I dont know that any "forum" was asked. It was published in QST, and was on
the open section of the WEB page. I, as a member, received a written
request to make my comments. I saw indications from some non-members that
they too had received requests for comments. Thus they did ask the amateur
community, several times to make comments. I made written comments, and
also talked to my representative direct about several subjects, only to have
them ignored. Maybe I was in the minority, but it certainly didnt look that
way when they made certain statements in QST. It appeared they simply
ignored what they didnt want to hear.
I really dont know what is worse: not asking, or ignoring - but they are
NOT forgiven.
Danny Douglas N7DC
ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA
SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all
DX 2-6 years each
.
QSL LOTW-buro- direct
As courtesy I upload to eQSL but if you
use that - also pls upload to LOTW
or hard card.
moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED]
moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk
----- Original Message -----
From: "bruce mallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <digitalradio@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 7:53 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] ARRL wake up ......
>
> Let me make it clear no one is blaming digital users
> for tiring to get adjustments to allow new modes
> PROVIDED you do not displace existing ones.
>
> Alan ...
> Yep they sure did ....... NOT
>
> The ARRL had no interest in negative input ...
>
> NONE of the 6 meter forums and I'm a member of a
> number of them had comments on it NOR were any of the
> 6 meter groups asked ....
>
> Look at 6 meters and ask how do you justify 100 kHz
> wide signals on 90% of a DX band ????
>
> Look at 2 meters and where would you place 100 kHz
> wide signals ???? 145.900 ? 146.520 ????
>
> When myself and a number of others sent E-Mails to
> arrl directors we got letters directing us to other
> directors ..... THEY WELL KNOW who to contact for
> bands like 10 6 or 2 meters if they REALLY want to
> hear from users.
>
> A clip from a digital post ......
>
> "Wow. The league wants total control of "boxing" new
> modes into a smaller part of the spectrum; meanwhile
> we keep the analog junker repeaters happy with their
> bandwidth-hogging transmitters nicely segmented away
> from new technology.
> Too bad - you'd think the amateur service would have
> room for both; antiquated technology and new fanged
> digital modes."
>
> And digital needs 100 kHz now WHO is the bandwidth hog
> ?
>
> AND how many hams are even ARRL members ?
>
> No doubt there are ways that new modes can work along
> side the older ones but common sense among the ARRL
> Ellette is needed next time.
>
> Bruce
>
> --- Alan NV8A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > According to the latest ARRL Letter, the League has
> > been asking people > for three years now and has
> received many responses. > Withdrawing
> > RM-11306 now is one result of those responses.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Alan NV8A
> >
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> Announce your digital presence via our DX Cluster
telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
>
> Our other groups:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.1/778 - Release Date: 4/27/2007
1:39 PM
>
>
