opinion. Should newcomers to CW stay above 7025 even if they have an extra ticket? Well, it seems not everyone agrees on that sort of thing.

If you're trying to duplicate something on the level of the ARRL handbook. Good Luck. Personally, I don't think QRZ posters have the stamina for it. I guess time wiill only prove me wrong or right on this one.

Starting with a wiki is a great idea. I believe some other site has already tried to do something like this, google for hampedia. The problem with a wiki is you really have to let go of the control and let people participate for it to take off. That is, either you have a model similar to wikipedia, or you can expect the project to take years and years.

[nq3x]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 12 2006,12:27)]Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 12 2006,08:24)][

First, follow the grammar rules you learned in grade school. Here's the basics:

How to write good
1
Umm, Umm, no offense, but shouldn't that be:

"How to write WELL?"
Guys,

It's a pun.

If you read the rules, you'll see that each one describes a grammar rule with a mistake. Hence the "mistake" in the title.

My wife is always telling me that a joke is no good if you need to explain it. Guess I missed the mark... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

And "the basics" can be argued to be plural as well as singular. It's akin to the difference between British usage and American usage. Brits say, "The crowd are going wild." Yanks say, "The crowd is going wild."

Just a thought from your humble editor...

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 13 2006,09:44)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 12 2006,12:27)]Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 12 2006,08:24)][

First, follow the grammar rules you learned in grade school. Here's the basics:

How to write good
1
Umm, Umm, no offense, but shouldn't that be:

"How to write WELL?"
Guys,

It's a pun.

If you read the rules, you'll see that each one describes a grammar rule with a mistake. Hence the "mistake" in the title.

My wife is always telling me that a joke is no good if you need to explain it. Guess I missed the mark... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

And "the basics" can be argued to be plural as well as singular. It's akin to the difference between British usage and American usage. Brits say, "The crowd are going wild." Yanks say, "The crowd is going wild."

Just a thought from your humble editor...
Bob,

Some people just can't take PUNishment. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

"I'm never anywhere on time," Tom related.


eric

[ae5rc]

What an admirable project. Before #the "QRZ Handbook" is compiled and #sent to press, check Doug DeMaw's book,
" W1FB's Help for New Hams". It has many of the suggested chapters already done and in print.

It is a good book to read. #The grammar in his publication is #correct. (Mr. DeMaw's book will cut many out of jobs on this project) #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif!!


73,
KB5LPA

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 13 2006,09:44)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 12 2006,12:27)]Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 12 2006,08:24)][

First, follow the grammar rules you learned in grade school. Here's the basics:

How to write good
1
Umm, Umm, no offense, but shouldn't that be:

"How to write WELL?"
Guys,

It's a pun.

If you read the rules, you'll see that each one describes a grammar rule with a mistake. Hence the "mistake" in the title.

My wife is always telling me that a joke is no good if you need to explain it. Guess I missed the mark... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

And "the basics" can be argued to be plural as well as singular. It's akin to the difference between British usage and American usage. Brits say, "The crowd are going wild." Yanks say, "The crowd is going wild."

Just a thought from your humble editor...
Bob, it's anything BUT a "PUN." A PUN is a play upon words, or use of similar words to impart a humourous response. But not merely exxagerated or egreggious "mistakes," even if purposefully attempted.

Many of us saw the first phrase"...How to write good..."
and were much less inclined to take the rest of the post seriously. At least a disclaimer at the end would have been a bit more civilized and reassuring to the rest of us.

Besides, didn't your grammer teach you nuthin' 'bout usin' good gramma? This ain't the 20th Century, no more! This here's the "Internet."

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (ab8ro @ Aug. 12 2006,22:41)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 11 2006,23:28)]If the project is to succeed, it will need to provide FACTS, not mere opinions (which I believe is the basis for Wikipedia; anyone can add comments, regardless how far-fetched or outright inaccurate the comment may be.) And THAT is a daunting task. (The ARRL Handbook itself isn't exempt from the problem.) I DO hope it will become an on-line success. But with all due respect, it has to be first-class, respectable, and as free of errors as possible, so a disinterested senior editor would be a definite plus, to oversee the whole project, and catch the glaring (to everyone but the individual authors) gramma-tickle or teck-nickle errors..
It's not fair to say that Wikipedia is merely opinions. Anyone can edit it, true, but in reality only those knowledgeable tend to edit the majority of pages. Just because I know something does not make it opinion. I know, for example, that 1+1=2. That is a factual statement. I can provide a reference if necessary.

Moreover, there is no denying the encyclopedic tone of the Wikipedia. Perhaps I'm wrong but I had the distinct impression that folks here wanted something less encyclopedic.

I also disagree that it needs to be free of opinion to be useful. I think a lot of what are traditions in amateur radio are nothing but opinion. Should newcomers to CW stay above 7025 even if they have an extra ticket? Well, it seems not everyone agrees on that sort of thing.

If you're trying to duplicate something on the level of the ARRL handbook. Good Luck. Personally, I don't think QRZ posters have the stamina for it. I guess time wiill only prove me wrong or right on this one.

