Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Amps] Palstar DL5K 5KW load

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [Amps] Palstar DL5K 5KW load
From: "Keith Dutson" <kdutson@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:10:52 -0500
List-post: <mailto:amps@contesting.com>
I cannot see where your opinion complies with the description of the amps
list posted here.
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

73, Keith NM5G

-----Original Message-----
From: amps-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:amps-bounces@contesting.com] On
Behalf Of Will Matney
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 1:38 PM
To: amps@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [Amps] Palstar DL5K 5KW load

Uhhhh Keith, I thought you had to be a licensed ham to legally operate an
amplifier? Last I seen this was not a CB amp group but a ham group. So who
are you to say who posts what? I thought only the administrator or
moderators done this? I'd about imagine you root for Samual Morse? I'm sorry
if I hit a nerve by telling the Gods honest truth so excuuuuuuse me.

Will

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 8/31/05 at 1:29 PM Keith Dutson wrote:

>Please take your opinion of ham radio elsewhere.  We don't need it here.
>
>73, Keith NM5G
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: amps-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:amps-bounces@contesting.com] 
>On Behalf Of Will Matney
>Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 11:19 AM
>To: amps@contesting.com
>Subject: Re: [Amps] Palstar DL5K 5KW load
>
>Theo,
>
>Joking around aside (I know Hal does run legal), the FCC does in fact 
>descriminate over how many WPM one can do. That's the very reason I 
>dropped my license years ago after having it a whole 2 years at the 
>most. A friend of mine had a nervous condition, where he always shook just
a small amount.
>Anyhow, he couldn't never use his hand to even get 5 WPM! By this, the 
>FCC says, no you cant have a license. Even though mind you, he was just 
>as smart as myself and deserved it. Just like now, even though some is 
>smart enough by studying to pass the extra exam, if they cant pass the 
>code, they cant get the license. That's nothing but pure blatent 
>descrimination. The license should be given by what one knows in their 
>noggen, not how fast ones finger will move.
>
>One of these days, maybe, if those requirements are finally quashed, 
>I'll re-license, but not until then. To me, it's a shame there's still 
>descrimination in what supposed to be a free country with no 
>descrimination.
>They also wonder why the number of hams are dropping off. My thoughts 
>are that young folks would rather use a computer for their 
>communication than go through the license requirements, especially 
>morse code. Quash morse code, and the youth will seek their licenses. 
>However, we still have the hard liners, or the "hollier than thows" 
>(that think they're better than others!), who make the rulings and 
>protest against stopping the code requirements. If it's left up to 
>them, my opinion is the hobby will go right down the toilet....
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Will
[snip]

_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>