| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 08.08.00 11:29l 209 Lines 7498 Bytes #999 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_206A
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/206A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0ROF<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<DB0ACH<PI8JOP<PI8ZAA<
PI8HGL
Sent: 000808/0001Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:3314 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_206A
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 00 23:11:15 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_206A>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Ham-Digital Digest Mon, 31 Jul 2000 Volume 2000 : Issue 206
Today's Topics:
*** DESPERATE *** - PLEASE HELP ME!!!
Forget HF & CW - Think Digital
It's kind of a shame... (3 msgs)
PK232 Proms
PSK31 message relay test
Small TNC? (3 msgs)
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <Ham-Digital@UCSD.Edu>
Send subscription requests to: <Ham-Digital-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the Ham-Digital Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-digital".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
Loop-Detect: Ham-Digital:2000/206
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 05:45:27 -0600
From: kenny@kacweb.com (Kenny A. Chaffin)
Subject: *** DESPERATE *** - PLEASE HELP ME!!!
In article <D8Eg5.38889$qS3.79498@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>, Pse@NoEmail.Com
says...
> I like the idea that he should sell his computer first!
>
> Rob
>
> "W4JLE" <w4jle@alltel.net> wrote in message
> news:8lt8pp$37p$1@news1.alltel.net...
> > If you spend time looking for a job, instead of spamming all the
> newsgroups
> > with your begging, life would get better.
> >
> > <InGreatNeed@vqrywqyal.net> wrote in message
> news:A10D7155.yykv@bamb.org...
> > > I need money, plain and simple... I'll be very direct about this.
> > > -
> > > I'm in the worst financial crisis of my life... I lost my job, my house
> > > and perhaps my family if I don't do something.
> > > -
> > > Please Please --- H E L P M E !!!!!
> > > -
> > > -
> > > Send whatever you can to:
> > > -
Yeah, and then his kidneys.
KAC
--
KAC Website Design
Custom Programming, Web Design, and Graphics
kenny@kacweb.com - http://www.kacweb.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:18:11 -0800
From: "kl7ifp" <kl7ifp@email.msn.com>
Subject: Forget HF & CW - Think Digital
<Aaron Jones> wrote in message
news:kip4nsgcequ4a6aus0sfr46ni8u1nc6bq9@4ax.com...
> "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net> wrote:
> >For most aircrew, the first thing that sinks to the bottom, is the
> >survival radio,
>
> Retort 1: So a CW rig would be better because it floats??
>
> Retort 2: Gee, even I keep my cell phone locked to my belt. Do you
> think I should write the Air Force with this idea...
How water proof is your cell phone. Salt water make it useless in minute.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jul 2000 17:37:55 GMT
From: Tom W9FL <W9FL@arrl.net>
Subject: It's kind of a shame...
I don't think it should be any made any harder to get into Amateur Radio.
If we make it any harder, before long there won't be any new hams, and Ham
radio will be dead.
As far as I'm concerned, you could get rid of the code requirement
altogether. I still think code is very usefull and fun, but it is going to
die out eventually. Especially with modes like PSK now in use.
The eeeeennnnnnnddddddless code-no code debate.
2w8ji@contesting.com (Tom W8JI) wrote:
>On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:34:22 -0700, "R.L. Tannehill, P.E."
><rickw7rt@firstinter.net> wrote:
>
>>different. (100 questions, draw schematics, etc....) It's a different
>>era, and the test process is appropriate to this era.
>
>That's true. All testing is "dumbing down" as it is called. In schools
>and in professional exams, so I suppose there is no reason amateur
>radio should be exempt from the social change.
>
>>As you mention,
>>this change got you back into ham radio. That can only be a positive.
>>So, continue your learning now that you have an Extra....get involved
>>with digital modulation modes, satellites..etc. But don't let the "code
>>forever" OF's here on this NG make you feel like less of an Extra.
>>Besides, those old curmudgeons won't be around forever. :)
>
>Actually the thing most people seem to dislike is the fact the
>technical tests are getting easier along with the code. If the people
>who had the FCC's ear were really interested in amateur radio, they
>would have made an entry level license available for digital modes or
>general voice and restricted CW on HF, like a low-code tech exam with
>expanded privleges and a bit less theory.
>
>Instead, the motive was to sell radios and other goods. That meant an
>automatic upgrade was the best means to the end goal.
>
>What I dislike about the restructing is they actually made getting
>into the hobby no better....they actually made it worse. The main
>function seems to be lowering the bar for all classes of license, and
>lowering it the most for the highest classes.
>
>I understand that from Kenwood's view. They are teetering on the edge,
>and wanted to sell radios to stay in business. They tried to sell
>radios at truckstops, but the hams stopped that so they needed another
>way to spur sales.
>
>It makes sense for W5YI, because he has long been for a
>communicator-type of license. He also makes his money when people test
>and study.
>
>The problem is it doesn't make sense for our hobby, because we made
>getting in no better...or actually worse. In the United States, the
>number one priority is making all people equal...regardless or effort
>or ability.
>
>73 Tom
>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:19:04 -0600
From: kenny@kacweb.com (Kenny A. Chaffin)
Subject: It's kind of a shame...
In article <398467f2$0$60939$392904a7@news.execpc.com>, W9FL@arrl.net
says...
> I don't think it should be any made any harder to get into Amateur Radio.
> If we make it any harder, before long there won't be any new hams, and Ham
> radio will be dead.
> As far as I'm concerned, you could get rid of the code requirement
> altogether. I still think code is very usefull and fun, but it is going to
> die out eventually. Especially with modes like PSK now in use.
>
>
> The eeeeennnnnnnddddddless code-no code debate.
>
>
>
>
>
> 2w8ji@contesting.com (Tom W8JI) wrote:
> >On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:34:22 -0700, "R.L. Tannehill, P.E."
> ><rickw7rt@firstinter.net> wrote:
> >
> >>different. (100 questions, draw schematics, etc....) It's a different
> >>era, and the test process is appropriate to this era.
> >
> >That's true. All testing is "dumbing down" as it is called. In schools
> >and in professional exams, so I suppose there is no reason amateur
> >radio should be exempt from the social change.
> >
> >>As you mention,
> >>this change got you back into ham radio. That can only be a positive.
> >>So, continue your learning now that you have an Extra....get involved
> >>with digital modulation modes, satellites..etc. But don't let the "code
> >>forever" OF's here on this NG make you feel like less of an Extra.
> >>Besides, those old curmudgeons won't be around forever. :)
> >
> >Actually the thing most people seem to dislike is the fact the
> >technical tests are getting easier along with the code. If the people
> >who had the FCC's ear were really interested in amateur radio, they
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_206B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
