Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [MT63] Re: GB> Final word about ARRL

Expand Messages
  • N7HIY
    Winlink proprietary closed useage mode and the unattended Terminator robots will the final nail in the Coffin of the ARRL Cliff N7HIY ... From: Brian
    Message 1 of 12 , Feb 16, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Winlink proprietary closed useage mode and the unattended "Terminator"
      robots will the final nail in the Coffin of the ARRL

      Cliff N7HIY

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Brian Carling" <bcarling@...>
      To: <glowbugs@...>; <DCBOATANCHORS@...>;
      <flboatanchors@yahoogroups.com>
      Cc: <MT63@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 19:16 PM
      Subject: [MT63] Re: GB> Final word about ARRL


      >
      > You may not have got the impression.
      > BUT they are SOLIDLY behind this multi-million dollar effort
      > that is getting funded by GIFTS (to clubs mostly) from
      > local governments anxious to get on the Homeland
      > Defense bandwagon and show that they are doing something
      >
      > Unfortunately they are helping perpetuate and the grow the menace
      > of AIRMAIL / WINLINK / CRA, I mean PACTOR. This is the
      > scourge of the HF bands.
      >
      > If you ever tried to operate PSK31, PSK63, MT63 or MFSK you
      > would know what I mean.
      > These unattended ROBOTS come BARGING IN Ono your
      > frequency and there is no operator tere to stoip them/. They do not
      > QSY. They keep trying and trying ans trying UNTIL they get
      > through.
      > They effectively OWN whatever frequency they decide to be on.
      > You can thank and ARRL anf FCC gone amuck for this.
      > I can understand the handful of misguided hams who want this.
      > I can understand the German firm that makes the $1500.00
      > modems.
      > What I can't understand is the ARRL leaders and the Digital
      > Committee
      > which I believe have all betrayed amateur radio.
      > The officers have ignored appeals for help.
      > The top brass at ARRL are totally behind this and nothing will deter
      > them.
      > It is as wrong and as foolish as BPL and ten times as annoying!
      >
      > There is NOTHING that is done by WINLINK / Packet on HF that
      > cannot be done by other means just as good with a sound card
      > and computer, but without that modem someone is going to miss
      > out on multi-million dollars in sales.
      >
      > On 16 Feb 2005 at 18:03, Kenneth Lopez wrote:
      >
      >> Hi Gents,
      >>
      >> I contacted the directors, and got responses from Jim W5JBP, and Bob,
      >> W6 RGG, and Art W6XD. thanking me for my imput. Jim engaged in a
      >> multi-email exchange with me and answered questions about automatic
      >> vs. semi-automatic and general band plan issues.
      >>
      >> I didn't get the impression they were selling a particular point of
      >> view.
      >>
      >> Ken N6TZV
      >>
      >>
      >> On Feb 16, 2005, at 5:23 PM, William R Colbert wrote:
      >>
      >> > I have been a member for 49 years now and have
      >> > tried to contact my director once. That was
      >> > when this WinLink garbage started up and
      >> > wiped out the portions of 30 meters fro 10.119
      >> > to 10.129 every 1 khz as a picket fence type
      >> > operation. I wrote to Steve Ford at ARRL,
      >> > his response was that he would file the note
      >> > in case he wanted to use it in correspondence
      >> > column; my Section Manager, the Assistant
      >> > Director and the Director at the time Jim Haynie.
      >> > Still waiting to hear from all except the SM - he
      >> > was the only one with any type of response. It was
      >> > as if I was desecrating their chosen deity. I also wrote
      >> > to one of the founders of the WinLink and he said
      >> > that they decided to operate in the 10.120 area
      >> > because he had heard no cw activity there. I can't
      >> > to this day believe his receiver or antenna was that
      >> > bad. After that, I felt that it was useless to try and
      >> > get any of the biggies to do anything except
      >> > what was on their agenda.
      >> >
      >> > Ray, W5XE
      >> >
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > << Try MT63 on 80m - great fun!>>
      >
      > - The MT63 Reflector -
      > MT63@egroups.com
      >
      > (To unsubscribe. send email to
      > MT63-unsubscribe@onelist.com)
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >



