The definition given although likely accurate is not relevent to the discussion because it's NOT the definition used by the FCC.
Although none of us (US hams) are going to be deported to Siberia (unless there's some sort of agreement between the US and USSR that I'm not aware of), we CAN be fined $10,000 and lose our licenses for violating the law. It' just not worth it to most of us. There are some that are dumb enough to push the issue, the smart ones work to try and get the law changed. All it takes is ONE person to screw it up for ALL of us. I don't intend to be that person. :-) Jeff -- KE7ACY CN94 ----- Original Message ----- From: g4ilo --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "J. Moen" <j...@...> wrote: > > Your definition might be called what "good SS" is and the way ROS does SS > might be called what "bad SS" is. But how wide is PSK31? Is ROS wider? So ROS > is wider than needed to convey intelligence. So is RTTY. But it isn't SS. > Your point is well taken, but not relevant to people under the FCC's > jurisdiction. I don't see why not, actually. I understand from these posts that it is the individual American ham's responsibility to determine whether anything they do complies with the regulations. The fact that someone asked for guidance and received an answer that many believe to be wrong doesn't change that. IF someone got a knock on the door for using the ROS mode then I would have thought citing that formula as justification for believing the mode they were using was not SS would be a valid response. The onus would then be on the FCC/whoever to produce a valid counter argument. The fact that the mode was once described as SS by a non native English speaker could easily and plausibly be explained as a mistranslation. Not that I have any interest at all in encouraging use of the ROS mode! But why are you all so worked up over this? It is the USA not Soviet Russia, you aren't going to end up in Siberia are you? Julian, G4ILO
