HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rfc@allegra.att.com (Robert F. Casey)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: On private repeaters
Date: 7 Jan 93 22:54:47 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ

In article <1993Jan7.170532.19294@linus.mitre.org> m14494@mwvm.mitre.org (Mike White) writes:
>This subject surfaces every few years, and becomes a Big Issue for 
>a while.  Here's my  $ 2e-2 worth:
>
If an operator wants to have a private
>repeater, that's fine with me; I certainly have no right to use his
>repeater against his will.  In that case, however, I feel he has
>abbrogated his end of the gentleman's agreement, and I am free to
>use the repeater frequencies for my own purposes, subject only
>to the rules and customs about interference; in other words, when
>the closed repeater is not actually on the air, the freqs are fair game.
>If I'm using the freq, in my opinion the closed repeater users have 
>to wait till I'm done before they key up; they have no right to
>ask me to reserve the frequency for their exclusive use.
>Mike, N4PDY

I suspect that the above arguement might have merit *if* the rest of the
band is, at the time you wanted to operate, so jam packed that you can't
find an open frequency to use.  That's rarely the case, and you probably
should operate on a frequency that is not the input to someone's machine
if you don't intend to use, with permission, that machine.  There are
simplex subbands for non-repeater voice operations.  And usually not
all occupied at all times.

I would think that proper (and FCC rules say something to this effect?)
operation would dictate using empty simplex channels for simplex 
operations.  And not play frequency lawyer and be a pain in the 
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: jwl@ferrari.cray.com (Jim Lynch)
Subject: Re: intermod, overload, desense?
Reply-To: jwl@ferrari.cray.com (Jim Lynch)
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.  Eagan, MN.
Date: 12 Jan 93 09:59:03 CST

In article <1is80mINNb0r@clover.csv.warwick.ac.uk>, esrlb@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Mr S Browne) writes:
>In article <1993Jan9.141959.17257@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>[.......]
>
>>If you want to build a notch filter, install a Tee in your
>>antenna feedline, attach the feedline to an FM broadcast
>>receiver, and attach a length of coax to the odd leg that
>>is slightly more than a quarterwave at the offending
>                         ^^^^^^^^^^^
>>station's frequency. Short this cable at it's free end.
>                      ^^^^^
>>
>>Ant----------T-------radio
>>             |
>>             |
>>           short
>
>Seems to me that it's an open-circuited quarter wave stub that's needed.
>In the diagram above, the short would be transformed by the quarter wave
>section to look like an open circuit at the tee, and therefore little
>effect at the frequency it's cut for would result. If it was open circuit
>at the far end, it would transform to  a short at the tee end, however.
>If it were a half wave in length, you'd want it to be shorted.
>Velocity factor of the cable needs to be taken into account, of course.
>
>>Gary
>
>Simon Browne (G0GWA)
>Engineering Dept
>Warwick University, UK

Would either of you two gentleman care to discuss the characteristics of this
filter?  Like what are the bandpass (bandreject?) characteristics?  How would you calculate
them?    The books discuss l/c filters and active filters, but is there a simple
way to determine the characteristics of a stub?

Thanks, Jim.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Lynch, Sales Analyst,  Cray Research, Inc. / ARS: K4GVO
Southeast District, Phone: (404) 631-2254, Email: jwl@sedist.cray.com
Suite 270, 200 Westpark Drive, Peachtree City, GA 30269
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: bwilkins@iat.holonet.net (Bob Wilkins n6fri)
Subject: Re: Who do repeater coordinators represent?
Organization: the cAVe group
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:06:29 GMT

cep4478@ultb.isc.rit.edu (C.E. Piggott) writes:
: In article <1993Jan2.184109.13079@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> rcanders@nyx.cs.du.edu (Rod Anderson) writes:
: >It is important to recall that in many areas the repeater frequency
: >coordinators have been appointed by the REPEATER owners.
: 
: 
: This is the reason I am against having packet channels coordinated
: by the repeater councils - I don't think any coordination should
: operate in this mode. 

In our area the local coordinating body does band planning. The packet ssb
atv exparimental cw and other special interest groups get together to
coordinate the various uses of spectrum. The ARRL plan is a guide we use,
but the special needs of our region are what make up our band plan. This
plan is voted in place by the membership after much prior discussion.

In this band plan are frequencies for Packet. The local packet
coordinating committee has established the uses for each of these
frequencies. There are BBS , netrom keyboard to keyboard , dx spotting
cluster , tcp/ip , 9600 baud , and backbone frequencies.