      ---
      avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
      Virus Database (VPS): 0507-2, 02/16/2005
      Tested on: 2/16/2005 8:10:22 PM
      avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
      http://www.avast.com
    • Brian Carling
      You may WELL be right about this OM. I hate to see it. The word IS getting out about this nasty practice and it is worse than any code vs. know-code or any BPL
      Message 2 of 12 , Feb 17, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        You may WELL be right about this OM.
        I hate to see it.

        The word IS getting out about this nasty practice and it is worse
        than
        any code vs. know-code or any BPL problem.

        ARRL may be trying hard to "fix" the BPL issue while self-
        destructing
        through their significant contribution of support to a
        FAR worse problem - WINLINK and unattended robots
        that are ruining 40, 30 and 20m now.

        On 16 Feb 2005 at 20:10, N7HIY wrote:

        > Winlink proprietary closed useage mode and the unattended "Terminator"
        > robots will the final nail in the Coffin of the ARRL
        >
        > Cliff N7HIY
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "Brian Carling" <bcarling@...>

        > > You may not have got the impression.
        > > BUT they are SOLIDLY behind this multi-million dollar effort
        > > that is getting funded by GIFTS (to clubs mostly) from
        > > local governments anxious to get on the Homeland
        > > Defense bandwagon and show that they are doing something
        > >
        > > Unfortunately they are helping perpetuate and the grow the menace of
        > > AIRMAIL / WINLINK / CRA, I mean PACTOR. This is the scourge of the
        > > HF bands.
        > >
        > > If you ever tried to operate PSK31, PSK63, MT63 or MFSK you
        > > would know what I mean.
        > > These unattended ROBOTS come BARGING IN Ono your
        > > frequency and there is no operator tere to stoip them/. They do not
        > > QSY. They keep trying and trying ans trying UNTIL they get through.
        > > They effectively OWN whatever frequency they decide to be on. You
        > > can thank and ARRL anf FCC gone amuck for this. I can understand the
        > > handful of misguided hams who want this. I can understand the German
        > > firm that makes the $1500.00 modems. What I can't understand is the
        > > ARRL leaders and the Digital Committee which I believe have all
        > > betrayed amateur radio. The officers have ignored appeals for help.
        > > The top brass at ARRL are totally behind this and nothing will deter
        > > them. It is as wrong and as foolish as BPL and ten times as
        > > annoying!
        > >
        > > There is NOTHING that is done by WINLINK / Packet on HF that
        > > cannot be done by other means just as good with a sound card
        > > and computer, but without that modem someone is going to miss
        > > out on multi-million dollars in sales.
        > >
        > > On 16 Feb 2005 at 18:03, Kenneth Lopez wrote:
        > >
        > >> Hi Gents,
        > >>
        > >> I contacted the directors, and got responses from Jim W5JBP, and
        > >> Bob, W6 RGG, and Art W6XD. thanking me for my imput. Jim engaged
        > >> in a multi-email exchange with me and answered questions about
        > >> automatic vs. semi-automatic and general band plan issues.
        > >>
        > >> I didn't get the impression they were selling a particular point of
        > >> view.
        > >>
        > >> Ken N6TZV
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> On Feb 16, 2005, at 5:23 PM, William R Colbert wrote:
        > >>
        > >> > I have been a member for 49 years now and have
        > >> > tried to contact my director once. That was
        > >> > when this WinLink garbage started up and
        > >> > wiped out the portions of 30 meters fro 10.119
        > >> > to 10.129 every 1 khz as a picket fence type
        > >> > operation. I wrote to Steve Ford at ARRL,
        > >> > his response was that he would file the note
        > >> > in case he wanted to use it in correspondence
        > >> > column; my Section Manager, the Assistant
        > >> > Director and the Director at the time Jim Haynie.
        > >> > Still waiting to hear from all except the SM - he
        > >> > was the only one with any type of response. It was
        > >> > as if I was desecrating their chosen deity. I also wrote
        > >> > to one of the founders of the WinLink and he said
        > >> > that they decided to operate in the 10.120 area
        > >> > because he had heard no cw activity there. I can't
        > >> > to this day believe his receiver or antenna was that
        > >> > bad. After that, I felt that it was useless to try and
        > >> > get any of the biggies to do anything except
        > >> > what was on their agenda.
        > >> >
        > >> > Ray, W5XE
        > >> >
        > >>
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        > > --------------------~--> Tired of hearing the same songs over and
        > > over? Listen to Internet Radio! Skip songs. Click to listen to
        > > LAUNCHcast! http://us.click.yahoo.com/.mKGzA/HARHAA/kkyPAA/CPMolB/TM
        > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
        > > ~->
        > >
        > > << Try MT63 on 80m - great fun!>>
        > >
        > > - The MT63 Reflector -
        > > MT63@egroups.com
        > >
        > > (To unsubscribe. send email to
        > > MT63-unsubscribe@onelist.com)
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > ---
        > avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
        > Virus Database (VPS): 0507-2, 02/16/2005
        > Tested on: 2/16/2005 8:10:22 PM
        > avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
        > http://www.avast.com
        >
        >
        >
      • Brian Carling
        Thanks for the 5 cents worth John... The e-mail message handling will work just as well (and faster) via MT63 so you are worng. Nobody is doing it simply
        Message 3 of 12 , Feb 17, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks for the 5 cents worth John...
          The e-mail message handling will work just as well (and faster) via
          MT63 so you are worng.

