Hear, hear! The idea that a licensed amateur who uses this service should be
penalized by having their license revoked is pure Stalinism at its worst and
is so silly as to be beneath comment. Let's revoke the driver's licenses of
any driver who ever gets into a Dodgem at an amusement park or the marriage
licenses of any married person who ever permits their imagination to play
games whenever an attractive member of the opposite sex walks by. For that
matter, if you ever use any Internet-based phone service, let's rip out your
_real_ telephone service and put your name on a blacklist of persons who
will never be permitted to use such equipment during the remainder of their
natural lives.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: Taking the radio out of ham radio
John:
are you saying that there should be restrictions put on personal freedom?
That there should be unfair consequences to exercising ones freedom to do
what one wishes within the law?
You say that anyone who participates or supports this service should loose
their license. By taking away that persons license you are saying that they
are not permitted to exercise personal freedom outside of their amateur
privileges without experiencing unrelated consequences to their other earned
and rightful privileges.
. This constitutes a limit on personal freedom beyond a set parameter of
boundaries within an excepted frame work. Are you suggesting that this kind
of attitude should be extended to all aspects of society or just ham radio?
If just ham radio then I am glad you are not in charge of licensing policy
and regulations, because if so, we'd still be in the amateur stone age.
If you believe it should be extended to all aspects of society, using one
set of boundaries or restrictions upon a privilege to define the boundaries
of general personal freedom, then I would think you would be an avid
supporter of leaders such as Mussolini, Stalin and Hitler to name just a
few.
Sure this service is a fake, sure its a fraud, but saying a person should be
subjected to consequences that are obviously completely unrelated is really
quite bazaar.
You say its nothing to do with ham radio, that its totally different, it has
no relationship to ham radio what soever, but then you say the consequences
of using the service should be directly related back to ham radio, an
apparently completely unrelated area. Not only unrelated, but that a person
should experience negative consequences, a punishment for participation
which includes denial of access and freedom to practice something you say is
completely unrelated.
All this is JMO of course.
73
Colin, V A6BKX
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 12:15 PM
Subject: Re: Taking the radio out of ham radio
> but the wording of that site fraudulently claims to be "ham radio" skype
> doesn't do that, echolink has an RF side of it, and actually, I pulled the
> link down, no other internet chat room fraudulently claims to be ham radio
> like that and anyone who'd support an operation like that, should be
highly
> ashamed of themselves and lose their license.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 1:25 PM
> Subject: Re: Taking the radio out of ham radio
>
>
> > John:
> > does that mean that anyone who uses skype, or any voice chat program and
> > holds an amateur radio license should have their license revoked simply
> > because they dared to use a format other then RF transmision to send
their
> > message or to communicate?
> > You yourself use echolink and even support a node on echolink. What
major
> > difference is there between this setup and echolink other then there are
> > no
> > actual RF transmitting devices involved?
> > Its a way to get hams together, just as it happens on the air, but using
> > computers.
> > People probably thought SSB was going to ruin ham radio too back in the
> > 50's, and FM as well, and look at how things work now.
> > I think a close minded attitude towards these kinds of things is
> > anti-progressive and shows a lack of desire to move ahead or even to try
> > new
> > ideas related to both amateur radio, and amateurs themselves.
> > Remember, its not always about the radio, its about the people behind
the
> > radio and their interests and ideas and desires.
> > 73
> > Colin, V A6BKX
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 10:12 AM
> > Subject: Re: Taking the radio out of ham radio
> >
> >
> >> but this idiot that invented this doesn't have any RF involved at all
so
> >> it's not radio in the least and anyone who thinks it is needs to look
at
> >> what radio is. Personally, I think anyone who would sign up or anything
> > with
> >> them should lose their license but that's JMO.
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Christopher Moore" <[log in to unmask]>
> >> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:38 AM
> >> Subject: Re: Taking the radio out of ham radio
> >>
> >>
> >> > Buddy,
> >> > Since you signed up for the 90 day free trial, give us a report on
how
> >> > it work and whether the transceiver software is accessible. They
said
> >> > there were some shortcut keys to help the visually impaired.
> >> >
> >> > The one nice thing about this product is you don't need to mess
around
> >> > with your router ports as you do with echolink. you can also make
> >> > qso's
> >> > with cw.
> >> >
> >> > I think the purists might argue that anything that use voip is NOT
ham
> >> > radio.
> >> >
> >> > 73 Chris w1gm
> >> >
> >
|
