HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kurt@cs.tamu.edu (Kurt Freiberger)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Date: 25 Jan 1993 20:00:35 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Texas A&M University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: dsls2.cs.tamu.edu
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change

In article <1993Jan22.210202.23769@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) writes:
|> As to the Texas VHF society, their being tied up for two years in
|> litigation seems to have had nothing to do with what they did, but what
|> someone wrote in the club newsletter...again, a bit removed from the
|> actual issue of frequency assignment/coordination.  If I were the Texas
|> VHF, etc., I'd have just folded the tent and started a new club, assuming
|> the club was incorporated to at least protect its officers from individual
|> suits.
|> 
I also assume that if this were Colonial times, and the British had just 
landed, you would have packed up and moved to another colony.
"Folding the tent" means the other guy has won.  There are values that mean
more than the monetary hits.  FTT is an example of the degeneration of the 
times.  

So is this thread, the way it has turned.

-- 
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.policy
From: dana@lando.la.locus.com (Dana H. Myers)
Subject: Re: Pres. Clinton speech via Packet?
Organization: Locus Computing Corporation, Los Angeles, California
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 18:15:31 GMT

In article <14600040@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> alanb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Alan Bloom) writes:
>In rec.radio.amateur.policy, steve@zero.com (Steve Urich) writes:
>
>>	Just wondering what the legal implications are if one would resent
>>	Pres. Clintons enaugural speech via packet? I read the speech and
>>	it looks pretty harmless, more like poetry :-). 
>
>If it is sent in a 2-way QSO with another station, no problem.  If it is
>broadcast via a packet BBS bulletin, then it violates the restrictions
>on broadcasting:
>
>     97.113 (c)  No station shall transmit communications in order to
>     engage in any form of broadcasting... 
>
>     97.3 (10)  Broadcasting.  Transmissions intended for reception
>     by the general public, either direct or relayed.  ...
>     (23) Informational bulletin.  A message directed only to amateur
>     operators consisting solely of subject matter of direct interest
>     to the amateur service.
>
>     97.111 (b) In addition to one-way transmissions specifically 
>     authorized elsewhere in this Part, an amateur station may transmit
>     the following types of one-way communications:   ...
>     (6)  Transmissions necessary to disseminate information bulletins.
>
>In other words, you can send bulletins of interest to the amateur service 
>as such, but not bulletins of interest to the general public.

I believe the notion of "broadcasting" here means that you intend for
non-amateurs (i.e. "general public") to be the receiving audience.  I do
not believe that Part 97 would prohibit the sending of a packet bulletin
containing Clinton's speech to a wide distribution on packet radio, since
only amateurs can practically receive packet bulletins (AX.25 is a two-way,
non-broadcast, protocol).

-- 
 * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ 		| Views expressed here are	*
 * (310) 337-5136 		| mine and do not necessarily	*
 * dana@locus.com  DoD #466 	| reflect those of my employer	*
 * This Extra supports the abolition of the 13 and 20 WPM tests *
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 18:32:09 GMT

In article <8527@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>Sorry; I simply cannot buy that argument. If someone wants to use a system
>capable of talking from Houston to San Francisco, let him help support it.

Well I always thought these closed systems were thinly disguised commercial
operations, now we know for sure. And from some of the access fees quoted 
out of SoCal, apparently very profitable ventures as well. If you want to
operate machines for pay, Jay, then go into the commercial service where
you belong. Reread 97.113(b) before you flame. You can't *require* payment
for use of your radio station.

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     |                     | 
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From: cole@concert.net (Derrick C. Cole)
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change
Organization: MCNC Data Operations
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 14:58:04 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.180215.28415@ke4zv.uucp> gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman) writes:
>In article <8510@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>>
>>...but if I'm in the middle of a conversation with folks in Austin, Dallas,
>>Midland, and Corpus Christi, and someone comes on locally who, far from
>>supporting my repeater, is an active opponent of it, what would you have me
>>do? I choose not to let him run me off of my system, interfering with my
>>conversation.
>>
>>(This is not a hypothetical. It has happened here. Repeatedly.)
>
>Given that Jay will never win the Miss Congeniality award, why am I
>not surprised? Around here when someone joins the conversation we
>say, "welcome ya'll" and include the person in our conversation. If
>your communication is so private that it mustn't be inclusive, then
>I suggest you avail yourself of the services of a commercial common
>carrier.

Hear, hear.

But I'm curious...  Why would this someone be such an active opponent?

