New Digital Petition at the FCC -- RM-11831

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by K0IDT, Mar 31, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
  1. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    OK, my friend -- I listed that to show the intent of the FCC. It was very clear that it was written regarding pactor 1.
     
  2. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    OK, my friend, I thought i explained when presenting that, that it showed the INTENT of the FCC. It was written well before the advent of newer Pactor modes, obviously. The key sentence that I think one might wish to take away is this:
    " will not
    conflict with our objective of preventing the use of codes
    or ciphers intended to obscure the meaning of the commu
    nication. 6"

    So the principle that they were explaining is that a guiding goal is to prevent the use of codes or ciphers INTENDED TO OBSCURE THE MEANING. How could one possibly apply an obscuration claim to equipoment which is AVAIALBLE FOR PURCHASE? See, now does it make more sense? Cheers, Gordon
     
  3. N8OHU

    N8OHU Ham Member QRZ Page

    No support for modems they were planning to use because US Amateurs can't use baud rates above 300 baud maybe?
     
    N4QX likes this.
  4. W6EM

    W6EM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Why the FCC looked the other way has a lot of possible answers. Much was likely rooted in a Newington cadre likely exerting undo influence. But, only circumstantial evidence, at least for now. More may surface. Who knows what the Shadow knows?
     
    AB2RA likes this.
  5. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hmmm.... Gee I don't know much abouut what you are talking. My understanding is that MARS has been subsumed into SHARES. Maybe it is cheaper that way? Why do hams go getting mad about what each other is sending over the radio all the time? Gee, I dunno.......but The government widely uses PACTOR....and SHARES is part of the Government and it uses PACTOR right and left, so they don't seem to be upset about off shore single supplier.... I don't know if that answered your question or not. But it is all I now. Cheers, Gordon
     
  6. W6EM

    W6EM Ham Member QRZ Page

    OK, Gordon. As a Winlink Cheerleader, you must know that the body of each message, and any attachments are not decodable by a 3rd party observer. Even using the latest SCS Dragon modem. Oh, sure, you would have us believe that all that is necessary are the headers, callsigns, etc. Or, maybe that Winlink will gladly archive all traffic for 3 weeks in case anyone might want to inspect it. Not good enough. You know it and we all know it.
     
    K4AGO and AB2RA like this.
  7. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well....the obvous answer is that either my reading is correct and it is covered by all the back and forth where one paragraph calls out another.....or else THEY LIKE THIS DEVELOPMENT and if you call them on it they will just release an opinion plainly stating that like they did in 1995. If you think they have been negligent in the prosecution of such and OBVIOUS, WILFULL, REPEATED violation, then go to your District Attorney and get them prosecuted, for heavens' sakes!!! Obviously that is not going to fly, my frined. you are pounding sand.
     
  8. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    Can you actually explain your claims? Can you explain WHY the body of amessage and attachments are not decodeable? Because I have heard personal testimony (of which you may not be aware) that your claim is false, so please explain further so I can learn. And no, my friend, I *don't* know "it" That's why I'm asking you to make explanations....not just accusations. Haven't we seen enough ACCUSATIONS being thrown about in the united states recently to last for all of time? What helps more is when people EXPLAIN things. Cheers, Gordon. Oh and by the way, I guess I'm a cheeleader for AX.25 and also for the NTS......
     
  9. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    I'm sorry...but I just don't follow your statement......
     
  10. KX4Z

    KX4Z Ham Member QRZ Page

    So I think I answered and explained the intent portion of that old letter in a separate post.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page