PDA

View Full Version : Background Info on the ARESCOM Scam


N5PVL
02-09-2005, 11:33 AM
Looking back in my Weblog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php) to September 4th, 2004, I found some info that is relevant to recent discussions (http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=7;t=80786) here at QRZ.

Quote[/b] ]

This came in yesterday from Mike Baugh W8AKF:

Quote[/b] ]

- The meat of the report that the ARRL demands you not see:

Although I've been told that whatever my position is with ARRL, will be compromised if I publish the AD HOC members dissenting report, here is the meat of the report that ARRL demands you not see:

This same perpetrator has hoodwinked the ARRL since 1983.

73 Mike

The majority recommendation of the ARRL hfdigital committee represents the interests of a small special interest group, Winlink, representing 0.007% of the FCC licensed radio amateurs in the United States, and NOT the interests of ALL radio amateurs, as requested by ARRL president, Jim Haynie.

The ARRL hfdigital committee majority recommendation [hfdigital:284] was composed and written jointly by the Winlink author, W5SMM, and the Winlink Network Administrator, K4CJX, and then rubber-stamped, without comment except for typo corrections, by the Winlink supporters on the committee, WA1LOU and K0PFX.

All alternative recommendations were totally ignored by the chairman and Winlink supporters. At no time during the committee discussions did WA1LOU or K0PFX submit any independent comments or suggestions except for corrections. The chairman of the committee, who is also the Winlink software author, consistently shut off discussion prematurely and forced a vote, which was naturally won by the Winlink majority, eventually resulting in the resignation of the widely respected Peter Martinez, G3PLX, in protest for having his views silenced.

The committee majority recommendation therefore represents the views of a special interest group, and NOT the interests of all radio amateurs.

This dissenting recommendation is submitted as a recommendation that at least attempts to consider the needs of ALL radio amateurs, including Winlink.

Introduction

Winlink consists of a network of fully automated digital transceivers, providing free email gateways to the Internet using the ham bands in competition with commercial LEO satellite services which do the same thing, but charge for messaging on a per-minute basis.

This network of fully automated transmitters is causing historically high levels of interference to all other radio amateur activities on HF because the automated side of an email gateway is incapable of "listening first", or frequency sharing, as radio amateurs usually do, and are required to do, by FCC regulation, and the other side, which is supposed to be manned by a "listen first" live operator, finds it unnecessary to be concerned about anyone else already on the frequency, because the protocol chosen by Winlink is capable of overpowering anyone else on the frequency, and keep hammering away using ARQ until the Winlink station dominates the frequency. The result is high levels of QRM to all others.

In addition, the manual stations escape detection by never transmitting any callsign identification in case they try to connect with an automatic station and fail. They just create QRM and leave the air unidentified.

The majority recommendation proposes to expand this network of robot transmitters to completely cover the ham bands without restriction, including the phone band segments, with the exception of the CW and beacon regions. This chart of the current coverage of the 20 meter band by Winlink robots indicates why interference by these robots is so high and currently disrupts so many other traditional radio amateur communications.

It is easy to visualize what it would be like if the majority recommendation were accepted by the Board. There would be no space left on the HF bands for ragchewing, DX chasing, award-chasing, contesting, or experimentation, free from constant interference from Winlink robot stations, such as suffered currently by digital operators, and more recently, on 30 meters by CW operators, who find it more and more difficult to operate without a Pactor station suddenly coming on the frequency in the middle of their QSO.

The ARRL Board should be promoting bandplans that encourage the development of more spectrum-efficient modes, such as PSK31 and MFSK16, which accomplish the essential task of communications in less bandwidth, as opposed to promoting wider data modes which add to the interference and congestion on HF bands instead of reducing it.




Another point related to the WinLink2000 stuff taking up too much space and QRM'ing people:

Since the proposed system will be under ARES, the PACTOR III QRM will be "emergency communications" that you just plain old cannot complain about.

Cute, huh?

My recommendation is that the WinLink2000 software and the WinLink2000 people all get the heave-ho, right out of any of the ARRL's future business.

This kind of cynical underhandedness has no place in the hobby in the first place, and most certainly has no place within the ARRL.

These folks are troublemakers, and deserve the boot.

Let's give it to them.

