WinLids on Parade - AE6XO

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by N5PVL, Nov 4, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-Geochron
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: HRDLLC-2
  1. KY5U

    KY5U Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    You know, I'd like to move on to other topics too but I have to say that transmission after transmission, the genetically superior Winlink crew QRM. So it seems only fitting that thread after thread we keep reminding them of it.

    So you want to be constructive? Explain why people would continue to use this software given a pretty good chance it will QRM another amateur every time it is used.
     
  2. AC0H

    AC0H Ham Member QRZ Page

    Albert,

    I wonder why you're so interested in "compromising" with 1/2 of 1% of HF users, who have shown nothing but disrespect and in some cases outright hostility toward the rest of us?

    Even with the ridiculous "EMCOMM" claims made by the WinLinkers and the ARRL (still waiting on definitive, undeniable proof that winlink has saved anything other than a sail mail subscription) is free HF email really worth it?

    There's nothing "technically innovative" about these wideband digital modes. It's still just FSK which has been around for decades. You want some technical innovation? How about trying to figure out a way to pack the same amount of data into 1/10 or 1/5th the bandwidth? That would be innovative.

    WinLink2K and SCS aren't interested in technical innovation. They're interested in their own little private HF email network and selling modems.

    A pox on their houses!
     
  3. NK0V

    NK0V XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    AC0H
    MIV wants to reward the Winlids/ARRL he is shilling for, no one else. The "taditional" hams (us) mean nothing to him. In this climb to the top of the Winlink/EmComm mountain nothing matters, only the $$$ at the end of the rainbow.
    Because we do not support this Winlink garbage blindly we are all "stupid", "b***hers", and "whiners" and the list goes on and on. This is going to be pushed on us more and more as the winlids demand more and more of the spectrum. Unfortunately there are those of us on this board who are all to willing to give winlink ANYTHING it wants.
     
  4. KI4WCA

    KI4WCA Ham Member QRZ Page

    How about a new band for the winlink crowd?Say in the commercial maritime and aero allocations?And a commercial license to go with it.Yes, that would work.The military currently has a very capable sat network for data relay.I would think cw,ssb, and psk would be enough for emcomm stuff on the amateur allocations.Unless the real agenda is a spectrum grab.And transforming the amateur service into something decidedly non amateur.
     
  5. KC7GNM

    KC7GNM Ham Member QRZ Page

    They already have that in the form of Sailmail. They just choose to bypass a pay service and use the amateur band for their free email service.
     
  6. KC7GNM

    KC7GNM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Albert,

    Your problem is you want to compromise with people that do not want to work or talk to us. We have tried to talk to them over in their own groups only to get banned. They don't like to hear that they are interfering with other amateur radio ops because what they don't know they can ignore. That is the whole idea behind Steve Watermans little empire. Sorry but there is no compromise with these people as they won't even come here and debate this issue or let us debate it with them on their own groups.

    That is the reason why I now automatically turn in anyone I find interfering with my comms. I don't even bother letting them know anymore. They will just get a letter from the FCC from now on.
     
  7. KI4ITV

    KI4ITV Ham Member QRZ Page

    11-18 00:14 (callsign removed) DN08 10.140.50 1115 MultiPSK Unbelievable. 4 PSK signals, 1 MFSK, a Hellschreiber sig (mine) and maybe domino or something..... and a pactor 3 comes up right over everyone.
     
  8. KI4NGN

    KI4NGN Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Both. And I was also watching the spectrum display. The only signals I heard and saw were the Pactor.
     
  9. AD4MG

    AD4MG Banned QRZ Page

    Well, that's not true at all. Albert sees this from a different perspective. His suggestion to compromise is probably the path this will eventually have to take. How else is this going to be "fixed"?

    Many amateurs worked together against RM-11306, for the benefit of the majority of amateurs (your reference to "traditional" hams), none more tirelessly than Albert.

    I do disagree with him that nothing is gained here. I believe we should apply peer pressure on these lids, and single out and identify each and every one of them that causes interference.

    Post the callsigns of interfering stations. File interference reports with the FCC. Write letters, email, whatever it takes to make the problem known. Perhaps at some point in time, we will force a solution. One which nobody may like, but a solution, nonetheless.
     
  10. KI4NGN

    KI4NGN Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Believe me, I understand your obvious frustration and anger, all legitimate, but it also could be said to be convenient and worn out to be verbally assaulted when just attempting to look for some mitigation beyond what others think the only solution.

    I find it difficult to believe that a ham with a license for the past 40 years has suddenly become a lid. Could he be? Sure, and maybe he has been since he obtained his license.

    However, as convenient and worn out it may be to mention the possibility that perhaps he hears no signals, it's still none the less a very valid possibility. No one would deny this possibility for any other modes, no one would call the mention of this possibility convenient and worn out, yet this appears to be easy for some where these modes are concerned.

    It must be obvious that if the FCC has not acted on what I presume from this and other threads to be a mountain of submitted QRM evidence, they're not going to act.

    If this is true, then it is to everyone's benefit to come up with a workable solution beyond what many believe is the only one. It's either that or take the FCC to court for not enforcing the regulations.

    Of course if none of this evidence has been submitted to the FCC, but it's just been used to substantiate venting, then nothing is going to change.

    73,
    Mike
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

ad: w5yi