Danny Douglas wrote:
>
> And who will go to that group? Probably only the ones being bothered
> with the interference! Those who are happy with WinLink, and its
> continuance will NOT. Why should they? If one gets what he wants, he
> isnt likely to go to an anti-subject group to get his daily d
>Obviously some folks have not learned how to skip over threads that
>do not interest them. Others I'm sure don't want to hear what they're
>doing may be incorrect. Sad. I hope it survives and does well but it
>of no interest to me.
The way this is handled on QRP-L mailing list is simply to pre
Demetre SV1UY wrote:
Hi all,
Following this discussion I could help but notice the frontpage of
this group. It mentions DIGITALRADIO GROUP International.
--
DIGITALRADIO GROUP
A meeting place for discussion of amateur radio di
I believe you're right! It was set up to be a VENT group. Don't think it ever
really accomplished anything nor did it really get off the ground!
Rod
Chris Jewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rodney writes:
> Just did a Group search and it's there. It's called, "FCCSUCKS", but ther
Very will put Rick,
I would like to have the chorse to read the discuss
and then I delete it, than to not have to right at
all, we all have that right to read or not to read,
with out a chorse it is over.
Russell NC5O
--- Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you can not discuss the most critic
If you can not discuss the most critical digital radio issues of the
time on a given group, then they will migrate to some other group, often
along with other things you might have wished have remained. These
issues will not just go away by themselves and to actually want to
prevent discussing
Juergen is correct. I will end this thread at 1200 Z, 16/01/08
Digipol can be be used to continue the thresd.
On Jan 15, 2008 9:16 PM, jgorman01 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> I know some of the comments and arguments here are boring at times.
> However, they do serve a purpose in refini
Rodney writes:
> Just did a Group search and it's there. It's called, "FCCSUCKS", but
> there's only ONE message on it and who knows if it even has a moderator!.
>
> I agree, someone (NOT me) needs to start an FCC Rules discussion group!
>
> Rod
> KC7CJO
It appears that the digipol Y!-g
Just did a Group search and it's there. It's called, "FCCSUCKS", but there's
only ONE message on it and who knows if it even has a moderator!.
I agree, someone (NOT me) needs to start an FCC Rules discussion group!
Rod
KC7CJO
Howard Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There used to be a group called, "FCC Sucks!", or something like that, but I
haven't heard anything from it in a long time.
Howard Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yes, we
need to have a place where the discussions of FCC rules are
appropriate. Does anyone know o
10 matches
Mail list logo