          Nobody is doing it simply because ethe destructiove bandwagon
          has left the station... and the sailors are all onboard.

          VHF Winlink would be fine for that portal.
          HF Winlink is slow, annoying and dangerous.

          On 16 Feb 2005 at 22:07, John Bradley wrote:

          > >" If you ever tried to operate PSK31, PSK63, MT63 or MFSK you
          > > would know what I mean.
          > > These unattended ROBOTS come BARGING IN Ono your
          > > frequency and there is no operator tere to stoip them/. They do not
          > > QSY. They keep trying and trying ans trying UNTIL they get through.
          > > They effectively OWN whatever frequency they decide to be on. You
          > > can thank and ARRL anf FCC gone amuck for this. I can understand the
          > > handful of misguided hams who want this. I can understand the German
          > > firm that makes the $1500.00 modems."

          > Excuse me , are we talking about the same thing?

          Well, we don't know yet, since you haven't said what you are
          talking about yet, buit go ahead!

          > I operate a lot of PSK and MFSK, and don't have a problem with the
          > Pactor Signals....... sure I can hear them but they don't bother
          > MFSK........ can be right beside me and everything still works. And
          > that is running a Zepp antenna on 20M.

          You happen to only operate on one or two frequencies.
          Good thing that is all you will ever want then.

          > Rather than a "bunch of misguided hams who want this" there is one
          > thing that pactor can do that all the other modes cannot, and that is
          > to do the wireless email to internet portal message handling. This is
          > an absolute essential service in time of disaster, pure and simple. If
          > the digital wizards could figure out another mode and portals that
          > could do this, I'm all for it.

          > I, too, resent the fact that the inventors (authors) of pactor have
          > not released the software into the public domain, rather than selling
          > expensive modems. Sooner, rather than later, someone will come up with
          > an equally effective program to replace pactor, and I'm all for it.
          > The problem will be that any new software will end up as a
          > semi-automatic operation, with a single station connecting to an
          > automatic mail box. If the station initiating the contact cannot hear
          > another digital signal, then there would be the potential some
          > inadvertent interference, irrespective of mode.

