QRZ! Ham Radio 3/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 3.iso/digests/infoham/940209.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-06-04 | 23.2 KB

Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 21:00:35 PST
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #209
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Fri, 25 Feb 94       Volume 94 : Issue  209

Today's Topics:
                     ARLB021 FCC call sign update
                     Electric Fence RFI (2 msgs)
                        Getting Coax Seal OFF?
                            Hams on Usenet
                    INTERNET -- PACKET gateway!!!
       Money grabbing SOB's at STD.COM (was Re: ftp for files)
                         Nude Radio Amateurs
                 On-line Repeater Directory (4 msgs)
                           online rpt idea
                Software for DOS-PC for decoding Morse
                    This Week on Spectrum 02/26/94

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to [e-mail].

Archives of past issues of the Info-Hams Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/info-hams".

We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 24 Feb 94 15:24:17 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.kei.com!yeshua.marcam.com!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!@
Subject: ARLB021 FCC call sign update
To: [e-mail]

SB QST @ ARL $ARLB021
ARLB021 FCC call sign update

ZCZC AG85
QST de W1AW
ARRL Bulletin 21  ARLB021

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 14:30:04 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!hpuerca.atl.hp.com!hpuerca![e-mail]
Subject: Electric Fence RFI
To: [e-mail]

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Carole L. Hamilton) writes:

>I've got some bad interference on 80 through 10
>meter bands from an electric fence about 500
>feet away. The effect is very sharp clicks
>about 3-4 per second. Analog noise blanker
>works some but not 100%.

>Anyone have any cures?

Try a 100 watt carbon resister between the positive and
negative terminals of the battery powering the fence. A
_large_ resister, preferably with lot's of cooling fins.

Failing that, judiciously applied diagonal cutters work.

Er.. it _is_ YOUR fence isn't it? :-)

Cheers & 73 Ed Humphries N5RCK
Hewlett Packard Atlanta GA

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 20:29:27 GMT
From: news.tek.com!cascade.ens.tek.com![e-mail]
Subject: Electric Fence RFI
To: [e-mail]

In article <2kl3h8$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ben E. Cline) writes:
>
>In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
>(Carole L. Hamilton) writes:
>
>>I've got some bad interference on 80 through 10
>>meter bands from an electric fence about 500
>>feet away. The effect is very sharp clicks
>>about 3-4 per second. Analog noise blanker
>>works some but not 100%.
>
>>Anyone have any cures?
>

I have the same problem. But my noise blanker in the FT-980 takes it out,
even on the lowest setting. If you want something to build, you might pick
up some op amps and start with the standard noise blanker circuits found in
the ARRL books and op am cook books. I believe it would be fairly easy to
make a blanker to take out the tic-tic-tic of an electric fence. All you should
need is a quick enough time constant I believe.

Terry Burge
KI7M

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 15:27:02 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news.tamu.edu!TAYLOR.TAMU.EDU![e-mail]
Subject: Getting Coax Seal OFF?
To: [e-mail]

> When using co-ax seal or other goopy sealers, it pays to wrap
>the connectors with PVC tape first, then apply the goop. Then when you
>remove the goop, you take off the tape and everything is clean.

Now they tell me....
Greg Taylor, KD4HZ // [e-mail] // 409-845-4445 // Fax-847-8744


------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 14:33:21 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!hpuerca.atl.hp.com!hpuerca![e-mail]
Subject: Hams on Usenet
To: [e-mail]

In <2kjb2o$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Derek Wills) writes:

>>I have need to contact a number of hams, many whom may be
>>USENET members.  At one point we used to see a 4 (or more)
>>part index of Hams on Usenet.  Is that listing still published
>>and available somewhere?

>Uh-oh, your name isn't Dave Rhodes, is it?

>Derek "pass it on" Wills (AA5BT, G3NMX)

No, Derek, his name is not Dave; but he does know a little boy
in England who is trying to set a Guiness record and wants
your QSL card!

Ed "mine's already in the mail" Humphries
N5RCK Hewlett Packard Atlanta GA

------------------------------

Date: 26 Feb 94 02:33:51 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: INTERNET -- PACKET gateway!!!
To: [e-mail]

>
>Please forgive me, if my question is stupid but I wanted to know!
>
>Thanks.
>
>Yvan Dupont, (VE2YDU)
>

Someone once said (maybe it was my dad) "the only stupid question
is the one that isn't asked".

   jd

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 15:34:57 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!news.larc.nasa.gov!eos1.larc.nasa.gov![e-mail]
Subject: Money grabbing SOB's at STD.COM (was Re: ftp for files)
To: [e-mail]

In article <2kl5bf$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Walt Dabell) writes:
>Scott Ehrlich ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
>: You are more than welcome to venture through the mod archives on World:
>: anonymously ftp into: ftp.std.com:/pub/hamradio/mods
>
>[...]
>
>: Please let me know what you think.
>
>I think it's a goddamn shame those cheap sons-a-bitches at std.com now
>want to charge us internetters for accessing their system! Anybody got
>any info on a system where there aren't a bunch of money-grabbing .com
>types running it?
>--
>       ________________________________________________________________
>       Walt Dabell    KD3GS   [phone]    [e-mail]
>
  What are you talking about?  ftp.std.com works fine for me.
Their logon message is related to charges for accounts directly on
their system.  Their anonymous ftp access still appears to be open
and free.