Starting with a wiki is a great idea. I believe some other site has already tried to do something like this, google for hampedia. The problem with a wiki is you really have to let go of the control and let people participate for it to take off. That is, either you have a model similar to wikipedia, or you can expect the project to take years and years.
You make some valid points, but I or someone could say at Wikipedia that 1+1=3, and that they have incontrovertible proof to that effect. And SOME people will believe them. Wikipedia doesn't seperate fact from fiction, or in an Amateur Radio sense, gentleman's agreement from what is merely legal, but not considerate. (Such as operating FM below 144.300 MHz, right in the weak signal band. THAT is by bandplan and gentleman's agreement, but unfortunately, only gentlemen [and ladies] abide by such agreements.) If someone at Wiki says it's fine to operate FM on 144.200 MHz, how many people will believe that statement? Legal? YES: but inconsiderate, and may be causing interference to stations an FM radio will never know exist.

So there HAS to be some editorial review, otherwise it will turn into a useless bit of fluff, and support will dwindle as time goes by. You can't rely on only the "knowledgeable (or honorable) to add to a Wikipedia-type offering; there WILL be those with less than honorable intentions (as often witnessed in other threads) that will do their darndest to disrupt anything, and everything, they can.

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 14 2006,13:23)]Quote[/b] (ab8ro @ Aug. 12 2006,22:41)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 11 2006,23:28)]If the project is to succeed, it will need to provide FACTS, not mere opinions (which I believe is the basis for Wikipedia; anyone can add comments, regardless how far-fetched or outright inaccurate the comment may be.) #And THAT is a daunting task. #(The ARRL Handbook itself isn't exempt from the problem.) #I DO hope it will become an on-line success. # But with all due respect, it #has to be first-class, respectable, and as free of errors as possible, so a disinterested senior editor would be a definite plus, to oversee the whole project, and catch the glaring (to everyone but the individual authors) gramma-tickle or teck-nickle errors..
It's not fair to say that Wikipedia is merely opinions. Anyone can edit it, true, but in reality only those knowledgeable tend to edit the majority of pages. Just because I know something does not make it opinion. I know, for example, that 1+1=2. That is a factual statement. I can provide a reference if necessary.

Moreover, there is no denying the encyclopedic tone of the Wikipedia. Perhaps I'm wrong but I had the distinct impression that folks here wanted something less encyclopedic. #

I also disagree that it needs to be free of opinion to be useful. I think a lot of what are traditions in amateur radio are nothing but opinion. Should newcomers to CW stay above 7025 even if they have an extra ticket? Well, it seems not everyone agrees on that sort of thing.

If you're trying to duplicate something on the level of the ARRL handbook. Good Luck. Personally, I don't think QRZ posters have the stamina for it. I guess time wiill only prove me wrong or right on this one.

Starting with a wiki is a great idea. I believe some other site has already tried to do something like this, google for hampedia. The problem with a wiki is you really have to let go of the control and let people participate for it to take off. That is, either you have a model similar to wikipedia, or you can expect the project to take years and years.
You make some valid points, but I or someone could say at Wikipedia that 1+1=3, and that they have incontrovertible proof to that effect. #And SOME people will believe them. # Wikipedia doesn't seperate fact from fiction, or in an Amateur Radio sense, gentleman's agreement from what is merely legal, but not considerate. #(Such as operating FM below 144.300 MHz, right in the weak signal band. #THAT is by bandplan and gentleman's agreement, but unfortunately, only gentlemen [and ladies] abide by such agreements.) #If someone at Wiki says it's fine to operate FM on 144.200 MHz, how many people will believe that statement? #Legal? #YES: but inconsiderate, and may be causing interference to stations an FM radio will never know exist.

# #So there HAS to be some editorial review, otherwise it will turn into a useless bit of fluff, and support will dwindle as time goes by. # You can't rely on only the "knowledgeable (or honorable) to add to a Wikipedia-type offering; there WILL be those with less than honorable intentions (as often witnessed in other threads) that will do their darndest to disrupt anything, and everything, they can.
I agree. That is why I am going to serve as one of several "scolding bony fingers," to keep everyone honest. I have a pretty good track record of publication with ARRL, as well as with the UCLA Plasma Physics department. We have enough guys around here like W8JI to keep us in line too.

Eric

[nq3x]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 14 2006,15:08)]
Bob, it's anything BUT a "PUN." A PUN is a play upon words, or use of similar words to impart a humourous response. But not merely exxagerated or egreggious "mistakes," even if purposefully attempted.

Many of us saw the first phrase"...How to write good..."
and were much less inclined to take the rest of the post seriously. At least a disclaimer at the end would have been a bit more civilized and reassuring to the rest of us.

Besides, didn't your grammer teach you nuthin' 'bout usin' good gramma? This ain't the 20th Century, no more! This here's the "Internet."
Sorry. Misused "pun". Etymological exercise? Is that an acceptable descriptor?

I thought anyone interested in grammar had seen this list years ago. When I first read it - I think sometime in 1994 - I was led to understand that it was written as a tongue-in-cheek exercise by a high-school English teacher. Regardless, it is an excellent series of examples of what NOT to do.

And anyone with the future of human culture at heart will despair when the addition of disclaimers becomes the mark of "civilized" writing.

WARNING: The above is a nasty snark, not intended toward personal WA9SVD personally, but a nasty snark nonetheless.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Oh, and we have a nasty go-round about your last statement quarterly on another board I frequent. There are a bunch of whiny, lazy idiots thereat who will use any excuse to avoid erudition. Their latest ploy is that the Internet, and its instant-gratification nature, obviates any attention to grammar, spelling, or indeed making any sense. I and others call them out periodically, explaining that good grammar makes language less taxing to read than the hieroglyphical conjunctions of Roman letters the idiots string together. In other words, we point out that the purpose of grammar is standardized rules which make language easier to understand and express ideas.