          Yes and it should be illegal.

          > I guess what we need, by "we" I mean all the digital users , is to
          > sit down and work out a "gentlemen's agreement" as to how and what
          > frequencies we can use with different modes, on each band.

          That has been tried repeatedly among digital operators, and met by
          extreme
          rudeness and lack of co-operation on the part of the handful of
          individuals
          that operate the QRO unattended robot jammers.

          > I admit that I do not know the US regulations regarding the US band
          > plan and what modes can be used where. In Canada our whole band plan
          > is a "gentlemen's agreement" , so it does work .

          You have never tried 30m digital or MT63 I bet.

          > I don't think there is a need for a bunch of wild-eyed statements
          > which do nothing to promote cooperation between advocates of different
          > modes.

          You obviously know a lot more about this than I do, so I will see
          what you can do to resolve it.

          >All these digital modes are a pleasure to use, and would be
          > invaluable in times of need to pass health and welfare traffic, etc.
          > Maybe we should put all this surplus energy into some ermergency
          > protocols and message template for digital communications?

          Go for it!

          > Hey, despite all the rhetoric, ALL digital modes are here to stay, far
          > better to work this out on our own without government imposing
          > something on the ham community.

          That is what is happening now. SO you are getting your wish.
          Enjoy your narrow sliver of frequencies.
        • don_putnick
          ... Pactor ... everything ... Ever notice how nicely a PSK31 signal can fit between the two Pactor tones? I think we should promote that technique in the name
          Message 4 of 12 , Feb 17, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In MT63@yahoogroups.com, John Bradley <jbradley@s...> wrote:
            > Excuse me , are we talking about the same thing?
            > I operate a lot of PSK and MFSK, and don't have a problem with the
            Pactor
            > Signals....... sure I can hear them
            > but they don't bother MFSK........ can be right beside me and
            everything
            > still works. And that is running a Zepp antenna on 20M.

            Ever notice how nicely a PSK31 signal can fit between the two Pactor
            tones? I think we should promote that technique in the name of
            frequency reuse.

            Don enn-nay-six-zed
          • w9ofa@dasice.com
            I m 25. The people of my generation do not understand what it is to live without a fully digitized wireless voice transmission system (cell phones). Even old
            Message 5 of 12 , Feb 20, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              I'm 25.

              The people of my generation do not understand what it is to live without a
              fully digitized wireless voice transmission system (cell phones). Even old
              FM cell phones are dying away.

              In about 20 years, most of the current generation of hams will have passed
              away, and the HF bands will have only small sections relegated to SSB voice
              and CW modes. Digital communication, both voice and data, will occupy the
              rest. People will set up NVIS style nodes on the lower bands, and the
              higher bands will be used for DX.

              Any position against this vision will merely alienate more younger people
              from the hobby.

              If the current "generation in charge" keeps protesting against digitizing
              the hams bands, then they will merely give fuel for the large corporate
              interests who want to take frequencies away from "those backwards hams".

              Anyway, that's my opinion, I could be wrong.

              Dave, W9OFA
            • John Becker
              I disagree with this HF bands will have only small sections relegated to SSB voice and CW modes. Not till one can drive down the interstate typing on a
              Message 6 of 12 , Feb 20, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                I disagree with this " HF bands will have only small sections
                relegated to SSB voice and CW modes. " Not till one can
                drive down the interstate typing on a keyboard and reading a
                laptop screen. I have seen changes in my 35 years as a ham.
                When I got on RTTY in 1970 that was the only digital mode
                there was. (other then CW ) Than came Packet, Amtor (by the
                same guy that came up with PKS31) Pactor and the rest.

                I really fail to see that big deal about the sound card modes.
                They are all the same. Just change the number of the tones,
                change the sound of the tone and OH BOY we have another
                new sound card mode. How many are needed ? I do enjoy the
                TNC modes Amtor, Pactor and packet... and from time to time
                I'll play a little MT63 or HELL. And that is all of the sound card
                modes for me.

