QRZ! Ham Radio 4/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 4.iso/digests/policy/940241.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 18.6 KB

Date: Mon,  6 Jun 94 04:30:10 PDT
From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V94 #241
To: Ham-Policy


Ham-Policy Digest           Mon,  6 Jun 94       Volume 94 : Issue  241

Today's Topics:
             ----> Re: Usefulness of the amateur service
              Usefulness of the amateur service (4 msgs)

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 Ham-Policy Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-policy".

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: Mon, 6 Jun 1994 01:48:00 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!brunix!maxcy2.maxcy.brown.edu![e-mail]
Subject: ----> Re: Usefulness of the amateur service
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (The Artation) writes:

> First let me say that I think you are underestimating emergency
> communications.
> Granted a really serious emergency is rare, but so is a flat tire.  We still
> would be foolish not to prepare.  Many people have told me that the cellular
> phone has made mobile ham operators obsolete in emergency situations. This may
> be true in cases of highway accidents and the like, but in the case of true
> disasters, the cellfone service will be down for a long long time.

Any emergency management agency or relief service which builds its
emergency communications network around cell service is incredibly inept.

You are correct in stating that the ARS provides emergency communications in
disaster situations. Over the past couple of years we've seen several
examples.

However, does this qualify as a "national benefit"? What percentage of
licensed operators actually participated in those emergency situations?
Were their actions only something that could be obtained as the result
of having an ARS, or, if the ARS didn't exist, would other, better
systems be in place to accomplish the same type of tasks?

I happen to think that if the ARS didn't exist, that other systems
performing a similar task would be in place. I don't think that the
ARS adds value to the nation as a whole with our presence. Because of
this, I think its inapproprate to call the ARS a SERVICE, but to call
it what it really is today - a hobby. Its been sold as a hobby by the
League and other organizations seeking to get "new blood" into the
hobby, and that's exactly what its become: a hobby, not a service.



> Also, I do think that the ARS provides other valuable services to the nation.
> The thing is that many of these "services" are indirect.  Many of our modern
> conveniences (e.g. the above-mentioned mobile phone) came directly or
> indirectly from some guy playing around with amateur radio.  Big electronics
> companies may spend billions on research, but it is very consumer-driven.

Perhaps, but the presence of the ARS didn't guarentee these things; if a
market existed for them, then companies would have developed them on their
own. Again, the ARS offers nothing to the nation that isn't or can't be
obtained/given in other ways/means.

MD
--
-- Michael P. Deignan
-- Amalgamated Baby Seal Poachers Union, Local 101
-- "Get 'The Club'... Endorsed by Baby Seal poachers everywhere..."

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jun 1994 01:31:52 GMT
From: brunix!maxcy2.maxcy.brown.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Usefulness of the amateur service
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Cecil A. Moore -FT-~) writes:

> Hi Michael, in 40+ years of being a ham, I have lost count of the times
> I have used my ham radio to assist others. You can say that I could just
> as easily do it over a cellphone, but I don't have a cellphone.

Yes, you don't, but hundreds of others do. Ham radio as a "community
service" along the roadside is a moot point today. I've lost count of
the number of times I've heard a motorist accident or disabled
vehicle report called in only to be told "we already have that, thank you".

The point of my question was that someone said that the amateur radio
service is a SERVICE to the nation, not a hobby. I do not believe that
statement to be true, and I don't think that anyone can cite "benefits"
that the amateur service provides today. Sure, we can each cite
specific, isolated incidents, but these are not indicative of the
amateur radio hobby as a 600,000+ member whole.

MD
--
-- Michael P. Deignan
-- Amalgamated Baby Seal Poachers Union, Local 101
-- "Get 'The Club'... Endorsed by Baby Seal poachers everywhere..."

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jun 1994 02:07:26 GMT
From: brunix!maxcy2.maxcy.brown.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Usefulness of the amateur service
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] (Benetton-Ford) writes:


> As a scholar of some learning, you must recognise what argument you are
> begging in this series of postings.  You propose a new organisation or
> system, utilising 'some other type of resources' to replace the ARS in
> it's mission during emergency communications.

No, I'm not "proposing" anything. I'm simply stating that the claim
that the ARS is a "benefit" to the nation is not true. Services that
the ARS provides could easily be duplicated or even bettered in other
ways. There is no single, unique, irreplaceable "service" that the
amateur community supplies that justifies its existance today as a
"service". As a hobby, yes, but not as a service.


> You then ask the amateur
> radio operators to defend their own existance: 1) using the assigned
> portions of the electromagnetic spectrum, and 2) as an organisation that
> does more than 'chit-chat' on thier radios.

As a hobby, I could care less what your area of interest is. Others have
stated that as a hobby amateur radio will have a tough time justifying
its occupation of so much valuable bandwidth.


> While not germane to this discussion, your postings to this group alone
> have been numerous and at times highly contentious.

What can I say? I enjoy a good philosophical debate.


