Re: [AMRadio] K1MAN thread of discussion
Okay, I'll step up and admit that I made poor judgment on this issue. I read something out of context (bad mistake), and detected what I thought was a bit of flame throwing, and decided to make my remark. Once I went back and read the whole thread, I realized I was wrong, dead wrong. The topic itself was not really my issue at that senior moment. For those who think I "over moderate" this list, I respectfully disagree. Any of you that have been on this list since the beginning know full well that I have RARELY intervened or moderated any topic. The exception of late is where I have asked that trimming of threads off your reply be observed, and that anyone wanting to buy something another poster has for sale, be made directly to the seller, not the list. That is NOT a bad rule, and if any of you think it is, I'd like for you to step up and tell us. To date (since abt 1997), I have never banned or removed anyone from this list, and that is mainly due to the fact that we have a really great group of members here, and I sincerely mean that. Resume your topic of K1MAN/W1AW. You spoke, I listened However I still reserve the right to be the mean 'ol moderator if I have to ;) 73 Brian / W5AMI
Re: [AMRadio] K1MAN thread of discussion
On 4/4/06, Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Those, like myself, who want reflectors to be used as a conduit for > technical problems, part sourcing, etc. and others who want to air > "political" issues relating to the hobby. I'm not so sure that discussion of an organization that the FCC considers representative of amateur radio is really 'political' as much as administrative. It's not realistic to expect it to be *just* about the tubes, knobs, and dials. To be honest, some of the technical discussions that get really drawn out put me to sleep too, mainly because they go over my head once they get into all of the formulae I learned in college but have mostly forgotten since. But others benefit greatly, and it's as much a part of the hobby as operating or rule-making proceedings or dealing with interference issues (K1MAN included). Still, there's more to it than just the tangible. > We have enough exposure to dreary world > issues without bringing more to worry about while we are in our "escape" > frame of mind doing radio. True, but this 'escape frame of mind' shouldn't be used to insulate us from the realities of the threats facing AM or even general amateur radio in the future. It would be nice if we didn't have to deal with it at all, but to ignore it is, IMHO, irresponsible as it leaves the 'work' of defending AM to someone else. If this reflector was nothing BUT P&Ming, or all work and no play, I'd be more in agreement. Factored into the total number of posts this list receives, I seriously doubt these issues are a real problem to anyone beyond those with a narrow scope of interest. >I would like to see a Ham radio reflector created > just to air those kind of topics. The amfone board has a section just for ARRL-related stuff, and while it's a good repository of information, it doesn't prevent the topic from coming up in other areas of the board as well. Operating, attending hamfests, old radio stories, broadcast station historynone of these things are 'technical' in the true sense of the word, yet I'd miss those posts and probably lose interest in the list if they weren't included. To me at least, it's the many aspects of AM and amateur radio that the members contribute that make it interesting and inviting. >We then can have a choice if we want to be > part of that experience. We already have this choice, I exercise it daily. It's called the choice to read or not to read (delete). To think that we shouldn't have to delete any posts or that every post would be of particular interest to everyone would be short-sighted. I agree with Don, anyone who would leave a great list like this over a thread that they are sick of is pretty thin-skinned and would likely leave over something else they didn't like in the future anyhow. I left the Drake list years ago when the list admin decided that selling computer gear via the list was okay, the reasoning being that you have to use a pc to read email. I disagreed, so I left. No threats, no tantrums, I just exercised my choice. No hard feelings, either. The problems caused by K1MAN go back a lot further than just his antics on 3890, he also made trouble during the AM power reduction issue many years back, some say helping it become reality as a result of his actions. I don't doubt for a second that a big contribution to his current situation has to do with the actions taken by the AM community against his bad operating practices and intentional interference. > Thanks for listening Ditto! ~ Todd/'Boomer' KA1KAQ
Re: [AMRadio] K1MAN thread of discussion
