| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 04.10.99 19:37l 273 Lines 7420 Bytes #-9731 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_247I
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/247I
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0ABH<DB0SRS<DB0MW<DB0NHM<DB0SIF<DB0HSK<PI8DRS<PI8DAZ<
PI8APD<PI8WNO<PI8HGL<PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 991004/1339Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:5487 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_247
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA20397 ; Mon, 04 Oct 99 13:05:05 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016167 ; Sat, 02 Oct 99 14:19:42 MET
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 99 14:07:31 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_247I>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/247I
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
wrong newsgroup, and will be flamed unmercifully.
> Live with the limitations of
> your choices, or kill all the landline forwarders. After all it is only a
> hobby.
Which "it" are you talking about?
> Free will exists, so I do not associate with known baby rapers.
How do you know?
> Pete/wa4hei
>
> --
> Eschew obfuscation.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 21:05:58 -0700
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Don <dnelsch@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:37F41B62.29E380AC@neo.rr.com...
> This is supposed to be a hobby, where one can have fun and provide a
service as
> well. If the HF routes are unreliable, it is a problem, not fun. As a bbs
sysop,
> I have chosen to take the path of message delivery service, and am
unwilling to
> accept a message that I can not be reasonably assured that it will be
delivered.
> If AX/IP is the reliable route, that's the way it will go out of this
system.
> Under the current conditions, I have no other choice.
The cry of the Land Line Lid:
"Whine whine radio is SOOO hard.
I'll just pretend I'm using radio and use the telephone.
Oh, that is SOOO much easier!"
If you are not having fun, please stop interfering with those of us
who ARE having fun!
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 21:08:06 -0700
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
pmarkham <pmarkham@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:36433.820539816A83pmarkhamnewsguycom@208.134.253.128...
> dnelsch@neo.rr.com (Don) wrote in <37F3DE03.A4D44210@neo.rr.com>:
>
> >Hank does intend for his messages to go via ham radio.
>
> That he may. Many others are just interested in the messages getting to
and from,
> intact, as fast as possible. Those folks of whom I speak, including me,
are the
> majority that used the old system while it met our requirements and few to
no
> economical alternatives were available. We have since deserted the amateur
radio
> network because it no longer meets our needs.
>
> The state of the current network is sufficient evidence for me that most
of the
> ugly denial rhetoric is less than honest.
What crap.
Those of us that can manage to move traffic via RADIO
are getting really tired of the whiners who claim it cannot
be done. Sure would be nice if you would stop interfering
with our enjoyment of the hobby.
If all you are interested in is sending messages, and not radio,
you can do that just fine on the internet. It's simple, it's cheap.
It's not ham radio.
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 21:03:20 -0700
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Don <dnelsch@neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:37F3DE03.A4D44210@neo.rr.com...
> Hank does intend for his messages to go via ham radio. But when they
arrive
> here and there is no HF station that is willing or able to accept them for
> further forwarding without distorting them in any way, then I intend to
deliver
> Hank's message any way possible, even if that includes using an AX.25 link
that
> is transported via the Internet.
Another Land Line Lid.
Why not send them back undelivered?
Instead you play "fake radio" and pretend you can handle them.
I'll do my best to avoid sending any traffic your direction.
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 21:08:57 -0700
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Cathryn Mataga <cathryn@junglevision.com> wrote in message
news:pxTI3.94$%Z.2278@nuq-read.news.verio.net...
> pmarkham wrote in message
<36433.820539816A83pmarkhamnewsguycom@208.134.253.128>...
> >dnelsch@neo.rr.com (Don) wrote in <37F3DE03.A4D44210@neo.rr.com>:
> >
> >>Hank does intend for his messages to go via ham radio.
> >
> >That he may. Many others are just interested in the messages getting to
and from,
> >intact, as fast as possible. Those folks of whom I speak, including me,
are the
> >majority that used the old system while it met our requirements and few
to no
> >economical alternatives were available. We have since deserted the
amateur radio
> >network because it no longer meets our needs.
> >
> >The state of the current network is sufficient evidence for me that most
of the
> >ugly denial rhetoric is less than honest.
>
>
> If you ignore the radio side of things, the network has never
> worked better. All you need is an axip connection from one of big
internet
> forwarders, and you'll get all the Bulletins and Messages you could ever
read.
> Though just for fun, I asked wb0tax for an account on his bbs -- I told
him
> that I just wanted to read messages right from the source --
> but he never gave me an account. Not exactly sure why -- he seemed
> sincerely befuddled by the request. Though for me, if fast is what
> counts, than might as well go to the hub -- and cut out the middlemen,
> you know.
Sure, why not. But what does it have to do with Ham Radio?
Nothing at all.
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
>.
------------------------------
Date: 1 Oct 1999 03:33:47 GMT
From: pmarkham@newsguy.com (pmarkham)
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
cathryn@junglevision.com (Cathryn Mataga) wrote in <pxTI3.94$%Z.2278@nuq-
read.news.verio.net>:
>
>If you ignore the radio side of things, the network has never
>worked better.
That is correct, Cathryn. That is what most have done. You have made the
point. That is why I said: "We have since deserted the amateur radio
network because it no longer meets our needs."
Charles quoted me, and said:
> Free will exists, so I do not associate with known baby rapers.
Starting to feel unwelcome? Hmmmm?
Awww.... Think I'm gonna cry.
No Charles. I have stood up to some of the meanest people in the world. You
and your ilk are pikers. They bring a smile to my lips.
To spell it out for you:
If I know someone is antithetical to me I do not associate with them.
If telephone forwarders are the equivalent of baby rapers, judging by your
prose they must be worse, I would make it my business to insure that I was
not associated with them in any voluntary manner, whatsoever.
If you wish to cry, do so, while I laugh.
Peter/wa4hei
--
Eschew obfuscation.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 15:30:16 -0500
From: "John Dewey" <jdewey@tribune.com>
Subject: LOOKING FOR PSK QSOS
When the bands are open, there is activity on both 30 and 17. I have had
qso's on 10 but rarely. Had a few into Europe on 15.
KA9CAR
Dave Arruzza wrote in message <37EEE06A.6534@snet.net>...
>I am a new op on Psk31. Find alot of action on 20 meters, but other
>bands are pretty slim pickings. Looking for skeds..tests...qsos...on all
To be continued in digest: hd_99_247J
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