Most of their coordination work involves new bbs operators. Most of our
bbs s are full service networked fully forwarding systems with about 100
users. I know of one that has over 300 users. The coordinators make
recommendations as they do not assign frequencies.

When the 220 band plan was changed recently the coordinating bodies were
faced with the fact that in northern california the 222-225 spectrum was
all repeaters. After a series of meetings of both repeater and packet
groups with representitives from weak signal and experimental users, a
plan developed reshape the spectrum. Yes there are fewer repeater
channels. Yes there are more packet frequencies. The weak signal and
experimental users have 150 KHz of spectrum at the lower end of the band.

Because every one came together at coordination council meetings all
existing users of the band had spectrum to do their thing with out
interference. Yes many people had to shift frequencies, but when it was
done, they were proud...it worked.

-- 
Bob Wilkins    n6fri          voice 440.250+ 100pl san francisco bay area
bwilkins@holonet.net          packet n6fri @ w6pw.#nocal.ca.usa.na
From: WRIGHT@morekypr.BITNET
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: What Happened to the LIST?
Date: 8 Jan 93 20:19:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: ucsd.9301082127.AA27388
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu

I have not received a copy of INFO-HAMS for almost a month now.
What Happened to it?  Did the creation of the new list cause this
one to stop or what?

I WANT MY INFO-HAMS!!!!!!

Tim Wright  KD4OVM
WRIGHT@morekypr.BITNET
From: "Lakshman Bijanki" <lucky@ece.iisc.ernet.in>
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: News of a DXpedition to the Laccadives as reported by Sangu,VU2SF
Date: 12 Jan 93 17:58:04 UT
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
P1-Message-Id: IN* *ernet;surya       006581.0726841684000
Originator: brian@ucsd.edu

 News of a DXpedition to the Laccadives as reported by Sangu,VU2SF
 to Raj,VU2ZAP and Lucky,VU2LBW, sysops at BBS VU2RSB:

  Dr.Sangunni states that the DXpedition from Bangalore to Laccadives will
 be QRV on the Bands on the 13th January 1993 at approximately 1400 UTC.
 They expect to operate 7 - 10 days.
 
 The Members of the DXpedition will be operating on 40,20,15 and 10m as:

  VU7SF - Dr.Sangunni, VU7API - Palani, VU7LZ  - Tom

 They will be assisted by VU2DEN - Gopal

 They plan to operate on the following frequencies (KHz) on SSB:
  Tx       Rx
   7,090 - 7,160 for USA
  14,195 - 10 up 
  21,200 - 10 up
  28,500 - 10 up
  
 On CW all bands 005 Khz listening 5 up.

 QSL to:  P.O.BOX 41366, Nashville, TN 37204, U.S.A

 Good Luck and good hunting!
 
 -- Lucky, VU2LBW
    lucky@ece.iisc.ernet.in
From: munger@fnalo.fnal.gov
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: WANTED: Wincharger tower specs
Date: 8 Jan 93 14:36:45 GMT
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: fnalo.fnal.gov

WANTED: Wincharger tower specs and windload for city ordinance compliance. 
Has triangular 20 foot sections, one foot X cross members spaced every two
feet. N9LCM, 1029 East Liberty Drive, Wheaton, IL 60187. 708-665-3952.
Thanks!
From: vbreault@rinhp750.gmr.com (Val Breault)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: W5YI - Economical with the truth?
Date: 7 Jan 93 15:35:42 GMT
Organization: General Motors Research Labs
In-reply-to: G0RDI.BRidge_House@rxuk.xerox.COM's message of 7 Jan 93 12:27:20 GMT

In article <".7-Jan-93.12:26:57".*.Iain_Philipps.Bridge_House@RXUK.Xerox.com> G0RDI.BRidge_House@rxuk.xerox.COM writes:

<some deletions>
   "Congratulations! on the recent upgrading of your amateur radio operator
   license! We note, however, that you upgraded without having your most recent
   FCC amateur radio operator license in your possesion. While this is perfectly
   legal, the FCC does not allow VEC's to forward amateur radio upgrade (Form 610)
   applications to them for new license issuance without a photocopy of the
   applicant's most pervious license attached. In view of this, we are HOLDING
   your FCC FORM 610 application here at the VEC Office until we receive a copy
   FROM YOU of your most previous amateur radio operator license.
<some deletions>

   OK - who can cite the FCC regulations cited by W5YI?

97.19 (b)
"Each application for a renewed or modified amateur service license
 must be accompanied by a photocopy of the license document or the
 original document.  Each application for a modified operator license
 involving a change in operator class must be submitted to the VEs
 administering the qualifying examination.  All other applications
 must be submitted to: FCC: P.O. Box 1020, Gettysburg, PA 17326."

