Re: [digitalradio] Is Ham Radio Only for Random Communications?

2006-08-27 Thread Bill Aycock

Again, Bonnie is using loaded words to bolster an argument that really 
needs help to be heard. Here, she repeats the word Random many times and 
uses loaded words and phrases, like Hobby pursuit, Playful pastime, 
Curiosity, to put-down the things that don't agree with her view.  And, 
again she insists on the use of channel instead of frequency

She also tends to be an absolutist, as when she uses the wordOnly in her 
subject line. Just as there are shades of gray instead of black and white, 
and maybe in place of yes and no, there is room for co-existance, instead 
of only on either side.

One needs to read here arguments carefully; they tend to be crafted as an 
advertising flack writes his stuff. (See, I can use loaded words[flack], too).

Bill-W4BSG

At 02:38 AM 8/27/2006 +, you wrote:

For communication between two ham radio stations to exist,
some type of starting point is required.

In ham radio, the importance of this fundamental initial
starting point has gradually been lost, while heavy emphasis
has been placed upon the body of the communication or the
technique of the radio medium itself.

This has resulted in an entire ham radio culture built upon
varying degrees of random communication. A random
communication has great value as a hobby pursuit, a playful pastime,
an exploration, or a curiosity. Many hams have never known
anything but this randomness and are therefore content with it
or have accepted it as status quo.

Hams are by and large, traditionally most familiar with the starting
points of random communications, characterized by the most famous
starting point, the CQ. The operator can turn on the radio, call
CQ, and possibly start up a random communication if another ham
happens to be randomly listening on the same channel or dialing
the VFO. The longer the CQ, the better the chance of the random QSO.

A non-random or less-random communication however, requires a
more definite and intentional starting point. Many hams are
interested in non-random communication. There is a need to
further the state of the art for initiating communication
between specific hams and groups of hams.

Hams traditionally have employed some less-random techniques to
generate a more intentional or controllable starting point for
less-random communications. Most of the common techniques use
manual monitoring of some kind:

1. Dial up a specific frequency or channel or repeater, and roll the
dice that the other ham is manually listening to the radio speaker
at that moment on that channel for your call.

2. Regularly scheduled QSOs: Get on the air at a pre-determined
channel and pre-arranged time every day. Call and monitor it.

3. Regularly scheduled nets: A larger group of hams gets on the
air at a pre-determined channel and pre-arranged time every day.

The ARRL was founded upon a relay network of hams using
some of the above techniques. For the ARRL network, Maxim placed a
good deal of importance on inititating non-random communications
through regimentation of operators and standardizing techniques.

There are other techniques that some hams have been using to
achieve non-random communication starting points. We can explore
these in future postings and discussion on this group.

Bonnie KQ6XA



.







Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)


Yahoo! Groups Links





Bill Aycock - W4BSG
Woodville, Alabama 




Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 





Re: [digitalradio] Is Ham Radio Only for Random Communications?

2006-08-27 Thread Steve Hajducek

Hi Bill,

I just want to make one observation regarding the 
Amateur Radio Service (ARS) from a strictly U.S. 
Amateur perspective as you to are U.S. based. 
That observation is with respect to FCC Part 97.1 
below, in the order of priority listed, I pretty 
much think it sums it all up pretty well, don't you?

Now, anyone for some Digital Radio technical 
exchanges in the spirit of Part 97.1 and the 
similar basis and purpose for the Amateur Radio 
Service that bond Amateurs around the world?

/s/ Steve, N2CKH


§97.1 Basis and purpose.

The rules and regulations in this Part are 
designed to provide an amateur radio service 
having a fundamental purpose as expressed in the following principles:

(a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of 
the amateur service to the public as a voluntary 
noncommercial communication service, particularly 
with respect to providing emergency communications.

(b) Continuation and extension of the amateur's 
proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art.

(c) Encouragement and improvement of the amateur 
service through rules which provide for advancing 
skills in both the communications and technical phases of the art.

