Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] Heathkit SB-1000

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [AMPS] Heathkit SB-1000
From: bcotter@pop.uky.edu (Bill Cotter)
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 18:02:27 -0500
Richard,

Please consider taking the attacks on others offline. If you have something
personal against Tom, perhaps you should discuss it with him, if he is
interested.
The ax-grinding only serves to obscure the excellence of this reflector and
the 
people using it. I would hate to see this reflector end up like the
rec.radio listserves. 

Thanks,

Bill N4ALG 








At 11:03 AM 3/28/97 -0800, Rich Measures wrote:
>Subject:     Re: [AMPS] Heathkit SB-1000
>Sent:        3/28/1997 6:34 AM
>To:          Jay E Ostrem, wc7m@vcn.com
>
>>Subject:     Re: [AMPS] Heathkit SB-1000
>>Sent:        3/27/1997 6:15 PM
>>Received:    3/28/1997 2:37 AM
>>From:        Jay E Ostrem, wc7m@vcn.com
>>To:          Rich Measures, measures@vc.net
>>
>>Dear Rich,  Just wanted you to know,  I was one of the lemmings that fell
>>for the tar and feathering QST subjected you to. 
>Lots of other people believed QST's "6 Respondants" (Telewski, Rauch, 
>Brandon, et cetera) in the 9/94 issue simply because QST has 
>remnant-credibility from the days when George Grammer, W1DF, and a few 
>dedicated others, tried their level best to keep technoblather out of QST 
>magazine.   IMO, in the long run, the tar and feathers did not adhere as 
>well to the intended recipient as it did to the hands of the tar and 
>feather crew. 
> When I got wind that trouble was brewing in early 1994, I sent a letter 
>to QST Editor Mark Wilson.  In this letter I told Mark that the VHF 
>parasitic-xuppressor controversy could be resolved by testing the two 
>basic types of VHF suppressors with equipment that was available in the 
>ARRL Lab.   Mark chose not test.  Three years later, Wes, N7WS, did.  It 
>took 70 years to confirm that F. E. Handy was right in the 1926 Handbook. 
> 
>>...snip...
>>
>>I looked at your Web page, and saw pictures and descriptions of broken parts
>>in my amp.
>Alas, it happens too often--and needlessly so.  
>>I have corresponded with, and read postings by Tom Rausch.  
>>I find him
>>rather pompous and a bore.  
>------especially when smokescreening a technoblunder.  A number of hams 
>who use the Internet informed me via e-mail that they are intimidated by 
>him.  
>>Some of his suggestions were contrary to good
>>practice,and rather unresearched.  I tried them and ended up wasting
money.  
> Tom shines in some areas---and shines people on in others.  I believe 
>he's probably beginning to realize that some of the statements he made in 
>QST (9/94) are his albatross.  
>
>
>R. L. Measures,ag6k,805-386-3734    
>
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
>Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
>Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
>
>

 __________________________________________________________
|                                                          | 
| Bill Cotter, N4ALG           e-mail: bcotter@pop.uky.edu |
| 173 Carolyn Lane               Home: (606) 887-5563,2402 |
| Nicholasville, KY 40536-9340   Work: (606) 323-6474      |
|__________________________________________________________|
 


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com

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