But no, the idiots just claim we're suppressing them. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 14 2006,15:31)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 14 2006,15:08)]
Bob, it's anything BUT a "PUN." #A PUN is a play upon words, or use of similar words to impart a humourous response. #But not merely exxagerated or egreggious "mistakes," even if purposefully attempted.

# #Many of us saw the first phrase"...How to write good..."
and were much less inclined to take the rest of the post seriously. #At least a disclaimer at the end would have been a bit more civilized and reassuring to the rest of us.

# #Besides, didn't your grammer teach you nuthin' 'bout usin' good gramma? #This ain't the 20th Century, no more! #This here's the "Internet."
Sorry. #Misused "pun". #Etymological exercise? #Is that an acceptable descriptor?

I thought anyone interested in grammar had seen this list years ago. #When I first read it - I think sometime in 1994 - I was led to understand that it was written as a tongue-in-cheek exercise by a high-school English teacher. #Regardless, it is an excellent series of examples of what NOT to do.

And anyone with the future of human culture at heart will despair when the addition of disclaimers becomes the mark of "civilized" writing.

WARNING: The above is a nasty snark, not intended toward personal WA9SVD personally, but a nasty snark nonetheless.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Oh, and we have a nasty go-round about your last statement quarterly on another board I frequent. #There are a bunch of whiny, lazy idiots thereat who will use any excuse to avoid erudition. #Their latest ploy is that the Internet, and its instant-gratification nature, obviates any attention to grammar, spelling, or indeed making any sense. #I and others call them out periodically, explaining that good grammar makes language less taxing to read than the hieroglyphical conjunctions of Roman letters the idiots string together. #In other words, we point out that the purpose of grammar is standardized rules which make language easier to understand and express ideas.

But no, the idiots just claim we're suppressing them. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
Well, as some sage said (the human type, not the herbal type), "Language is the currency of thought." The obvious implication thereof is that sloppy language is an indication of lame thinking. I agree.

Eric

[WA9SVD]

Bob, (and Eric,)

I won't take it as a personal attack. Far from it. As long as we stay civilized, I assume we can be a bit sarcastic, if it doesn't jeopardize your project.
I DO believe you are taking on a formidible task, and to be done correctly (not just right) will take a tremendous effort. If you are up to the task, then I will contribute (or assist) as much as I can. And I can rite more gooder than most peeples. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

P.S. Without knowing your background or credentials, it was difficult to ascertain whether your "list" was a spoof, or something worse. IMHO, not everyone reads QRZ threads (Thank goodness!) as academic publications. Or considers them as such.

Really, such a presentation would have been more appropriate to English 101 (actually, 5 th Grade English) for the students to examine, and realize the grammatical errors as they occurred.
But you switched from what we thought was a completely serious topic ( a QRZ Handbook) and suddenly switched to a completely different style. It's no wonder some of us were left questioning the ability or seriousness of the entire project, or at least your editorial ability.
Yes, I caught each "error." But there was no indication whether they were intentional or not. There have been even worse "editors" that have risen to editorial status (here locally) at a National newspaper that don't know the difference between to, too, and two. With that sort of expertise working for a national newspaper, it's difficult to know whether an Internet submission such as yours was serious or not.

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 14 2006,22:19)]Bob, (and Eric,)

I won't take it as a personal attack. Far from it. As long as we stay civilized, I assume we can be a bit sarcastic, if it doesn't jeopardize your project.
I DO believe you are taking on a formidible task, and to be done correctly (not just right) will take a tremendous effort. If you are up to the task, then I will contribute (or assist) as much as I can. And I can rite more gooder than most peeples. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

P.S. Without knowing your background or credentials, it was difficult to ascertain whether your "list" was a spoof, or something worse. IMHO, not everyone reads QRZ threads (Thank goodness!) as academic publications. Or considers them as such.
Well, anything worth doing is going to be formidable. When I looked at writing my first novel, I wondered how anyone could write 100,000 words. Now it takes me 10.000 just to clear my throat. HI.

We have a LOT of talent here, probably more in numbers than when the first ARRL Handbook was published. Actually, F.E. Handy pretty much wrote the first book himself. We have the information...we have millions of words already in the QRZ archives, and we have some highly motivated people. If one tenth of the energy devoted to never-ending debates on here is dedicated to this book, it should be a snap.

Eric

[kl7aj]

It's time to get this show on the road! I have written the first page of Chapter One. As y'all look this over, you will see how the mood and "vibe" of this is quite different from most other amateur radio literature. This is the sort of angle I'd like to emphasize throughout the book, as much as possible.

If this doesn't ring your chimes, now's the time to speak up! I'm on a roll. HI

Eric

[nq3x]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 15 2006,00:19)]Bob, (and Eric,)

I won't take it as a personal attack. Far from it. As long as we stay civilized, I assume we can be a bit sarcastic, if it doesn't jeopardize your project.
I DO believe you are taking on a formidible task, and to be done correctly (not just right) will take a tremendous effort. If you are up to the task, then I will contribute (or assist) as much as I can. And I can rite more gooder than most peeples. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

P.S. Without knowing your background or credentials, it was difficult to ascertain whether your "list" was a spoof, or something worse. IMHO, not everyone reads QRZ threads (Thank goodness!) as academic publications. Or considers them as such.