Charles Brabham, N5PVL #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif




Note: All comments pertaining to PACTOR III in the above apply just as well to SCAMP, another wide-mode digital mode that will behave much as PACTOR III does, on the air. - If it ever gets past the "vaporware" stage, which is in doubt.


At the time this weblog was posted, Jim Haynie was still successfully pretending an unbiased position in all of this mess.

Recent postings by Jim here on QRZ show that this is not the case. - Jim is a Liddite, a person who thinks that ham radio is obsolete and who sneers at those who use "pure RF". - Jim wants to put our amateur radio activities on the Internet. - Ham radio is just not good enough for him.

The important thing is to get as many ham radio activities off the air and onto the Internet as possible.

Jim Haynie has secretly harbored this sicko attitude for quite a while, apparently, but he only came out in the open about it a few days ago. I had heard unverified reports that Jim was up to his ears in this scam months before, but I did not take them seriously until Jim's behavior here at QRZ verified it.

Great attitude for the president of the ARRL to take, huh?

Yes, it is definately time for a shakeup at ARRL HQ... Time to take out the trash.

The info in this old weblog has several callsigns to consider for the ARRL HQ Lid List, and now there's Jim Haynie, W5JBP who has identified himself as being part of the Liddite clique.

Has anybody been left out? Let's drag this nest of corruption and anti-ham thinking out into the open.

The ARRL needs a good deal more transparency and accountability. The BPL issue is too important to let some inept clowns at ARRL HQ distract us from that issue with thier corrupt antics.

If hams had known what these people were up to from the start, this problem would have been nipped in the bud... A lot more of our energy and resources would have then gone into the BPL issue at this critical time.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

W3MIV
02-09-2005, 01:53 PM
And this, again, from a guy who whines about personal attacks when there are none?

"Corruption?"

"Scam?"

These are serious words signifying serious charges that should not be bandied about loosely by a man with an ax to grind.

I find this thread disgusting. This whole topic has gone far enough.

N5PVL
02-09-2005, 02:08 PM
W3MIV says:

Quote[/b] ]

I find this thread disgusting. This whole topic has gone far enough.



For my part, I find the behavior my post describes to be disgusting, and that it is the behavior, not the topic that has "gone far enough".

Is it your position that the described behavior should just be allowed to go on without remark? - That amateur radio operators should just "try to relax and enjoy the experience"?

The ARRL is a great organization... Let's clean it up, and get it back on-mission. ( Amateur Radio, duh! )


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

W3MIV
02-09-2005, 02:30 PM
Charles, you post is both a personal attack on Jim Haynie, with whom many may choose to disagree, but tastefully and respectfully, and a clear example of excess zeal in the pursuit of a personal quest that reaches well beyond the "health" of amateur radio.

Were I a moderator, dear Charles. I would give YOU the old heave ho! You Elmer-Gantryesque fanaticism about packet has seemingly carried you over the edge. Come about before you run onto the shoal.

I think Haynie deserves an apology from you.

N5PVL
02-09-2005, 02:45 PM
Well, I won't argue with you. - And nobody held a gun to Jim's head and forced him to express his disdain for "pure RF".

I pointed out the fact that Jim has finally stated his position on this matter of whether it is the ARRL's job to promote Radio - or the Internet. If you feel that his position reflects poorly upon his character you should blame Jim, not me.

- Or are you one of those "shoot the messenger" types?

I think ARRL members who signed up for an amateur radio oriented organization deserve an apology from Jim Haynie.

If he has no confidence in ham radio and sees no point in developing its use, then what is he doing in the ARRL, much less ARRL HQ?


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

K0RGR
02-09-2005, 03:47 PM
Where is all this interference? I don't hear it. Yes, I live as far from the ocean as you can get, but don't a lot of RVers use WINLINK too? From the description here, I'd expect to hear it all over the band, but I have never had a digital or CW QSO disrupted by PACTOR.

For some unfathomable reason, we still have those slow speed packet radio cricket noises taking up a fair amount of spectrum beaconing to each other 24 X 7 in the middle of the most precious HF real estate there is. Is that the problem? Does a PACTOR station occasionally cause a lost packet or two that aren't already wiped out by a static crash?

