What WinLink is all about:

[N5PVL]

http://www.idiyachts.com/RadioEmail.html

Get YOUR copy TODAY!

[N5RLR]

I can see where this thing could become very ugly... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[G0GQK]

What an ill chosen title for the book ! #A person who has the capabilities to sail a yacht could hardly be classed as an idiot. They would have to have passed examinations in navigational skills, reading maritime charts and other things neccessary to have control of a vessel.

I would not take kindly to it being suggested that I was an idiot because I required some help in understanding a subject, and purchased a book to provide me with that information.

G0GQK

[kf4vgx]

Thanks for the link, I'll order a book !

Now if someone could come up with an idea of advocating Winlink into the text messaging features on Echolink.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[WA2ZDY]

GQK, that may be how it is on your side of the pond, but not so here. At least here in New Jersey, a boat operator license is issued by the state and is only required to operate a powered vessel on non-tidal waters. And wave runners have some licensure requirement now as well.

But any fool can power up a boat/yacht and take it out on the ocean. The exception is for-hire, but if you aren't carrying paying passengers there are no licensing/exams requirements at all.

The biggest concerns with this winlink thing - to me anyway - are that there are folks getting ham licenses just to use our frequencies for email. They have no interest in ham radio, they're just too cheap to pay for certified maritime radio gear and for proper commercial email service.

The second thing is these amateur sailors are placing their own lives at great risk. Many of them are sailing out on the open sea and without proper maritime gear they have no means of calling for help if the need really arises. To a point we might say "yes, but that's their problem," but in the end the taxpayers end up paying for the search and rescue efforts that will follow the "my mommy and daddy never came back from sailing" calls.

Winlink or any internet based email over the air is a bad idea and should be banned. 47CFR97.113(a)(5) already essentially prohibits this use of the ham bands anyway, but I don't imagine it will ever be enforced.

[N5PVL]

Quote[/b] ]
Winlink or any internet based email over the air is a bad idea and should be banned.

I couldn't agree more, and here's why:

WinLink started off as a participant in the global HF Packet network, one of several outfits who were involved in providing remote E-mail service on Packet at that time.

All of the Email-over-Packet services then ran across the same problem... The fact that E-mail often contained content which is illegal to carry over the ham bands. This included advertising, messages related to pecuniary interest, foul language and even pornography.

Juno.Com Email service, the first free E-mail service attached an ad at the bottom of each Juno.com E-mail, for example. Many SYSOPs were concerned about losing thier liscenses and did not trust non-hams who originated much of the E-mail that went through the system to keep thier messages clean and appropriate.

It was also obvious that some users of these E-mail over ham radio services were utilizing the system to conduct business.

Various filter software was tried, but as it is today with SPAM, clever hackers regularly found a variety of ways to defeat such software and in the end, it was determined that only manual review of each E-mail message by a human operator was reliable enough to ensure legal operation.

Manual review of E-mail messages to be transported across the ham bands then became the standard for that kind of operation, for the obvious reason.

Unfortunately, the amateurs who found themselves in the position of reading every E-mail that entered the system tended to find other, better things to do with thier lives after a while. - They tended to "burn out" after so many months of this activity, especially in the most poplular services that carried the most E-mail.

One by one, HF Packet operators who handled Internet E-mail ran out of people who were willing to manually review each message and in all cases but one, they eventually discontinued the practice rather than risk losing thier liscense due to transporting the illegal content so many E-mails tended to have.

The exception was the WinLink group, who decided to pull out of the global HF Packet network instead, and utilize a digital protocol ( PACTOR ) which was much more difficult to monitor. This "to heck with the rules as long as you don't get caught" attitude defines the WinLink group to this day, in many respects.

The WinLinkers claimed that they started thier new network from scratch because of PACTOR's greater speed, but the fact is that when they left the global HF Packet network, they also left behind over a thousand servers located in cities around the world, and had to start off from scratch with only a few PACTOR servers located in the United States. Obviously speed and service area was not the motivating factor there.

The primitive STAR network WinLink developed, in conjunction with a TOR digital mode that was not appropriate for network use was encouraging for them at first, when thier "let's circumvent PART97" network operated on a small scale, with just a few users. As it grew though, the "technological jail" they had locked themselves into became more and more apparent.

WinLink had painted themselves into a corner where the only way they could expand thier services at all was by hogging up more and more bandwidth, and by developing a cavalier attitude about crashing other hams' ongoing QSOs.

