Let's continue the experiment in the true spirit of HAM radio.
So far no one has tabled an actual piece of legal document stating the legality
of the mode. So continue to use the mode until otherwise told.
Mark (VK2KLJ)
On 04/03/2010, at 6:33 AM, pd4u_dares p...@hotmail.com wrote:
Oh ja... someone raises a supposed illegality, and Jose changed the discription
BECAUSE of that SUPPOSED illegaly. And he is to blame... I think all of us are
to blaim for this flaming thread. No one excluded.
So let's continue betatesting since we do not know if it illegal or not, in the
through ham spirit.
We enjoy experiments as HAM's by definition of the 'ham spirit', isn't it? So
let's leave the history of this debate to HAM radio historians, and await
their official publication HI.
Marc
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote:
I really don't think there any ROS haters. ROS is a mode that is fun
to use and works well. There may be some who complain that it interferes
with the NCDXF beacon network, but the suggested frequency was then
moved upward, in the true spirit of cooperation.
However, there is a misconception about those whose motives are only to
obey the regulations they MUST live under, and the understandable need
to clarify what is legal or not, so they do not risk penalties or
citations for illegal operation.
The problem was created by the author himself by first posting a seven
page document purportedly claiming it was FHSS (and in no uncertain
terms!), and then totally revising the description to say it is
actually FSK144 (at the suggestion of someone who said that would make
it legal somehow). It was the author that first characterized that
anyone who is not with me is against me and that anyone even
questioning the legality of ROS should be banned ( such as myself) or
punished ( locked out of using the mode by being singled out and
included in a non grata list).
I do feel sympathy for Jose, and appreciation for his very fine work,
but it was HIS mistake in the beginning and continuing to make more
mistakes that made it even worse that has led to the current situation.
He is not being banned by Andy, only not actively promoted, which I
think is a totally appropriate and diplomatic response to the banning of
others. Especially in an open forum and world of amateur radio, banning
or punishing anyone for their stated opinions is simply unacceptable.
An apology from Jose might result in forgiveness from those harmed and
we could then can get on with the job of either using the mode, or being
sure we use it in accordance with our own administrations, or petition
for use under whatever limitations are necessary to accomodate other
users of the same bands in a cooperative manner.
73 - Skip KH6TY
pd4u_dares wrote:
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruffdog@
.. But to be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there
seems much to much grief happening from this.
Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than ..
It'd be nice to see something other than ROS comments on the digi
reflector
group. For a change.
Yeah let's stop our support for ROS on this group as well as on K3UK's
sked page... Let us created two camps: the ROS haters and the ROS
lovers...the good guys and the bad guys, and all in the name of the
ham radio spirit of course!!
:-O
Marc, PD4U
Try Hamspots, PSKreporter, and K3UK Sked Page
http://www.obriensweb.com/skedpskr4.html
Suggesting calling frequencies: Modes 500Hz 3583,7073,14073,18103,
21073,24923, 28123 . Wider modes e.g. Olivia 32/1000, ROS16, ALE: 14109.7088.
Yahoo! Groups Links