IMHO I think there is a division within the various radio reflector groups. Those, like myself, who want reflectors to be used as a conduit for technical problems, part sourcing, etc. and others who want to air "political" issues relating to the hobby. By no means am I trivializing the political aspect but when I'm having fun reading through threads of technical topics I am quickly brought back to the real world with the insertion of message threads on operating practices and other similar topics.. Many time these start reading like "yes it is, no it isn't, yes it is, no it isn't" and on and on. We have enough exposure to dreary world issues without bringing more to worry about while we are in our "escape" frame of mind doing radio. I would like to see a Ham radio reflector created just to air those kind of topics. We then can have a choice if we want to be part of that experience. Thanks for listening, Tom K3TVC
Re: [AMRadio] K1MAN thread of discussion
Correct as usual Don... Kudos! 73 vince ka1iic On Tuesday 04 April 2006 06:31 pm, Donald Chester wrote: > From: Brian Sherrod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >What does any of this K1MAN/W1AW stuff have to do with AM discussion? > >Let's > >get back on track here folks. > > Actually, there is a connection with the AM community that hits some raw > nerves, besides the longtime QRM to the AM window caused by his 3890 kc > "bulletins." Back in the 1980's during the FCC's AM power proceeding, > K1MAN filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the FCC's decision. > There was supposed to have been a 7-year grandfather period under the old > power rule, after which the FCC had promised to "reconsider, if there is > any > justification to do so." > > During a discussion of the issue with ARRL officials, Dave Sumner mentioned > that K1MAN's lawsuit had "hardened the FCC's position," and he thought it > would be very difficult to get them to change their minds at that point. > > When they went to court, Baxter totally blew the case, according to other > AM'ers in attendance. He acted as his own attorney, and during the court > proceedings got completely sidetracked onto some tangent about his disaster > relief efforts with I.A.R.N. following the Mexico City earthquake (which > had absolutely nothing to do with the AM power issue). The judge ruled in > favor of the FCC, saying that the court was routinely "deferring to the > expertise" of the regulatory agency (the FCC). > > Afterwards, I attended an FCC Forum at Dayton, where Johnny Johnston was > presiding at the Q-A session. I posed the question, if the FCC was > planning to follow up on its stated commitment to reconsider the AM power > issue at the end of the grandfather period, in 1990. Johnston's reply: > "You took us to court, remember?" When I pointed out that it was K1MAN who > took the FCC to court, Johnston's replay was, "As far as I'm concerned, it > was the amateur community who took us to court. That's an issue that got > caught up in 'circumstances'." > > The historic AM power limit may have very well fallen victim to a petty ego > struggle between Johnston and his hinchmen at the FCC, and K1MAN. > > >I've already had two people leave the list > >today. > > If someone left the list over something so trivial as that one thread of > discussion, they must be pretty thin-skinned. I doubt if they were > contributing very much anyway. We're probably better off without them. Is > the "delete" button broken on their computer? > > Don K4KYV > > > > ___ > > This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout. Try it - you'll > like it. > http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/ > http://gigliwood.com/abcd/ > > > __ > AMRadio mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html > Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net > AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net > AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami, Paul Courson/wa3vjb
Re: [AMRadio] K1MAN thread of discussion
Excellent comments Don - I learn more about all of this with these discussions. It is too easy to draw a simplistic conclusion and write everybody off in simple terms when you read bits and pieces about these conflicts between K1MAN and others, as well as other conflicts within hamdom. There DOES seem to be an element of obstinacy and ego that runs throughout a lot of it. I seem to observe many hams - often in the 40 to 60 year-old age groupo that display all of the maturity of third grade bullies on the school yard! You are right - Brian Sherrod seems to be behaving way over-protectively. MOderators need to just let some of this stuff go even if it is a little "exciting" for some folks. We will never LEARN or reason things through together if offenses against controversy are continually allowed to trump free speech! 