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: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: FBNews-1
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
  1. KI4WCA

    KI4WCA Ham Member QRZ Page

    I know.I was being sarcastic.The saving of a very few dollars while indiscriminately nuking the psk guys is very lame, as is the emcomm argument.
     
  2. WA0LYK

    WA0LYK Ham Member QRZ Page

    Why does there have to be a solution that is "FAIR" to everyone, especially when it rewards those users who cause harmful interference?

    The current shared spectrum rules are already "FAIR" to everyone. There is just one set of users that has decided to not play by the rules. They have, in essence, declared everyone operating on "their" frequencies to be jammers and therefore decided to not utilize busy detection - at all.

    Most of us would continue to have a qso if possible when bothered by a jammer, i.e. ignore them. However, few if any would start a qso over an existing one. Winlink could do the same thing if they wished, i.e. turn off busy detection on a case by case basis if their transmissions were being jammed.

    I also don't know how assigning a space for wideband digital would help unless all narrowband signals were banned from that space. In fact, if other wideband signals were allowed, this wouldn't solve winlink's problem. This also goes against no one "owning" a frequency and starts us down a road I certainly don't want to go down.

    If this should happen, there will be a huge incentive for other folks to find the highest bandwidth signals possible and operate them in the most obnoxious manner all the while declaring that "interference" mitigation is the responsibility of the calling station who naturally "can't" hear anyone on the frequency. In addition, anyone who operates on "their" self-declared frequencies will be labeled jammers and deserve any interference they receive. All this will be done in the hopes they will also receive a unique allocation for their operation. Not a good direction to set amateur radio on.

    Ultimately, the best solution is for winlink (and other similar operations) to admit that amateur radio is shared spectrum and that a place and time to operate is NEVER guaranteed to anyone. This will mean email will have to be delayed until an open frequency can be obtained. Winlink just needs to suck it up and admit to their users that this is the case and then tell everyone that future operations will be conducted in accordance with current shared spectrum rules followed by all other amateurs.

    I might add, this has a great incentive to utilize more narrow bandwidths like pactor II since it is much more spectrum efficient as many have pointed out in the past.

    Jim
    WA0LYK
     
  3. KC7GNM

    KC7GNM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Oh I totally agree. The Emcomm argument is the lamest of all. The most they would ever use winlink for is maybe health and welfare. For true emcomm you would never rely on email.
     
  4. ND6M

    ND6M Ham Member QRZ Page

    ...Why does there have to be a solution that is "FAIR" to everyone...[/quote]
    wa0lyk..... GREAT post! it pretty well sums up the problem and the solution [​IMG]  [​IMG]  [​IMG]
     
  5. AB0WR

    AB0WR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Great post!

    It brings out the one thing that the WL2K system administrators have never admitted, not even to themselves.

    WL2K does not have dedicated spectrum allocated to it. Thus, advertising WL2K as a "life-saving" communications system to the user base is actually putting those people who depend on it for safety-of-life communications in a dangerous situation. There is no guarantee that they will be able to find a PMBO on a clear frequency to facilitate those safety-of-life communications when they are needed.

    The WL2K system admins have tried bullying the amateur community into "giving" WL2K clear frequencies by turning off their busy detection and running roughshod over other communications using the frequencies they consider to be "theirs". This mindset has not worked (for the most part) and has made WL2K one of the most despised operations that amateur radio has ever seen. The WL2K system admins should consider the current situation carefully when making plans for the future although with their arrogance and hubris I doubt this will ever happen.

    This is an out-growth of the ever more popular mindset which sees the Amateur Radio Service as a common carrier for third party traffic instead of a service primarily for the purpose of communications between amateur radio operators. The mindset of the Emcomm fanatics that sees the ARS as a common carrier providing permanent communications infrastructure for third parties, i.e. government agencies and non-government agencies, is closely related and is just as pernicious as WL2K in the long run.

