Hey Charles! Me thinks you've got a rather broad brush being used here.
Someone says that PACTOR is dead..........period. Another has said that PACTOR is dead........and if I was smart, I'd pitch my AEA unit like everyone else. You, speaking for Packet enthusiasts, say Packet operators won't climb on board this innocent proposal because they're constantly being QRMed by PACTOR lids and for that reason, the Packet operators want nothing to do with anything that remotely touches PACTOR. That isn't fair to me, and any number of other folks who like the PACTOR I mode and are kindling a small surge of rebirth in the mode's interest. I've always followed the rules as they have, I'm sure. Individual PACTOR I operations cannot possibly be linked to BOTS, Winlink or whatever. I'm sure that Jack has been a considerate and law-abiding Ham for all his licensed life and means no ill-will towards anyone, least of all disrespect. I bet you and the others don't even know Jack and doubt you have ever been deliberately interferred with by him. I doubt he'd like to be included in any association with Winlink and the BOTS any more than I would. That message you quoted was a friendly, enthusiastic idea that came about from some ideas that have been bantered about offline amongst myself and some others who want to use our TNCs and PACTOR I again, just because. Seriously, this business about Winlink and BOTS is getting just a bit hysterical I think, to the point of irrationality. I say that simply because of your reaction and you're not alone at all. AND.......it's understandable for sure. But, jeez, Charles. Aren't you being a bit harsh to the point that you're taking a swipe at everyone? That's exactly what the Packet operators don't want for themselves. I was on last night running my PK232 through its paces and getting reacquainted with it. I even made a couple of contacts with it using PACTOR I during Sunday and it was fun! Surely, you're not going to call me a lid simply because of using the PACTOR mode, alledged to being mis-used by others alledged to have a totally selfish agenda are you? Just my polite $ .02 worth. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Brabham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <digitalradio@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 9:44 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Pactor & Packet Spot Page now up. > Don't hold your breath while you wait for an enthusiastic response from > Packet operators, who are constantly QRM'ed by PACTOR Lids and generally > will not tolerate being associated with them, in any way. > > The difference is that the Packet folks do not feel that they have a > god-given right to crash other hams' QSO's. We operate according to PART97 > and The Amateur's Code. > > - When we are not having our QSO crashed by a mindless PACTOR Lid, that > is...
