K1MAN Responds

Why did I join qrz.com again. This is nothing more than a Hoopla.


73
K1JWM

 

AMEN Brother! You have that right. This is going to make the Ham Bands worse than if we all had BPL, yet anyone that speaks up is accused of "ARRL Bashing."

 

I find it interesting and distressing that every post seems to turn into a name-calling contest and a series of insults and exclamations of idiocy on the side of anyone not aligned with whoever happens to be posting.  To those of you who engage in such activities, I say "Breaker, breaker Good Buddy, I'm 10-7, 10-4!"

To those of you with IQ's that surpass your age, the fact of the matter is that Amateur Radio is governed by rules and regs.  K1MAN has been given ample opportunity to abide by those rules and regulations.  He has flaunted his distain for same, and as a result, he is now being assessed a fine, forfeiture of equipment and a revocation of his license.  It's pretty cut and dried.  As members of a society, we do not have the luxury of deciding which law is applicable to us and which is not.  We are expected to obey ALL laws, whether we agree with them or not.  Just because you don't SEE a reason for a stop sign at a particular intersection does not mean that you won't be expected to pay a fine if the police see you running that sign, intentionally or not.

Now to the side issues.  I am not familiar with WinLink.  Does it not use CSMA signalling?  If it does, then a WinLink station will be inhibited from transmitting on any frequency upon which a signal is detected.  Of course, the sensitivity of such will be dependant on squelch settings, sensitivity of receiver and so on.  Perhaps THIS conversation, though, is best carried on another thread, as it seems to be off topic in a discussion of fines and forfeitures assigned to an individual accused of carrying on lengthy tirades and interfering with operations in a deliberate and malicious manner.

ARRL bulletins.  As noted, it's very common for an operator NOT to hear other QSO's in progress, even though both parties may hear the operator in question.  It's called a "skip zone."  It's even a test question.  Some of you who are complaining of W1AW interference may want to review.  Again, perhaps THIS conversation, though, is best carried on another thread, as it seems to be off topic in a discussion of fines and forfeitures assigned to an individual accused of carrying on lengthy tirades and interfering with operations in a deliberate and malicious manner.

Gentlemen, and admittedly I use the term loosely, let us try to communicate in a meaningful and respectful manner.  Name calling only inflates emotions, and not neccessarily the positive ones.  While I enjoy a bit of mud-slinging myself from time to time, in this thread it has served only to cause a deterioration of the conversation into a string of insults.  If you have something worth saying, please try to say it in a polite, respectful and constructive manner.

 

Yet another person trying to take constitutional law and apply it to the FCC - This guy just don't get it. Riley said his "problem children" were the Advanced & Extra Class, not technicians. I think I see why. In my book he's just another Jack Gerritsen. Constitutional Law isn't for the weak-minded, K1MAN. Being an Amateur is a PRIVILEGE not a right defended by our Constitution. Get a CB Radio, K1MAN, I think you'd be happier there. I'm glad I live in Michigan where we hardly ever hear someone being a fool on the amateur bands. 73

 

The answer to this question is NO. It uses the proprietary PACTOR II/III ARQ protocols and does not detect other stations on frequency. The developers indicate that upgrades are on the way to improve this, but they will likely end up as an option the owner can set or reset as desired.

The SCAMP system under Beta testing, is reported incorporate some form of channel busy detection, but there are no particulars available to assess the effectiveness of this code. We will, likely, have to wait until it is released to determine whether it is effective or not.

Ken

 

When questioned about SCAMP, the author confirmed that the "busy" detector detects whether a data signal is present on the channel. It does not look for voice. The author invited anyone who wanted to develope a voice detector for SCAMP to do so. This information is over a month old, so it is possible there have been developments since.

