QRZ! Ham Radio 5/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 5.iso/digests/infoham/941168.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 29.8 KB

Date: Fri, 28 Oct 94 13:01:06 PDT
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: List
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #1168
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Fri, 28 Oct 94       Volume 94 : Issue 1168

Today's Topics:
                       * SpaceNews 31-Oct-94 *
                     double-letters in callsigns
        Keeping in touch by Ham radio: round the world flight
                      Kenwood, Icom, Yaseu BBS?
                     LOGIC (Logbook Program)????
                 NoCal OO goes after Packet BULLetins
           Popular 75 meter "Piss and Moan" Net to return?
                    Subject: W1AW steps on others?
                          Tech EXAM Software
                          WTB: Radar gun...

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: 28 Oct 94 17:52:28 GMT
From: [e-mail] (John Magliacane)
Subject: * SpaceNews 31-Oct-94 *

SB NEWS @ AMSAT $SPC1031
* SpaceNews 31-Oct-94 *


BID: $SPC1031


                               =========
                               SpaceNews
                               =========


                         MONDAY OCTOBER 31, 1994


SpaceNews originates at KD2BD in Wall Township, New Jersey, USA.  It is
published every week and is made available for unlimited free distribution.


* ITAMSAT NEWS *
================
Due to heavy workload and the desire to turn to different interests,
Alberto I2KBD, appointed Gianluigi IK2VOO as main command station and
Stefano IK2OYD as backup for the ITAMSAT-OSCAR-26 satellite.  After some
training on the 20th of October, IK2VOO succesfully turned on ITAMSAT and
exercised some onboard functions.  Both transmitters (435.867 MHz and
435.822 MHz) were commanded on and some telemetry was collected.  The
spacecraft was found to be in good shape with the battery well charged and
the main operating parameters in nominal status.  After a week of tests,
with the main purpose of better training in the commanding procedures,
IO-26 was reset in preparation to the main software reload.

[Info via Alberto E. Zagni, I2KBD, of the ITAMSAT Command Team]


* FO-20 NEWS *
==============
On 16-Oct-94, the initial software loader was successfully uploaded to
FO-20 by ground command stations.  On 19-Oct-94, software reloading was
completed by 0300 UTC and digital (Mode JD) transponder operation resumed.

The FUJI-OSCAR-20 satellite was launched four and a half years ago.  Its
storage battery performance is still better than FO-12 in its early days.
The characteristics of batteries have changed gradually, and the setting
of battery volatage of power control unit (PCU) has changed to level 3.

[Info via Kazu Sakamoto, JJ1WTK]


* MIR NEWS *
============
During the night between 11-Oct-94 and 12-Oct-94, the power supply voltage
on the Mir space station sharply decreased.  This is believed to be due to
insufficient battery charging by the solar panels on Mir.  All systems in
the base block discontinued functioning and it became impossible to control
the attitude of the MIR-complex.  It also became impossible to aim the
communications antenna toward the geostationary relay satellite for contact
with mission control.

During this period, a listeners in Europe were able to monitor quite a bit
of activity on 143.625 MHz.  Problems onboard Mir were reported and
discussed, and the opinions of Russian specialists were varied.  The VKS
(Russian space force) spoke of a very complicated situation.  Deputy
Flight controller Blagov of TsUP blamed the age of the station, which has
been in orbit since the beginning of 1986, while the PRO of TsUP sounded
rather optimistic.  He stated that the Euromir94 expedition will remain
on schedule dispite the problems on Mir.  Amateur communications have taken
place over Europe, and it is hoped that this activity will become more
widespread once the power problems on Mir are solved.

During the evening hours between 12-Oct-94 and 13-Oct-94, Viktorenko and
Kondakova remained on duty and available if necessary.  Meanwhile, a lot
of recharging occurred and specialists hoped to be able to adjust the
attitude of the complex in such a way that the solar arrays would function
as efficiently as possible so that communications via the relay satellite
would be restored.  The cosmonauts did not panic during this period.
Viktorenko and Kondakova even joked about the fact that the exchange rate
of the dollar on board MIR remained stable, which could not be said about
the voltages of their power supply systems.

