Beware the ARRL/WINLINK Conspiracy!

[N9LYA]

Everyone beware!

The ARRL/Winlink conspiracy will try to eliminate autoforwarding in order to
argue that the
sub-bands are therefore not needed. If there are no sub-bands, then there
are no
constraints on using Pactor-III everywhere, as well as SCAMP everywhere,
since any
unattended operations over 500 Hz in width must now stay in the sub-bands.

Inside Latest issue, QRZ in Sumner's
"It seems to us"
in this issue includes an about-face on keeping autoforwarding. I am sure
Winlink is behind
this for two reasons - kill off competition from HF Packet and get out of
the sub-band
fenced in area.

The result (and the real reason) behind eliminating sub-bands needs to be
made known to
every ham that hates the QRM from the Winlink Pactor mailboxes. I am sure
most do not even
realize what is happening!

73 Jerry N9LYA

[AD4MG]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Mar. 15 2005,07:51)]yaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnn.....

From your profile:

Quote[/b] ]
I am logging many DX contacts and having a blast. Hope to catch you on the air.

Albert,

I regret that the previous post apparently bores you. #Obviously, you see no threat from the ARRL bandwidth proposal. #Will you be "having a blast" working DX on your IC-746 Pro when the pactor robots are slamming you? #I hope so, that's a nice HF rig.

You do understand that both issues are part of the same proposal I hope.

What may bore you is of great importance to others. #Ice hockey bores me to death, but I can't remember throwing this little fact up in the face of the many fans who do enjoy the sport.

Thank you for your thought-provoking post. #It contributes so well to constructive discussion.

[N8CPA]

Albert, you are far better at dismissal and condescension than that truncated comment reveals. It was not nearly your best. I usually enjoy your Triptiks to the nether regions. The brevity of that one, however, is far beneath the soul of your wit.

Beware, lest the tongue cheek
gets punctured by the nearby teeth.

[N5PVL]

Sorry MIV, but it is not "ALL unattended operation on HF" that are being threatened for no supportable reason.

The unattended stations that operate within the special sub-bands set aside for unattended operation cause zero interference precisely because they operate within those narrow slivers of spectrum. - These are the unattended stations being threatened, not the unbounded WL2K QRM mills that are being proposed.

Isn't that "special"? #

This endless cadre of PACTOR III stations ( or SCAMP, assuming it gets past the promotional stage ) that will be QRM'ing the HF bands at will won't be bothered by this campaigne at all.

These days, if you want to know where the corruption in the ARRL is centered, look at who pushes WL2K the hardest - and who works the hardest to eliminate competition against WL2K by genuine Hams using genuine Ham Radio - as these tend to cast the various "Integration with the Internet" schemes like WL2K in a bad light.

If they can just force those Hams off of the air and get them on the Internet instead, they will know they have won. - This is the face of corruption at ARRL HQ today.

Two polls here at QRZ showed that 85-90% of the responders thought that it is the ARRL's job to promote the development and use of Amateur Radio, not the Internet and that our best response to competition offered by the Internet is to develop the use of Amateur Radio, not to ( duh! ) put our communications over the Internet.

In other words, 15% or less of the Hams who responded agree with the essential premise behind WL2K and other "Integration of Ham Radio with the Internet" schemes.

So what we have at ARRL HQ is an tiny, ingrown clique of folks who are extraordinarily "out of touch" with the hobby in general and the desires of most Amateurs in particular - calling for their unpopular, minority views to be cast in stone for decades by the FCC and congress.

These are persons who are using the influence and prestige of their positions at ARRL HQ in order to work against, not for the wishes and best interests of their fellow hams.

( Yawn )

Just everyday, boring stuff like we see all the time. Nothing special about the hobby being undermined by an anti-ham group that have insinuated themselves into ARRL HQ... Happens every day.

Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket
Admin: HamBlog.Com
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog

[AD4MG]

I must say that I'm missing your point Albert. #You appear to have issues for
any sort of unattended digital operation, but yet you stick your finger in the
eye of those who have issues with the ARRL proposal concerning this matter, then
you express your displeasure with the sailboat e-mail via amateur radio crowd.

What is it that you are trying to tell us? #You admit past problems with Pactor
forwarding disrupting your activities, then you blast packet operations that,
due to the operating frequency limitations, cannot possibly have bothered you.

Your contradictions only lead to confusion, and you leave anyone reading your
opinions at somewhat of a loss. #I certainly am at a loss to figure out where
you are coming from, maybe I'm just not cerebral enough to communicate at your
level.

I enjoy working DX, both on SSB and CW. #I also do quite a bit of packet radio
operation, but that's currently limited to VHF & UHF at this time. #Is it not
adequate that there are amateur radio operators using the HF bands for packet
radio auto-forwarding to justify its continuation, or is there some issue you
have with this particular mode that you have failed to share with us?

I suspect that if the ARRL is successful in granting virtually unlimited access
to our HF bands for these Pactor robots that our enjoyment of working DX will
be severely reduced. #I also think that amateur radio operators all over the
world will be pretty upset that we are so arrogant to allow such activity on
these frequencies. #To date, I am more than a little puzzled as to why the hams
in other countries haven't added their two cents worth on this subject, as this
is an issue that will affect their enjoyment of the HF bands as well.

I am in total agreement that the rich folks with the big buses and sailboats should
NOT be allowed to turn our HF bands into just another resource for the internet.
I don't use amateur radio spectrum to send and receive e-mail, and I don't think
you do either. #I pay my ISP every month to use their system, which is designed to
do what I use it for. #Like you said, "Let them all buy satellite phones, say I,
and I'll buy stock." #Bravo! #That's exactly the way it should be.

