- Original Message -
> Hey Phil,
>
> Why do you want to continue this part of the discussion after I politely
made
> a retraction earlier this week to the statement above that you quoted me
on?
Mainly because I was going through some e-mails that had piled up over
several days and I did no
On Saturday 08 April 2006 10:50 am, you wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Brian Sherrod"
>
> > What does any of this K1MAN/W1AW stuff have to do with AM discussion?
>
> Let's
>
> > get back on track here folks. I've already had two people leave the list
> > today.
>
> Plenty, if you e
- Original Message -
From: "Brian Sherrod"
> What does any of this K1MAN/W1AW stuff have to do with AM discussion?
Let's
> get back on track here folks. I've already had two people leave the list
> today.
Plenty, if you ever had an AM QSO disrupted by the broadcasts of either of
these s
From: "Mike Sanders K0AZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This thread is painful at best.
In the late 50s the then sales manager for Walter Ashe Radio in St. Louis,
MO ran
A2 code practice on 10 meters. From letter recognition to maybe 10 WPM.
This
was
done on a regular schedule and was one way bro
K1MAN was a major source of QRM on 75 meter AM in the northeast with his
seemingly endless broadcasts, so to me the subject has quite a lot to do with
AM discussion.
I think it's kind of silly to leave the list just because you don't like one of
the topics. There are so many other interestin
Mike Sawyer wrote:
I meant W1AW.
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Markavage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 5:18 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] k1man fined
Maybe you should drop Art, W1AM, a note, and ask him why it happened.
Pete, cwa
On Tue,
I meant W1AW.
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Markavage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 5:18 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] k1man fined
Maybe you should drop Art, W1AM, a note, and ask him why it happened.
Pete, cwa
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 16:52:46 -0
On Tuesday 04 April 2006 4:18 pm, Peter Markavage wrote:
> Maybe you should drop Art, W1AM, a note, and ask him why it happened.
> Pete, cwa
>
> On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 16:52:46 -0400 "Mike Sawyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> writes:
> > Tell that to the fellow op who just got his QSO squashed by W1AM
> > f
and desist
> > with
> > > > their
> > > > one-way transmissions since they never check the frequency to
> > see if
> > > > it is
> > > > in use. I hold them in the same low esteem as K1(wo)MAN. To me
> > that
> > > > is
d-U-Lator,
> Mike(y)
> W3SLK
> - Original Message -
> From: "Peter Markavage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 4:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [AMRadio] k1man fined
>
>
> Never said there was a FCC rule limiting Bulletin time. I timed t
; > in use. I hold them in the same low esteem as K1(wo)MAN. To me that
> > > is
> > > intentional QRM and is subject to the same set of rules that you
> > > cite. Their
> > > best bet would be to get permission or licensing to broadcast just
> > > outside
>
Tell that to the fellow op who just got his QSO squashed by W1AM firing up
on top of him!
Mod-U-Lator,
Mike(y)
W3SLK
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Markavage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 4:30 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] k1man fined
Never said
t; in use. I hold them in the same low esteem as K1(wo)MAN. To me
> that
> > > is
> > > intentional QRM and is subject to the same set of rules that you
>
> > > cite. Their
> > > best bet would be to get permission or licensing to broadcast
> just
> > > outsid
; > is
> > intentional QRM and is subject to the same set of rules that you
> > cite. Their
> > best bet would be to get permission or licensing to broadcast just
> > outside
> > of the ham bands and not cause any problems to anyone.
> > Mod-U-Lator,
> &
Message-
> From: vince werber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 11:55 AM
> To: Discussion of AM Radio
> Subject: Re: [AMRadio] k1man fined
>
>
> Let's face the facts about this K1MAN issue...
>
> In this case K1MAN earned the fine...
>
Let's face the facts about this K1MAN issue... He never provided code
practice to the best of my knowledge ever, only endless voice material AND...
It appears he wasn't acting as a control operator at the control point AND it
appears he wasn't meeting the proper ID at the proper times... and h
o
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 9:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Discussion of AM Radio
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] k1man fined
- Original Message -
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] k1man fined
> Also I would think ARRL in Newington should be VERY
> careful before they fire up their W1AW Broadcasts
I agree, Phil. I don't think the Amateur bands are the place for any
type of "broadcasting". Whether the ARRL is for the benefit of the
Amateur Radio operator or not it is still a commercial entity. However,
where K1MAN crossed WAY over the line in my estimation is when he had a
"call in" ra
- Original Message -
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] k1man fined
> Also I would think ARRL in Newington should be VERY
> careful before they fire up their W1AW Broadcasts now.
> This precedent could easily be applied to them, if someone
> wanted to entrap them.
The difference betw
K
>
> - Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Markavage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 10:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [AMRadio] k1man fined
>
>
> Slk said, " As a non-member of the ARRgghhL, I do not get their
> repo
,
Mike(y)
W3SLK
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Markavage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 10:57 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] k1man fined
Slk said, " As a non-member of the ARRgghhL, I do not get their reports
or broadcasting (since it is a single
Slk said, " As a non-member of the ARRgghhL, I do not get their reports
or broadcasting (since it is a single transmission to the masses)
schedule."
Any of this information is available off the ARRL Web Site whether
you're a member or not. The complete W1AW bulletin schedule and
frequencies are
e mountain. Of course, hindsight is always
twenty-twenty.
Mod-U-Lator,
Mike(y)
W3SLK
- Original Message -
From: "Brian Carling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of AM Radio" ;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; &
Interesting stuff...
The DISCUSSION section about mentioninmg a web site is
interesting - that may now be an issue, but I didn't see any firm
conclusion.
Also I would think ARRL in Newington should be VERY
careful before they fire up their W1AW Broadcasts now.
This precedent could easily be ap
24 matches
Mail list logo