73 de KC4WEJ,
Derrick

-- 
"And I believe that Ronald Reagan can make this country what it once was...  An
arctic region covered with ice."
                       -- Steve Martin (oldie but goodie)
-----
From: willis@cs.tamu.edu (Willis Marti)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Date: 21 Jan 1993 14:19:57 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Texas A&M University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: neuron.tamu.edu
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change

In article <1993Jan21.100601.6496@ke4zv.uucp>, gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:
...
|> had an opportunity to give it the ultimate EMP test. Anybody got a 
|> spare nuke?
|> 
|> Gary

Given the mood of most of the postings, Gary, I'm sure there are
several people who'd be glad to have one delivered to you. 8-))))!!
 
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From: ean@gvls2.gvl.unisys.com (Ed Naratil)
Subject: Re: Abandonment of CW
Organization: Paramax Systems Corp., Valley Forge Labs, Paoli, PA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 11:49:56 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.154312.145481@locus.com> dana@lando.la.locus.com (Dana H. Myers) writes:
>
>
>  However, today, little, if any, of the government radio communications
>operations, use CW.  It seems that government traffic is now either voice
>or automated digital (such as FEC packet).
>

Yep, even the US Coast Guard is giving up CW on August 1, 1993, and 
going to be using SSB.  

If you want the full text of this, see the Federal Register of January
19, 1993, page 4194.  Or if you can get the information from the USCG
ask for CGD 92-078.


--
Ed Naratil                                     (All standard disclaimers apply)
Amateur Packet: w3bnr@N3LA.#epa.PA.USA.NA            ean@VFL.Paramax.COM
From: gw214790@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Galen Watts)
Subject: Re: Language on the net (was Re: Closed repeaters)
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:07:43 GMT
Organization: I've had enough.

In article <8583@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <Jan27.214742.55990@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> gw214790@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Galen Watts) writes:
>>The ease at which I'm offended depends on the individual situation.
>>I am not as easily offended as the minister down the street, but obviously 
>>I am more easily offended than you.  When offended, I sometimes go
>>for long walks near my rural home, or just laugh at the limited
>>vocabulary of those that offend me.
>
>Ah. You're prejudiced, then.

That's quite a leap of logic.

>I don't suppose it has occurred to you that there are those with large and
>varied vocabularies that nonetheless find the words that offend you useful,
>has it?

The number of words that offend me is quite small.  As I stated, the offense
depends on the context and venue.
>
>>My forbearance comes from long experience in how not to injure myself
>>when performing menial tasks.
>Accidents do happen.

Only if you let them.

>>If my prudery is blatant, then your capacity to offend must be infinite.
>
>Hardly; after all, if my vocabulary is as limited as you claim, then I must
>soon run out of things to say.

If you run out, you can always spout some expletive.

>>Galen Watts, KF0YJ and president of the Bug Jay Maynard Society. 
>
>You're no better than the second vice president; Julian Macassey and John
>Stanley beat you to it by quite a bit. I routinely ignore both.
>Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can

My apologies to Julian and John for not observing decorum and Robert's Rules
of Order.

Now, you can ignore me, too.  Have a life, Mr. Maynard.

May you live in interesting times,
Galen Watts, KF0YJ
From: phil@vitacom.UUCP (Phil Steffora)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: VITA Press Release
Date: 21 Jan 93 16:58:17 GMT
Organization: UCSD Usenet Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Originator: daemon@ucsd.edu


I'm responding to the Press Release that was published in Vol.93/Is. 17
in regards to VITA.

I would like to have more information on VITA and their offerings. If Joe Sedlak , who posted the Press Release would please send me something it would be much appreciated . . .

Phil Steffora
VITACOM CORPORATION

PTS.
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From: jreese@NeoSoft.com (Jim Reese)
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 15:34:26 GMT
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change

In article <1993Jan20.211059.8912@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) writes:
>It need not cost the coordinator anything more than his personal time
>and effort.  There is no requirement that the coordinator hire an attorney.

Anyone who goes to court to defend a lawsuit without an attorney is a FOOL!

>As above, if the coordinator's decision is within the framework of whatever
>FCC regulations apply, I fail to see why a coordinator couldn't just 
>make that argument him/herself to the judge where the case is being
>handled.  Also, it should be obvious to any court that any case
>like that should not be argued in anything other than the appropriate
>federal court.

The problem is that you won't be sued for "assigning a frequency to someone
else"...you'll get trapped in a slander case or something similar.  The 
simple fact that they get you into the suit at all will bring your coordinating
functions to a halt...you lose, even if you win...






-- 
     Jim Reese, WD5IYT            | "Real Texans never refer to trouble
  jreese@sugar.neosoft.com        |  as deep doo-doo"  --Molly Ivins

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 21:23:18 GMT

In article <8486@lib.tmc.edu>, jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
> 
> You apparently want to force such systems as the Cactus Intertie to become
> fully open. I have a prediction for you: it'll shut down first. All told, that
> will free up 10 channels in California, out of a total of 198. Big deal.
>              --
Hey Jay,
   This isn't a flame --- but how do you figure this number ? The way I count
it, each site uses at least 8 freqs and I don't expect that they could be
re-used except at (at least) alternate sites.

		Input
		Output
		East Link In
		East Link Out
		West Link In
		West Link Out
		Control Link In
		Control Link Out

And that's assuming only one 'user' In/Out freq. I know that alot of those
sites have additional in/out links for telemetry, security, etc. That's gotta
add up to more than 10 for the whole state.

J.R.
K9IJ


Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: Re: Language on the net (was Re: Closed repeaters)
Date: 27 Jan 1993 15:22:57 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <11545@prijat.cs.uofs.edu> bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>Tell me something Jay, if you were invited to speak before a group fo people
>at your local high school on amateur radio, would you punctuate your talk with
>profanity the way you think it should be here??

No, for many reasons. First of all, I doubt seriously that I would encounter
the need to denounce a jammer or comment on other similar situations. Second,
the forum is different, both because it would be an invited talk, not an
ongoing discussion, and because it would be possible to use other means of
conveying emotion. Third, I don't "punctuate" my messages with such language;
the one that started all of this was the first time in several months that I
had felt it necessary to employ such strong terms. Finally, while I do not
believe the kids would object, I'm certain that the teacher or other official
who did the inviting would, and that would make it much less likely that I
would be invited back.

>USENET/INTERNET is changing just like Ham Radio.  There are a lot of schools
>below the University level receiving this group now.  Of course, this has
>always been "mixed company".  

That kind of language is far from the worst that kids hear regularly; one
adjective in an extrelemy strong statement of disgust is hardly going to send
a kid down the road to ruin.

I'll ask you the same question as I've asked before: how do you react when you
drop a desk on your foot? Are those words not in your vocabulary at all?

>I don't think I would be classed as a prude, but then, I also don't think of
>USENET as being the same as a Marine barracks either.

I don't think that this is a Marine barracks either, but, as I told Jon Bloom,
there are times that other words don't fit.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
    "begin 666 foo 266]U(&AA=F4@;F\@;&EF92X: ` end" -- Daniel Drucker
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From: gjones@kirk (JONES)
Subject: Packet Radio Internet Gateway
Organization: New Mexico State University
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 09:13:06 GMT



   I've recently been asked by some of the users of the student opperated
machine that I help adminster to provide a gateway to the internet for the 
numerous local packet radio owners.  I've just had a short request and I'm 
interested in finding out what the legalities and technicalities of this
addition to our machine  might be, I know through the FAQ that the FCC is 
interested.  The gateway would only be for users of our machine and in  
that sense a private one.  If anyone out there in netland would be so kind  
as to proivde a little more information on this matter I'd be most  
appreciative.

respond to :   here or even better rich@scf.nmsu.edu

Thanks,

Rich

 _______________________________________________
|						|
|         Richard G. Jones			|
|         Student Computing Foundation 		|
|         New Mexico State University		|
|         inet: rich@scf.nmsu.edu               |
|						|
 _______________________________________________
From: arb2@bunny.gte.com (Alan R. Bugos)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: Regulations on Rebroadcast
Date: 25 Jan 93 18:37:00 GMT
Organization: GTEL


Does anyone know where I can find FCC rules and regulations on 
rebroadcasting transmissions?  For example, I know some voice repeaters 
can be setup to rebroadcast a message received on the input.  I image this 
could be useful for some one to find out how well they're getting into the 
repeater since the incoming message would be received, recorded, and then 
retransmitted on the output.  Is this legal?  Anyone who can help me 
understand this more clearly, please send a reply to:   arb2@gte.com.   
Thanks for the help.

Alan, N1NQI
E-mail:  arb2@gte.com
From: brian@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Date: 23 Jan 1993 16:52:59 GMT
Organization: The Avant-Garde of the Now, Ltd.
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsd.edu
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change

gw214790@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Galen Watts) writes:
>As for the use of language along the lines of Mr. Maynard's,  did you
>consider the possibility of younger hams reading his comments?  
	[...]
>I often use such language myself, but not where the possibility of someone
>below the age of 12 can hear me.