See this article (http://www.uspacket.org/digiblog/?p=20) for an illustrated demonstration of why thier network as it stands today takes up 62.4 times as much spectrum as HF Packet in order to operate and expand.

Because of the poor technical decisions the WinLink group made, motivated by a desire to "get around" the PART97 regulations concerning content restrictions, they are now trapped with a need to either take up ever-increasing amounts of spectrum - or wither and die off altogether.

Thus the naked spectrum-grab made by WinLinkers who have infected the ARRL executive cadre, known as the "bandwidth segmentation proposal".

This crooked proposal will allow WinLink QRM-bots to crash QSO's across the ham bands including the phone area, instead of being restricted to just a few areas as they are at this writing.

WinLinkers, as a group, have demonstrated a blatant disregard for the FCC regs, thier fellow hams, and any 'gentlemen's agreement' within the hobby that has stood in thier way. - To think that they would suddenly become angels after being given the ability to park thier QRM-bots wherever they please is laughable.

Why doesn't WinLink go over to Packet? - Because then they would have to start manually reviewing every E-mail that goes through thier system again in order to keep from getting caught at what they do right now. - Transporting E-mail with illegal content every day on the ham bands, in direct competition with existing commercial services. They know that if they had to go back to operating legally, they would soon run out of message monitors and have to shut down.

They coudn't continue to operate illegally without getting caught, if thier message content were open to review and self-policing by thier fellow hams.

In other words, WinLink is a shameful scam being perpetrated upon the amateur radio community. Of course they are not going to "come clean" or work cooperatively with others.

What they will do instead is to hog up more and more spectrum, and crash more and more QSO's until the amateur radio community and the FCC finally loses patience with them.

[kf4vgx]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 03 2006,17:49)]Quote[/b] ]
Winlink or any internet based email over the air is a bad idea and should be banned.

I couldn't agree more, and here's why:

WinLink started off as a participant in the global HF Packet network, one of several outfits who were involved in providing remote E-mail service on Packet at that time.

All of the Email-over-Packet services then ran across the same problem... The fact that E-mail often contained content which is illegal to carry over the ham bands. This included advertising, messages related to pecuniary interest, foul language and even pornography.

Juno.Com Email service, the first free E-mail service attached an ad at the bottom of each Juno.com E-mail, for example. Many SYSOPs were concerned about losing thier liscenses and did not trust non-hams who originated much of the E-mail that went through the system to keep thier messages clean and appropriate.

It was also obvious that some users of these E-mail over ham radio services were utilizing the system to conduct business.

Various filter software was tried, but as it is today with SPAM, clever hackers regularly found a variety of ways to defeat such software and in the end, it was determined that only manual review of each E-mail message by a human operator was reliable enough to ensure legal operation.

Manual review of E-mail messages to be transported across the ham bands then became the standard for that kind of operation, for the obvious reason.

Unfortunately, the amateurs who found themselves in the position of reading every E-mail that entered the system tended to find other, better things to do with thier lives after a while. - They tended to "burn out" after so many months of this activity, especially in the most poplular services that carried the most E-mail.

One by one, HF Packet operators who handled Internet E-mail ran out of people who were willing to manually review each message and in all cases but one, they eventually discontinued the practice rather than risk losing thier liscense due to transporting the illegal content so many E-mails tended to have.

The exception was the WinLink group, who decided to pull out of the global HF Packet network instead, and utilize a digital protocol ( PACTOR ) which was much more difficult to monitor. This "to heck with the rules as long as you don't get caught" attitude defines the WinLink group to this day, in many respects.

The WinLinkers claimed that they started thier new network from scratch because of PACTOR's greater speed, but the fact is that when they left the global HF Packet network, they also left behind over a thousand servers located in cities around the world, and had to start off from scratch with only a few PACTOR servers located in the United States. Obviously speed and service area was not the motivating factor there.

The primitive STAR network WinLink developed, in conjunction with a TOR digital mode that was not appropriate for network use was encouraging for them at first, when thier "let's circumvent PART97" network operated on a small scale, with just a few users. As it grew though, the "technological jail" they had locked themselves into became more and more apparent.

WinLink had painted themselves into a corner where the only way they could expand thier services at all was by hogging up more and more bandwidth, and by developing a cavalier attitude abnout crashing other hams' ongoing QSOs.

See this article (http://www.uspacket.org/digiblog/?p=20) for an illustrated demonstration of why thier network as it stands today takes up 62.4 times as much spectrum as HF Packet in order to operate and expand.