   73     -     Iain
   G0RDI

   g0rdi.bridgehouse@rxuk.xerox.com
--
-val-

Val Breault - GM Research - vbreault@gmr.com - N8OEF            \      /|
Instrumentation dept., 30500 Mound Rd., Warren, MI 48090-9055    \    / |
The opinions expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect   \  /__|
those of GMR or those of the General Motors Corporation.           \/   |___
 

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Need a 3rd hand for Soldering!?
Keywords: question
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 15:26:21 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.222522.20042@news.columbia.edu> hyx1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Harry Y Xu) writes:
>I always feel like my 2 hands are not enough when soldering.
>1 hand holds the soldering iron;
>1 holds the solder;
>another hand is needed to hold the component, or the pliers that hold the
>component to prevent over-heating.
>
>Does anyone have a smart solution?

Sure, it goes by the trade name of The Third Hand. It's basically a
C clamp base with #12 solid wires coming out of it. Each wire has
an alligator clip, a magnifier, or other handy tool attached. You
clamp the parts in the clips and bend the wires so they are in the
proper relationship, then solder away.

Gary

-- 
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary      
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     | emory!ke4zv!gary@gatech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: Yaesu FT-5100 Help  
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 02:53:02 GMT

Tis easy to crossband repeat the 5100.  Just hold down the RPT key
while switching the power on (same as the 470-HT, I believe).  A
call to Yaesu (310-404-2700) yielded this info.  According to
Winston in tech support, this slipped out of the manual when it
went to press.  My 5100 didn't have any crossband info in the box,
but an acquaintance said that his 5100 had an addendum slip
packaged mentioning the RPT key trick.

Works quite nicely.  One thing is that there is a lot of high
freqency attenuation.  I found that adding a 27K ohm resistor
between the input and output leads of the data jack seems to clean
up the sound (similar to a suggestion for audio improvement on the
470 HT).  I used a variable pot and adjusted experimentally for
best sound.

I really like my 5100.  The in-band sensitivity is good.  I've been
lazy and haven't benched it at work yet.  The 2m FM receive seems
better than my Kenwood 751, which surprises me.  Fortunately the
5100 does not get hammered with spurious signals in the 70 cm band
the way the 530 HT does.

Here is a synopsis of how the 5100 receive (and
probably transmit too) is easily expanded.  I asked Winston to fax
me the mod sheet (see above).  The jumper change is pretty easy for
a resonably skilled solderer, but not for the neophyte.  The rig is
then reset with F/W-D/MR-REV keys while powering up.  The
upper/lower RX followed by upper/lower TX limits are then keyed in
for each band.  I've noticed that sensitivity in the expanded
portions is less than in the amateur bands, but prefectly usable
for copying weather stations, etc.  Exapnding the band seems to
disable the ARS function, but I'd rather have the coverage since I
memorized the band plans already.

I can't think of a good way to reproduce the mod drawing in ASCII,
so I recommend calling them for the fax.

By the way, the 5100 service manual is not yet available.  I've
been on a waiting list for about three weeks, and I'm sure it'll be
a while longer.


-- 
Bill Mayhew      NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-9995  USA    phone: 216-325-2511
wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (140.220.1.1)    146.580: N8WED
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: sawyer@twg.com (Bruce B. Sawyer)
Subject: Re: ICOM 751 remote control
Keywords: ICOM, IC-751, remote, control, CI-V
Organization: The Wollongong Group, Palo Alto, CA
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:09:08 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.082011.2187@dxcern.cern.ch> frode@dxcern.cern.ch writes:
>I have an old IC-751 that I have decided to contol from the
>RS-232 port of my PC.  To do that I need the ICOM EX309
>parallel to CI-IV (parallel) interface and the UX-14 CI-IV (parallel)
>to CI-V (serial) interface plus another TTL to RS232 level
>converter. Apart from being a bit expensive, I find it a rather
>crummy solution and I have decided to brew my own interface by
>going directly from the logic board to RS232.  To help me understand
>the protocol in use I would be interested in getting hold of
>the circuit diagram for the EX309 and UX-14.  As far as I have
>heard the EX309 only consists of two 8bit latches and I guess the
>UX14 will contain a shift register or two to do the serializing bit.
>Any help with diagrams or other hints is very wellcome.
>
This comes up frequently.  Don't even think about buying the Icom converter.
All it does is convert between RS232 voltage levels and TTL levels.  You
have TTL on the Icom side; RS232 on the computer side.  You can do it with
very simple (and cheap) line drivers and receivers or with an integrated
part from Maxim.  The Maxim chip is probably the easier route to go because
you don't have to come up with -9V like you would with a line driver; it
runs completely off +9V (+/- a VERY large tolerance).  There were circuits
for both the Kenwood and Icom interfaces in CQ Mag about a year ago--I'll
take a guess at last April, though my memory is poor.  But you could do
it by just getting a RS232 line driver and line receiver from Radio Shack and
building the support circuitry from the back of the package.  Take receive_
data from the serial port through the line driver and OR the TTL input with
TTL output from the RS232 line receiver; the RS232 input to this receiver comes
from the transmit_data line on the computer's serial port.  The "OR"d TTL 
lines then go to the center conductor of the phono connector for your 
transceiver.  Of course, you have to grab grounds on both the transceiver
and the serial port side.  Your total cost just can't go over $10 unless you
go for gold plated connectors.