[Info via Chris v.d. Berg, NL-9165/A-UK3202]


* DP3MIR UPDATE *
=================
German Astronaut Ulf Merbold, DP3MIR, has been active from the Russian
space station MIR over Europe during last week during the evening hours.
Unfortunately the power supply problem aboard MIR has prevented Ulf from
using the Digital Voice Memory and this obviously reduces his activity to
only a few passes a day over Europe.  Precise information about this
problem is not available, as all questions and answers regarding the HAM
activity of DP3MIR have to be relayed via the Moscow control centre, which
turns out to be very complicated.

DP3MIR will stay aboard MIR until about 03-NOV-94.  It is hoped he will be
active over other continents too.  The QSL info is: DP3MIR via the usual
German (DARC) QSL Bureau.

[Info via Norbert, DF5DP, DARC Coordinator Satellites and Space Projects]


* WEBERSAT-OSCAR-18 NEWS *
==========================
WEBERSAT-OSCAR-18 controllers have noticed that the satellite has become
increasingly more difficult to copy ovr the past several months.  There is
a weak but relatively steady tone of about 1200 Hz in the demodulated
signal.  A hypothesis suggests that this tone is due to a partial loss of
carrier suppression in the Raised Cosine BPSK transmitter.  Reception of
this transmitter (437.102 MHz +/- doppler) can be improved by adjusting the
IF-shift of the downlink receiver.  It is believed this improves recption by
shifting the insufficiently suppressed carrier into the skirts of the IF
filter, suppressing the carrier on the ground.  Controllers are trying to
find ways of fixing this, or working around it.  They may also switch to
the straight-PSK transmitter, 437.077 MHz, on occasion, which may now give
better copy.

[Info via Bob Argyle, KB7KCL]


* RS-12 NEWS *
==============
Karsten Hansky, DL3HRT, reports that Ron, 7Q7RM is very active on RS-12.
He can be heard regularly, especially on the weekends.  His usual
operating mode is CW, and his QSL manager is G0IAS.  Karsten worked 7Q7RM
two weeks ago, sent his QSL directly to G0IAS, and received a quick reply
last weekend.

In the reply, G0IAS wrote that Ron typically calls CQ 15 minutes after LOS
of RS-12.  Then he usually has about 5 minutes to work into Europe when
there is some skip on 21 and 28 MHz.  Karsten heard Ron very strong on the
21 MHz RS-12 uplink from Germany, and his signal on the downlink was good
as well (559).  G0IAS wrote that 5Z4FM follows the same procedure to work
into Europe, but DL3HRT has not heard him as of yet.  Gary, C53HG, reported
that he works RS-12 at times as well.  Last month, DL3HRT worked JW, 4X,
EA8, OY, and 9H on RS-12.  He is also looking for contacts into the East
Coast of the United States via RS-10.

[Info via Karsten, DL3HRT]


* FEEDBACK/INPUT WELCOMED *
===========================
Mail to SpaceNews should be directed to the editor (John, KD2BD) via any
of the following paths:

FAX       : [phone]
PACKET    : KD2BD @ N2KZH.NJ.USA.NA
INTERNET  : [e-mail] -or- [e-mail]
SATELLITE : AMSAT-OSCAR-16, LUSAT-OSCAR-19

MAIL      : John A. Magliacane, KD2BD
            Department of Engineering and Technology
            Advanced Technology Center
            Brookdale Community College
            Lincroft, New Jersey  07738
            U.S.A.


       <<=- SpaceNews: The first amateur newsletter read in space! -=>>

/EX

--
John A. Magliacane, KD2BD   * /\/\ * Voice   : 1-908-224-2948
Advanced Technology Center  |/\/\/\| Packet  : KD2BD @ N2KZH.NJ.USA.NA
Brookdale Community College |\/\/\/| Internet: [e-mail]
Lincroft, NJ  07738         * \/\/ * Morse   : -.-  -..  ..---  -...  -..

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

Date: 28 Oct 94 18:58:45 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Paul Marsh)
Subject: double-letters in callsigns

I question the use of "double - p", etc., in spoken callsigns.  If your
call was N0AUU, what would you say?  How long do I sit there wondering if
your call was KA0AUU, or KA0AW?  The goal of spoken communication is to
communicate as clearly as possible.  Unexpected changes in expected
transmissions muddy this goal.