Because of the poor technical decisions the WinLink group made, motivated by a desire to "get around" the PART97 regulations concerning content restrictions, they are now trapped with a need to either take up ever-increasing amounts of spectrum - or wither and die off altogether.

Thus the naked spectrum-grab made by WinLinkers who have infected the ARRL executive cadre, known as the "bandwidth segmentation proposal".

This crooked proposal will allow WinLink QRM-bots to crash QSO's across the ham bands including the phone area, instead of being restricted to just a few areas as they are at this writing.

WinLinkers, as a group, have demonstrated a blatant disregard for the FCC regs, thier fellow hams, and any 'gentlemen's agreement' within the hobby that has stood in thier way. - To think that they would suddenly become angels after being given the ability to park thier QRM-bots wherever they please is laughable.

Why doesn't WinLink go over to Packet? - Because then they would have to start manually reviewing every E-mail that goes through thier system again in order to keep from getting caught at what they do right now. - Transporting E-mail with illegal content every day on the ham bands, in direct competition with existing commercial services. They know that if they had to go back to operating legally, they would soon run out of message monitors and have to shut down.

They coudn't continue to operate illegally without getting caught, if thier message content were open to review and self-policing by thier fellow hams.

In other words, WinLink is a shameful scam being perpetrated upon the amateur radio community. Of course they are not going to "come clean" or work cooperatively with others.

What they will do instead is to hog up more and more spectrum, and crash more and more QSO's until the amateur radio community and the FCC finally loses patience with them.
Gee Charlie . you just wasted a lot of typing efforts for nothing http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[KE5FRF]

I must admit, I'm with Charles on this.

I don't yet have a say in HF land, but when I'm there (the old fashioned way, BTW) I don't want the bands polluted by illegal business transactions conducted by affluent yacht owners who only got their ham license so they can trade their stocks via e-mail while on a weekend cruise to Bermuda.

The key here is that amateur radio is supposed to be open 2-way communication between 2 or more people, in which the signal can be recieved by any listener, with easily obtainable equipment (or software in the case of digital modes). No encryptions are supposed to be allowed. If that problem could be resolved, and illegal business use of the bands stopped, I wouldn't particularly have a problem with it, per se.

See Charles, we can agree on some things.

[n0ov]

Guy's I'm not following the logic. Why would anyone who took the time to get an amateur radio license NOT be allowed to legally use the frequencies. To me, that's like saying you couldn't use a CW ID outside of the bands marked for CW use.

Instead of banning this mode of operation, it should be restricted to ensure it does not cause QRM to other modes.

Thus why I support Winlink and DO NOT agree with path we seem to be taking to let these data transactions to be all over the band segment.

If I'm missing something here, please help me understand. (Charles -- agree with your observation and conditions of use)

[kf4lne]

This book cant be all bad. Just look at what I can learn to do from it.

Learn how to set up a Wireless HF Radio E-mail System!

Send and receive E-mail through your Ham/Marine SSB Radio!

Keep in touch with family & friends where there are no phones!

Learn about HF radios and Modems before you buy!

Compare features & benefits of HF E-mail service providers!

Access and use GRIB weather files!

Obtain timely weather and tropical cyclone reports!

Find equipment and installation help worldwide!

INCLUDES A FREE CD ROM LOADED WITH SOFTWARE, RADIO SOUNDS & INFO!

Listen to and learn what HF Radio E-mail transmissions sound like!

Troubleshoot your HF radio system!

Worldwide Radio Fax stations and frequencies!

Free GRIB weather readers and more software!

WOW! Look at all the cool stuff I can do on my boat with HAM radio!

[kb3mng]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ Feb. 05 2006,01:38)]I don't yet have a say in HF land, but when I'm there (the old fashioned way, BTW) I don't want the bands polluted by illegal business transactions conducted by affluent yacht owners who only got their ham license so they can trade their stocks via e-mail while on a weekend cruise to Bermuda.
It would be appropriate to know something about what you are complaining about.

There are some "affluent yacht owners", but most ocean going yachts belong to people who are not particularly wealthy. The most common scenario is for somebody to save money for a time, go cruising for a while, and then have to stop somewhere and get a job when the money runs out. They usually live frugally and repeat this cycle every few years. Ordinarily, the people doing this do not have a house because they needed to sell it for money to buy/equip the boat and cover living expenses while unemployed. A typical vessel is a sailboat in the 30 to 40 foot range.