                So don't hold your breath waiting for SSB and CW to dry up and
                blow away. It is the bread and butter of ham radio.

                John, WØJAB
                Louisiana, Missouri
                EM46LK
                AMSAT & ARRL member







                At 11:44 AM 2/20/05, you wrote:

                >I'm 25.
                >
                >The people of my generation do not understand what it is to live without a
                >fully digitized wireless voice transmission system (cell phones). Even old
                >FM cell phones are dying away.
                >
                >In about 20 years, most of the current generation of hams will have passed
                >away, and the HF bands will have only small sections relegated to SSB voice
                >and CW modes. Digital communication, both voice and data, will occupy the
                >rest. People will set up NVIS style nodes on the lower bands, and the
                >higher bands will be used for DX.
                >
                >Any position against this vision will merely alienate more younger people
                >from the hobby.
                >
                >If the current "generation in charge" keeps protesting against digitizing
                >the hams bands, then they will merely give fuel for the large corporate
                >interests who want to take frequencies away from "those backwards hams".
                >
                >Anyway, that's my opinion, I could be wrong.
                >
                >Dave, W9OFA
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                ><< Try MT63 on 80m - great fun!>>
                >
                >- The MT63 Reflector -
                > MT63@egroups.com
                >
                >(To unsubscribe. send email to
                >MT63-unsubscribe@onelist.com)
                >
                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • Walt DuBose
                I believe that digital voice will replace SSB in 5-10 years...you can run 10 watts where you run 100 today or 100 today where you would like to run 500 watts
                Message 7 of 12 , Feb 20, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  I believe that digital voice will replace SSB in 5-10 years...you
                  can run 10 watts where you run 100 today or 100 today where you
                  would like to run 500 watts SSB today and NO noise.

                  You will also see digital voice on V/UHF...perhaps even some sort
                  of trunking system using digital voice store and forward repeaters.

                  Walt/K5YFW

                  John Becker wrote:
                  > I disagree with this " HF bands will have only small sections
                  > relegated to SSB voice and CW modes. " Not till one can
                  > drive down the interstate typing on a keyboard and reading a
                  > laptop screen. I have seen changes in my 35 years as a ham.
                  > When I got on RTTY in 1970 that was the only digital mode
                  > there was. (other then CW ) Than came Packet, Amtor (by the
                  > same guy that came up with PKS31) Pactor and the rest.
                  >
                  > I really fail to see that big deal about the sound card modes.
                  > They are all the same. Just change the number of the tones,
                  > change the sound of the tone and OH BOY we have another
                  > new sound card mode. How many are needed ? I do enjoy the
                  > TNC modes Amtor, Pactor and packet... and from time to time
                  > I'll play a little MT63 or HELL. And that is all of the sound card
                  > modes for me.
                  >
                  > So don't hold your breath waiting for SSB and CW to dry up and
                  > blow away. It is the bread and butter of ham radio.
                  >
                  > John, WØJAB
                  > Louisiana, Missouri
                  > EM46LK
                  > AMSAT & ARRL member
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > At 11:44 AM 2/20/05, you wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  >>I'm 25.
                  >>
                  >>The people of my generation do not understand what it is to live without a
                  >>fully digitized wireless voice transmission system (cell phones). Even old
                  >>FM cell phones are dying away.
                  >>
                  >>In about 20 years, most of the current generation of hams will have passed
                  >>away, and the HF bands will have only small sections relegated to SSB voice
                  >>and CW modes. Digital communication, both voice and data, will occupy the
                  >>rest. People will set up NVIS style nodes on the lower bands, and the
                  >>higher bands will be used for DX.
                  >>
                  >>Any position against this vision will merely alienate more younger people
                  >
                  >>from the hobby.
                  >
                  >>If the current "generation in charge" keeps protesting against digitizing
                  >>the hams bands, then they will merely give fuel for the large corporate
                  >>interests who want to take frequencies away from "those backwards hams".
                  >>
                  >>Anyway, that's my opinion, I could be wrong.
                  >>
                  >>Dave, W9OFA
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >><< Try MT63 on 80m - great fun!>>
                  >>
                  >>- The MT63 Reflector -
                  >> MT63@egroups.com
                  >>
                  >>(To unsubscribe. send email to
                  >>MT63-unsubscribe@onelist.com)
                  >>
                  >>Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > << Try MT63 on 80m - great fun!>>
                  >
                  > - The MT63 Reflector -
                  > MT63@egroups.com
                  >
                  > (To unsubscribe. send email to
                  > MT63-unsubscribe@onelist.com)
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • John Bradley
                  I agree strongly with Walt , that the future of ham radio is digital , both phone and text. . These modes are so enjoyable , and the results unsing MT63,MFSK,
                  Message 8 of 12 , Feb 20, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I agree strongly with Walt , that the future of ham radio is digital , both
                    phone and text. . These modes are so enjoyable , and the
                    results unsing MT63,MFSK, PSK and others, using low power and wire antennas
                    is simplt phenomenal. No longer does the average ham has to have an acre of
                    aluminum up in the air, and endure the wrath of his neighbours to work the
                    world.

