Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+BPL\s+interference\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+BPL\s+interference\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] BPL interference (score: 1): Author: "Rick Bullon" <kc5ajx@hotmail.com>; Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 03:51:40 +0000; Hello All I know that the BPL issue has been beat to death and I don't to upset any of you that is feed up with the last few threads on the subject but, I just read the latest ARRL Bulletin. There is; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00799.html (8,057 bytes)
2. RE: [TowerTalk] BPL interference (score: 1): Author: "Paul Playford" <w8aef@worldnet.att.net>; Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 20:26:44 -0000; My management experience indicates crap starts at the top and works down (along with BPL). Amateur radio is supposed to be above politics but BPL is politics. Witness how quick the FCC and NTIA chang; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00802.html (9,203 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] BPL interference (score: 1): Author: Jamesnf@aol.com; Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 18:15:09 EDT; All: In these polarized political times, it is difficult to keep unrelated feelings regarding the presidential candidates from inappropriately becoming part of our ham radio discussions. But having s; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00805.html (7,368 bytes)
4. RE: [TowerTalk] BPL interference (score: 1): Author: "Tod - ID" <tod@k0to.us>; Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 18:27:48 -0600; Maybe Ralph Nader or one of the other candidates has taken a position. Tod, KØTO _______________________________________________ See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "W; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00808.html (9,286 bytes)
5. RE: [TowerTalk] BPL interference (score: 1): Author: "Rick Bullon" <kc5ajx@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 00:35:23 +0000; --Original Message Follows-- From: "Tod - ID" <tod@k0to.us> To: <Jamesnf@aol.com>, <w8aef@worldnet.att.net>,<kc5ajx@hotmail.com>, <towertalk@contesting.com> Subject: RE: [TowerTalk] BPL interference; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00809.html (10,161 bytes)
6. Re: [TowerTalk] BPL interference (score: 1): Author: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com>; Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 20:44:13 -0700; Maybe we should ask this guy what his position is: http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=BZZ91748 :):) Mike, W4EF....................... _______________________________________________ See: http:/; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00810.html (8,167 bytes)
7. RE: [TowerTalk] BPL interference (score: 1): Author: "Jim Chaggaris" <jimc@pwrone.com>; Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 01:29:57 -0500; I don't know why everyone is so up in arms...It's an easy solution...I for one will do my best to "aim" at the worst... 73's Jim KJ9A James E. Chaggaris President PowerOne Corporation 1211 W. 22nd St; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-10/msg00813.html (11,732 bytes)
8. Re: [TowerTalk] BPL interference (score: 1): Author: Tom Frenaye <frenaye@direcway.com>; Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 15:24:45 -0500; Actually, that isn't true. A recent look at the web sites shows that both support rolling out broadband technologies, in general. The 2004 Republican platform endorses BPL. It isn't easy to find, but; /archives//html/Towertalk/2004-11/msg00013.html (8,963 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]