For these people, there is no such thing as "a weekend cruise to bermuda". The trip is 5 to 7 days one-way. Even giant cruise ships take about 1.5 to 2 days just to get there from the east coast of the US.

"Affluent yacht owners" use reliable systems like Inmarsat, Iridium, or Trackphone. If they really need to trade stocks at sea, the cost of those communication methods are minor when you consider the improved reliability over any HF system.

If somebody is conducting business over email, a likely cause is that they are ordering replacement parts for failed equipment. It's hard to find parts for a 20 year old engine in the islands. This is what services from Pin Oak Digital, Globemail, or Sailmail are for.

If you don't have an amateur license for other reasons, Sailmail is a better choice for cruisers who want email. For Sailmail, you do not need any new licenses beyond what you already have: the ship's station license and restricted radiotelephone operator that you already have for your marine HF. You don't need to memorize a couple hundred irrelevant trivia questions.

(Irrelevant to an ocean sailor, of course; if someone finds the questions are interesting, then that person is interested in amateur radio, and is not the person you are complaining about.)

Of course, many cruisers already have amateur radio licenses because they want to participate in the HF nets. (For some reason, the nets are all on amateur frequencies rather than marine frequencies.) In that case, they likely already have an amateur license and might as well use Winlink for at least the "hi mom" kind of email. (Third party traffic is third party traffice, whether via voice of data.)

[KF0RT]

Quote[/b] (w0pee @ Feb. 05 2006,08:15)]Instead of banning this mode of operation, it should be restricted to ensure it does not cause QRM to other modes.
Kill two birds with one stone and restrict it to 14.275...

73, Rob

[n8yx]

Quote[/b] (KF0RT @ Feb. 06 2006,03:32)]Kill two birds with one stone and restrict it to 14.275...
With 14.313 as an alternate.

[N5PVL]

Isn't there plenty of room on the 11-meter band?

[n8yx]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 06 2006,06:57)]Isn't there plenty of room on the 11-meter band?
There's a thought: Put 'em on Channel 6...and when "the Bowl" gets rolling, all WL TFC will come to an abrupt halt. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

[N5PVL]

If WinLink Email traffic could be monitored and thus 'self-policed' by other amateurs for illegal content, that would also bring WL to and abrupt halt.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (w0pee @ Feb. 05 2006,08:15)]Guy's I'm not following the logic. Why would anyone who took the time to get an amateur radio license NOT be allowed to legally use the frequencies. To me, that's like saying you couldn't use a CW ID outside of the bands marked for CW use.

Instead of banning this mode of operation, it should be restricted to ensure it does not cause QRM to other modes.

Thus why I support Winlink and DO NOT agree with path we seem to be taking to let these data transactions to be all over the band segment.

If I'm missing something here, please help me understand. (Charles -- agree with your observation and conditions of use)
We fought the civil war, the north won and yet we battled racial inequality for another nearly 100 years. Just figiting the battles at hand does nothing for the underlying issues.

Winlink is unfortunately the poster child for greedy spectrum grabbing political pressure within Amateur Radio. If we ever want a harmonious bandplan, we better have a general attitude adjustment from the Digital Elite. Just restricting robot stations will not address this.

[K3UD]

Quote[/b] (kb3mng @ Feb. 05 2006,22:49)]Of course, many cruisers already have amateur radio licenses because they want to participate in the HF nets. (For some reason, the nets are all on amateur frequencies rather than marine frequencies.) In that case, they likely already have an amateur license and might as well use Winlink for at least the "hi mom" kind of email. (Third party traffic is third party traffice, whether via voice of data.)
MNG,

Nice post but you missed a few points.

Yes there are maritime nets on HF, but we know where the frequencies are and there are typically no QRM problems from the net. What we don't know is where WL2K autobots will pop up when someone who does not want to pay for a service like Sail-Mail decides to send email via that particular protocol.

If these operations were confined to very specific frequency ranges and not mixed in the areas where the established maritime nets have been established (IE: the phone bands), everything would be much better on the bands. Unfortunately both RM-11305 and 306 would allow them either anywhere they want to go or sharing the phone bands. either way it is a recipe for problems. Alos, how do you know that those on Yachts or Pontoon boats are not cunducting commercial business via WL2K when they should be using commercial services to do it?

I remember when all kind of problems went on with ham radio clubs that owned repeaters when some misguided hams used the auto patch to do things like order a pizza or make appointments with clients of their business operations.