Richard Eckman  KO4MR
NASA Langley
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Feb 1994 07:41:15 GMT
From: mvb.saic.com!unogate!news.service.uci.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!netcomsv!bongo![e-mail]
Subject: Nude Radio Amateurs
To: [e-mail]

 I find the whole concept of nude radio amateurs somewhat
offensive. The very thought of all those geezers, Morris key in hand,
sitting there, testicles swinging in time to their fists. Even if they
are wearing their callsign baseball caps, it is a pretty disgusting
thing to do.

 I belong to a group with higher purposes. We would never
transmit naked. Furthermore, we would never send QSL cards depicting
members in the buff.

 The Conservative radio amateurs always make sure they are
properly attired before engaging in QSOs. I always make sure I have on
a cute bra and matching pair of clean panties when I pick up the mike.

 It is important to be properly dressed and have on clean
underwear when in the shack. You wouldn't want to get electrocuted and
be taken to hospital wearing a pair of knickers that are less than
fresh. That would start them talking down at the ham club.


--
Julian Macassey, N6ARE  [e-mail] Voice: [phone]
Paper Mail: Apt 225, 975 Hancock Ave, West Hollywood, California 90069-4074

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 20:20:52 GMT
From: hp-cv!hp-pcd!hpcvsnz![e-mail]
Subject: On-line Repeater Directory
To: [e-mail]

Daniel D. Todd ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I hope so! But I'll bet if we get together and pout our own out it would
                                                 ^^^^

       Oh, dear, I do hope we
       don't have to start pouting
       about all this.

        ;-)  K7ITM

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 14:44:47 GMT
From: agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]
Subject: On-line Repeater Directory
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Marc B. Grant) wrote:

>SO .... it's not like the ARRL is protecting something very sacred, it's
>just that they have alot of man-hours involved in the repeater directory
>project, and if there's anyone that can't understand why they don't want
>to give the information away, well, then, I guess you just don't
>understand business.

The ARRL isn't a for-profit organization, and its purpose isn't to make
money.  They provide many free services, such as the reciprocal operating
information, the file server, etc.  They also distribute the net directory
in electronic form.  There may be good reasons for keeping the repeater
directory under their control, but "we have to make money off of it" isn't
one of them.

Perhaps they're working on their own electronic version?

--

------------------------------------------------------
Jack Hamilton      Postal: POB 281107 SF CA 94128  USA
[e-mail]     Packet: kd6ttl@w6pw.#nocal.ca.us.na

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 20:26:29 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!sdd.hp.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!jericho.mc.com!fugu![e-mail]
Subject: On-line Repeater Directory
To: [e-mail]

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Marc B. Grant) writes:
-->Yes, the information in the repeater directory is public information, but
-->the ARRL compiles the information, and puts it into the format that you
-->buy at the stores.
.........-->
-->SO .... it's not like the ARRL is protecting something very sacred, it's
-->just that they have alot of man-hours involved in the repeater directory
-->project, and if there's anyone that can't understand why they don't want
-->to give the information away, well, then, I guess you just don't
-->understand business.
-->
-->
-->--
-->================================================
-->    Marc B. Grant     Voice Mail: 214-246-1150
-->  [e-mail]      Amateur Radio N5MEI
-->   [e-mail]
-->================================================

Well put Mark.  Anyway, it is pretty inconvenient to log
into an FTP site while you're doing 55 ;-) to find the
local repeater frequency.

BFD to shell out $6 per year?