I too have used strong language in this forum.  Occasionally, someone
complains.  However, I prefer to remain an optimist, and write in the
expectation that people reading here will be of sufficient physical,
mental, or emotional age that they will be able to understand that
there are times when strong language is necessary to adequately express
depth of feeling.

There are strong words for expressing strong emotions.  These are
honorable words, with a venerable history.  When used by a master of
the language, they express ideas in a way that no other words or
phrasing can even approximate.

Regrettably, there are a number of prudes extant whose attention to
form rather than content will nearly always lead them to miss this
point.  These same people are often among those who believe themselves
to be so holy that their own shit don't stink.

Hang on for the ride.
	- Brian

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From: gary@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman)
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change
Reply-To: gary@ke4zv.UUCP (Gary Coffman)
Organization: Destructive Testing Systems
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 18:24:28 GMT

In article <C17Mx0.2Fu@sugar.neosoft.com> jreese@NeoSoft.com (Jim Reese) writes:
>
>When the Texas VHF-FM Society was sued, it was for slander.  The person 
>filing the suit claimed that his character was defamed by an article printed
>in the Society's newsletter outlining the particulars of the case involving
>this person.  There was no basis for the suit, and it was eventually 
>dismissed with predjudice towards the Society, but it prevented the Society
>from doing normal business for two years.
>
>This stuff DOES happen.  It's not just fabrication.

Slander, or libel as Jay says, is the type of risk you open yourself
up to when you have a publication. Reasonably prudent publishers carry
insurance for such cases, and exercise some editorial care not to spread
gossip or tell tales out of school. Gannett gets sued about once a week
on average. We never settle, we nearly never lose, and we never let a suit 
interfere with the conduct of our business. In fact, it's turned into a 
minor profit center for the company since we've started getting damage 
awards for frivolous suits under tort reform.

Our legal staff has also found it very productive to countersue in many
cases. Since few claimants have a legal leg to stand on, their attorneys
usually advise them to drop their suit rather than be bankrupted. We
recently sued an *attorney* for filing a frivolous suit on behalf of a
client, that's allowed under Georgia tort reform. Boy did that get results 
fast.

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     |                     |
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change
Date: 26 Jan 1993 17:03:34 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <Jan25.214455.59042@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> gw214790@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Galen Watts) writes:
>And if we also did Texas, we could reduce the static bandwidth by about
>99.9%.  Between you and Maynard, you guys post about 90% of this group.
>Do you guys in Texas work?

Sure. I have a system maintenance job running at the moment, and am waiting on
it to finish.

Kurt, Jim, and I only post about half of the group, though; the open repeater
comrades and the prudes take up the rest.

>Close whatever repeater you want.  If I work simplex on the output, what are
>ya gonna do about it.

If I can't hear you, I'm going to use the repeater anyway. Do you often engage
in jamming?
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
    "I don't want to read poor Microsoft bashing. I want to read good
Microsoft bashing." -- Douglas A. Bell, in comp.os.os2.advocacy (Me too!)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From: gw214790@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Galen Watts)
Subject: Re: Closed repeaters (FCC wants them open)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:23:46 GMT
Organization: I don't need no stinking organization.
Keywords: FCC; closed repeaters; rule change

In article <C17nG4.2L0@sugar.neosoft.com> jreese@NeoSoft.com (Jim Reese) writes:
>In article <Jan20.151950.13613@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> gw214790@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Galen Watts) writes:
>>Would you use such language on the air?  I think you are the disgrace, 
>>Mr Maynard.
>
>I think Jay expressed the opinion of many amateurs.  Anyone who would condone
>jamming and litigation to prove a point is a disgrace.
>     Jim Reese, WD5IYT            | "Real Texans never refer to trouble
>  jreese@sugar.neosoft.com        |  as deep doo-doo"  --Molly Ivins

I don't advocate or condone jamming.  Litigation is everyone's legal right.
If the litigation is frivilous, the court will dismiss the case and possibly
take action on the filer.

As for the use of language along the lines of Mr. Maynard's,  did you
consider the possibility of younger hams reading his comments?  
The language used by Mr. Maynard does nothing but give his opponent
another look from me, and gives me the impression Mr. Maynard does not
have the command of the English language he needs to present a convincing
argument.
I often use such language myself, but not where the possibility of someone
below the age of 12 can hear me.  Ditto for my mother.

I don't need no stinking signature block.
Galen Watts, KF0YJ