Same with my call --  N0ZAU.  I almost always say "zed", because if I
don't, about 1/3 of the replies wonder if I said "zee" or "cee".

Paul Marsh    N0ZAU    Omaha      [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 14:53:08 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Keeping in touch by Ham radio: round the world flight

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim Deeming) writes:
>
>Does anyone know the rules and regs about operating amateur radio
>equipment from an aircraft?  One ham I talked to seemed to think the FAA
>might have some problems with this...

The use of amateur equipment is at the disgression of the operator
of the aircraft. In the case of commercial aviation, the operator
is the *carrier*, not the pilot. In the case of private planes, all
that is required is the permission of the pilot. Interference with
any aircraft system is immediate cause to cease operations. For
commercial carriers only, the *particular* piece of equipment must
be certified not to cause interference to the *particular* aircraft's
systems before airborne operations may be permitted. Thus the general
attitude is "forget it" because the testing required to make this
certification would take the aircraft out of operation for too long
a period. The FARs take a slightly more casual attitude with private
aircraft operations.

Voyager had amateur equipment on board for their round the world
flight. The rules for experimental aircraft are somewhat different,
and somewhat more relaxed, than for even ordinary private aircraft.
However, I seem to recall that the FAA recently made a rule about
operation of electronic devices during the takeoff and landing
portions of a flight that may even limit use of amateur radios in
private and experimental aircraft.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |

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

Date: 28 Oct 94 13:27:51 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Owen)
Subject: Kenwood, Icom, Yaseu BBS?

I'm looking for information on rig-control via computer for the
Big Three brands.  Perhaps they have BBS that I can check?  The number
that I already have for Mr. Kenwood (310-761-8284) doesn't seem to
work.  So...  if you know whether these manufacturers have dial-up
BBS (or an Internet connection??) please let me know.  Thanks.

MRO

************************************************************************
Michael R. Owen, Ph.D.                        W9IP/2
Department of Geology                         Northern Lights Software
St. Lawrence University                       2881 County Route 21
Canton, NY  13617                             Canton, NY  13617
[phone]             -  voice  -        [phone] (6-9pm)
InterNet : [e-mail]        FAX: [phone]
************************************************************************

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

Date: 28 Oct 1994 12:52:05 -0400
From: [e-mail] (JimKD0AV)
Subject: LOGIC (Logbook Program)????

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bill Turner) writes:

> I like to multitask under Windows,
>usually running LogPlus!, my TNC program (Hostmaster II+) and the DOS
>version of DX Edge.

Bill, I use logic and like it.  Part of the problem you had may be
multi-tasking (i.e, running it within windows).  I typically use logic in
the dox environment and use the ability of logic to run the tnc in the
packet cluster at the same time.  Using 486/33 with 4 meg Ram

73 and GL,
Jim KD0AV

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

Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 13:57:38 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Gary Mitchell)
Subject: NoCal OO goes after Packet BULLetins

>>In article <389n39$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bob Wilkins  n6fri) says:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>3.  The Information sent MUST BE RELATED TO, AND OF INTEREST TO
>>AMATEUR RADIO OPERATORS ONLY!

Lets say I have a friend who is a programmer (not a ham) and really interested
in the AX25 protocol (from a technical perspective).   Wouldn't the above
statement rule out amateurs discussing it on the air.  The word "ONLY" bugs me.

Thanks Gary,  WB9TPG   ([e-mail])

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

Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 15:03:11 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Popular 75 meter "Piss and Moan" Net to return?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim Deeming) writes:
>
>Not to nitpick, but how is it that it is "not suitable for family", yet
>suitable for amateur radio?  Being a newbie, I thought the rules on this
>were fairly straightforward when I took my test.