73
George
K3UD

[w5alt]

Quote[/b] (w0pee @ Feb. 05 2006,11:15)]Guy's I'm not following the logic. #Why would anyone who took the time to get an amateur radio license NOT be allowed to legally use the frequencies. #To me, that's like saying you couldn't use a CW ID outside of the bands marked for CW use.
But that's what the rules are, OM. CW is allowed on all frequencies, except 60 meters. You cannot ID with CW on 60 meters. Anywhere else is specifically mentioned as permitting CW - and you can use CW to ID.

[N5PVL]

Digital elitists, not digital elite.

The digital elite are good hams; They respect both the PART97 regulations and thier fellow amateurs. They follow and adhere to the Amateur's Code. They do not particularly think of themselves as "the elite" and that is, in part, why they are.

Digital elitists think they are better than everybody else, and that the rules are there for the little people, not them..

It is important to differentiate between the two, because to do otherwise is to do some really great hams a grave disservice.

[kb3mng]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Feb. 06 2006,16:51)]Quote[/b] (kb3mng @ Feb. 05 2006,22:49)]Of course, many cruisers already have amateur radio licenses because they want to participate in the HF nets. (For some reason, the nets are all on amateur frequencies rather than marine frequencies.) In that case, they likely already have an amateur license and might as well use Winlink for at least the "hi mom" kind of email. (Third party traffic is third party traffice, whether via voice of data.)
MNG,

Nice post but you missed a few points.

Yes there are maritime nets on HF, but we know where the frequencies are and there are typically no QRM problems from the net. What we don't know is where WL2K autobots will pop up when someone who does not want to pay for a service like Sail-Mail decides to send email via that particular protocol.

If these operations were confined to very specific frequency ranges and not mixed in the areas where the established maritime nets have been established (IE: the phone bands), everything would be much better on the bands. Unfortunately both RM-11305 and 306 would allow them either anywhere they want to go or sharing the phone bands. either way it is a recipe for problems. Alos, how do you know that those on Yachts or Pontoon boats are not cunducting commercial business via WL2K when they should be using commercial services to do it?

I remember when all kind of problems went on with ham radio clubs that owned repeaters when some misguided hams used the auto patch to do things like order a pizza or make appointments with clients of their business operations.

73
George
K3UD
I specifically did not address the issue of what frequency winlink is on because it was not relevant to the posting I was responding to.

I was pointing out that the sentiment expressed by FRF (and others at various times) is based on an incorrect stereotype. In my post, I attempted to give a very brief description of the reality.

My points are:
- few yachties are rich
- the rich ones use sat phones
- it would be stupid to put in the effort to get a ham license if your only purpose was to gain access to winlink
- if you have a ham license anyway, you might as well use winlink when appropriate

Obviously, there is a problem with winlink, but I think there are enough complaints that are well founded. Also obviously, winlink is attractive to boaters, but assuming that the whole problem is millionaires who can't afford $2/minute to get their stock trade executed right now does not help anybody.

Now, to address your points:

Obviously, the single most significant thing winlink could do to generate some good will would be to restrict themselves to a narrow portion of each band.

I don't see a problem with restricting automatically controlled stations to specific sub-bands, even if we are regulated by bandwidth rather than mode. (I didn't make that comment to the FCC because several other people had already done so.)

I note that stations subject to US jurisdiction tend to keep their Pactor III operations in the automatic control bands, but they let their Pactor I and Pactor II (500 hz modes) out all over the place. Stations in other nations don't follow our rules, so our regulations aren't going to fix the problem of interference from them.

I can't prove that nobody on a boat is conducting business via winlink. Probably somebody is. What do we do about it? We know that drug trafficers transport their product from Florida to New York on I-95, but our answer is not to tear down the interstate highway system.

I don't think anybody would be so excited about the possibility that somebody might transmit an occasional commercial message through winlink if there weren't already an existing dislike of winlink. That is, those messages would still be frowned upon by the community, but would not be enough to cause winlink to be second only to morse code for discussion here. It would get the same treatment as other illegal activity on the ham bands.

As far as I can tell, the principal real complaint with winlink is the QRM.

Suppose I had a magic wand and could make winlink stay in a narrow portion of each band. Would that be a solution?

Suppose I had TWO magic wands and I could also make winlink use standard RTTY signalling instead of Pactor-III, so you could monitor all their traffic. Would that be a solution?