W3MIV
02-09-2005, 04:03 PM
Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 09 2005,10:45)]- Or are you one of those "shoot the messenger" types?
Please, Charles. Let's call a spade a spade.

You are no messenger, Charles. You are, to use a bit of jargon from a half-century past, an "agit-prop." You are a salesman for a mode that enjoys a tiny following and have been whistling past the grave yard for a long time. Anyone who has logged onto QRZ.com more than three times, and has an IQ somewhat above a box of rocks, can spot your agenda as soon as he or she sees your call.

What you are hawking is not much better than what the other mode-plumpers are pushing; it is just that they are more effective at it than you. Perhaps a long read of your former posts would give you a hint as to why.

I don't object in the least to your plumping for any brand of snake oil that the bumpkins are willing to buy. I do think, however, that your rude and abusive name-calling should be brought to a halt.

N5PVL
02-09-2005, 05:01 PM
W3MIV says:

Quote[/b] ]

You are no messenger, Charles. You are, to use a bit of jargon from a half-century past, an "agit-prop." You are a salesman for a mode that enjoys a tiny following and have been whistling past the grave yard for a long time.



Actually I do not support any particular digital mode, but rather the practice of using those digital modes in order to participate in the global digital network. - Networked Amateur Radio.

Networked Amateur Radio has a global following, and in areas not retarded by Liddite attitudes it is highly developed, being utilized daily by thousands of hams. Just about every digital mode with decent error-correction is used responsibly as a part of that network, on all bands, at all speeds at one place or another.

This is the network that represents the single most significant international cooperative effort ever undertaken by amateur radio operators.

This is the network that operates within tiny sub-bands set aside for the express purpose of eliminating the possibility of QRM - and the system works flawlessly so we never crash anybody's QSO.

This is the network that Riley Hollingsworth once praised as the only terrorist-proof digital network we have, due to it's independent, decentralized, anarchic nature.

WL2K, by the way, depends upon a central control point AND Internet linkages in order to function at all. - Mr. Hollingsworth's praise does not apply to WL2K in any particular.

You are welcome to see WL2K as a big step forward if you must... To me it's a step back, away from hams using ham radio.

At the same time, I find the idea of polluting the HF bands with dozens more wide-ARQ mode signals at unpredictable times and places to be utterly obnoxious, not good operating practice by any standard.

It's a massive QRM factory that ARESCOM / WL2K proposes.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

W3MIV
02-09-2005, 06:29 PM
Charles, your facility in gliding past the issue is impressive, and I know that you are an intelligent man, thus feel this must be guile rather than mere stolidity.

The issue, again, is not about modes, but about the overall lack of taste and courtesy in your comments about, rather than just to, Jim Haynie.

I believe you owe him an apology. Indeed, I believe you owe all of us an apology for your intemperate remarks and assertions.

n9lya
02-09-2005, 07:10 PM
Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Feb. 09 2005,06:29)]Charles, your facility in gliding past the issue is impressive, and I know that you are an intelligent man, thus feel this must be guile rather than mere stolidity.

The issue, again, is not about modes, but about the overall lack of taste and courtesy in your comments about, rather than just to, Jim Haynie.

I believe you owe him an apology. Indeed, I believe you owe all of us an apology for your intemperate remarks and assertions.
I do not see where Charles is disrepectful to JIM... I have seen a lot of comments from Jim that are just like yours.. They do nothing to discuss the topic.. Just a lot of BS trying to circumvent the topic... And to draw credability away from it as well. Mostly stuff that has nothing at all to do with the posting...

73 Jerry N9LYA
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

n9lya
02-09-2005, 07:13 PM
Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Feb. 09 2005,04:03)]Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 09 2005,10:45)]- Or are you one of those "shoot the messenger" types?
Please, Charles. Let's call a spade a spade.

You are no messenger, Charles. You are, to use a bit of jargon from a half-century past, an "agit-prop." You are a salesman for a mode that enjoys a tiny following and have been whistling past the grave yard for a long time. Anyone who has logged onto QRZ.com more than three times, and has an IQ somewhat above a box of rocks, can spot your agenda as soon as he or she sees your call.

What you are hawking is not much better than what the other mode-plumpers are pushing; it is just that they are more effective at it than you. Perhaps a long read of your former posts would give you a hint as to why.