There are lots of "not nice" things you can say that won't run afoul
of the FCC's obscenity standards (and even those are under periodic
court challenge). It's not yet illegal to be Politically Incorrect
on amateur radio. For example, I could tell the one about the priest,
the minister, and the rabbi, which you might find offensive, without
violating FCC rules.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |

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

Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 15:19:24 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Subject: W1AW steps on others?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott Earle) writes:
>In <2EAB50FC@smtp> [e-mail] (VEKINIS Peter) writes:
>>K1MAN's 45 minute broadcast on 14275, about 6 times a day, steps on others
>>most of the time, because it's an automatic broadcast.
>>But then such is life....
>>Peter, KC1QF.
>Isn't this illegal? I once heard an XU that had half of Europe and North
>America calling him, and that broadcast started up on 14275 completely
>wiping his signal out. There's no way that the pileup couldn't be heard,
>from most places on our planet!
>
>The thing that irritated me the most was that the broadcast included words
>to the effect that if other stations were heard on the frequency while the
>broadcast was being made, that the offending stations be reported to the
>FCC!!!
>
>Aren't there laws against making automated broadcasts? I thought that the
>FCC rules stated that "nobody owns a frequency", and that no transmissions
>should be made before checking that the frequency was in use?
>
>I would appreciate anyone else's opinions on this.

Even bulletin stations are still subject to monitoring to see if the
frequency is in use before transmitting. However, the ARRL does not do
this, and neither does K1MAN. K1MAN does other things, such as threatening
people who transmit on "his" frequency during his broadcasts, which the
ARRL does not do, but both are in violation of the rules by failing to
respect existing QSOs on the frequencies where they fire up their broadcasts.
(K1MAN operates under the same legislative loophole that the ARRL uses, and
lobbied to get, so his basic broadcasting is legal, if despicable. What's
not legal for *either* of them is firing up on top of existing QSOs.) A
W1AW operator told me that it wasn't "feasible" for them to monitor each
of the frequencies their automated broadcasting operation uses before the
system fired up. I'm sure that K1MAN would use a similar argument. I don't
consider that an acceptable reason for violating the rules for either of
them.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | [e-mail]
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 18:35:26 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Tech EXAM Software

In article <38nlvh$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (GuyK965862) writes:
>What is a good computer program I can get to help me study for the TECH licence.

I have used some DOS shareware from GHZ Engineering, 78-6997 Mamalahoa,
Holualoa, HI 96725.  I have the stuff for TECH, ADVANCED, and EXTRA.
This stuff runs under DOS on a simple system, has the entire question
pool, and will quiz you from the pool, randomly shuffling the multiple
choice answers so you can"t easily memorize.  If you get a question
wrong, it asks it of you later in the quiz, a feature I really found
helpful.  This was to me studying for my ADVANCED,
and my 11-yr son is working on his tech.

I have the tech version UUENCODED and can probably get it to you.
Respond to me via e-mail.
This is good stuff, I strongly encourage you to register it, as I did.

/***
Gary W. Thorburn  [e-mail]  KD1TE
***/

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

Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 05:14:29 GMT
From: [e-mail] (bill nelson)
Subject: WTB: Radar gun...

[e-mail] (JERRY NORMANDIN) writes:
: In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (bill nelson) writes:
: If you had college calculas you can understand the theory. It's not a
: nontechnical book. With the information provided you can make your own
: device (NO SCHEMATICS BUT ENOUGH THEORY SO IT WILL NOT BE A PROBLEM)
: And do some math, what is the best frequency of light for this
: device... use common sense. Infra Red causes Jitter so... please
: Mr. that tells me no such thing as Laser Doppler Radar that NASA allready tested and the Air F
: Air Force allready has... tell me... what's the frequency Kenneth
:
: MAN, I'm not just a hobbyist, It's how I earn a living. Check out the book rt tt sth aDzleWis a y o
:
: YOU WILL BE FASCINATED AND LEARN SOMETHING AT THE SAME TIME.

I already responded to this in a previous posting.  As I stated there,
your argument is immaterial.  I am well aware of doppler laser, it has
been around for about 20 years.  It is just that the laser speed measuring
devices do not use doppler, they are Time and Distance, and laser is very
good at measuring distance.

There may be an exception. I think it was Gary C. who stated that the
Georgia police have experimented with doppler laser.