73s - Brian, AF4K > >From: Brian Sherrod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >What does any of this K1MAN/W1AW stuff have to do with AM discussion? > >Let's > >get back on track here folks. > > Actually, there is a connection with the AM community that hits some raw > nerves, besides the longtime QRM to the AM window caused by his 3890 kc > "bulletins." Back in the 1980's during the FCC's AM power proceeding, K1MAN > filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the FCC's decision. There was > supposed to have been a 7-year grandfather period under the old power rule, > after which the FCC had promised to "reconsider, if there is any > justification to do so." > > During a discussion of the issue with ARRL officials, Dave Sumner mentioned > that K1MAN's lawsuit had "hardened the FCC's position," and he thought it > would be very difficult to get them to change their minds at that point. > > When they went to court, Baxter totally blew the case, according to other > AM'ers in attendance. He acted as his own attorney, and during the court > proceedings got completely sidetracked onto some tangent about his disaster > relief efforts with I.A.R.N. following the Mexico City earthquake (which had > absolutely nothing to do with the AM power issue). The judge ruled in favor > of the FCC, saying that the court was routinely "deferring to the expertise" > of the regulatory agency (the FCC). > > Afterwards, I attended an FCC Forum at Dayton, where Johnny Johnston was > presiding at the Q-A session. I posed the question, if the FCC was planning > to follow up on its stated commitment to reconsider the AM power issue at > the end of the grandfather period, in 1990. Johnston's reply: "You took us > to court, remember?" When I pointed out that it was K1MAN who took the FCC > to court, Johnston's replay was, "As far as I'm concerned, it was the > amateur community who took us to court. That's an issue that got caught up > in 'circumstances'." > > The historic AM power limit may have very well fallen victim to a petty ego > struggle between Johnston and his hinchmen at the FCC, and K1MAN. > > > >I've already had two people leave the list > >today. > > If someone left the list over something so trivial as that one thread of > discussion, they must be pretty thin-skinned. I doubt if they were > contributing very much anyway. We're probably better off without them. Is > the "delete" button broken on their computer? > > Don K4KYV > > > > ___ > > This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout. Try it - you'll > like it. > http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/ > http://gigliwood.com/abcd/ > > > __ > AMRadio mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html > Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net > AMfone Website: http://www.amfone.net > AM List Admin: Brian Sherrod/w5ami, Paul Courson/wa3vjb >
[AMRadio] K1MAN thread of discussion
From: Brian Sherrod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> What does any of this K1MAN/W1AW stuff have to do with AM discussion? Let's get back on track here folks. Actually, there is a connection with the AM community that hits some raw nerves, besides the longtime QRM to the AM window caused by his 3890 kc "bulletins." Back in the 1980's during the FCC's AM power proceeding, K1MAN filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the FCC's decision. There was supposed to have been a 7-year grandfather period under the old power rule, after which the FCC had promised to "reconsider, if there is any justification to do so." During a discussion of the issue with ARRL officials, Dave Sumner mentioned that K1MAN's lawsuit had "hardened the FCC's position," and he thought it would be very difficult to get them to change their minds at that point. When they went to court, Baxter totally blew the case, according to other AM'ers in attendance. He acted as his own attorney, and during the court proceedings got completely sidetracked onto some tangent about his disaster relief efforts with I.A.R.N. following the Mexico City earthquake (which had absolutely nothing to do with the AM power issue). The judge ruled in favor of the FCC, saying that the court was routinely "deferring to the expertise" of the regulatory agency (the FCC). Afterwards, I attended an FCC Forum at Dayton, where Johnny Johnston was presiding at the Q-A session. I posed the question, if the FCC was planning to follow up on its stated commitment to reconsider the AM power issue at the end of the grandfather period, in 1990. Johnston's reply: "You took us to court, remember?" When I pointed out that it was K1MAN who took the FCC to court, Johnston's replay was, "As far as I'm concerned, it was the amateur community who took us to court. That's an issue that got caught up in 'circumstances'." The historic AM power limit may have very well fallen victim to a petty ego struggle between Johnston and his hinchmen at the FCC, and K1MAN. I've already had two people leave the list today. If someone left the list over something so trivial as that one thread of discussion, they must be pretty thin-skinned. I doubt if they were contributing very much anyway. We're probably better off without them. Is the "delete" button broken on their computer? Don K4KYV ___ This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout. Try it - you'll like it. http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/ http://gigliwood.com/abcd/