A pix is worth a K words:

            receive_data <---------line driver<----+
COMPUTER                                ^          |-----------> transceiver
            transmit_data -------->line receiver---+                  ^
                                        ^                             |
            signal_ground---------------|-----------------------------+

       
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: cozyer@student.business.uwo.ca (Carl Ozyer)
Subject: KENWOOD TS-790-A AND ATV ?
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 15:15:37 GMT

DOES ANYONE OUT THERE KNOW HOW THE KENWOOD TS-790-A OPERATES WITH
ATV ? 
THERE IS AN ATV LIGHT IN THE DISPLAY. IN 73 MAGAZINE (I THINK)
ABOUT 2 YEARS AGO IT HAD A PRODUCT REVIEW AND STATED THAT ATV
WAS EASY WITH THIS RIG.IT DID NOT STATE HOW.
I HAVE CONTACTED KENWOOD USA AND CANADA AND DID NOT GET
A RESPONSE FROM EITHER.
I HAVE DONE THE MODS TO GET 300 AND 800 MHZ AS WELL AS CROSSBAND.
ALSO I HAVE THE 1200 MHZ UNIT AND IT HAS A 287 MHZ IF JACK ON
THE BACK OF IT.IN THE MANUAL AND SERVICE MANUAL IT DOES NOT SAY
WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS.IT DOES SAY THAT ADVANCED SKILLS
ARE NEEDED TO OPERATE THIS FEATURE,WHAT EVER IT IS.
ANY IDEAS ?

PLEASE SEND REPLIES TO
cozyer@student.business.uwo.ca
73 CARL VE3ZCO

cozyer@student.business.uwo.ca (Carl Ozyer)
Western Business School  --  London, Ontario
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc,sci.electronics
From: schaerer@isi.ethz.ch (Thomas Schaerer)
Subject: Re: Halogen RFI
Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.misc,sci.electronics
Organization: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 12:30:02 GMT

Ken Jongsma (jongsma@esseye.si.com) wrote:
: I bought one of those imported Halogen floor lamps over the holidays
: and am reasonably happy with it. There's just one problem: It has
: a built in dimmer that splatters all over the AM radio band.

I assume, no or a bad hf-filter reduces the high-RF-bandwidth-radiation
from the dimmercircuit, which allways works with thyristors or triacs.
More problems? Write to my e-mailbox.

Greeting and a happy new year from  thomas
From: dave@eram.esi.COM.AU (Dave Horsfall)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: RFI susceptability of new cars?
Date: 5 Jan 93 00:30:03 GMT
Organization: Pacific ESI, Sydney, AUSTRALIA
X-Disclaimer: "Me, speak for us?"
X-Witty-Saying: "Mobius strip - see other side for instructions"

In article <1993Jan03.232623.4498@uhura.neoucom.edu>,
    wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) writes:

| The AM/FM receivers have had some
| intermod problems, however.  Occasionally, the FM radio in my Mazda
| MX6 gets hammered by police radar units when I pass near a cruiser.
| I get a loud buzz in the speaker as I go by.

So what are you complaining about :-)

-- 
Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU)         VK2KFU @ VK2RWI.NSW.AUS.OC
dave@esi.COM.AU                ...munnari!esi.COM.AU!dave
From: kurt@cs.tamu.edu (Kurt Freiberger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Date: 4 Jan 1993 16:54:07 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Texas A&M University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: dsls1.cs.tamu.edu

In article <1993Jan03.182401.749@eng.umd.edu>, chuck@eng.umd.edu (Chuck Harris - WA3UQV) writes:
|> In article <C0A7J9.7tL@NeoSoft.com> jreese@NeoSoft.com (Jim Reese) writes:
|> >
|> >There's room for everyone...get a grip.
|> 
|> I've got a very good one, how about you?
|> 

The burning question is - on what?

