QRZ! Ham Radio 4/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 4.iso/digests/policy/940514.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 7.9 KB

Date: Tue,  1 Nov 94 04:30:21 PST
From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: List
Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V94 #514
To: Ham-Policy


Ham-Policy Digest           Tue,  1 Nov 94       Volume 94 : Issue  514

Today's Topics:
                  I PASSED MY TECH TODAY!!! (2 msgs)
                           ITU Regulations
            NoCal OO goes after Packet BULLetins (2 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: 30 Oct 1994 13:09:03 -0500
From: [e-mail] (TOM SUNMAN)
Subject: I PASSED MY TECH TODAY!!!

       I Passed my Technician exams today!!! I can hardly contain myself!
Thanks to all who answered my questions about HT's, I went with the
HTX-202. Nice Rig.
      Now comes the hard part......waiting for the license!!! What a
thrill, I can hardly wait!

73's to all

Tom Randall
(waiting for his callsign!)

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

Date: 30 Oct 1994 21:40:25 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Douglas J Renze)
Subject: I PASSED MY TECH TODAY!!!

[e-mail] (TOM SUNMAN) writes:

>       I Passed my Technician exams today!!! I can hardly contain myself!
>Thanks to all who answered my questions about HT's, I went with the
>HTX-202. Nice Rig.
>      Now comes the hard part......waiting for the license!!! What a
>thrill, I can hardly wait!

>73's to all

Congratulations!  Welcome to amateur radio.  You've made an excellent choice
of a first handheld.  I've been using mine for over a year and haven't been
disappointed yet.

--
         Doug Renze, N0YVW * [e-mail] * N0YVW @ W0IUQ.ia.usa.na
                                [e-mail]

                       "Boom...sooner or later...BOOM!"

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

Date: 27 Oct 1994 12:21:10 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Teh Aik Wen)
Subject: ITU Regulations

In article <[e-mail]>,

>And why aren't sending tests required of U.S. hams?

Good question.

In Singapore, our morse test consists of sending (straight key) and receiving.

We have 2 classes of licences, just briefly:

Restricted - No code requirement, allows the licencee VHF privs, FM, 10
watts maximum power. (One has to pass a theory exam)

General - Send and Rec 13wpm (letters & numbers, but tested seperately). Of
whcih that a new licencee is restricted to a maximum power of 25 Watts,
_AND_ CW only for the first 12 months of operation, after which, the maximum
power allowable is 150W. (Has to pass theory + morse)

PS: Theory exam is conducted once a year, morse - twice. And you can't take
the morse exam if you didn't pass the theory.

You mean you aren't tested on sending?

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

Date: 31 Oct 1994 18:11:40 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Hank Oredson)
Subject: NoCal OO goes after Packet BULLetins

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve Wolf) writes:
|> Again, the acks for the ax.25 protocol are little more than the op at W1AW
|> looking at the power meter and seeing that watts are going into the antenna.
|> The acks mean the data is reaching the other BBS but we don't know where the
|> bits might go from there.  All we have in ax.25 is a remote wattmeter.
|>
|> What's to understand?  It seems like people keep trying to assign intent
|> to the receiving station ... but intent for what?  Why take a bulletin that
|> walks like a _bulletin_ and talks like a _bulletin_ and call it a "message"?
|>
|> All bulletins are broadcasting.  They are sent in many directions.  When being
|> forwarded, the receiving station did not ask for them.  The sending station
|> has no expectation that the receiving BBS will read or reply to them.

Steve,

sorry, but you are just plain wrong here.

Please think about how things work, read part 97, and then
come back and join in the discussion with some useful ideas.

This horse is dead, you can stop beating it.

   ...  Hank


--

Hank Oredson @ Mentor Graphics             Library Operations
Internet     : [e-mail]    "Parts 'R Us!"
Amateur Radio: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 00:02:08 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Wolf)
Subject: NoCal OO goes after Packet BULLetins

: |> "all" or a like form of "all" (MUSIC, SEWING, CRAFTS, NAFTA, etc.)
: |> indeed informational bulletins?
: |>
: |> Is there a difference between:
: |>
: |> 1.  My tuning in a W1AW transmission and listening to an ARRL bulletin.
: |> 2.  My tuning in a packet BBS station and reading an ARRL bulletin.
:
: 1.  You listen, you are NOT in QSO with anyone.
: 2.  You CONNECT, and are in QSO with the BBS.
:
: 1.  W1AW has NO CLUE that you are listening.
: 2.  You BBS KNOWS you are connected, and that the two calls are in QSO.
:
: This really cannot be so difficult to understand?

Again, the acks for the ax.25 protocol are little more than the op at W1AW
looking at the power meter and seeing that watts are going into the antenna.
The acks mean the data is reaching the other BBS but we don't know where the
bits might go from there.  All we have in ax.25 is a remote wattmeter.

What's to understand?  It seems like people keep trying to assign intent
to the receiving station ... but intent for what?  Why take a bulletin that
walks like a _bulletin_ and talks like a _bulletin_ and call it a "message"?

All bulletins are broadcasting.  They are sent in many directions.  When being
forwarded, the receiving station did not ask for them.  The sending station
has no expectation that the receiving BBS will read or reply to them.

73,
Steve
     Internet      :  [e-mail]
     Amateur Radio :  no8m@no8m.#neoh.oh.usa.na
     MSYS Mail List:  [e-mail]

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

Date: 31 Oct 1994 17:56:52 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Hank Oredson)

References<[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NoCal OO goes after Packet BULLetins

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Kevin Sanders) writes:
|> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave Bushong) writes:
|> >
|> >As many have said, this newsgroup is more relaxed as far as what we
|> >can and can't post.  What would happen, though, if that guy posted a
|> >cookie recipe on rec.radio.amateur.misc?  He'd get flamed off the net.
|> >He would be told that this is not the place to post cookie recipes.
|> >
|> >Ditto for the Packet BBS system.
|> >
|>
|> [ Note I removed .misc from Newsgroups: line ]
|>
|> This is not a valid analogy.  Cookie recipes belong in a newsgroup other
|> than the rec.radio.amateur.* groups, but how does one choose an appropriate
|> "newsgroup" within the context of packet bulletins?

Perhaps the same way we always have.  e.g. information about
cookies might be sent as COOKIE@USA ...

Gee, we've been doing this for years (zt least 10).

Should not be so difficult.

If your local BBS system does not support operations that allow
you to view the category of your choice, perhaps it should run
different software.

   ...  Hank


--

Hank Oredson @ Mentor Graphics             Library Operations
Internet     : [e-mail]    "Parts 'R Us!"
Amateur Radio: [e-mail]

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

End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #514
******************************