I believe that much of this recent discussion by some of those on this list
(and I am trying to not be disagreeable) is a case of cutting off your nose to
spite your face. We admittedly have some who loath grid circling. I don't. I
see nothing wrong with it, and neither does the ARRL (whose opinion is the one
who matters) but I have a hard time believing this alturism which is currently
springing up-we don't use the band (in an acceptable way) so lets get rid of it
to allow it to be used for better purposes, that what amateurs do. I think the
core of the argument still lies in the individuals' hatred of grid circling and
this is presenting some sort of scorched earth policy.
If this is really how you feel, then:
1. What would constitute a legitimate QSO on that band that should be used for
evidence? Is exchanging grid squares really a meaningful exchange? That is
what goes on during most band openings. Should it be a ragchew? If so, how
long should it have to be?
2. How far would a legitimate QSO have to be distancewise to make it justifying
our amateur allocation? Many wireless internet setups are very line of site,
probably shorter than what the grid circlers use? Does that warrant taking
away those allocations also? Many cell phone calls are done at very short
distances. Are those legitimate uses of the spectrum?
3. Does giving cell phone companies additional frequencies, so teen age girls
can text (probably while driving) to each other about who's boyfriend is cuter
really justify the spectrum any more than contest QSOs do?
73s John AA5JG
--- On Mon, 1/4/10, Steve Clifford <k4gun.r@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Steve Clifford <k4gun.r@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] (VHF Contesting) - how about we get back to
> having fun?
> To: "Jeff Thomas" <wa4zko@yahoo.com>
> Cc: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
> Date: Monday, January 4, 2010, 2:16 PM
> Zach,
>
> I made one comment on this subject but have stayed quite
> about it since
> then. My last comment was taken in a way that was not
> intended and I fear
> the same will happen again. That said, I can't let
> this one stand. The
> ARRL has made a big mistake in allowing grid
> circling. Yes, they boost the
> number of QSO's on the microwave bands and I'm sure the
> ARRL will waive them
> around whenever they are trying to defend the amateur
> spectrum.
>
> But is that really honest? Should we be using this
> kind of data to justify
> our use of the bands? Are amateurs using the band so
> infrequently that the
> scores of grid circling crews the biggest argument we
> have? If so, I think
> our claim to those bands is pretty tenuous.
>
> Now let's say we have plenty of other good arguments as to
> why cell phone
> companies shouldn't be given the microwave bands currently
> used by the
> amateur community. What happens when congress or the
> FCC finally figures
> out what a scam the grid circling crews are really
> pulling? It will not
> matter that we have so many other good arguments.
> They will focus upon that
> one practice to minimize the amateur use. They will
> hold it up as evidence
> that we are squandering our allocation. That will
> become the focus if they
> ever figure it out.
>
> I don't want to rely on arguments that have a scam at the
> core. If we as
> amateurs can't justify having our parts of the microwave
> bands without
> throwing in the contrived contacts from parking lot
> distances, then we don't
> deserve it at all.
>
> I submit this respectful of those who disagree.
>
> Steve
> K4GUN/R
>
> On Sun,
> Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 13:44:28 -0600
> From: Zack Widup
> Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Use it or lose it debate.
> To: vhf@w6yx.stanford.edu
> Cc: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
>
>
> I kinda hate to say this, but Frank, you seem to care
> little about anything
> else except this captive Rover deal. Every topic posted
> here does not
> revolve around it. The captive Rover thing is only a tiny
> part of VHF+
> operation that takes place and wasn't even related to the
> topic that you
> responded to. If anything, the Rovers you refer to would
> even give us more
> in our defense (or offense) regarding our frequencies,
> because they are
> using them. The FCC and Congress could care less about who
> Rovers are or
> what they do in contests. All they care about is whether
> there is activity
> in that band or not.
>
> I have only had about a dozen people at most around here to
> work on the
> bands 2304 and up. I've made numerous "pilgrimages" to a
> nearby hilltop to
> work some of the few down by St. Louis, and have succeeded
> with some but not
> others. So we keep trying. This is all outside of contest
> periods - usually
> weekend mornings or when the Hepburn tropo index looks
> promising. So, just
> like the NRA of years ago, "I do my part."
> :-)
>
> 73, Zack W9SZ
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|