-- 
Kurt Freiberger, wb5bbw	  kurt@cs.tamu.edu   409/847-8607  fax:409/847-8578
Dept. of Computer Science, Texas A&M University      DoD #264: BMW R80/7 pilot
"We preserve our freedom using three boxes: ballot, jury, and cartridge."
      *** Not an official document of Texas A&M University ***
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: wws@craywr.cray.com (Walter Spector)
Subject: Re: old QST's and old QSL cards
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 8 Jan 93 19:39:54 CST

In article <14570580@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com>, alanb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Alan Bloom) writes:
|> In rec.radio.amateur.misc, aargyle@sobeco.com (a.argyle) writes:
|> 
|> >My grandfather was a radio amateur (he got his license in 1913). I have a collection of QST's from the 1920's and a bunch of QSL cards from the same period. Are these worth anything? Many of the Qst's still have their covers but most have either lost the|> ir covers or the covers are loose.
|> 
|> The QST's are certainly worth something.  The QSL cards probably not.

There is some sort of QSL preservation outfit that advertises in
some of the magazines.  They want old QSL cards, but I don't think
they actually pay for them.  I can't think of the name of the
organization now, but they had an ad in the 1991 and 1992 World Radio
and TV Handbooks.

Walt
----
Walt Spector
(wws@renaissance.cray.com)
Sunnyvale, California
_._ _._ _.... _. ._.
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: boyd@afsp.b30.ingr.com (stan boyd)
Subject: Re: Vertical Antennas - feedback on R7,GAP,BUTTERNUT
Reply-To: boyd@afsp.b30.ingr.com
Organization: Systems Integration, INTERGRAPH Corporation
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 13:13:08 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.180757.19294@jetsun.weitek.COM>, johnm@jetsun.weitek.COM (John Mcleod) writes:
>Path: b30news!ingr!infonode!uunet!paladin.american.edu!gatech!emory!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!agate!stanford.edu!apple!veritas!amdcad!weitek!johnm
>From: johnm@jetsun.weitek.COM (John Mcleod)
>Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
>Subject: Vertical Antennas - feedback on R7,GAP,BUTTERNUT
>Date: 5 Jan 93 18:07:57 GMT
>Organization: WEITEK Corporation
>Lines: 8
>
>The subject says it. I am considering a mulit-band vertical. I would
>prefer to use a 1/2 wave which does not need ground radials (I have
>a bad leaf problem on the roof, radials would make this worse).
>Any feedback on the GAP Eagle-VI ? this seems to have no ground radials
>apart from 8ft 'counterpoises' somewhat like the R7, and is some $100
>cheaper. Thanks for any responses...
>
>John N6RCD.

Has anyone tried or heard any reports (good or bad) on the new MFJ multi-band
vertical??


Stan KC4ZGF
From: hideg@spsd630a.erim.org (Steve Hideg)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: 430mhz band under th
Date: 8 Jan 93 17:11:37 GMT
	<1993Jan02.200308.16355@eng.umd.edu> <1993Jan04.035912.16697@ssc.com>
	<Xh2gs*B90@lemsys.UUCP>
Organization: Environmental Research Institute of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

I think the University of Waterloo needs to give Craig Lemon more homework.

_________________________
Steve Hideg  N8HSC

hideg@amadeus.erim.org
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
From: dbushong@wang.com (Dave Bushong)
Subject: Re: License Delays
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:00:26 GMT

popovich@cs.columbia.edu (Steve Popovich) writes:

>In article <Pine.3.05.9301101152.A27815-9100000@uafhp.uark.edu>,
>plaws@uafhp.uark.edu (Peter Laws) writes:

>> Ya know, maybe if we paid more than $0.56/yr for our licenses...
>> [...]

>And as for the FCC getting
>NOTHING, they're a Federal Government agency, so even if we're not
>paying them directly, we're paying them, make no mistake about it!


Let me check....... pull out the ol' paystub here....... ah, yes.
They are getting paid.

Dave

-- 
Dave Bushong, Wang Laboratories, Inc.   Amateur Radio Callsign KZ1O
Project Leader, OCR products            kz1o@n0ary.#noca.ca.na
Internet: dbushong@wang.com
From: brian@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters
Date: 7 Jan 1993 05:32:54 GMT
Organization: The Avant-Garde of the Now, Ltd.
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu

Jay, you're from Texas; you know that the best way to handle assbites
like these is to shoot them.  Cheaper, too.

For the rest of us:
This argument has once again gotten beyond reason; either take it to
the street or shut up.
	- Brian