Really, such a presentation would have been more appropriate to English 101 (actually, 5 th Grade English) for the students to examine, and realize the grammatical errors as they occurred.
But you switched from what we thought was a completely serious topic ( a QRZ Handbook) and suddenly switched to a completely different style. It's no wonder some of us were left questioning the ability or seriousness of the entire project, or at least your editorial ability.
Yes, I caught each "error." But there was no indication whether they were intentional or not. There have been even worse "editors" that have risen to editorial status (here locally) at a National newspaper that don't know the difference between to, too, and two. With that sort of expertise working for a national newspaper, it's difficult to know whether an Internet submission such as yours was serious or not.
Point taken. I should have thought more deeply. After all, we barely know each other. People who know me know I am passionate about proper use of language. They also know that I consider proper use a dying art, as evidenced by the editors you mentioned. If anyone should have a handle on grammar and syntax, it should be editors. Sheesh. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

The task is a indeed daunting. We are at the foot of the mountain, peering upward in awe. It is amazing that we'll begin the climb at all! But that's what we've set out to do, so that's what we're doing.

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 15 2006,04:32)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 15 2006,00:19)]Bob, (and Eric,)

# #I won't take it as a personal attack. #Far from it. #As long as we stay civilized, I assume we can be a bit sarcastic, if it doesn't jeopardize your project.
# #I DO believe you are taking on a formidible task, and to be done correctly (not just right) will take a tremendous effort. #If you are up to the task, then I will contribute (or assist) as much as I can. #And I can rite more gooder than most peeples. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

P.S. #Without knowing your background or credentials, it was difficult to ascertain whether your "list" was a spoof, or something worse. #IMHO, not everyone reads QRZ threads (Thank goodness!) as academic publications. #Or considers them as such.

# #Really, such a presentation would have been more appropriate to English 101 (actually, 5 th Grade English) for the students to examine, and realize the grammatical errors as they occurred.
# #But you switched from what we thought was a completely serious topic ( a QRZ Handbook) and suddenly switched to a completely different style. #It's no wonder some of us were left questioning the ability or seriousness of the entire project, or at least your editorial ability.
# #Yes, I caught each "error." #But there was no indication whether they were intentional or not. #There have been even worse "editors" that have risen to editorial status (here locally) at a National newspaper that don't know the difference between to, too, and two. #With that sort of expertise working for a national newspaper, it's difficult to know whether an Internet submission such as yours was serious or not.
Point taken. #I should have thought more deeply. #After all, we barely know each other. #People who know me know I am passionate about proper use of language. #They also know that I consider proper use a dying art, as evidenced by the editors you mentioned. #If anyone should have a handle on grammar and syntax, it should be editors. #Sheesh. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

The task is a indeed daunting. #We are at the foot of the mountain, peering upward in awe. #It is amazing that we'll begin the climb at all! # But that's what we've set out to do, so that's what we're doing.
Indeed. I think Bob and I both have the same warped sense of humor. And we hardly know each other either http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Well, like they say, the way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time. If the speed at which this team assembled itself out of the blue is any indication, it's not going to be anywhere near as daunting as it seems. We don't have any particular deadlines, anyway. When we think it's done, we'll approach a publisher. Whether that's a year or a decade away, really doesn't matter.

Eric

[kl7aj]

Oh, by the way, Bob. Why don't you put your preliminary chapter list on this thread, in case anyone happens to have missed it. Also, unless you have a particular objection, I want to put the chapter on propagation WAY near the beginning of the book. After all, this is amateur RADIO. I want to keep that point first and foremost. Do you agree?

Eric

[WA2ZDY]

I like that first page Eric. Is there to be room for personal stories, such as "How I started" stuff?

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 15 2006,04:32)][ People who know me know I am passionate about proper use of language. They also know that I consider proper use a dying art, as evidenced by the editors you mentioned. If anyone should have a handle on grammar and syntax, it should be editors. Sheesh. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
You'd never stand a chance working for the Lost Angeles Times with THAT attitude! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ Aug. 15 2006,12:31)]I like that first page Eric. #Is there to be room for personal stories, such as "How I started" stuff?
Absolutely! We will use EVERYTHING. (Within reason, of course )

eric

[kl7aj]

Here's the introduction to my chapter on ionospheric propagation. I want it near the beginning, but not sure where. Much more to follow. As always, comments and corrections solicited.

[nq3x]

Chapter list will follow. Work is murder today. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Watch this space!

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 15 2006,13:43)]Chapter list will follow. Work is murder today. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif #Watch this space!
If you want something done, give it to a busy man.


Good show, Bob!

[kl7aj]

And, Bob. Don't forget to use a gentle application of the Wouff Hong on the as-yet undecided "volunteers." http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[WA2ZDY]

Nice ionosphere stuff there. You need a few paragraphs about the Maunder Minimum of 1715, its effect on the weather and how we are lucky that shortwave transmission was perfected at a time when there were enough sunspots to prove the "shortwaves are useless experts" wrong.

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ Aug. 15 2006,15:12)]Nice ionosphere stuff there. #You need a few paragraphs about the Maunder Minimum of 1715, its effect on the weather and how we are lucky that shortwave transmission was perfected at a time when there were enough sunspots to prove the "shortwaves are useless experts" wrong.
Nice suggestions. Of course, the job now falls to you to write that up particular section. Remember...this is "The Peoples' Publication". If you think it, you write it. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif Isn't this fun?

-E

[kl7aj]

Migrating to wiki! My, that was fast!

[nq3x]

Chapter list posted to "QRZ Handbook Undaunted" thread.

