I said
"In today's world, (e) is arguably the most important."
The rationale for this prioritiation is that a typical month sees
more people killed, injured, or displaced by conflict than by natural
disaster. This is a personal view that shapes my time allocation. I
did not derive it from its position in 97.1 -- I didn't say "clearly,
they saved the best for last" -- nor do I expect any other amateur to
agree with me. Each of his must use his or her own best judgement in
fulfilling our obligations as radio amateurs. 97.1 gives us a set of
principles to guide our decisionmaking.
As I have said before, the premises on which we make technical
decisions are highly relevant. If you assert that the principles in
97.1 are listed in in priority order, and use that assertion to drive
a chain of technical decisions, then those decisions will be flawed
because the premise on which they are based is false. Identifying
such errors is hardly a waste of bandwidth.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hajducek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> But did you not just state "In today's world, (e)
> is arguably the most important"
>
> To me your statement read that you placed 97.1(e) in the priority.
>
> My purpose of the posting on Part 97.1 was to
> make a point that the rules are very much
> interpreted by all that read them, to include the
> entire basis for the existence of the Amateur Radio Service.
>
> I believe the bandwidth on this forum would be
> much better utilized to discuss the technical
> aspects of digital radio communications and to
> assist our fellow Amateurs seeking help with the
> digital modes rather than moving off focus. The
> statement intent of intent for focus of this
> forum lists many protocols and tools and I think is pretty clear as
follows:
>
> " This is a meeting place to discuss amateur
> radio digital applications such as RTTY, CW,
> PSK31,PSK63/125, MFSK16, Olivia-MFSK, PAX,
> Chip64, DominoEX, THROB, ALE, PACTOR, AMTOR,
> HELL, SSTV, Digital SSTV, and more. There are
> several reflectors dedicated to these separate
> modes but this group focuses on ALL digital
> modes. Software applications such as MixW,
> Logger32, MMVARI, MMTTY, MultiPSK, Hamscope,
> Winwarbler/DXLAB, Digipan, etc, etc, are often
> discussed. Theory of digital communications is
> encouraged. Experimentation with new digital modes is also
encouraged.
> Questions from newcomers are welcome"
>
> If is of course all up to Andy as to the direction personality of
this forum.
>
> Personally, I am interested in discussing many
> aspects of Amateur Digital Communications and of
> course those of which I am most involved will be
> of more interest to me than ones that I am not so
> much involved. I do not knock another digital
> mode for its existence or use, I look for ways to
> coexist with all modes. I am not pushing
> anything, just interested in discussing the
> technical aspects of technology and being of assistance,
> this is where I am coming from in my use of this forum.
>
> /s/ Steve, N2CKH
>
> At 10:39 AM 8/27/2006, you wrote:
> >No priority is stated, thus all of the principles set forth in
ยง97.1
> >are equally important.
> >
> >In particular, no one can claim that one activity is more important
> >than another solely because its applicable principle has a lower
> >ordinal.
> >
> >This is not a matter of interpretation. Regulations are explicit
when
> >they convey an order of priority.
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Dave, AA6YQ
> >
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