Every amateur should learn the facts concerning what the ARRL Bandwidth proposal proposes and apply common sense to see how it will effect those who use SSB, AM and CW. Technical discussions are irrelevent until two questions are answered:

1. Why should 95% of amateurs be negatively effected by the proposed change to please 5%?

2. What gaurantees to we have that the proposed changes will not result in interference to SSB,AM and CW users?

Additionally, the inclusion of Winlink type data signals in the voice bands will exaserbate any situation created by the addition of thousands of no code technicians to the HF bands. In other words, the ARRL bandwidth based bandplan proposal and the ARRL Restructuring Plan conflict particularly where existing General class licensees operate. Besides the decimation of the license class with untested NCTs, the lionshare of the inconvenience for the ARRL bandwidth based bandplan will be borne by Generals as well.

Don't take my word, look at it yourself. While K1MAN is rightly having to deal with the results of his past actions, his interference is nothing compared to what is coming if you sit idle and do nothing. Don't be sidetracked by the attempts to steer the discussion toward technical aspects. If the answer to either or both of the two questions enumerated above is not satisfactory to you, then just say "NO"!

 

Rights? What rights?

All we had was bologna sandwiches and we liked it. On a really good day we had Mac & Cheese!

 

Yes... they have in the past on 7290 Khz.
Often when working AM in the evening they have sent their scheduled 9:45PM bulletin a few Khz up to avoid our qso. Sometimes not, but that may be a matter of propagation. They may simply have not heard the station transmitting at the time.

 

Charlie (AG4YO), I have a question and it is not totally related to this K1MAN issue. Why must folks like you constantly put down "NCTs" or those of us with higher licenses that never had to perform at 20 wpm CW, or even 10 wpm? WE didn't change the structure and many of us earned our licenses, and still would have if the licensing structure had not changed. I know many folks memorized a bunch of Q&A, but many of us actually learned the material we had available to us. We aren't the K1MANs violating FCC rules and showing disregard for "gentlemen's usage" of ham bands. Many who are guilty of what K1MAN is accused of HAVE earned the higher license via the "old" licensing structure. Heck, code isn't even required in Australia anymore for any ham license! Don't be critical of folks just because they didn't have to learn things the way you did. Yeah I know, ya had to walk to school in the snow uphill both ways all summer long...I think putting folks down the way you have, about their licensing, is petty. Focus on why people of all walks of life flout rules and such, not how they earned their licenses.

Oh and if I made any typos or grammatical errors, forgive me, it could be worse!

73 de N6BOA

 

Mr. Baxter, it is operators such as yourself who cast a bad light on the entire Amateur Radio Service.

I believe I can sum up my opinion of your situation in six words:

You have only yourself to blame.

 

You notice that you don't see me anymore in a thread where you saw me earlier?

When a couple of people are bashing it out, then what can I post? All I will be doing is making things worse, and on top of that, there isn't anything I can add anyway because I know what will happen if I do get involved. What will happen is that someone will try to insult me, and I know from experience how I get carried away and come unglued.
Why the h, e, double heck do I want have that happen and get my day RUINED!?

And not only that, I refuse to insult my intelligence and lowering myself down.

Now I make sure that I look at most of my posts a,,

QUITE A WHILE

And think,,

TWICE BEFORE I HIT THE
POST
BUTTON!

Maybe even 3 times.

 

I just love when the pot calls the kettle black.

"for those with an IQ over their age"

"Gentlemen, and I use the term loosely"

Were you thinking your insults are better than other's insults?

 

why haven't they pulled his ticket?? duh!!!!

 

I guess you could call an NAL a fine, however, it is not the result of a hearing or trial. Only what the 'meter maid' says you can put in the envelope (to avoid a warrant).

There was no mention of forfeiture of his equipment or rem seizure, as I believe its called, in the FCC letter. So, at least as of now, that is not on the agenda.

Revocation of his license was also not included in the letter. His license will be up for renewal in about 90 days, and the FCC may hold up his application for renewal, should he file one, pending a review hearing in Washington before an Administrative Law Judge. Until the conclusion of that hearing, should it occur, he can still continue to operate legally as he is still licensed until the hearing judge reaches a decision.

Should the decision by the ALJ be to deny his renewal, then that would be appeallable to federal court. Again, if he were to chose to do so.


73,

Lee
W6EM