---
------------------------------------------------------------
         ||  // ||\\    //||    //\\      //\\
         || //  || \\  // ||   //        //
         ||//   ||  \\    ||  //        //
         ||\\   ||  ||    ||  \\   ===  \\   ===
         || \\  ||  //    ||   \\  //    \\  //
         ||  \\ || //     ||    \\//      \\//
---------------------------------------------------------FTAC
Bob Levine  KD1GG 7J1AIS VK2GYN               formerly KA1JFP
[e-mail]   <--Internet email    Phone[phone] x247
[e-mail] <--Packet Mail         FAX[phone]
------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 17:41:55 GMT
From: pacbell.com!att-out!walter!dancer.cc.bellcore.com![e-mail]
Subject: On-line Repeater Directory
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Marc B. Grant <[e-mail]> wrote:
>Yes, the information in the repeater directory is public information, but
>the ARRL compiles the information, and puts it into the format that you
>buy at the stores.
>
>The key here is that this information,  unlike the callboopk info, isnot
>simply available from any other source outside the ARRL, unless you want
>to compile the listings yourself.
>
>SO .... it's not like the ARRL is protecting something very sacred, it's
>just that they have alot of man-hours involved in the repeater directory
>project, and if there's anyone that can't understand why they don't want
>to give the information away, well, then, I guess you just don't
>understand business.

But the recent Supreme Court decision (telephone white pages) specifically
rejected the notion that time, money, effort constituted a valid reason
to be protected by copyright (for factual data that is).  The court
said that the overall presentation of the data had to constitute a
"creative" presentation.  Even if the ARRL directory has a valid
copyright protection, that copyright would (IMHO) only protect the
overall presentation of the data as it appears in the directory today...
that is it being arranged bu band, state, area.  The copyright would
not (again IMHO) protect any individual details (the factual aspects
of a repeater...callsign, frequency in/out, location, etc.)

I agree with others that have said ARRL should not be opposed to an
online version, regardless of where the source data comes from.  I
feel that way because I see little threat to ARRL Directory sales
from an online capability because the ARRL Directory is targeted
towards mobile use (store in the glovebox) as opposed to an online
directory which can provide sorted outputs to help coordination,
etc.  I sure wouldn't want a bunch of 8.5x11 paper sheets of
repeater listings in my car's glovebox....would you?

Again, as an ARRL member, I strongly support the league's overall
goals, but I disagree with them on this issue.  ARRL should be
encouraging such on-line capability, indeed the online capability
would be even better if I could send a packet request for info
and then have an autoreply sent back with the data I requested.
That'd be a great way to expand interest in packet.

Cheers,

Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 14:40:32 GMT
From: agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]
Subject: online rpt idea
To: [e-mail]

Conway Yee ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Tom Servo writes:
: #What about a different approach, one worthy of usenet?  If there were
: #a newgroup called say, rec.radio.amateur.repeater dedicated to
: #providing assistance and information about repeaters, people would
: #provide info, ask questions, and somewhere, an archive site would
: #accumulate repeater listings.  The whole process happens naturally
: #by itself, with no monitary interests involved (and no "leader"
: #to lynch :-).

: Not a bad idea at all except for one slight problem.  The ftp site
: would be a point of vulnerability.

I think it is a grand idea also .. information collected this way would
be in the public domain and acessible by anyone .. how information collected
at the site is used by others is left to individual creativity.

I have an on-line scanner database on my land-line bbs .. the object is
scanner buffs can call in and add new listings .. other callers can
either earch for specific listings, by state, frequency, city, organization,
etc or download a companion program and the database information to use as
they see fit on a stand-a-lone pc. No one owns the information placed there
and it is for all to share and use. I have had this running for a couple
of years now .. There is no reason this would not work for repeater
frequencies too.

lee - ab5sm              [e-mail]


--
                                             [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 25 Feb 94 13:52:58 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!netmbx.de!zib-berlin.de!fauern!news.dlr.de!dv.st.dlr.de![e-mail]
Subject: Software for DOS-PC for decoding Morse
To: [e-mail]

I am no radio amateur but enjoy listening to world radio. I am looking for
software to decode Morse with (DOS). Who can help?

------------------------------

Date: 24 Feb 1994 11:07:48 -0500
From: kb2ear.ampr.org!starcomm.overleaf.com![e-mail]
Subject: This Week on Spectrum 02/26/94
To: [e-mail]

If you ever wanted to build a radio station from the ground up, listen
to Spectrum this week.  Our guest is Mike Venditti.  Over the years he
has built 51 radio stations.  Mike has a wealth of stories about the
broadcast business to share with everyone.  In addition he is an antique
radio collector and broadcast historian.
--
Spectrum airs live Sunday at 0300 UTC (2200 EST Saturday) on:

  WWCR, 5810 KHz, Nashville, TN (World Wide)
  WIFI, 1460 AM, Philadelphia, PA (Philadelphia Area)
  Omega Radio Network, Galaxy III, X17, 5.8 MHz WIDE audio. (Satellite)

Spectrum is rebroadcast:

  Sunday at 1500 EST, on WIFI, 1460 AM, Philadelphia, PA (Philadelphia Area)
  Monday at 0400 UTC (2300 EST Sunday),
         on WWCR, 7435 KHz, Nashville, TN (World Wide)

--
Spectrum, "The Communications Magazine You Read With Your Ears."
Box 722, Holmdel, NJ, 07733-0722, USA
[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
+1 800-787-SPECTRUM, [phone]

------------------------------

Date: (null)
From: (null)
SB QST ARL ARLB021
ARLB021 FCC call sign update

FCC ISSUED CALL SIGN UPDATE

The following is a list of the FCC's most recently issued call signs
as of February 1.