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (n3oya @ Aug. 14 2006,15:31)]Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Aug. 14 2006,15:08)]
Bob, it's anything BUT a "PUN." A PUN is a play upon words, or use of similar words to impart a humourous response. This here's the "Internet."


Sorry. Misused "pun". Etymological exercise? Is that an acceptable descriptor?
(Edited to reduce length of quote.)

Bob (and Eric,)
HERE's an example of a PUN, as I'm sure you know. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

"There was the person who sent ten different puns to his friends, with the hope that at least some of the puns would make them laugh. No pun in ten did." ( Multiple Groans allowed HERE.)


They don't get "much more worser" than that...

Keep up the good work and I'll contribute what I can.

(P.S. Etymological exercise is acceptable, as I can't come up with a more appropriate description. It's just we didn't know if you might have been serious about your post, or it was supposed to be an exercise. Hopefully, all such things will be exorcised from the final version of the handbook!)

[n0nwo]

One thing that should be stressed in this book is operating procedure. You cannot have too many pages dedicated to radio procedure and good manners. things to be covered should include

correct procedure on repeaters, such as

how to correctly break in
when not to break in
not using cw abreviations on phone like Q codes, 73 etc.
stress plain language and not using CB slang or mannerisms.
More attention should be given to the other modes on the UHF VHF bands. #Attention given to band plans and conventions for each mode. Also talk about calling frequencies and simplex frequencies with emphasis on when it is proper to use them and when it is not.

The same goes for HF.

Information on DX windows and calling frequencies are not as available as they could be and would be valuable to both new and experienced hams. #Put this information in graph form for each band to make it easier to folow. Again... stress when to and not to use these
frequencies...

Contesting is a fact whether I like it or not. Sooooo... stress good operating practice like,

don't use more power than you really need. Stress the pride and value of doing more with less.
Stress that contesters do not have exclusive use of the bands during contests. It is not illegal, but more than ok for others to share the band and have their rag chew conversations or nets during a contest.
Maybe evan a call from this manual for sponcers of contests to limit the percentage of each band they cover and to make rules that discourage (drasticly cut points or disqualify contster ops) from using excessive power, deliberately causing interfearence ect.
of course that cuts both ways, non-contesters like myself should also be polite, not claim use of a frequenct just they are always there, and give contesters their space to do what they enjoy so much.

Some strong wording needs to be printed about nets.

Nets do not have a right to claim a friequency of their own. #It makes no matter how many years they have been there, they have no right to tell someone to leave a frequency, tune up on top of a conversation or just take over, just because it is time for their net to start. #These practices are not only arrogent and rude, they are also illegal!!!

Stress that 12m, 17m and 30m have long been a refuge from nets and contests by international "gentlemens" agreement. Trying to hold nets and contests on these 'WARC" bands is not illegal but is #really bad hamming. ( I for one would like to see in print the berating of the county hunter net on 30m the only full time net on any "WARC" band as an example of what not to do. I think those folks should be ashamed of themselves.) yes, I know, it is probably be a legal tangle to mention the county hunters by name... but I can dream.

Ok, that is just off the top of my head. If I and others put a little more time and thought on the subject, this could be greatly expanded.

[WA9SVD]

Another suggestion, perhaps for the "Operating Procedures" section or even "Getting started:"
An emphasis of Rules and regulations about using (or rather NOT using) modified AMATEUR equipment on other frequencies, regardless of rationalization or perceived exception because of Public Service work, or mere "convenience.". (SHOULD be in the question pool, but we will have to pick up the slack where the VE's and VEC's fall short.)

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (n0nwo @ Aug. 18 2006,11:41)]One thing that should be stressed in this book is operating procedure. You cannot have too many pages dedicated to radio procedure and good manners. things to be covered should include

correct procedure on repeaters, such as

how to correctly break in
when not to break in
not using cw abreviations on phone like Q codes, 73 etc.
stress plain language and not using CB slang or mannerisms.
More attention should be given to the other modes on the UHF VHF bands. #Attention given to band plans and conventions for each mode. Also talk about calling frequencies and simplex frequencies with emphasis on when it is proper to use them and when it is not.

The same goes for HF.

Information on DX windows and calling frequencies are not as available as they could be and would be valuable to both new and experienced hams. #Put this information in graph form for each band to make it easier to folow. Again... stress when to and not to use these
frequencies...

Contesting is a fact whether I like it or not. Sooooo... stress good operating practice like,

don't use more power than you really need. Stress the pride and value of doing more with less.
Stress that contesters do not have exclusive use of the bands during contests. It is not illegal, but more than ok for others to share the band and have their rag chew conversations or nets during a contest.
Maybe evan a call from this manual for sponcers of contests to limit the percentage of each band they cover and to make rules that discourage (drasticly cut points or disqualify contster ops) from using excessive power, deliberately causing interfearence ect.
of course that cuts both ways, non-contesters like myself should also be polite, not claim use of a frequenct just they are always there, and give contesters their space to do what they enjoy so much.

Some strong wording needs to be printed about nets.

Nets do not have a right to claim a friequency of their own. #It makes no matter how many years they have been there, they have no right to tell someone to leave a frequency, tune up on top of a conversation or just take over, just because it is time for their net to start. #These practices are not only arrogent and rude, they are also illegal!!!

