ARRL speaks on Regulation by Bandwidth

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by AA7BQ, Feb 25, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: FBNews-1
ad: OK1UUad-1
ad: Left-2
  1. AD4MG

    AD4MG Banned QRZ Page

    And after your display here, just who do you think gives a damn what you have to say?  I thought you were leaving?

    You can be a Winlink shill, an ARRL cheerleader, you can be whatever you want OM, but what we present here is no more misinformation than your distorted views.  Your views would punish many amateurs for the benefit of a very few, but for an arrogant digital elitist, it's justified in your little demented part of the scheme of things.

    Now why don't you do what you said you were going to do ... and just leave.  There are intellegent, decent people in the Winlink crowd who can debate the subject without bringing intolerance like yours to the discussion.

    Yours must be a very empty existence indeed.  You probably have a nice shiny badge and a whirling red light on your little truck to boot.

    Stay if you want, but be prepared for the reception you will get.  Many here don't take kindly at all to intolerance, especially when it relates to an individual's religious preferences, no matter where you read the material.  You should be banned for the personal attack you mounted on me, but I hope not.  I have a thick skin, and don't really give a hoot if you stay or not.  I will, however, delight in watching some of the witty folks here poke their finger in your eye!
  2. KH6TY

    KH6TY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Just received QST for May. On page 13, the ARRL states, "ARRL continues to believe that its petition is a measured response to progress in digital telecommunications technology and successfully balances the interests of all, regardless of which of the polarized opinions in in this proceeding, if any , constitutes a 'majority' view."

    I guess "balances the interests of all" means that the ARRL/Winlink consortium intends to have it all!

    They are hopeless! [​IMG]

    The ARRL leadership just HAS to go. [​IMG]
  3. N6KZB

    N6KZB Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    AD4MG , wow, such a vicious attack.

    You are a sad man indeed.

    Your vain attempts at slander and ridicule merely prove my point; you can't post true facts, you can’t handle the pressure, so get emotional.

    WinLink2000 and Pactor 3 are here to stay and growing, so find some other cause to champion.

    As W.C. Fields used to say:  “Go away son, you bother me”……………………..

  4. PE1RDW

    PE1RDW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Look who's talking....
  5. AD4MG

    AD4MG Banned QRZ Page

    His drivel isn't even worth a response Andre.  Maybe he'll run off and polish his little badge or something.  I debate only with intellegent people.  All he has to offer is a boring commercial for a proprietary TOR mode.  Not much there to debate.

    But notice how he resorts to the juvenile name calling, and then says I am attacking him.  Paranoia like that must be awful.  I hope he finds the help he needs.

    Wonder what he'll call me next?
  6. AD4MG

    AD4MG Banned QRZ Page

    Posted: April 10 2006,18:02
    N6KZB showing the real mindset of these people:

    "I contend that bandwidth is not the criteria for efficiency in this case, but what works well on HF, and gets you completed with your task."

    Posted: April 10 2006,23:57
    N6KZB spewing inaccuracies about the WL2K network:

    "It is not a store and forward system, such as the HF packet BBS's employ,"

    Posted: April 15 2006,15:44  
    N6KZB to Andre, PE1RDW:

    "Wonder how "snofroe" is doing these days..... "

    Posted: April 16 2006,13:26
    N6KZB to all, continuing the attack on Andre:

    "Do you know what he claims as a religion?"
    "By the by, he has a great listing on one of his Satanic cult site pages."

    Posted: April 16 2006,13:47
    N6KZB to me (horrors!):

    "And you are a jerk, and will continue to be so."
    "You are part of the "nut pack"
    "Since this thread has taken a nose dive with clowns like you..."

    Posted: April 20 2006,13:34
    And his "grand finale":

    "AD4MG , wow, such a vicious attack."
    "You are a sad man indeed."

    Nice work Mikey.  You sure showed all of us.  How can we mindless "nut-pack jerks" compete with cold hard facts such as these.  No surprise Winlink and automatic TOR operations are so unpopular with "normal" amateur radio operators.  You illustrate perfectly the perceived attitude of those involved with this QSO crashing garbage.  Life is going to be real tough for you guys as long as you carry with you the sheer arrogance you display. I bet your Winlink buddies are real proud of you now, their newest "loose cannon".

    Keep up the good work dude.
  7. N6KZB

    N6KZB Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Ahhhhhhhh,  is that the best you have.

    Stop trying to pretend you speak for the amateur community, you don't.

    Enjoy your posts, it is apparent that is all you have to live for.

    Sad little man, with sad little posts..........