District       Group A        Group B        Group C        Group D
               Extra          Advanced       Tech/Gen       Novice

0              AA0QC          KG0LB           ++            KB0LQM
1              AA1IL          KD1TP          N1RGM          KB1BFT
2              AA2RC          KF2TQ          N2XUK          KB2QVZ
3              AA3GZ          KE3LY          N3RKG          KB3BAU
4              AD4PJ          KR4MI           ++            KE4JKD
5              AB5SS          KJ5UR           ++            KC5FFG
6              AC6AC          KN6XZ           ++            KE6FCN
7              AB7BD          KI7VO           ++            KC7ANO
8              AA8NZ          KG8GR           ++            KB8RKQ
9              AA9KB          KF9TV          N9WBZ          KB9IWX
Hawaii           ++           AH6NF          WH6SG          WH6CRC
Alaska           ++           AL7PM          WL7QG          WL7CHL
Virgin Is.     WP2F           KP2CC          NP2HG          WP2AHU
Puerto Rico      ++           KP4WG           ++            WP4MNB

++All call signs in this group have been issued in this area.
NNNN
/EX

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 25 Feb 1994 07:17:48 GMT
From: portal![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <2kietb$[e-mail]>, <2kij3j$[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: ARRL Repeater Directory

Both sides of this question present good arguments, but I have a different
slant on it, stemming from something a lawyer once told me.

The saying is: "The law is what you boldly maintain and cautiously defend."

It seems to me that the ARRL is doing some bold maintaining.  If someone
calls their bluff, they may then have to do some cautious defending, but
ONLY if someone calls their bluff.

So from that standpoint also, the ARRL is taking a perfectly reasonable course.

Kim


[e-mail] (Rajiv Dewan) writes:

>In article <2kietb$[e-mail]>,
>sohl,william h <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>In article <[e-mail]>, Tom Bruhns <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>William=E.=[e-mail] wrote:
>>>
>>>: I have a real big problem with the idea that there are deliberate errors
>>>: purposely induced into what should be a reference book.  Maybe we should start
>>>: a "repeater directory accuracy project" to confirm all the listings in the
>>>: ARRL directory to see if content errors exist.
>>
>>My following post includes a layman's set of interpretations/opinions
>>relative to some legal issues...Bottom line, I'm not a lawyer, but
>>here's my opinion, treat it accordingly.
>>
>>First, I'm an ARRL member and a Local Gov't Liason (LGL) in the ARRL field
>>organization, but that doesn't mean I agree with all positions of ARRL.
>>I missed the initial thread of this discussion,but from the two recent
>>posts it appears ARRL has threatened legal action against someone
>>providing (or intending to provide) an "online" version of a repeater
>>directory.  It also appears that ARRL has determined that some of
>>the data included in this "online" directory must have been taken
>>from the ARRL Repeater Directory because there are certain
>>identical pieces of data that were created (e.g. a deliberate
>>misspelling of a town name, callsign, etc.) as such in the ARRL
>>publlished directory to use as a means of identifying data from
>>the ARRL directory which has been used to create other databases.
>>The ARRL then claims that using that information is a violation of
>>their copyright on their Repeater Directory.

><snip>

>Instead of getting hung up on legalities, let us look at from a
>rational/economic view point.

>Consider the following scenario.  Assume that there is no method of enforcing
>copyright on lists of facts.  Also assume that it costs money to get a list
>together.  In absence of copyright, no one will be willing to compile the
>list as they will surely lose money.  This is because the moment they get
>the list together, others will rip them off.  The end result will be no
>handy-dandy list for us to use.  We will be worse off for sure.

>So, what seems to be desirable is:
>   - to let copyright be used to ensure that people who invest in collecting
>     data get a fair return on their investment and
>   - yet, do not let copyright be used to prevent any one else from investing
>     money in compiling the facts.

>These two seem to be in conflict.  Salting the list with false entries
>is a great way out as the presence of these erroneous entries in some one
>else's list is prima facia evidence that they have not gathered data
>independently and are just ripping off the list.

>So, in my opinion, ARRL is following the best strategy possible.  If
>Yee's list is independently gathered then there should be and will be
>no problem whatsoever.

>Rajiv
>aa9ch
>[e-mail]

------------------------------

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #209
******************************
******************************