[WA0LYK]

Quote[/b] ]K3UD
Quote[/b] ] (kb3mng @ Feb. 05 2006,22:49)
Of course, many cruisers already have amateur radio licenses because they want to participate in the HF nets. (For some reason, the nets are all on amateur frequencies rather than marine frequencies.) In that case, they likely already have an amateur license and might as well use Winlink for at least the "hi mom" kind of email. (Third party traffic is third party traffice, whether via voice of data.)

MNG,

Nice post but you missed a few points.

Yes there are maritime nets on HF, but we know where the frequencies are and there are typically no QRM problems from the net. What we don't know is where WL2K autobots will pop up when someone who does not want to pay for a service like Sail-Mail decides to send email via that particular protocol.

At least maritime nets are designed for multiple stations to use a single frequency. Winlinks fundamental design requires horizontal frequency spreading rather than frequency stacking to preserve a limited resource.
Starting this kind of service as a limited experiment would have been ok. But allowing it to go worldwide with unlimited users is a disservice to hams everywhere.

My other question is when Scamp will be implemented and users told to throw their P3 modems overboard. Anyone reckon this will happen soon? Winlink is going to have to deal with the same problem businesses do when trying to upgrade to incompatible systems. How do you get your user base to cough up the money? I suspect we will see new stations with the new protocol which will double the number of frequencies used!

Jim
WA0LYK

[K3UD]

Maybe we should just turn over our frequencies to Google or Yahoo and let them build a wireless network for email. It sems like there are hams that want to take it that way in any event.

73
George
K3UD

[KB1KIX]

Quote[/b] (kf4vgx @ Feb. 05 2006,01:33)]Gee Charlie . you just wasted a lot of typing efforts for nothing http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
I don't think so.

I thought it was a well put argument.

Something that is well written - I pay attention to. If he was trolling and arguments were nothing but sarcasm - I wouldn't have read it.

Then again, I'm one guy, but I did pay attention.

Jonathan

[ky5u]

The ARRL plan is soundly rejected because the Digital Elite never answered the question of why they need so much spectrum. What about their needs mandates a bandwidth based bandplan. The only thing not fixed in the rules today is mixing analog voice and data. A simple overlap in the current rules at the border of the voice and data bands would take care of that. Just move the lower boundry of the voice bands down 25khz into the data band and approve both mode use. The only voice use approved would be as a part of a combined data application. Since it would be at the "top" of the data band, it would be open to General license class ops without the need to change the rules and would not reduce the voice bands.

But what do I know...

[N5PVL]

Makes sense to me.

[w8znx]

winlink=sky is falling

tnx fer the info on the book
will let all my liveaboard sailing friends

know where they can find out how to use
winlink

mac dit dit

[N5PVL]

Well, I guess if my name was Mac Dit Dit, I probably would have stayed out of school too. They say that kids can be really mean to the ones with strange or unusual names.

[kf4vgx]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 07 2006,18:13)]Well, I guess if my name was Mac Dit Dit, I probably would have stayed out of school too. They say that kids can be really mean to the ones with strange or unusual names.
Charlie the Tuna, representative of StarKist Tuna, made his first appearance in a TV commercial for StarKist, in 1961. He has starred in over 85 Television commercials, always trying to learn good taste. But the answer is always "Sorry, Charlie. StarKist wants tuna that tastes good, not tuna with good taste."

http://www.universalkitty.com/archives/photos/030805charlie.gif



http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif "Sorry, Charlie" http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

This is not a personal attack. Actually I think you have a great sense of humor. I enjoy your post #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif I hope you enjoy mine http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[N5PVL]

The Echolink crybaby takes his personal attack campaigne over here to the discussion about WinLink.

( Yawn )

A real class act, ( not ) - But a good example of what to expect from EchoLinkers and other non-hams in general.

[kf4vgx]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 07 2006,20:13)]Gee, how clever!
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Thank You ! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.universalkitty.com/archives/photos/030805charlie.gif




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

[N5PVL]

Well, I guess I shouldn't compain about the EchoLink poster-boy acting like an uncivilized moron... He does tend to prove my point about the general character of EchoLinkers.

He really should take his adolescent behavior back over to the EchoLink topic though, as there probably are hams here who would like to go ahead and discuss this topic, WinLink.

Getting back on topic, Charlie's idea about overlapping the voice and data segments in order to create an area for mixed-mode operation makles more sense than any of the other suggestions I've heard, and it would be easy for the FCC to do.

On thier end of the stick, it would eliminate an enforcement problem with the foriegn software and give amateurs a place to experiment with mixed modes on HF without complaints - and without causing problems with the majority of hams who coould care less about mixed-mode operation on HF.