I don't object in the least to your plumping for any brand of snake oil that the bumpkins are willing to buy. I do think, however, that your rude and abusive name-calling should be brought to a halt.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black... I see no name calling from Charles.. Show me where his examples of liddites or luddites is any different from some of your lables...???

Charles, This guy must be inside WINLINK.. Same kind of answers I used to get from them when I asked the tough questions that they still do not want to hear!!!


73 Jerry N9LYA http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

N5PVL
02-09-2005, 07:31 PM
W3MIV says:

Quote[/b] ]

The issue, again, is not about modes, but about the overall lack of taste and courtesy in your comments about, rather than just to, Jim Haynie.



Sorry, but that is YOUR issue. - Start a new thread on it, if you think the topic is worthwhile.

THE issue here can be found in the thread's title: "Background Info on the ARESCOM Scam"

Let's try to stay on-topic, shall we?


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

N5PVL
02-09-2005, 07:42 PM
N9LYA says:

Quote[/b] ]

Charles, This guy must be inside WINLINK.. Same kind of answers I used to get from them when I asked the tough questions that they still do not want to hear!!!



RGR, the guy has no arguement to counter the plain truth behind this thread, so he does the character attack thing, trying to start an arguement while simultaneously calling for a moderator.

I've seen guys behave that way before, and associate the behavior with a desperate desire to muddy the waters. - He'll say or do anything to get off topic - because he doesn't like the topic.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

W3MIV
02-09-2005, 07:51 PM
Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 09 2005,15:42)]N9LYA says:

Quote[/b] ]

Charles, This guy must be inside WINLINK.. Same kind of answers I used to get from them when I asked the tough questions that they still do not want to hear!!!



RGR, the guy has no arguement to counter the plain truth behind this thread, so he does the character attack thing, trying to start an arguement while simultaneously calling for a moderator.

I've seen guys behave that way before, and associate the behavior with a desperate desire to muddy the waters. - He'll say or do anything to get off topic - because he doesn't like the topic.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)
<---------- deep end.



Charles ------------------------------------------------->



Nuff said.

n9lya
02-09-2005, 08:19 PM
Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Feb. 09 2005,07:51)]Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 09 2005,15:42)]N9LYA says:

Quote[/b] ]

Charles, This guy must be inside WINLINK.. Same kind of answers I used to get from them when I asked the tough questions that they still do not want to hear!!!



RGR, the guy has no arguement to counter the plain truth behind this thread, so he does the character attack thing, trying to start an arguement while simultaneously calling for a moderator.

I've seen guys behave that way before, and associate the behavior with a desperate desire to muddy the waters. - He'll say or do anything to get off topic - because he doesn't like the topic.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)
<---------- deep end.



Charles ------------------------------------------------->



Nuff said.
You have a right to your opinion... And that is all it is considered to be..


73 Jerry n9lya

N5PVL
02-10-2005, 04:14 AM
N9LYA says:

Quote[/b] ]

I do not see where Charles is disrepectful to JIM...



Yes, I have always respected Jim - right up to the point where he expressed disdain for what he called "pure RF", as if he expected me to feel embarassed or stupid because I would rather work with amateur radio than pretend to, on the Internet.

If that were not enough, he is actively working to make it simply illegal to network ham radio on HF - in the USA. I suppose the real hams really using ham radio would make his Liddite ARESCOM system look kinda HOKEY or something. - So he's determined to get those hams off the air.

I don't see anything to respect in that.

My way of looking at it is that if Jim can't respect his fellow hams for using ham radio and if he is going to work to undercut those who do - then he needs to take a hike, to put it mildly.

I also don't see much to respect in the way he has pretended to be disinterested and objective in this matter for months, when he was in fact highly prejudiced, the entire time.

I don't like being strung along and misled by the president of the ARRL. I don't like having to drag the truth out of him concerning his opinions on important issues.

I'm afraid Jim has lost my respect forever. It's a shame, those months that I spent standing up for him and giving the benefit of the doubt, on the strength of his position at ARRL and because I liked him personally.

It turned out that Jim was not worthy of that support, or of my respect. - I don't have much respect for "amateurs" who have lost faith in the hobby but hang around anyway to fulfill their prophesy of obsolescence, or of being subsumed by the Internet.

