QRZ! Ham Radio 3/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 3.iso/digests/policy/930430.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-06-04 | 18KB

Date: Tue,  9 Nov 93 04:30:14 PST
From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V93 #430
To: Ham-Policy


Ham-Policy Digest           Tue,  9 Nov 93       Volume 93 : Issue  430

Today's Topics:
                         ftp access by packet
         GAY & QST - rec.radio.amateur.policy #6576 (2 msgs)
                    Homonauseated (was: GAY & QST)
   Homonauseated (was: GAY & QST) - rec.radio.amateur.policy #6571
                     The League SUPPORTS Morse...
                This is a hobby not a career (was: 3rd

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: 8 Nov 93 14:37:27 EST
From: psinntp![e-mail]
Subject: ftp access by packet
To: [e-mail]

In rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc, [e-mail] (Dave Jenkins) writes:
>[e-mail] (SP5WCA) writes:
>
>>[e-mail] (Roger-Daniel Laberge) writes:
>>> Is there any way to get access to Internet and FTP sites thru packet radio?
>>Technically yes, but it's illegal (3rd party stuff)
>
>Why would that be illegal?!?!?  How is that any different than my using an
>autopatch?  In both cases I am using remotely located ham equipment to access
>a non-ham realm.  As long as the content of the transmissions are Part 97
>compliant then no harm no foul.

Not quite.  The *entire* operation of the station must comply with
Part 97.  That means that there must be present, at the gateway station,
a control operator who is "continuously monitoring and supervising"
the traffic coming from the Internet.  [97.115(b)(1)]

While compliance with the content rules is necessary for any transmission,
third-party operation has additional requirements levied upon it,
particularly when the third party is participating in stating the message.
------
Jon Bloom, KE3Z                   | [e-mail]
American Radio Relay League       |
225 Main St., Newington CT 06111  |

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

Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1993 17:51:23 GMT
From: paperboy.ids.net!anomaly.sbs.com![e-mail]
Subject: GAY & QST - rec.radio.amateur.policy #6576
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
   [e-mail] (Jon Gefaell) writes:

> Mike, don't you think these assertions would make more sense if you actually
> knew what you were talking about? What you're doing here is making up things
> out of whole cloth. The 'fuss' was clearly spelled out in a number of messages
> here, even the most feeble minded person could clearly see the complaint and
> the response (as far as have occured here on USENET)

Jon, perhaps you should take remedial reading lessons. It has been clearly
stated by both parties here that the League has, since 1991, been in
possession of an advertisement submitted by LARC which is completely
acceptable and will run in QST. The only party being stubborn here is
LARC, choosing not to run this "revised" ad in lieu of receiving some
form of "blanket acceptance" clause or other "anti-discriminatory" policy
from the League.

The only people who have locked LARC out from QST at this point are
the LARC coordinators.


|> If you consider years of discrimination to be 'weak reasons'
....
|> I suggest you avail yourself of the archives for this group and re-read for
|> very detailed allegations of discrimination by ARRL.

The only accusations of discrimination I have seen, and I read this
group every day, is a rejection of LARC's original advertisement, for
reasons which were never really made clear by the League (at least
that I saw).

However, as a former editor, I would not call this discrimination,
simply editorial license. As an editor, I have the decision to add
or remove material from my publication, and if members find something
offensive (like the Motorola ad which ran a few issues ago) then I
have the right to remove it.

Now, you and several people have alledged "years" of discrimination.
Care to provide any of the following:

1. Evidence of a specific pattern of discrimination against gay
   organizations. Has the League systematically rejected advertising
   from other gay organizations? If so, please provide the
   appropriate evidence which supports this pattern.

2. Evidence of a pattern of discrimination against gays in the
   hiring or employee/employer relationship at the League. Again,
   please provide specific details.

3. Evidence that the League has systematically discriminated against
   gays in access to other League material. Has a group of gays ever
   been run out of W1AW by a hoard of "straights" who work for the
   League brandishing baseball bats?


Of course, you cannot provide any specific evidence, because the League
doesn't discriminate against gays, and you know it.

All you can do is point to a single instance where LARC's ad was
pulled from QST. However, this single event does not in of itself
constitute discrimination, and even if it *did*, it does not
demonstrate "years" of discrimination. To demonstrate YEARS of
discrimination (your words) then you should be able to provide
a documented paper trail to support your assertions. A single
incident makes a pattern not.

Instead, you have falled for the LARC cry of DISCRIMINATION! (in
an attempt to gain publicity and sympathy support by being the
oppressed victim.)