Stress that 12m, 17m and 30m have long been a refuge from nets and contests by international "gentlemens" agreement. Trying to hold nets and contests on these 'WARC" bands is not illegal but is #really bad hamming. ( I for one would like to see in print the berating of the county hunter net on 30m the only full time net on any "WARC" band as an example of what not to do. I think those folks should be ashamed of themselves.) yes, I know, it is probably be a legal tangle to mention the county hunters by name... but I can dream.

Ok, that is just off the top of my head. If I and others put a little more time and thought on the subject, this could be greatly expanded.
All very good points here. You know, the Wouff Hong and the Rettysnitch are both nigh unto a century old. I wonder if someone on here should create a 21st century version of the Wouff Hong? Perhaps even a real working model? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Eric

[w4rot]

Noob stuff.
WB2WIK/6 wrote a great piece on HowTo Call CQ.
Still have it.
W3SY turned me onto
Mike Zulu (http://www.mikezulu.com)
Do's and Do nots with humor.
and
Fun with wires.
Have fun,
rot

[KE5FRF]

Wow, what a great idea for an undertaking.

I will suggest something to borrow from the ARRL operating handbook...not steal mind you, but borrow...

I liked how they broke down the progression of amateur radio shack building into three distinct stages...

Without verbatum quotes, it kind of went like this...

Starter shack...Used tube rigs or hybrids from the 70s, simple wire antennas, such as a dipole or random wire. Power output from QRP level to 100 watts.
Offer suggestions and point out the pitfalls in regards to swap meet radio equipment. But on the same note, reassure the new operator that in the crawling stages, a used piece of equipment had at a bargain price offers a cheap ticket into the basics of operating and at a lower risk. After all, it doesn't feel as dissapointing to fry a 25 year old TS-820 that was purchased for 200 bucks as it does to fry a brand new 1200 dollar Ten-Tec (not from experience, of course) Also, instruct the novice operator on the essential test equipment and tools that he/she ought to be acquiring and learning how to use at this stage (SWR/PWR meter, DVOM, soldering iron) Offer information about the basics of the wire antenna and the expected performance of the most common first antennas. But in a nutshell, don't paint these beginning stages as "bad" and don't imply that a less than ideal antenna is the "wrong" way to start out. Stress that the heart of a station is a good antenna, but encourage the newbie to experiment with some basic antennas to form a foundation of knowledge. Otherwise, the new op is tempted to just purchase a factory job right out of the box and never get the chance to learn from trial and error.

Intermediate shack...Newer HF rigs, perhaps some bells and whistles... more complicated antenna design or concept, directional antenna perhaps. Perhaps a tower and higher grade feedline. Computer integration with logging software. Added peripheral equipment to add to the efficiency, quality, and performance of the station, such as tuners, antenna analyzers, preamps, sound card interface, etc. Power levels at or above 100 watts.....
At this stage, the operator has logged some operating time and honed some skills. He can get his signal into a pileup, and often comes out with a contact in his log. He knows the bands, and has a feel for propogation and what to expect at any given time. This would be a good time to discuss DXing, beam antennas, contests, and pile-ups.

Advanced (read wealthy or over time aqcuired) level shack...
Latest and greatest rig, kill-a-watt amplifiers http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif , large antenna arrays and towers, full bench of test equipment and toys, multiple rigs from homebrew to boatanchor, etc, etc, etc, etc.
I only dream about this shack, so I can't offer any idea on how to describe it....


But, you get the idea. This "section" of the "manual" would really be just a brief overview and not go into any detail on any particular. I don't know where you might fit it in, but I do think that it is good for a new ham to have the process of shack building summed up in this way. It will make the newer op feel good about buying used equipment, and help them realize that there is a "crawl before you walk" progression in this hobby, and it doesn't require a heavy investment up front.

If anything needs to be stressed to a new ham, it is just THAT, that this hobby doesn't have to be expensive, and that there is no "race" to compete with the "big dogs" and that many, many ops find themselves for years at a single stage with their shack, but are able to get a good level of enjoyment (per dollar spent) even at a beginner level station. In fact, I read in another text a very wise point...if amateur radio is rated on a "fun per dollars spent" scale, often times the op with a modest shack reports as much if not more pleasure from his equipment than the guy with a contest station...why? well, its like the old saying about owning a boat...a boat is great to own, but it is a big giant hole that sucks up your money as long as you own it. Nothing wrong with having a "superstation", but often the upkeep winds up being a constant drain from the old wallet. Again, the "fun per dollar spent" theory.

So, that is my input on your manual here. Hope someone with better writing skills can find a way to add my ideas.

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Aug. 18 2006,19:10)]Wow, what a great idea for an undertaking.

I will suggest something to borrow from the ARRL operating handbook...not steal mind you, but borrow...

I liked how they broke down the progression of amateur radio shack building into three distinct stages...

Without verbatum quotes, it kind of went like this...

Starter shack...Used tube rigs or hybrids from the 70s, simple wire antennas, such as a dipole or random wire. Power output from QRP level to 100 watts.
Offer suggestions and point out the pitfalls in regards to swap meet radio equipment. But on the same note, reassure the new operator that in the crawling stages, a used piece of equipment had at a bargain price offers a cheap ticket into the basics of operating and at a lower risk. After all, it doesn't feel as dissapointing to fry a 25 year old TS-820 that was purchased for 200 bucks as it does to fry a brand new 1200 dollar Ten-Tec (not from experience, of course) Also, instruct the novice operator on the essential test equipment and tools that he/she ought to be acquiring and learning how to use at this stage (SWR/PWR meter, DVOM, soldering iron) Offer information about the basics of the wire antenna and the expected performance of the most common first antennas. But in a nutshell, don't paint these beginning stages as "bad" and don't imply that a less than ideal antenna is the "wrong" way to start out. Stress that the heart of a station is a good antenna, but encourage the newbie to experiment with some basic antennas to form a foundation of knowledge. Otherwise, the new op is tempted to just purchase a factory job right out of the box and never get the chance to learn from trial and error.