(d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within 
the amateur radio service of trained operators, 
technicians, and electronics experts.

(e) Continuation and extension of the amateur's 
unique ability to enhance international goodwill.


At 10:16 AM 8/27/2006, you wrote:

Again, Bonnie is using loaded words to bolster an argument that really
needs help to be heard. Here, she repeats the word Random many times and
uses loaded words and phrases, like Hobby pursuit, Playful pastime,
Curiosity, to put-down the things that don't agree with her view.  And,
again she insists on the use of channel instead of frequency

She also tends to be an absolutist, as when she uses the wordOnly in her
subject line. Just as there are shades of gray instead of black and white,
and maybe in place of yes and no, there is room for co-existance, instead
of only on either side.

One needs to read here arguments carefully; they tend to be crafted as an
advertising flack writes his stuff. (See, I can use loaded words[flack], too).

Bill-W4BSG


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




Re: [digitalradio] Is Ham Radio Only for Random Communications?

2006-08-27 Thread Bill Aycock

Steve-

Thanks for another copy of PART 97.1. Forgive me if I don't print it and 
add it to the other copies I already have. My problem is that I object to 
stopping at the end of Part 97.1(a). I agree that it is given elevated 
status by virtue of position (ie, being first) but that does not mean that 
all activity must comply with, and add to, that need to the exclusion of 
the rest of 97.1.

Believe me, if you take the pleasure parts of amateur radio out and leave 
only the duty parts, amateur radio will diminish to the point where our 
frequencies will be subject to auction, also. I would hate for Amateur 
radio to be killed by this trend.

I also object to the implication from you and Bonnie , and some others that 
the application of ALE to amateur radio is an advance in the State of the 
Art, and any who don't agree are Luddites ( a favorite word of one of the 
other ALE pushers).  ALE is fine, in its place, but other services are FAR 
ahead, with reason, and in response to their own needs. They pay a price 
that I don't think is appropriate for us.

Bill-W4BSG

At 09:24 AM 8/27/2006 -0400, you wrote:


Hi Bill,

I just want to make one observation regarding the
Amateur Radio Service (ARS) from a strictly U.S.
Amateur perspective as you to are U.S. based.
That observation is with respect to FCC Part 97.1
below, in the order of priority listed, I pretty
much think it sums it all up pretty well, don't you?

Now, anyone for some Digital Radio technical
exchanges in the spirit of Part 97.1 and the
similar basis and purpose for the Amateur Radio
Service that bond Amateurs around the world?

/s/ Steve, N2CKH


§97.1 Basis and purpose.

The rules and regulations in this Part are
designed to provide an amateur radio service
having a fundamental purpose as expressed in the following principles:

(a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of
the amateur service to the public as a voluntary
noncommercial communication service, particularly
with respect to providing emergency communications.

(b) Continuation and extension of the amateur's
proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art.

(c) Encouragement and improvement of the amateur
service through rules which provide for advancing
skills in both the communications and technical phases of the art.

(d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within
the amateur radio service of trained operators,
technicians, and electronics experts.

(e) Continuation and extension of the amateur's
unique ability to enhance international goodwill.


At 10:16 AM 8/27/2006, you wrote:

 Again, Bonnie is using loaded words to bolster an argument that really
 needs help to be heard. Here, she repeats the word Random many times and
 uses loaded words and phrases, like Hobby pursuit, Playful pastime,
 Curiosity, to put-down the things that don't agree with her view.  And,
 again she insists on the use of channel instead of frequency
 
 She also tends to be an absolutist, as when she uses the wordOnly in her
 subject line. Just as there are shades of gray instead of black and white,
 and maybe in place of yes and no, there is room for co-existance, instead
 of only on either side.
 
 One needs to read here arguments carefully; they tend to be crafted as an
 advertising flack writes his stuff. (See, I can use loaded words[flack], 
 too).
 
 Bill-W4BSG


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)


Yahoo! Groups Links





Bill Aycock - W4BSG
Woodville, Alabama 




Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/