If you have evidence to support your allegations, please present it.
Otherwise, please shut up, since you know nothing of that which
you speak. And please, spare me the "I'm supporting the league because
I agree with their discrimination" bullshit. Anyone here can tell
you that I regularly criticize the League for any reason applicable,
they deserve it (except my good friend Ed Hare at the League, who
is long, long overdue for a raise.) In this case, though, LARC's puerile
tactics require greater criticism.

MD
--
-- Michael P. Deignan, KD1HZ          -
-- Internet: [e-mail]    -  I never tell the truth, because I
--     UUCP: ...!uunet!anomaly!kd1hz  -  I don't believe that there is such
--  AT&TNet: 401-273-4669             -  a thing...

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

Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1993 04:13:13 GMT
From: library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!darwin.sura.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!murdoch!livia.acs.Virginia.EDU![e-mail]
Subject: GAY & QST - rec.radio.amateur.policy #6576
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Rev. Michael P. Deignan <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>   [e-mail] (Jon Gefaell) writes:
>
>Now, you and several people have alledged "years" of discrimination.
>Care to provide any of the following:
>
>1. Evidence of a specific pattern of discrimination against gay
>   organizations. Has the League systematically rejected advertising
>   from other gay organizations? If so, please provide the
>   appropriate evidence which supports this pattern.
>
>Of course, you cannot provide any specific evidence, because the League
>doesn't discriminate against gays, and you know it.

This information has been provided to the CT. state government, and a
finding is pending, we've all read that. When the state rules, we'll
all find out if evidence was presented, and if it was considered valid
and proof of illegal discrimination.

>If you have evidence to support your allegations, please present it.

See above...

Puerile? you consider filing a complaint with the appropriate state board
to be childish and silly? Oh puhleeeze, shut up.
--
Any opinions expressed herein are not intended to be construed as those of UVA
______________________________________________________________________________
 ______
 \ \  /   Jon Gefaell,  Computer Systems Engineer   | Amateur Radio - KD4CQY
  \/\/  Systems Research, ITC OSSSD/Carruthers Hall | -Will chmod for food-
   \/   The University of Virginia, Charlottesville |  [e-mail]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon,  8 Nov 1993 19:48:44 UTC
From: swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!trane.uninett.no!news.eunet.no!nuug!news.eunet.fi![e-mail]
Subject: Homonauseated (was: GAY & QST)
To: [e-mail]

[e-mail] writes:

>    You MUST be kidding.  From you name, I assume you're female, and
>don't get into men's bathrooms all that often.  I can assure you, however,
>that bathroom liasons are still very much popular and in demand.  I saw
>it in college, I see it in bars and clubs, and I saw it in a restroom at
>a traveler's way-station on a trip I took last week.

The bars I go to don't worry too much about what the signs on the door say.

I can also, finally, relate this thread back to amateur radio. To condemn
all gay people because of the actions of an irresponsible minority, which is
what certain people in this thread are doing, is exactly analagous to
revoking all ham radio licenses and privileges because of the irresponsible
few who jam repeaters, act like fools on 14313, and so on.

'nuff said.

./Tina
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to [e-mail].
Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to [e-mail].

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

Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1993 04:07:50 GMT
From: library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!darwin.sura.net!hearst.acc.Virginia.EDU!murdoch!livia.acs.Virginia.EDU![e-mail]
Subject: Homonauseated (was: GAY & QST) - rec.radio.amateur.policy #6571
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Rev. Michael P. Deignan <[e-mail]> wrote:
>In article <[e-mail]>,
>   [e-mail] (Jon Gefaell) writes:
>
>> Tell that to a hemophiliac
>
>Getting a blood transfusion is a high-risk activity. So what? Do you
>have a point?

Yes, but if I comb my hair carefully it hardly shows...

>> You are incorrect. The primary reason for disease propogation is the lack
>> of sexual education, access to condoms, and heterosexual promiscuity.
>
>You're applying western standards to a different culture. Incorrect
>assumption. You are correct in one regard, however, and that is that
>hetrosexual promiscuity does play a large role. Now, if you want to
>suggest that we start mass condom air-lifts to Africa....

I think that might be a good idea. More important is to teach people there
what casues 'slim' (as they refer to AIDS) and encourage them to utilize the
options available to them to control the spread of the disease.

>> As far as sexuality is concerned, your 'humorous' signature says so much abou
>> you, stud.
>
>Wouldn't you like to know <lisp>.

