BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Louis Kim Kline <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 1 Nov 2008 00:25:02 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (108 lines)
Hi.

I would be a lot more impressed with this line of reasoning if it relied a 
little less heavily on the words "always" and "never."

Always and never generally represent extreme positions and they are 
seldomly right, but are usually sweeping generalizations.

I don't care if you choose not to use these modes--it's a free 
country.  fortunately, it is a free country, and others who wish to 
experiment in other ways of doing things (which is, by the way, part of the 
basis and purpose of amateur radio) can feel free to do so.

If you wish to take exception to the technology because of technical 
reasons like inferior audio, or the inherent delay introduced by going over 
an Internet connection, those would certainly be some things I could agree 
with.  But, frankly, I use more VHF and UHF these days than I do HF, and 
with your last rant, I feel a little defamed.  Kindly watch where you are 
throwing your stones.

73, de Lou K2LKK



At 12:39 PM 10/28/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>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
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG.
>Version: 7.5.549 / Virus Database: 270.8.5/1759 - Release Date: 10/31/2008 
>4:10 PM

Louis Kim Kline
A.R.S. K2LKK
Home e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
Work e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
Work Telephone:  (585) 697-5740  

ATOM RSS1 RSS2