  8. PE1RDW

    PE1RDW Ham Member QRZ Page

    What a surprice, to defend his personal attacks he posts another personal attack.
  9. AB0WR

    AB0WR Ham Member QRZ Page

    That's what happens when you try to defend the indefensible.

    tim ab0wr
  10. AD4MG

    AD4MG Banned QRZ Page

    Well Mikey and his sensless rants have hijacked the thread.  Hope he's finished with his juvenile name calling.

    Since this web site is set up to allow opinions, I'll have a go at refocusing the discussion with a few general statements.  I'll not offer great detail or proof, as each statement has been discussed at length here on QRZ.

    *** This proposal to allocate spectrum based on emission bandwidth was written by an ad-hoc digital committee comprised of a majority of folks with one single agenda ... advance the Winlink network.  One dissenting opinion was nearly crushed by the misguided political force of the ARRL.  Due to the wisdom of our forefathers, the dissenting opinion was eventually made public, and both sides of this issue became very clear.

    *** The proposal changed very, very little from the day it was written by the Winlink people to the day it was submitted to the FCC.

    *** The idea of spectrum allocation by emission bandwidth was actually considered by some as a valid thought.  Unfortunately, the petition itself suffered from numerous technical flaws, blatant prejudice against the vast majority of current amateur operations, and was considered by many digital innovators as actually discouraging future experimentation.

    *** Perhaps the most glaring problem with the proposal was that it would allow automatic (including the ficticious "semi-automatic") digital stations to operate anywhere bandwidth allowed, putting Pactor robots throughout the amateur spectrum, including the popular and already overcrowded voice segments.

    *** The proposal ignores what could be a large influx of new voice operators from the dropping of the code requirement, further compounding the previous problem.

    *** The proposal ignores international law regarding where digital operations will be located in the spectrum.

    *** There were no studies, or any consideration of the possible impact of the proposal.  The ARRL "Radio Gods" just decided it was better.  No explanation of why it was better, just that it was.  Concern was raised at one point that the ARRL was actually considering membership opinion regarding this proposal instead of actually going forward with what the Priest-Kings knew was better for amateur radio.

    *** 85% of those who bothered to add comment to the NPRM were dead set against the proposal.  Many made it a point to reference the Winlink network and Pactor robots as the reason they were against the proposal.

    *** The Winlink network appears to be a valid tool for emergency communications.  Few will argue that it does its job well.  I personally have great respect for the work that was done by the developement team that put this together.  That said, I don't think the network is as spectrum efficient as it could be, and I'm distressed at the potential for interference it creates.  Better planning towards being a better "neighbor" by the Winlink network could have made this entire process much easier.  Arrogance shown by rabid supporters of this network further compound the acceptance of these operations.  This is a peeing contest that will continue for a very long time.

    *** There is a solution, however.  Why the Winlink network folks (excluding Steve, K4CJX, who has discussed with me that this is acceptable, given ample specturm in which to operate) will not consider a compromise is beyond the understanding of reasonable amateurs.  Keep the unattended (both definitions of "automatic") stations in one part of each band, much the same way that packet has operated for many years, expand that allocation to allow these types of networks room to operate, and the problem is solved.  We could move forward.

    *** Keep the ARRL out of the planning process.  They promise the world and deliver nothing.  They promised to consider input on this petition before it was submitted, and there is no evidence that they did.  They promised a bandplan, a 2nd layer of defining spectrum allocation, and they produced nothing.  They are willing to shove their vision of what amateur radio should be down the throats of the majority, hence all the problems.

    In my world, if you cannot agree that the compromise situation in general I mention above is acceptable, you are a self-centered, arrogant, spectrum pig that deserves what you will get, and that's as little as the majority will allow.  By exhibiting the disdain towards your fellow amateur and failing to respect the operations and enjoyment of all, you catagorize yourself as such an individual, and if the shoe fits, then wear it, and suffer the fruits of your poison.  The self-centered, arrogant types like described don't understand ... if they do "win", they will destroy what amateur radio really is by removing the enjoyment of the service for many so that their selfish, arrogant behavior can continue at the expense of everyone.  Imagine emergency communications effectiveness with only 25% of the current number of amateurs.  I know for a fact that if I don't expect to experience the enjoyment aspect of the amateur radio service, that I'll be damned if I'll put the many hours that I currently do into volunteer work.  At the point that regulation of the service removes the ability to seek enjoyment of amateur radio, then I'll have no further need for that license.  I would wager that many share that opinion.

    Now Mike, I challenge you to rise above your juvenile name calling and discuss the issue at hand.  This thread is about expressing the outrage at the reaction the ARRL exhibits to the majority of commenters being against the proposal as it is written, not anything about how well pactor works, or how much you like it.  Or do you wish to continue calling me a "sad little man"?  I have the ability to ignore your name calling and express my opinion in a manner that is found to acceptable to most.  What have you got?  The invitation is extended, the floor is yours.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page