I emailed my director but I doubt that we will get any support from him as
well. This is very upsetting to me and many of my friends.
Nick
w4gkm
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Kolarik
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 6:37 PM
To: rtty-contesting.com ; Ben Antanaitis - WB2RHM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] BoD votes LoTW initiatives
Well that's about what I expected. The ARRL failed with the band allocations
by bandwidth (Winlink wars) and now it looks like they are trying an end run
to get the wideband junk everywhere. Did anyone on the Ad Hoc Symbol Rate
Rule
Modernization Committee ask for input from the ham community? This smells
bad.....again, it got very ugly last time. Write to your director and try to
stop it
before it gets to the FCC.
The questions I asked during the last dust up that got me booted and banned
from a certain digital reflector were
1. Who monitors the messages for content?
2. Does Part 97.101(b) not apply to Winlink?
3.Part 97.113(4), are emails moving through the Winlink system encrypted
within the message body? See point 1.
4. Part 97.113(5) SailMail is available.
This got started when a sysop told users to turn off busy channel detection
and
the open admission of users that they never had the volume up on their rigs
to listen for other signals.
I need to cool down some before I write my director or need bp meds.
Ron
K0IDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Antanaitis - WB2RHM" <wb2rhm@wb2rhm.com>
To: "rtty-contesting.com" <rtty@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 2:58 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] BoD votes LoTW initiatives
All,
FYI---- Here is the response I received today, 7/24/2013 from K1ZZ, the
CEO of the ARRL Re my strong objection to the ARRL 2.8KHz bandwidth
proposal for digital modes in all the HF bands.........
Here is the ARRL (but, we are working for your best interests)
position...........
73,
Ben - WB2RHM, WB2RHM/4, WB2RHM/2
ARRL Life Member
ARRL 50 yr Member
Active RTTY Contester
**************************************************************************************
Ben, I will forward your comments to your Director, Dennis Bodson, W4PWF.
However, you should welcome a limit being placed on the bandwidth of HF
digital data signals. At the present time there is no bandwidth limit
whatsoever on digital data signals as long as the 300 baud limit is
observed. It is legal today for a signal with multiple carriers, each with
multiple-bit-per-symbol modulation, to be considerably wider than 2.8 kHz.
The 2.8 kHz value accommodates digital emissions now in common use while
putting a cap on the bandwidth that a station could occupy in the future.
73,
David Sumner, K1ZZ
Chief Executive Officer, ARRL
**************************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|