Bill

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

Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 12:47:25 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Paul H. Bock)

References<38ktrd$[e-mail]> <phb.783176146@melpar>, <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The (1929) Amateur Code

[e-mail] (Jeffrey Herman) writes:
>[e-mail] (Paul H. Bock) writes:
>>>[e-mail] writes:

>>>>Show me a *commercially* built amateur transmitter/receiver for the
>>>>1929 ham, Rich! Just what do you think was available back then?

>>     A lot more than you are aware of, obviously.  While it is true
>>that hams of that era built their own transmitters as a rule,
>                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Exactly what I had in mind. That was the *amateur's* code, not the
>SWL's code!

     Well, you didn't exactly *say* that, you said "transmitter/
receiver," which is different.  But, in fairness, I knew what you
meant.  But let's continue on.....

>>     According to magazine ads of that era, it would also seem that
>>there were many "ready-built" components available which would have
>>simplified construction somewhat.

>But even so, the vast majority had to build what they operated.
>What was out there, in terms of components was quite expensive
>(price the available tubes and compare them to the average
>salary!).

     Well, you're implying that the average ham "manufactured"
his own tubes, which really isn't true.  I have a 1924 Radio Amateur's
Handbook (the A. Frederick Collins variety, not ARRL) and it has
schematics, parts lists, and even photos of ham stations from 10
to 100 watts, CW and 'phone.  Not a homemade vacuum tube in sight!
Lots of commercial capacitors, tube sockets, and the like.  But
the coils were certainly handmade, and all the wiring, the breadboard,
etc.  Lot of hand work, to be sure, but probably not much glass
blowing.....  :-)

     Regarding salaries, remember that the '20s was a time of
general *affluence* in this country, and the Amateur's Code was
written in 1928; the Depression didn't occur until after the
Crash of '29 (very late '29).

>>>>And even if there was one (which there wasn't), it would have been
>>>>up to the manufacturer, not the ham, to insure it was ``well-built''.

>>     Better read the FCC regs again, Jeff.

>And tell us just what were the regs back then in '28, Paul?

     Well, now, I'd have to research the regs of that era, of course, but
there *were* regs.  As a matter of fact, there have been regs ever since
the very first set created in the U.S., the Radio Act of 1912.

     I'll allow as how you were probably referring to that era because you
did use the phrase "would have been up to the manufacturer."  However,
my statement till stands; in fact it was *absolutely* true in *that* era
that the manufacturer *was not* responsible for ensuring that his
equipment was "well-built" because there were *no* technical standards
for manufactured equipment as there are now.  So, even if a ham of that
era bought manufactured equipment, it would be up to the ham to ensure
that it didn't prevent his station from qualifying as "well-built."

>>It is *never* up to the
>>manufacturer to ensure that a piece of equipment *once installed in
>>a station* complies with the FCC regulations for purity, stability,
>>etc., etc.  It is *always* the responsibility of the station

>Paul, we're talking about 1928, for gosh sakes! You need to change
>all your verbs to the past tense, then apply your argument to the
>regs and available equipment of that time.

     I did.  See above.

>>If your rig "gets you in trouble" with the FCC you can try filing
>>suit against the manufacturer (lots of luck!) and if it happens

>A wonderful statement for *today's* ham. But there was no `FCC' in
>1928, was there?

     There was a Federal Radio Commission, which examined applicants,
issued licenses, revoked licenses, etc.  In 1934, the Communications Act
of 1934 created the FCC and the entire FRC staff just kept right on
with what they were doing, only under a different name.

>>     Read "200 Meters and Down" for a historical perspective on this
>>issue.  The problem in those days was that a lot of the wonderful,
>>homebuilt stations Jeff is crowing about had *abominable* signals:

>Yes, by today's standards; but you have failed to put yourself in
>in that time period when the Amateur's Code was written; they made
>do with what they had available. And that is a wonderful book to
>read.

     Well, my point was that Paul Segal wrote the Amateur's Code in
the first place as a means of trying to get amateurs to "clean up"
their act.  When I say abominable signals, I also mean operating
practices; rampant BCI, deliberate interference with commercial and
military traffic, etc.  It was feared by ARRL that at the next
ITU conference the U.S. delegation might not be so supportive of
amateur radio if these practices continued.