> Throughout your
> postings, you have argued for the protection of your closed repeater by the
> FCC, as well as it's coordination by your local coordination group.  By
> implication, you ask for someone to challenge your coorinated status.

I haven't argued for the protection of my closed repeater, I've stated
that the FCC already recognizes my closed repeater as completely valid
and acceptable within the spirit of amateur radio.

> Additionally, in another thread, you make very sweeping, generalized
> statements regarding what, I read as, your personal toughts toward a more
> 'fair' testing system.

Actually, I've proposed an entirely new testing system and licensing
scheme, with two license classes instead of six and simplified licensing
requirements. But, you probably missed that message.


> The point to be taken from the above paragraph is only that, at times, I,
> and myself alone, irrespective of my amateur licensing, regard your
> positions throughout to be at odds with each other.  The only benefit
> to come of this is to agitate and irritate others into writing follow-ups,
> such as this one, I will admit, and for you to see your thread grow.

Ah, but for true intellectual stimulation one must constantly engage in
philosophical debates. A good debater will also, on occasion, debate on
the side of an issue which s/he personally disagrees with. This latter
example aids in the further development of excellent debating techniques.
In many of the classes I teach I often require students to defend a
position which they personally disagree with.


> The argument as you have stated it, paraphrased here, is 'explain to me
> why you think that you are worthwhile.'  You will always win the argument
> with 3 words: "I don't believe."

Ah, but its just another form of the utimate question - "Why am I here?" -
which has been pondered by philosophers throughout the eons.


> This will then, with some likelihood = p , p<1, turn into a flame war
> along the lines of the thread to which you have contributed regarding the
> Closed v. Open Repeater systems in California.

A flame war will only start when the participants no longer have any
substantive arguements to present and must instead rely upon ad
hominem attacks against individuals to "prove" their point.  I think
this is hardly the case in the Closed v. Open Repeater systems thread
(for the most part.)


> Returning the ball to your half of the court: Explain to us, the readers,
> of your new plan to revolutionize emergency communications.  Defend the
> plan, in much the same way you ask us to defend the staus quo.

Again, I propose nothing. I ask the question: what irreplaceable
benefit do you as an amateur operator provide the nation such that
you are a "national benefit"?

Emergency communications is usually the first thing people use as
justification.  Would the nation fall apart if the ARS was removed
from the emergency communication scene? No. Other, even better,
systems would be installed in their place.


> P.S.: Yes, I am a no-code tech, for less than one year, but involved for
> the three years that I have been studying for my 2 under-graduate degrees.
> And I am studying CW, with every intention to go through the 6-level
> licensing process.

Wait a few years. Maybe you'll only have to go through two if my
plan catches on.

MD
--
-- Michael P. Deignan
-- Amalgamated Baby Seal Poachers Union, Local 101
-- "Get 'The Club'... Endorsed by Baby Seal poachers everywhere..."

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

Date: 6 Jun 1994 03:05:12 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!news.byu.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Usefulness of the amateur service
To: [e-mail]

: What can I say? I enjoy a good philosophical debate.

  I have studied philosophy, etc. etc. and debating.  These avenues are only
  worth while and productive in my estimation when individuals are indeed
  honest in heart and are willing to look beyond what can be conveyed in words
  and look for truth, pure truth.  To the person only interested in a good
  debate, you will not get very far nor is it worth wasting any time on.  He
  isn't interested in truth but only in the argument per se.  What others have
  already said substantiate the claim that Amatuer Radio is not ONLY a hobby
  but also a service. I've had much similar experience and out here in the west,
  the local police departments, fire departments, etc. have allready solicited
  our help on a number of occasions because they just don't have the man power
  to maintain that kind of state of readiness all of the time. The sherrif's
  dept. for example has a team of commited amatuers that regularly are involved
  in search and rescue operations, who through their "tinkering" have become
  quite proficient in finding airplanes downed in the mountains, etc. etc.  The
  loacl police dept. had a big problem with crime in one district and the
  special investigator approached our club for our help because he had neither
  the man power nor resources (i.e. radios either) to watch the area for weeks
  on end (providing a citizens watch- we knew and could track every thing that
  came and went and could do so in an effiecient organized manner because of
  those skills aquired from practicing our "hobby".  They said (and it was true)
  that it would never have been possible without us.  Through numerous times,
  we had proved our efficiency, professionalism and skill, and thus have gained
  their trust and now are on their minds when they they need this SERVICE.
  So much for the current system filling in the holes because there is a need...
  they just don't have the resources we have provided neither could the
  community afford it if it wanted too- and these weren't even times of "major"
  crisis but things that never-the-less needed our help to resolve.

  You are, by your own admission, just interested in "a good philisophical
  debate" and not in answering any sincere question.

  I move that the argument be dropped until you are really interested in an
  answer.