I cannot disagree that it's time to look at our frequency allocations, and consider
discussion of what we need to do to make experimentation without undue restriction
possible. #The problem with the current ARRL proposal is that they skipped the
discussion part. #A small group has seized control of the organization that many
feel represents amateur radio (I am NOT in that uninformed group), and is using
that organization to force its will on the entire amateur radio community.

If discussion of that bothers you to such a degree, then I'll do what you may
wish to consider, and I'll just ignore your posts, although I would not benefit
from your opinion. #Yes, your opinion, and the opinion of EVERY amateur radio
operator on the face of the planet is important. #When actions by such a small
number of members of the amateur radio community can have so great an impact on
the community as a whole, it is time for considerably more than just simple
discussion. #At your pleasure, consider that testimony, and act accordingly. #I
don't believe you are the type of individual who wishes to suppress lively debate
of an issue. #If that were the case, you would not have bothered to make 1600+
posts here on QRZ.

I am certainly not attempting to "dis" you in any manner. #I'm simply making a
sincere attempt to hear your message. #Can you offer that message to us without
the misdirection? #I am honestly interested in understanding what's happening to
the amateur radio service these days, and your opinion is a part of that.

Best 73,
Luke

[N0OV]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Mar. 14 2005,07:47)]Frankly, I have come to the decision that I would like to see ALL unattended operation on HF, whether packet, WinLink or whatever, ended once and for all.

Here, here, or restricted to a very narrow band of operation that will NOT impact those who prefer to actually touch the radios!

[AD4MG]

Well Albert, I understand you a little better. #But I take exception to making any slanderous statements about the ARRL Board of Directors. #I simply offered comment that my opinion is that a small group of highly motivated individuals has "hijacked" the organization, and the interests of that small group may not be in line with the best interests of all amateur radio operators.

I have been able to discuss, in a polite manner, this very issue with Jim Haynie, here on QRZ. #We are worlds apart in our opinions, but yet Jim entertained my thoughts even though I'm not a member of the ARRL, and I make no secret of that fact.

You and I are fellow Dx'ers, and we're also fellow amateurs, so I'll try not to take offense to your reference to my fellow "packeteers", which seems to hint at your displeasure with such activities. #To each his own Albert, I don't do SSTV, but I don't have any problems with those that do.

Thanks for the clarification, although I can't help but feel that you group me into the "radical" responders to issues that I feel are important. #I may be very direct in pursuing information that will assist me in making informed decisions, but my intent is not to infuriate others.

I admire that you stand firm in your opinions and convictions, and it may be unintentional, but you sure project a level of disdain in your posts towards those who inquire of your opinions.

Anyway, we're nearly in agreement on this subject, but I don't have any great feeling of satisfaction from our communicating with one another. #It just seems that we're not quite in sync.

I'll leave this discussion between you and I where it is, and spare the rest of the QRZ readers any more back & forth.

I remain most interested in additional opinions on the topic. #A recent thread on a very similar topic was locked down by Glen, and I sincerely hope that this thread doesn't descend to that level.

73,
Luke

[KY5U]

Actually, Albert you had a great suggestion(albeit in the negative). We need to put all digital users in 60-80kHz and let them deal with their own issues. A digital WWF Smackdown!!

If digital users can be good neighbors to each other then we can entertain allowing them back in the voice and CW subbands.

[N5PVL]

Quote[/b] ]
Let them all buy satellite phones, say I, and I'll buy stock.

So... You think I should not be able to discuss this troubling matter at all, while you "will continue to post my irritation using tongue-in-cheek or otherwise."

Well, I guess I'll have to dissapoint you there, OM.

Note that the word "conspiracy" has only appeared in this thread within MIV's posts, along with "slander" and the phrase "character assault".

( I went back and also found "conspiracy" in the first post - and the Topic name! )

In the past, I've noted this person will join discussions he does not approve of, for the sole purpose of causing a distraction or even better - to convince a moderator to assist him in silencing the discussion.

Hence the negative, belligerent attitude, the wild claims, the succesion of boring, petty, argumentative posts, etc..

He's a Troll.

( Yawn )

Charles Brabham, #N5PVL

Director: USPacket
Admin: HamBlog.Com
Weblog: N5PVL's #Blog

[AD4MG]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Mar. 15 2005,13:36)]Actually, Albert you had a great suggestion(albeit in the negative). #We need to put all digital users in 60-80kHz and let them deal with their own issues. #A digital WWF Smackdown!!

If digital users can be good neighbors to each other then we can entertain allowing them back in the voice and CW subbands.

Not a good idea. #There would be no winner, as RTTY, AMTOR, PACTOR, ASCII and other 100% duty cycle modes would dominate, without a clear winner.

I would LOVE to see ONE simple question answered once and for all.

What is it about packet radio auto-forwarding in the miniscule slivers of spectrum on the HF bands that bothers so many people?

Please keep in mind that I do NOT participate in packet radio auto-forwarding in the miniscule slivers of spectrum on the HF bands. #I'm just puzzled why this causes so many so much grief.

I bet I get more misdirection and spin than would come out of a political party convention from the replies that will be generated to that simple question.

Is there any chance that we can get some reasonable discussion here? #I, for one, am not going to be so jovial when digital signals are spewing throughout the voice portions of the HF bands.