     Don't forget that "quiet hours" *imposed* by the FRC were very
common for hams of that era, and there was a reason:  BCI.  The FRC
was tired of complaints by the public, and that was the solution.  So,
Another focus of the "Amateur's Code" was to get hams to operate
responsibly and try to solve the BCI issue, so the ARRL could argue
that "we are self-policing; we are responsible," and maybe the FRC
would *lift* the "prime time" operating ban.

     So, the Code was a mean of estblishing a well-publicized
"yardstick" of conduct; it wasn't a statement of how great and
wonderful the hams of that era *were*, it was an attempt to correct
deficiencies (and I'm sure the "publicity" aspect was not lost on
the League, especially in dealing with the FRC).

>>>the station licensee.  In other words, the ham is always the
>>>the one to insure the station and equipment therein, is
>>>"well-built".

>ready made equipment back then. That's why I still contend that
>`well-built' referred to what the amateur built.

     Well, we have a semantics problem, then, because I believe 9EEA
meant that an amateur station, taken in toto as an entity, should
conform to the best construction practices of the day *regardless
of whether it was all homebuilt, partially commercial, or all
commercial*, and the *amateur* was responsible for seeing that it
was so.  I *do not* believe that Segal meant to imply in any way
that an amateur *had* to "build his own" in order to conform to
the Amateur's Code; he simply meant that *however* the amateur
assembled his station, it should be a "professional-quality"
result.  And that interpretation would apply just as much today
as it did then, which means that the Amateur's Code is just as
applicable today as then (which I also believe to be true;
especially the "Gentlemenly" part, which seems to have fallen
from favor.....).

>>     One final note:  It was in the 'teens that "amateur wireless"
>>began to take on a distictly different character, from "wireless
>>experimenters" to "wireless communicators."  In other words, the
etc., etc.

>And this is something today's hams should keep in mind prior to
>bashing the ARRL - if it wasn't for the League amateur radio would
>not have survived to today.

     Well, I'll give you a kudo for that one, Jeff, you're absolutely
correct.  In fact, it probably would have disappeared in 1919, or
certainly by 1924, without a focused organization to promote it.  And
the lesson for today is.....you may not always *agree* with the League,
but the historical record shows that the League has always acted in
the best interests of *preserving* amateur radio, and sometimes that
has meant compromie.  But a compromise that gives you "something" is
often (but not always!) better than a "hard stand" which leaves you
with *nothing* if you lose.

73,

  Paul, K4MSG


(|_|)  Paul H. Bock, Jr. K4MSG     Internet: [e-mail]
 | |)  Principal Systems Engineer  Telephone: [phone] x2062

   "You can have my bug when you can pry my cold, dead fingers from
    around it....." - anonymous radiotelegraph operator

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

Date: Fri, 28 Oct 1994 08:15:53 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Greg Law)

References<[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NoCal OO , packet BBS that lists posts by "topic"?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:

>Maybe, if someone writes new packet BBS software, they could establish
>"newsgroups".  Like maybe:  dx, mods, for_sale, wanted, help, recipes,
>images, IBMPC (small 7plus-ed programs, small meaning <20K max), Mac,
>debate (for those gun and such arguements), etc.

>I suppose someone could "simulate" the above now by grouping posts
>by the keyword in the to:<keyword>@<area>, like "images@ww, forsale@usa,
>wanted@nocal, and such.  You connect to this new packet BBS, it lists
>all the <keywords> in all the posts that have arrived since last time
>you logged in.  Then you tell the BBS which <keyword> "group you
>want to list.  Looks a little like a newsgroup.

>Anyone done this?

The KA9Q NOS varients already have this ability except that it truly does
segregate messages into different folders. Private messages to me are put in
my private mailbox while bulletins to FORSALE@anything are in the public
FORSALE mailbox. It really is a better way to handle messages, especially
since most people seem to want to view a small niche of messages. Hopefully
MSYS and F6FBB will add such capabilities in the near future. Frankly,
stuffing all messages in one pen is the pits.


============================================================================
73 de Greg  AMPRNet  - [e-mail] [44.106.56.35]
            AX.25    - ke4dpx@wi9p.#ncky.ky.usa.noam
            Internet - [e-mail]
============================================================================

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

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #1168
******************************