Intermediate shack...Newer HF rigs, perhaps some bells and whistles... more complicated antenna design or concept, directional antenna perhaps. Perhaps a tower and higher grade feedline. Computer integration with logging software. Added peripheral equipment to add to the efficiency, quality, and performance of the station, such as tuners, antenna analyzers, preamps, sound card interface, etc. Power levels at or above 100 watts.....
At this stage, the operator has logged some operating time and honed some skills. He can get his signal into a pileup, and often comes out with a contact in his log. He knows the bands, and has a feel for propogation and what to expect at any given time. This would be a good time to discuss DXing, beam antennas, contests, and pile-ups.

Advanced (read wealthy or over time aqcuired) level shack...
Latest and greatest rig, kill-a-watt amplifiers http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif , large antenna arrays and towers, full bench of test equipment and toys, multiple rigs from homebrew to boatanchor, etc, etc, etc, etc.
I only dream about this shack, so I can't offer any idea on how to describe it....


But, you get the idea. This "section" of the "manual" would really be just a brief overview and not go into any detail on any particular. I don't know where you might fit it in, but I do think that it is good for a new ham to have the process of shack building summed up in this way. It will make the newer op feel good about buying used equipment, and help them realize that there is a "crawl before you walk" progression in this hobby, and it doesn't require a heavy investment up front.

If anything needs to be stressed to a new ham, it is just THAT, that this hobby doesn't have to be expensive, and that there is no "race" to compete with the "big dogs" and that many, many ops find themselves for years at a single stage with their shack, but are able to get a good level of enjoyment (per dollar spent) even at a beginner level station. In fact, I read in another text a very wise point...if amateur radio is rated on a "fun per dollars spent" scale, often times the op with a modest shack reports as much if not more pleasure from his equipment than the guy with a contest station...why? well, its like the old saying about owning a boat...a boat is great to own, but it is a big giant hole that sucks up your money as long as you own it. Nothing wrong with having a "superstation", but often the upkeep winds up being a constant drain from the old wallet. Again, the "fun per dollar spent" theory.

So, that is my input on your manual here. Hope someone with better writing skills can find a way to add my ideas.
Thanks for the input. Just for the record, I have a very long association with the ARRL, and if they had offered me JUST a wee bit more money back in 1987, I probably would be editor of the ARRL Handbook at this time. I have been greatly influenced by the ARRL publications since my early youth, and would never deign to actually compete head to head with the venerable ARRL Handbook. However, we are going to have some real treats in the QRZ Handbook that just aren't covered in ARRL literature...or anywhere else, to the best of our knowledge. Actually this idea has been festering in my brain for a long long time, as well as a few others here on QRZ. We just had to reach the critical mass of like-minded souls to convince us that this had to be done...and that it COULD be done.
One thing you won't find in this Handbook is anti-ARRL rhetoric. Not that ARRL is perfect, and not just because I get an author's check from them fairly regularly. In fact, it was a lot of the unproductive whining I've endured that finally coerced me to get off my posterior and do something about it...and perhaps lead a few others in a similar direction.
Anyway....I shall forthwith dismount my soapbox.

73,

eric

[nq3x]

N0NWO - I used a portion of your words as well as your suggestion and added to the Wiki (http://www.reynoldsworks.com/qrz_handbook_wiki/index.php/QRZ_Handbook_of_Amateur_Radio_Knowledge_and_Lore). Go take a look!

WA9SVD - I don't know much about those regulations. How about writing something more detailed? Quote chapter and verse if you like. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

KE5FRF - You wrote, "Hope someone with better writing skills can find a way to add my ideas." Hell, you're mostly done. Take it a bit further and send it to me via email (or post it to the Wiki (http://www.reynoldsworks.com/qrz_handbook_wiki/index.php/QRZ_Handbook_of_Amateur_Radio_Knowledge_and_Lore). Between the two of us, we can make it shine!

[N4AUD]

I've begun an article on homebrewing shop techniques, but it's going more slowly than I had planned. I had typed quite a bit, but didn't save it when a storm briefly knocked out power. I do a save now after each paragraph. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ Aug. 20 2006,08:28)]I've begun an article on homebrewing shop techniques, but it's going more slowly than I had planned. I had typed quite a bit, but didn't save it when a storm briefly knocked out power. I do a save now after each paragraph. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Don't feel too bad. I lost 115 pages of a novel I was working on due to a Microsoft glitch. I've used Linux for 14 years now. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

eric

[WA2ZDY]

Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 19 2006,01:20)]However, we are going to have some real treats in the QRZ Handbook that just aren't covered in ARRL literature.... . #
Bet they will be soon now though.

Quote[/b] ]and not just because I get an author's check from them fairly regularly I'd bet Newington is already well informed of this "competition" to the Handbook and if they never sent you another check again I wouldn't be surprised. Those folks are about the money and if you sell ONE copy of the qrz.com handbook, that's $49.95 ARRL probably won't get.

Yeah, I can see them having conniptions as you plot.