The ARRL/WinLink bandwidth segmentation proposal throws the baby out with the bath water, tossing all structure and organization to the winds. - All so they can park thier robots on top of QSO's anywhere. It's no wonder that the great majority of the comments on RM-11306 have been unfavorable.

The book this topic refers to shows the WinLink shill k4cjx making a blatant sales pitch to boaters to get ham tickets for the sole purpose of obtaining cheap email service.

His lack of respect and responsibility concerning the hobby and his fellow hams is really ludicrous... As long as he can jack up the number of WinLink customers and impress the folks at Newington, he doesn't care whether those "new hams" have any actual interest in ham radio or not. - The guy is so phoney, all he needs is a loud checkerd suit, a pork-pie hat and a fat cigar.

The WinLink network is primarily designed as a cover-up for illegal operation. The illegal content of many of thier emails can't be reasonably monitored or subjected to peer review for the purpose of self-policing, due to the WinLink network's bizarre structure.

From a networking point of view, WinLink is a train-wreck; A sorry combination of laughably obsolete network design set up to operate with a digital mode that is obviously unsuitable for anything but a very small network. From a point of view that coinsiders hiding what they are doing though, it's all just great.

[kf4vgx]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 07 2006,21:11)]Well, I guess I shouldn't compain about the EchoLink poster-boy acting like an uncivilized moron... He does tend to prove my point about the general character of EchoLinkers.

He really should take his adolescent behavior back over to the EchoLink topic though, as there probably are hams here who would like to go ahead and discuss this topic, WinLink.

Getting back on topic, Charlie's idea about overlapping the voice and data segments in order to create an area for mixed-mode operation makles more sense than any of the other suggestions I've heard, and it would be easy for the FCC to do.

On thier end of the stick, it would eliminate an enforcement problem with the foriegn software and give amateurs a place to experiment with mixed modes on HF without complaints - and without causing problems with the majority of hams who coould care less about mixed-mode operation on HF.

The ARRL/WinLink bandwidth segmentation proposal throws the baby out with the bath water, tossing all structure and organization to the winds. - All so they can park thier robots on top of QSO's anywhere. It's no wonder that the great majority of the comments on RM-11306 have been unfavorable.

The book this topic refers to shows the WinLink shill k4cjx making a blatant sales pitch to boaters to get ham tickets for the sole purpose of obtaining cheap email service.

His lack of respect and responsibility concerning the hobby and his fellow hams is really ludicrous... As long as he can jack up the number of WinLink customers and impress the folks at Newington, he doesn't care whether those "new hams" have any actual interest in ham radio or not. - The guy is so phoney, all he needs is a loud checkerd suit, a pork-pie hat and a fat cigar.

The WinLink network is primarily designed as a cover-up for illegal operation. The illegal content of many of thier emails can't be reasonably monitored or subjected to peer review for the purpose of self-policing, due to the WinLink network's bizarre structure.

From a networking point of view, WinLink is a train-wreck; A sorry combination of laughably obsolete network design set up to operate with a digital mode that is obviously unsuitable for anything but a very small network. From a point of view that coinsiders hiding what they are doing though, it's all just great.
Well, I guess I shouldn't complain about the EchoLink poster-boy acting like an uncivilized moron... He does tend to prove my point about the general character of EchoLinkers.

He really should take his adolescent behavior back over to the EchoLink topic though, as there probably are hams here who would like to go ahead and discuss this topic, WinLink.

His obsession with acting like a jerk is really boring.

Getting back on topic, Charlie's idea about overlapping the voice and data segments in order to create an area for mixed-mode operation makes more sense than any of the other suggestions I've heard, and it would be easy for the FCC to do.

On their end of the stick, it would eliminate an enforcement problem with the foreign software and give amateurs a place to experiment with mixed modes on HF without complaints - and without causing problems with the majority of hams who could care less about mixed-mode operation on HF.

The ARRL/WinLink bandwidth segmentation proposal throws the baby out with the bath water, tossing all structure and organization to the winds. - All so they can park their robots on top of QSO's anywhere. It's no wonder that the great majority of the comments on RM-11306 have been unfavorable.

The book this topic refers to shows the WinLink shill k4cjx #making a blatant sales pitch to boaters to get ham tickets for the sole purpose of obtaining cheap email service.

His lack of responsibility concerning the hobby is ludicrous... As long as he can jack up the number of WinLink customers and impress the folks at Newington, he doesn't care whether those "new hams" have any actual interest in ham radio or not. - The guy is so phony, all he needs is a loud checkered suit, a pork-pie hat and a fat cigar.