                    This technology is what will make our hobby continue, attracting younger,
                    technically savvy members to our fraternity. We live in exciting times, and
                    where there are constant improvements to the digital side, with the next
                    frontier being digital voice on HF........


                    John
                    VE5MU


                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: Walt DuBose <dubose@...>
                    To: <MT63@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 1:26 PM
                    Subject: Re: [MT63] Re: Final word about ARRL-Must-Get-Better


                    >
                    > I believe that digital voice will replace SSB in 5-10 years...you
                    > can run 10 watts where you run 100 today or 100 today where you
                    > would like to run 500 watts SSB today and NO noise.
                    >
                    > You will also see digital voice on V/UHF...perhaps even some sort
                    > of trunking system using digital voice store and forward repeaters.
                    >
                    .
                  • Steve Friis
                    Hi all, I thik what dave was trying to say is that ANALOG voice will go away, not voice communications per say. When I first heard, saw, ham radio, there was
                    Message 9 of 12 , Feb 20, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi all,

                      I thik what dave was trying to say is that ANALOG voice will go away,
                      not voice communications per say. When I first heard, saw, ham radio,
                      there was CW and there was AM (Full carrier, both sidebands. Some
                      experimentors were playing with silly-side band. I remember hearing some
                      guys (One of them was BQU, fondly known as "Big-quick and uggly") saying
                      that this new mode would be the death of ham radio because shortwave
                      listeners couldn't copy the hams using this mode and wouldn't join the
                      ranks.

                      Then, as well as now, new modes, some of which ARE more efficient, are
                      manifesting. Thanks to all those who dream and build these new modes. I
                      for one want to see this happen.

                      Just as back in the days of AM/SSB wars for occupation of the bands, we
                      MUST allow this experimentation and subsiquent groth.

                      BTW a little ways back in this thread was the mention of operating PSK31
                      between the tones of a amtor signal. Sort of reminds me of saddling up
                      to an AM broadcast signal on 40, and operating right there. Hmmm......