  -Vince

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

Date: 6 Jun 1994 04:59:49 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.duke.edu!eff!news.kei.com!ssd.intel.com!chnews![e-mail]
Subject: Usefulness of the amateur service
To: [e-mail]

Michael P. Deignan ([e-mail]) wrote:

: Yes, you don't, but hundreds of others do. Ham radio as a "community
: service" along the roadside is a moot point today. -- Michael P. Deignan

Could be it's only your part of the country where ham radio is a moot
point. 'Round these here parts, tain't nobody can afford a cellphone.
Seriously, where I live, cellphones don't work. The entire nation is
*NOT* like Brown University. About once a week I shoot a coyote to
keep the pack from eating my dogs and cats. About once a month, I help
someone with my ham radio because I may be the only person along for the
next day or so. Thank God (and the Arizona Repeater Assoc.) for mountain
top repeaters. Tain't no cell sites SE of Queen Creek, AZ. Tain't even no
runnin' water. If your car ever breaks down around here, you had better
pray for a ham to come along. Otherwise, the illegal aliens will leave
what's left of you for the buzzards.

73, KG7BK, [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jun 94 03:59:49 -0500
From: news.delphi.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <2sib8p$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <2std7b$[e-mail]>▒
Subject : Re: 440 in So. Cal.

Jay Maynard <[e-mail]> writes:

>There's a group on one side that believes in honoring commitments, and in
>dealing honestly and fairly with people, and another much larger group that
>wants to break promises and run the pioneers off because they now covet their
>neighbor's property.

Reread Part 97.  No one owns an amateur frequency.  The only property rights
here are in the physical hardware of the repeater.

>Have you been there? I have. I was president of the Texas VHF-FM Society
>while it was defending itself against a lawsuit brought by someone who wanted
>us to change our policies to accomodate his wishes. (That wasn't the subject
>of the suit, but that was the underlying motive.) It has happened before, and
>it WILL happen again if your ideas come to pass.

Which is indeed unfortunate, and the reason why reform would require FCC action
to allow coordinators to take other factors into account.

>Eminent domain takings require compensation for the fair market value of what
>is taken.

Once again, no one owns a frequency.

-- Ed Ellers, KD4AWQ

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jun 1994 09:31:37 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <2sib8p$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <2std7b$[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: 440 in So. Cal.

Jay Maynard ([e-mail]) wrote:
: Even so, the still own (unless they've sold it) that land. It's the same
: thing as homesteaders: They were granted land in order that someone woul dmake
: use of it. You can't take that away from them now. Even if you tell them, "Oh,
: you can move your house, and equipment, and livestock, and other
: improvements", you've still destroyed its value.

You seem to forget here that the ham radio spectrum is OWNED by all hams,
if you want to use an anology of OWNERSHIP.

: There's lots of it available, too, without resorting to forcing folks off of
: their homesteads.

THEIR homesteads?  I think not.  Their repeater maybe, but if they aren't
operating it in the interests of the GROUP of OWNERS at large, then why
allow it to continue?  FCC come tear this roadblock down so the majority
can use THEIR OWNED frequency.

: There's a group on one side that believes in honoring commitments, and in
: dealing honestly and fairly with people, and another much larger group that
: wants to break promises and run the pioneers off because they now covet their
: neighbor's property.

None of the new hams ever made you or anyone else a promise.  YOUR
frequency coordinators that are on YOUR side or are members of YOUR group
made a promise to coordinate frequencies in a FAIR and JUST manner for ALL.

: Have you been there? I have. I was president of the Texas VHF-FM Society
: while it was defending itself against a lawsuit brought by someone who wanted
: us to change our policies to accomodate his wishes. (That wasn't the subject
: of the suit, but that was the underlying motive.) It has happened before, and
: it WILL happen again if your ideas come to pass.

Nice how this comment is very lacking on details, isn't it?  Did that
lawsuit even apply to our current discussion?  Just checking.

: Eminent domain takings require compensation for the fair market value of what
: is taken.

Nothing's being taken... just coordinated fairly for all OWNERS involved.

: There are those who would argue that manifest destiny is a euphemism for
: taking away many people's land and livelihoods wrongly. That argument would
: certainly apply here.

You don't use the frequencies to make a living (illegal) obviously, and
it isn't YOUR land to "stake a claim" on.  It is public property of the
hams involved, which include ALL hams in Southern California if I am
reading this thread right.

Yes, I do respect your right to put up a repeater and not have it
interferred with, no problems there... I am just showing you that ALL
hams are the so-called OWNERS of the frequencies that YOUR repeater
operates on.  YOU do NOT OWN that frequency just because you are parked
on it, and if a better use for that frequency comes along in the amateur
community at large, it would be considered courteous of the small cliqish
repeater group to allow some more of the ham community at large to have
access to those frequencies as well.  Either by opening their repeaters
to outsiders, or taking them off the air altogether.  Wasted spectrum on
quiet repeaters and simplex channels, and any open spectrum without
anyone using it for whatever reason is sad.

Hope this adds to the conversation.  Off to the balloon launch!

By the way, PP-ASEL?  Me too... can't wait for the new DEN to open!

Regards,

--
Nate Duehr
[e-mail]

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

End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #241
******************************