The WinLink network is primarily designed as a cover-up for illegal operation. The illegal content of many of their emails can't be reasonably monitored or subjected to peer review for the purpose of self-policing, due to the WinLink network's bizarre structure.

From a networking point of view, WinLink is a train-wreck; A sorry combination of laughably obsolete network design set up to operate with a digital mode that is obviously unsuitable for anything but a very small network. From a point of view that considers hiding what they are doing though, it's all just great.


....


OK, Charlie http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif


Quote N5PVL,
Uncivilized moron, " adolescent" ,

His obsession with acting like a jerk is really boring.
Uncivilized moron... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif.


ER ? Who are you talking about http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif.
....
Getting back on topic, Charlie's idea about overlapping the voice and data segments in order to create an area for mixed-mode operation makles / makes ,more sense than any of the other suggestions I've heard, and it would be easy for the FCC to do.

OK , Sorry Charlie. #If You say so. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif makles

[N5PVL]

I guess poor vjx must be mentally ill... It's sad to see somebody go on like that.

I wonder if he'll ever get around to talking about WinLink, or contribute anything positive to the discussion.

[kf4vgx]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Feb. 08 2006,03:07)]I guess poor vjx must be mentally ill... It's sad to see somebody go on like that.

I wonder if he'll ever get around to talking about WinLink, or contribute anything positive to the discussion.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif #Sorry Charlie #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif




mentally ill http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif .




Let me gets this straight , you brake all the rules of sanity when you provoke others by degrading yourself and others that you disagree with.

You insulted your fellow #amateurs #..
Calling amateurs childish names #etc,
Quote N5PVL,

Ever notice how all the nasty comment types either don't bother to read first, or perhaps are just literate enough to post nasties, but not literate enough to read the topic through?

They say when you ASSUME you make an ASS out of U and ME etc,

"Ignorant moron" ,moronic misuse,
more adolescent behavior.

Yes, I feel that I am a better ham than an EchoLink user.

Echolink users are none hams etc.
....
I'm sure there are a few I missed here somewhere.
....


# # # #I say again ,

# # # # # # # Get a Life !

# # #Mentally ill ? # # your words,not mine .

I issue a challange!

Charlie ,can you involve yourself in any discussions
without reducing intelligent conversations of those whom you disagree with by petty childish name calling ?

Please ,go on with your ravings, I'm sure QRZ is use to it.

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 73 OM http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[N5PVL]

Nope; Still off-topic, still can't spell, still no positive contribution to the discussion.

I'm shocked. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[WA0LYK]

Did anyone read the comment on 11306 that ended this way:

Quote[/b] ]Otherwise, the digital crowd will do the opposite. The ARRL RM- 11306 suggestions on the last two pages are, 47C.F.R._S 97.309(a) and (b) : Using published digital codes to facilitate communications, then log and measure them. It looks pretty good. The novices should not be ghettoed. They should be amongst the veterans. Bandwidth limitations especially on `phone are pretty ludicrous. If you`re just bragging in the jam, it`s all right to put a sock over the mivcrophone, add mic cable, turn the Chebyshev turret switch clockwise, dig into a roundtable/ ragchew, switch to sideband or another band, or just get off! (listening or not) It`s not your turn. That`s the American way . If it`s grass on the panadapter and you`re feeling selfless, do the opposite. Take off the sock, turn the Chebyshev counterclockwise, raise the antenna a branch, get more than two of the other operators rolling, showing off their families and birds, (or tone CW on 10 metres, a hint), put the Ham TV on a Shadbolt pattern and tones, then work pictures, and finally, put the Cathedral Radio in the back of the car, play said same, go to the store for shoes, and see who gets curious, and, Oh by the way, someday you`ll be chewing skin for shoes, so enjoy life whilst you can. Fred Jodry, KA2PYQ …_._

I was rolling on the floor wondering what this fellow had imbibed, swallowed, smoked, or snorted (or which combinations).

Sounds like we have another one with the same problem!

Jim
WA0LYK

[n8yx]

Quote[/b] (WA0LYK @ Feb. 09 2006,08:20)]Did anyone read the comment on 11306 that ended this way:

I was rolling on the floor wondering what this fellow had imbibed, swallowed, smoked, or snorted (or which combinations).
Another shining testimonial for "Just Say No"...! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[N5PVL]

That's what I suggested to the FCC in my comment about RM-11306...

Just say no! #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif