Thanks Juergen , 100 % agree
73 de LA5VNA Steinar
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, dl8le [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Per definition the
DIGITALRADIO GROUP
is
A meeting place for discussion of amateur radio digital modes,
applications, software, hardware, equipment, and on
H- OK When you do that, please discontinue me as a member of the
group. The main reason I have remained a member is the free wheeling
discussion of the subject of digitial radio. Is it not amazing that the
major number of members who oppose the subject are outside the USA? I
thought the
And who will go to that group? Probably only the ones being bothered with
the interference! Those who are happy with WinLink, and its continuance
will NOT. Why should they? If one gets what he wants, he isnt likely to go
to an anti-subject group to get his daily dose of venem. The subject IS
If you can not discuss the most critical digital radio issues of the
time on a given group, then they will migrate to some other group, often
along with other things you might have wished have remained. These
issues will not just go away by themselves and to actually want to
prevent
Very will put Rick,
I would like to have the chorse to read the discuss
and then I delete it, than to not have to right at
all, we all have that right to read or not to read,
with out a chorse it is over.
Russell NC5O
--- Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you can not discuss the most critical
Hi all,
Following this discussion I could help but notice the frontpage of
this group. It mentions DIGITALRADIO GROUP International.
--
DIGITALRADIO GROUP
A meeting place for discussion of amateur radio digital modes,
I believe you're right! It was set up to be a VENT group. Don't think it ever
really accomplished anything nor did it really get off the ground!
Rod
Chris Jewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rodney writes:
Just did a Group search and it's there. It's called, FCCSUCKS, but there's
Rick, are you a politician? A standard rethoric trick of politicians
is to phrase something as a statement which has not been made and
then start to complain about that attitude ...
I am not against a discussion about the most critical digital radio
issues as you state it. I have a problem
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Hi all,
Following this discussion I could help but notice the frontpage of
this group. It mentions DIGITALRADIO GROUP International.
--
DIGITALRADIO GROUP
A meeting place for discussion of amateur radio
Rick,
I agree with you completely. I wouldn't have researched the propnet
group without hearing about it here. I see where they are operating
probes as they call them below 10 meters. Not sure how legal that
is. After watching their 30 meter beacons for a while and seeing them
come up over
Obviously some folks have not learned how to skip over threads that
do not interest them. Others I'm sure don't want to hear what they're
doing may be incorrect. Sad. I hope it survives and does well but it
of no interest to me.
The way this is handled on QRP-L mailing list is simply to
Danny Douglas wrote:
And who will go to that group? Probably only the ones being bothered
with the interference! Those who are happy with WinLink, and its
continuance will NOT. Why should they? If one gets what he wants, he
isnt likely to go to an anti-subject group to get his daily dose
Yes, we need to have a place where the discussions of FCC rules are
appropriate. Does anyone know of such a group on Yahoo??
Andy, would you consider creating such a group??
Howard K5HB
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, dl8le [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Per definition the
DIGITALRADIO
There used to be a group called, FCC Sucks!, or something like that, but I
haven't heard anything from it in a long time.
Howard Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, we
need to have a place where the discussions of FCC rules are
appropriate. Does anyone know of
Just did a Group search and it's there. It's called, FCCSUCKS, but there's
only ONE message on it and who knows if it even has a moderator!.
I agree, someone (NOT me) needs to start an FCC Rules discussion group!
Rod
KC7CJO
Howard Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rodney writes:
Just did a Group search and it's there. It's called, FCCSUCKS, but
there's only ONE message on it and who knows if it even has a moderator!.
I agree, someone (NOT me) needs to start an FCC Rules discussion group!
Rod
KC7CJO
It appears that the digipol Y!-group was
I know some of the comments and arguments here are boring at times.
However, they do serve a purpose in refining positions and educating
folks about the rules.
Let's face it, with the number of hams the US has we are an 800 pound
gorilla in amateur radio. Maybe not the only one, but certainly
Juergen is correct. I will end this thread at 1200 Z, 16/01/08
Digipol can be be used to continue the thresd.
On Jan 15, 2008 9:16 PM, jgorman01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know some of the comments and arguments here are boring at times.
However, they do serve a purpose in refining
18 matches
Mail list logo