    I take heart in the fact that I see so many upstanding amateurs on QRZ fighting to keep amateur radio true to its roots and purposes. Don't let those who see the amateur bands as spectrum to be carved up for the use of small special interests wear you down.

    tim ab0wr
     
  6. K5GHS

    K5GHS Ham Member QRZ Page

    Because, at least from what I'm reading here, the average user doesn't even know.

    They probably just get the HF rig, hook the modem to it, and probably never have even heard static, much less whoever they are QRMing.

    It worked with the guy in this thread. Perhaps when you get QRMd a google or a QRZ check on the person should be in order. If an email address is found, notify the person of what they are doing.

    I think you will find that, just like the person in this topic, they didn't know. Why? Because they probably got the stuff and someone set it up for them, and/or they got the license, read the instructions, set it up per them, sent themselves a test email, it worked, done.

    Just like the average computer user would do. Unless the instructions say something about it (assuming, of course, they even read them!) they won't know. All they know is they can get their email, it works.

    Who cares about anything else. Until its brought to their attention, of course [​IMG]
     
  7. N5PVL

    N5PVL Ham Member QRZ Page

    In AE6X0's case:

    The guy works for NASA, and has been associated with ham radio since the 60's - and he "just doesn't know" that he is supposed to listen before transmitting?

    I don't think so.
     
  8. KY5U

    KY5U Subscriber QRZ Page

    If I have a rig that puts out a bad spur and QRMs and I don't know about it then that is one thing. Once I know and spread the word around to others, if I or any of those folks still use it knowing it will QRM then that is ok by you?

    The Winlink folks know the program can easily interfere with others, yet they don't do anything about it. In fact, they shift the blame to the user. And truthfully, most users of WL2K should know by now that it interferes, and still use it anyway.
     
  9. K5GHS

    K5GHS Ham Member QRZ Page

    Yeah, but from what I read about it, isn't the AVERAGE user a person who uses a boat (or RV or whatever) that goes to a class to get the appropriate license, hooks up the modem, and goes to emailing?

    Ok, so maybe this guy knew more. Maybe others do too. But perhaps they think its like packet....that it DOES have busy detection. Has anyone tried asking any of the other people on these watch lists?

    Once they are contacted and ignore you, and/or spit in your face, then you take it to the next level, obviously. But from what I'm hearing, wouldn't the logical step process be:

    1) Record the users infractions. If you don't feel comfortable with one, and with these lists I'm seeing, most violate multiple times, then record a few times.

    2) See if they have an email address. If they do, contact them, send them the screenshots, and offer to help them understand what they are doing is wrong.

    3) If met with no response, a bad response, or after talking to them they continue, then take the letter you sent them, as well as any responses, and forward it to the FCC?

    Then you would be proving to the FCC that you attempted to try and educate the other user and attempted to solve the problem on your own, and that didn't work-now maybe the FCC will act since your complaints have been ignored?

    This is the system that Repeater owners often have to use. They have to verbally and make a written request to a user if they don't want them to use the system. If those are ignored, then they go to the FCC who then sends the scofflaw a letter.

    Didn't it work with this guy? I mean, I don't agree with the method, but someone contacted him, said "hey, there is a thread on QRZ about you QRMing people" and he came on, apologized, and as far as I can tell, hasn't done it again, right?

    And, I seem to recall activity went down on that particular frequency for a few days too.

    So why not try it some more? I mean whats the worst that will happen? It won't work and the FCC will have hundreds of letters not only proving QRM, but you tried to resolve the issue using the "self enforcement" provision of the rules, and you were basically told where to go. Then it should be their turn. Either that or they turn a blind eye, then you DO have basis for a lawsuit.

    Documentation. You gotta have it before you can take that kind of step. Right?

    This thread, if not doing anything else but being bickering that continues, should prove that if you tell these people, maybe SOME of them will at least think about what they are doing.

    And if not, you have the paper trail. Once the FCC goes after them, they cannot cry "but I didn't know." They will be required to take action that the FCC agrees with.

    It would expedite the process, to be sure, wouldn't it?
     
  10. KY5U

    KY5U Subscriber QRZ Page

    Another mark in the "it's ok to QRM as long as it doesn't happen to you" column.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page