He's part of the problem, in my book. When he encourages and works to force amateurs to abandon radio for a Liddite Internet scheme, he is undercutting both the hobby and our chances to advance the art.

I don't have much respect for people who have not only given up - but who hang around to try to convince, fool, or even force others into giving up as well.

We need that about like we need a screw driven through our coax.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)

k4ah
02-10-2005, 10:17 AM
Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 08 2005,23:33)]Recent postings by Jim here on QRZ show that this is not the case. - Jim is a Liddite, a person who thinks that ham radio is obsolete and who sneers at those who use "pure RF". - Jim wants to put our amateur radio activities on the Internet. - Ham radio is just not good enough for him.
I don't want to sound ignorant but what is your definition of "PURE RF"? Wouldn't it get boring listening to nothing but a carrier? And no I don't have a secret agenda and I am not inside WINLINK " whatever that means".

By the way in the RF R&D field "Pure RF" is a carrier with no modulation techniques employed. As I said BORING!

IMHO the best digital mode is CW. No fancy equipment needed for that one.

n9lya
02-10-2005, 10:45 AM
Quote[/b] (k4ah @ Feb. 09 2005,22:17)]Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 08 2005,23:33)]Recent postings by Jim here on QRZ show that this is not the case. - Jim is a Liddite, a person who thinks that ham radio is obsolete and who sneers at those who use "pure RF". - Jim wants to put our amateur radio activities on the Internet. - Ham radio is just not good enough for him.
I don't want to sound ignorant but what is your definition of "PURE RF"? Wouldn't it get boring listening to nothing but a carrier? #And no I don't have a secret agenda and I am not inside WINLINK " whatever that means". #

By the way in the RF R&D field "Pure RF" is a carrier with no modulation techniques employed. #As I said BORING!

IMHO the best digital mode is CW. #No fancy equipment needed for that one.
Hi Steve...
When we use the term PURE RF.. In our case we are referring to one heck of a lot LESS internet dependance, (Telepone connectivity).. A lot less...
Thus the term PURE..


73 Jerry n9lya

k4ah
02-10-2005, 11:08 AM
Thanks for the reply. That is why I like radio. I don't have to be dependent on anyone but me. I am set up to use solar power and batteries and my soldering equipment does not need electricity so I can do minor fixes without power. I also don't need my computer to do any of it, even though I could since it runs off batteries also and can be recharged using my panels.

Living in the mountains you learn not to depend on electricity being on in the winter.

I remember a similar argument when packet radio started. It was the end of the world as we know it. But we survived and if we stick together and not bicker we might not lose what we have. Discorse is fine but name calling and finger pointing does none of any good.

N5PVL
02-10-2005, 11:33 AM
K4AH asks:

Quote[/b] ]

I don't want to sound ignorant but what is your definition of "PURE RF"?



According to Jim Haynie and his Liddite buddies at ARRL HQ, "Pure RF" is a derogatory term for things that amateurs do with radio, when there is a perfectly good Internet connection that could be used instead.

Users of "Pure RF" are supposed to feel like they are really stupid and backward to be using ham radio like that.

Jim and his Liddite buddies sneer at amateurs and call them "Radio Purists".

- It all backfires on them though, because only another Liddite would or could agree with them that "Radio Purist" is actually an insult.

You had a reasonable expectation that "Pure RF" was anything besides an insult... The confusion was not on your end, but rather upon those who have twisted "Pure RF" around to the point where they imagine it to be something bad.

This reminds me of degenerate drug addicts who insult each other with the term "straight" - which describes a person with no ongoing drug addiction.

- It's a "sour grapes" deal against amateurs who believe in and support amateur radio - by those who no longer do.

Sadly for this hobby, Jim Haynie has identified himself as being a member of this Liddite group with his derogatory remarks condemning hams using radio as "RF Purists".

That's what they call "corruption", and it sure isn't pretty.

Does it amaze you that Jim Haynie can sink to the point of dissing radio and working to undermine his fellow hams who use it - without realizing that what he is doing is wrong?

It amazes the heck out of me.


Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket (http://www.uspacket.org)
Admin: HamBlog.Com (http://www.hamblog.com)
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog (http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php)