I don't use those if I can help it either I just think echolink is the worst
of the bunch, but I have never once used IRLP and doubt if I ever will, or
telephone links. None of those links around here anyway that I know of.
Honestly, I spend very little time on UHF/VHF anyway, and that's all why,
and the problems that come with it. I find those users are the ones that
never check if a frequency is in use before jumping in and calling someone,
if it wasn't for the NTS nets and my involvement with ARES and RACES, I'd
probably never be on UHF/VHF at all except the club repeater for the club
I'm president of, and my own if I even had them which I probably wouldn't.
An HT to ask for help if I needed it in a place we didn't know would
probably be all I'd have, and I was close to that point at one point anyway.
Beyond that, all HF.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Buddy Brannan" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: Introduction
>I happen to agree with you insofar as PC-to-PC and to an extent PC-to-
> radio connctions, but where there's radio at both ends, I don't see
> what the difference is between Echolink (or IRLP or Asterisk or ...)
> and a system linked via, say, telephone interconnects or even long
> haul RF links. Where there's a radio at both ends, what's the
> objection, specifically? I also agree that making contacts through
> such a system isn't the same as, say, working a pileup on 20, but no
> award I know of seriously counts such contacts anyway. But such awards
> don't count contacts via wide area linked systems, either.
> On Oct 28, 2008, at 10:50 AM, John Miller wrote:
>
>> As I see it, it's not radio, it's anti radio, and is absolutely
>> murdering
>> ham radio. I'll either be actually on the air, or doing something
>> else but I
>> didn't work so hard to get my license to use the computer to make my
>> contacts for me because I'm too lazy to setup a station and work for
>> the
>> contacts. I had a simplex link up for a while but it was a couple
>> statements
>> I heard on it that made me wake up and realize just how bad echolink
>> is
>> hurting things and it was then that I pulled it down for good. I
>> suppose if
>> a sponsoring group wants it on 1 of my repeaters, I may consider it
>> but I
>> won't be using it and probably won't put it on at all.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Buddy Brannan" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 9:59 AM
>> Subject: Re: Introduction
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 28, 2008, at 9:04 AM, John Miller wrote:
>>>
>>>> My CW is very slow, I much prefer phone, and would be absolutely
>>>> ashamed to
>>>> be on echolink
>>>
>>> Well....there's one great way to improve that cw speed :) And as for
>>> Echolink, why not use it? I mean--you *are* allowed to connect radios
>>> to it, y'know, so it really *is* radio, except when it isn't.
>
> --
> Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
> Phone: (814) 746-4127 or 888-75-BUDDY
> Create your own economic stimulus package:
> http://www.powermall.info
|