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ Aug. 20 2006,11:01)]Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 19 2006,01:20)]However, we are going to have some real treats in the QRZ Handbook that just aren't covered in ARRL literature.... .
Bet they will be soon now though.

Quote[/b] ]and not just because I get an author's check from them fairly regularly I'd bet Newington is already well informed of this "competition" to the Handbook and if they never sent you another check again I wouldn't be surprised. Those folks are about the money and if you sell ONE copy of the qrz.com handbook, that's $49.95 ARRL probably won't get.

Yeah, I can see them having conniptions as you plot.
I don't hear them shaking in their boots just yet. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif


Eric

[nq3x]

And even if they do shake, what of it?

It's capitalism, baby! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

If your product, your process, or your company can't handle competition, you need to get out of the free market economy. Competition is the lifeblood of the Western economy. Without it, little innovation would ever take place, even less would be improved.

New! Improved!

In a perfect world, ARRL, when threatened, would improve their product. Having little faith in human nature, I can imagine them striking back in the form of sniping at KL7AJ. He has refused to acknowledge any such blow, so let ARRL eat cake.

Besides, I note RSGB have published a Handbook. Does ARRL send them C&D notices? No. ARRL sells the RSGB Handbook (or at least they did a few years ago).

Me, I'm a guy who wrangles words, who has no affiliation at all with Newington, so it doesn't worry me.

[N1MLF]

In fairness to all concerned I think it would behoove the authors to take the high road and give other publications due mention.
I don't understand much about copyrights & their infringement but perhaps gain permission to use excerpts from others pubs (with full credit of course) and not try to re-invent a wheel where one already exists.
*I* feel this would go a good ways towards peacefull co-existance. Maybe in the end the ARRL would be willing to sell print or CD copies.
On the other hand I might have my head up where the sun don't shine but I thought I'd drop the suggestion for consumption.

Regards..JW..

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (N1MLF @ Aug. 23 2006,11:17)]In fairness to all concerned I think it would behoove the authors to take the high road and give other publications due mention.
I don't understand much about copyrights & their infringement but perhaps gain permission to use excerpts from others pubs (with full credit of course) and not try to re-invent a wheel where one already exists.
*I* feel this would go a good ways towards peacefull co-existance. Maybe in the end the ARRL would be willing to sell print or CD copies.
On the other hand I might have my head up where the sun don't shine but I thought I'd drop the suggestion for consumption.

Regards..JW..
I agree. We determined at the beginning that that the book is not going to be a platform for ARRL-bashing. I have over 10 ARRL Handbooks myself! (Different years, of course!)

I would like to use as much original content as humanly possible...this is the simplest way to avoid copyright issues....and to make the most interesting book, as well.

Definitely the high road

Eric

[kl7aj]

Here is my introduction to Traffic Handling, y'all. Add to it as you see fit.


Eric

[kl7aj]

Say....

We want to have a whole chapter (or perhaps an appendix) dedicated to QSL cards. If you have a cool QSL card (either your own, or a DX, or even a famous ham), we need good COLOR scans of it.

Also...a reminder....we need original artwork....all you budding cartoonists and graphic artists, send your stuff in. We'll sort it out later!

eric

[kj5t]

I began an article on Youth & Contesting for QRZ.com (http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=21;t=119384)

It needs A LOT of editing and additional information, I am not sure if this is the kind of stuff you are looking for, but let me know if I can be of any assistance for any youth stuff. I am not much of a writer but would be happy to help.

Also feel free to use any pictures or information from this open presentation I did at Ham-Com 2006 (http://www.hamcom.org/presentations/WWYC.ppt).

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (KD5OWO @ Aug. 26 2006,21:29)]I began an article on Youth & Contesting for QRZ.com (http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=21;t=119384)

It needs A LOT of editing and additional information, I am not sure if this is the kind of stuff you are looking for, but let me know if I can be of any assistance for any youth stuff. I am not much of a writer but would be happy to help.

Also feel free to use any pictures or information from this open presentation I did at Ham-Com 2006 (http://www.hamcom.org/presentations/WWYC.ppt).
Excellent~!

We can use a good chapter on youth operating. Don't worry about style...just get the info out there....we'll do the editing...make it all purty. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Eric

[N4AUD]

I've got about 1800 words so far on basic shop techiques for homebrewing. It will need massive editing. I've only gotten through soldering pipe for antennas so far and have started on soldering electronic components. Lots more to go! So, should I upload it somewhere now, or wait until it's done?

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ Aug. 28 2006,10:57)]I've got about 1800 words so far on basic shop techiques for homebrewing. #It will need massive editing. #I've only gotten through soldering pipe for antennas so far and have started on soldering electronic components. #Lots more to go! #So, should I upload it somewhere now, or wait until it's done?
Hi Audie

Good job, thanks! Yes just send it to Bob n3ayo
He'll edit it to perfection. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

eric

[N4AUD]

I uploaded what I've got so far to the Wiki. Edit away! It's not finished, not even close, but there it is.

[kl7aj]

And here's an intro to your into, I think you'll like!

Eric

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (K1ALK @ Aug. 28 2006,11:16)]I uploaded what I've got so far to the Wiki. #Edit away! #It's not finished, not even close, but there it is.
Bob Davis [bob@reconstructinghistory.com]


Here's bob's address

[N4AUD]

Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Aug. 27 2006,12:17)]And here's an intro to your into, I think you'll like!

Eric
Ha! Awesome!

[kl7aj]

Scientific Method intro