I prefer C, thanks all the same.
--
Any opinions expressed herein are not intended to be construed as those of UVA
______________________________________________________________________________
 ______
 \ \  /   Jon Gefaell,  Computer Systems Engineer   | Amateur Radio - KD4CQY
  \/\/  Systems Research, ITC OSSSD/Carruthers Hall | -Will chmod for food-
   \/   The University of Virginia, Charlottesville |  [e-mail]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 18:06:28 GMT
From: spsgate!mogate!newsgate![e-mail]
Subject: The League SUPPORTS Morse...
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]> Robert,
[e-mail] writes:
>The vast majority of Codeless Technicians operate exclusively on Two
>Meters. I fail to see how this is going to keep us from losing 220,
>420, or 902, Dan.
>
> --Robert

Robert,
   You are an idiot.  Nothing more needs to be said.

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

Date: 8 Nov 93 11:13:48 EST
From: psinntp![e-mail]
Subject: This is a hobby not a career (was: 3rd
To: [e-mail]

In rec.radio.amateur.policy, [e-mail] (Robert) writes:

>I submit to you, Gary, that the Codeless Technician is not fulfilling
>*any* of the purposes for which the Government granted them a license in
>the Amateur Radio Service.

Robert,

The hate and discontent you are spreading is causing more harm to
the hobby you pretend to love so much. I, for one, am quite tired
of seeing the flames and immature, insensitive insults from all
sides of this issue, both pro- and anti-code.

Ultimately, it is the FCC, not you or I, who decide the requirements
for each class of license. After that fact, we can choose to keep this
hobby whole or to tear it in two. I have made my choice. What is
yours?

Why don't all of us show some acceptance. I accept the new hams into
the hobby, remembering how much I wanted to be accepted when I was
a new ham. Whether one has or has not passed a code test is not nearly
as important as one's enthusiasm and attitude. Let's give both
a chance to develop. The types of insults I have seem some hams
use about the no-code license and its operators will only foster
bad feelings, not constructive change.

To the new hams, I ask that you recognize that Morse code has long
been a tradition of the Amateur Radio Service. It may well be that
it is time for change, but change does not come overnight. Coming into
the hobby and amateur community as a newcomer and insulting all of
what is and has been is not the way to make friends. Much of what
ham radio is, including the things you enjoy, was built by those
who went before you. Wanting to effect change is a good thing;
doing so without regard for the feelings and needs of others is
not. The types of insults I have seem some hams use about the coded
licensees will only foster bad feelings, not constructive change.

We all have a choice -- we can try to effect change through those
processes which are in place to make changes to the Amateur Service,
or we can trade insults until we are all red in the face. One of these
alternatives is a lot of work, but gets results. The other one is
easy, and it gets results, too -- just not ones I would be proud of.

A personal 73 from ARRL HQ to ALL hams! Ed



-----
Ed Hare, KA1CV                  [e-mail]
American Radio Relay League
225 Main St.
Newington, CT  06111            If you tie a strip of colored cloth to
[phone] - voice          part of your body, the tribe acts
ARRL Laboratory Supervisor      differently!
RFI, xmtr and rcvr testing
-----

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

Date: 9 Nov 1993 00:46:08 -0600
From: library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!nbc.ksu.ksu.edu![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject : Re: THE argument for CW requirements (was: End-It All Now, Pleas

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul Flaherty) writes:
>Ed Ellers <[e-mail]> writes:
>
>>Shouldn't law also be based on RATIONAL expectations?  Why should ONE mode be
>>a barrier to entry to the use of other modes?
>
>Sounds like a good "no-written-test" argument; after all, why should I have
>to learn about (insert-wideband-mode) when all I want to do is work CW?

You should still have to take written test to be tested on operating practices,
rules and regulations, and other such things like that that are not covered
by a simple CW test.  I agree that IF the code requirement is abolished, as
it should be, the written tests should be made harder, in fact, I think they
are too easy right now.  But, I am fully in favor of doing away with the code
requirement entirely, or at least doing away with the 13 and 20 WPM tests.

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

Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1993 05:31:22 GMT
From: news.Hawaii.Edu!uhunix3.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <2bn079$[e-mail]>j
Subject : Re: This is a hobby not a career (was: 3rd

In article <2bn079$[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kok Chen) writes:
>[e-mail] (Jeff Herman) writes:
>
>>Post Script: How about scheduling a USENET QSO party on HF one of these
>>days; I can't even imagine what you folks would sound like on the air.
>>We'd have a fun time laughing about present and past rec.radio articles.
>
>
>I'm game.  SSB or RTTY?  :-) :-)
>
>73,
>
>Kok Chen, AA6TY (Back when NH6IL was WA6QIJ: DX'ing extraterrestrials)
>Apple Computer, Inc.       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Gad, I'm showing up in other poeple's sigs now!

Jeff NH6IL [on potty patrol]

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

End of Ham-Policy Digest V93 #430
******************************
******************************