                      Steve/WM5Z


                      John Becker wrote:

                      > I disagree with this " HF bands will have only small sections
                      > relegated to SSB voice and CW modes. " Not till one can
                      > drive down the interstate typing on a keyboard and reading a
                      > laptop screen. I have seen changes in my 35 years as a ham.
                      > When I got on RTTY in 1970 that was the only digital mode
                      > there was. (other then CW ) Than came Packet, Amtor (by the
                      > same guy that came up with PKS31) Pactor and the rest.
                      >
                      > I really fail to see that big deal about the sound card modes.
                      > They are all the same. Just change the number of the tones,
                      > change the sound of the tone and OH BOY we have another
                      > new sound card mode. How many are needed ? I do enjoy the
                      > TNC modes Amtor, Pactor and packet... and from time to time
                      > I'll play a little MT63 or HELL. And that is all of the sound card
                      > modes for me.
                      >
                      > So don't hold your breath waiting for SSB and CW to dry up and
                      > blow away. It is the bread and butter of ham radio.
                      >
                      > John, WØJAB
                      > Louisiana, Missouri
                      > EM46LK
                      > AMSAT & ARRL member
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > At 11:44 AM 2/20/05, you wrote:
                      >
                      > >I'm 25.
                      > >
                      > >The people of my generation do not understand what it is to live
                      > without a
                      > >fully digitized wireless voice transmission system (cell phones).
                      > Even old
                      > >FM cell phones are dying away.
                      > >
                      > >In about 20 years, most of the current generation of hams will have
                      > passed
                      > >away, and the HF bands will have only small sections relegated to SSB
                      > voice
                      > >and CW modes. Digital communication, both voice and data, will
                      > occupy the
                      > >rest. People will set up NVIS style nodes on the lower bands, and the
                      > >higher bands will be used for DX.
                      > >
                      > >Any position against this vision will merely alienate more younger people
                      > >from the hobby.
                      > >
                      > >If the current "generation in charge" keeps protesting against digitizing
                      > >the hams bands, then they will merely give fuel for the large corporate
                      > >interests who want to take frequencies away from "those backwards hams".
                      > >
                      > >Anyway, that's my opinion, I could be wrong.
                      > >
                      > >Dave, W9OFA
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > ><< Try MT63 on 80m - great fun!>>
                      > >
                      > >- The MT63 Reflector -
                      > > MT63@egroups.com
                      > >
                      > >(To unsubscribe. send email to
                      > >MT63-unsubscribe@onelist.com)
                      > >
                      > >Yahoo! Groups Links
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > << Try MT63 on 80m - great fun!>>
                      >
                      > - The MT63 Reflector -
                      > MT63@egroups.com
                      >
                      > (To unsubscribe. send email to
                      > MT63-unsubscribe@onelist.com)
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > *Yahoo! Groups Sponsor*
                      > <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129232oid/M=324658.6070095.7083352.3001176/D=groups/S=1705034690:HM/EXP=1109011280/A=2343726/R=0/SIG=12i0pidr9/*http://clk.atdmt.com/VON/go/yhxxxvon01900091von/direct/01/&time=1108924880139986>
                      >
                      >
                      > Get unlimited calls to
                      >
                      > U.S./Canada
                      >
                      > <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129232oid/M=324658.6070095.7083352.3001176/D=groups/S=1705034690:HM/EXP=1109011280/A=2343726/R=1/SIG=12i0pidr9/*http://clk.atdmt.com/VON/go/yhxxxvon01900091von/direct/01/&time=1108924880139986>
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      > *Yahoo! Groups Links*
                      >
                      > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
                      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MT63/
                      >
                      > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      > MT63-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      > <mailto:MT63-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
                      >
                      > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                      > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
                      >
                      >
                    • Joe
                      I m going to make a bold statement and say your all wrong. Amateur radio is like many other hobbies, people like the old,, the new, and a blend of both. Look
                      Message 10 of 12 , Feb 21, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I'm going to make a bold statement and say your all wrong.

                        Amateur radio is like many other hobbies, people like the old,, the new, and a blend of both. Look at car enthusiasts. There are old car collectors, new car collectors, and those that like both. There are specialty car enthusiasts who like only specific types of cars. To say that amateur radio will only be SSB and CW, or only digital is wrong. There is always going to be the people who long for the old modes of operation (like the 55 Chevy owners) and those that try the new modes.

                        That's what makes the hobby so interesting......

                        73, Joe, k1ike
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.