Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Moving\s+ham\s+radio\s+eflectors\s+to\s+permit\s+attachments\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 08:53:17 -0500
Since my earlier posting, I have learned that since February, 2021, groups.io has charged for groups larger than 100 members. While I think donations could easily cover these costs, and would be will
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00058.html (7,317 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Edward Mccann via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 07:05:14 -0800
Happy to contribute. Annual from members would be a pain to administer. AG6CX Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Tower
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00059.html (9,124 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Grant Saviers <grants2@pacbell.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 07:32:11 -0800
Of course Google Groups are NOT "completely free". We are the product they will sell to advertisers and for whatever other uses (given the culture it is wise to speculate) google might be doing. It's
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00060.html (8,878 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: "Lux, Jim" <jim@luxfamily.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 08:18:17 -0800
On 12/21/21 5:53 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote: Since my earlier posting, I have learned that since February, 2021, groups.io has charged for groups larger than 100 members. While I think donations could
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00061.html (9,534 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Bob Richards <bob@rwrconsult.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 09:08:49 -0800
Another group I belong to uses Google Groups.  That group is not primarily focused on technical information.  One thing I have discovered using Google Groups is the limited size of attachments allowe
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00062.html (10,466 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: "Jamie WW3S" <ww3s@zoominternet.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 17:56:22 +0000
what are the fees for groups.io? I know many groups I belong to ask for contributions when the time comes to renew, and most only accept donations for a few hours or so before they collect what they
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00063.html (10,623 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:14:48 -0500
$ 20/month for up to 500 members.  Additional members $0.44/member/year.  I have no idea what the total membership of towertalk is, but suspect it's a couple of thousand, which suggests another $700
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00065.html (11,517 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Bryan Fields <Bryan@bryanfields.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:57:56 -0500
On the internet when you don't pay for the product, you are the product. However most (all?) providers are still monetizing your content even if you're paying. Look at the yahoo groups debacle. They
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00066.html (9,841 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Keith Dutson <kdutson@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 23:48:53 +0000 (UTC)
I am a member of three Google groups.  I have paid zero.  I have no more unwanted email than anyone else I know. 73, Keith NM5G On Tuesday, December 21, 2021, 02:58:25 PM CST, Bryan Fields <bryan@bry
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00067.html (10,812 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Dick NY1E <dick@ny1e.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 03:17:48 +0000 (UTC)
I belong to one groups.io reflector and it drives me nuts, none of the messages have quoted text, so I never know what the poster is referring to... Maybe it's an option turned off but it's confusing
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00071.html (8,994 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Gary K9GS <k9gs@gjschwartz.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 21:22:06 -0600
Hi Dick,Groups.io provides a mechanism to quote when replying to a post.  But because it is not default it is something the poster needs to do.  Most do not.73,Gary K9GS -- Original message --From: D
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00072.html (9,549 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: KD7JYK DM09 <kd7jyk@earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 20:22:18 -0800
"I belong to one groups.io reflector and it drives me nuts, none of the messages have quoted text, so I never know what the poster is referring to... Maybe it's an option turned off but it's confusin
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00074.html (9,858 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: "Tim Duffy" <k3lr@k3lr.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 23:33:49 -0500
I am trying to understand what is wrong with the current reflector format? 2000 users and working great - why mess with success? If you need to post an attachment - make it a link and all goes well.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00075.html (10,489 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 20:52:01 -0800
2000 users and working great - why mess with success? I strongly agree. If you need to post an attachment - make it a link and all goes well. That's easy for you, me, and others with a website, but n
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00076.html (9,866 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Gary K9GS <k9gs@gjschwartz.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 23:26:06 -0600
It all depends on how you post to groups.io. Do you receive posts from an email client and reply or do you use the groups.io web site to reply?73,Gary K9GS -- Original message --From: KD7JYK DM09 <kd
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00077.html (9,797 bytes)

16. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Michael Tope <W4EF@dellroy.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 23:12:24 -0800
2000 users and working great - why mess with success? I strongly agree. If you need to post an attachment - make it a link and all goes well. That's easy for you, me, and others with a website, but n
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00078.html (10,223 bytes)

17. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: Jonathan - KE0YBL via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 08:36:31 +0000
I kind of like the idea of keeping it independent (not moving to groups.io). As a ham, I appreciate things that run independently from giant centralized services. Sounds funny, coming from a guy who
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00079.html (11,428 bytes)

18. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: JP <jp@ezoom.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 06:33:37 -0800
Agreed. I like the simplicity of this list. Even though I havent been active on air for some time, this is the *only* ham radio related resource I still subscribe to, and read, daily. There must be a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00085.html (11,636 bytes)

19. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: VE3FH via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 17:02:22 +0000 (UTC)
It depends on how you reply... If you reply by clicking "reply" in your email client or email web interface the text remains. If you reply by clicking on the "reply to group" link at the bottom of a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00094.html (10,370 bytes)

20. Re: [TowerTalk] Moving ham radio eflectors to permit attachments (score: 1)
Author: J Chaloupka via TowerTalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 19:26:31 +0000 (UTC)
I like the simplicity of this list. Even though I havent been active on air for some time, this is the *only* ham radio related resource I still subscribe to, and read, daily. There must be a reason
/archives//html/Towertalk/2021-12/msg00100.html (12,443 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu