[Amps] AMP Reflector Quality of Information

[Administrator]

OK folks ... I thought this would burn itself out but it has 
not.  I do not want to return to moderating every post so let 
this thread die. 

The technical quality (signal to noise ratio) has greatly 
improved here in the last several months mostly due to the 
massive reduction is name calling and ego-puffery.  Those 
who believe they are missing "quality technical information" 
are welcome to seek it elsewhere or invite technically savvy 
individuals to join the activity here.  However, discussions 
of reflector policy, personal attacks, ego-puffery, and 
pseudo-science will not be tolerated. 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: amps-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:amps-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Dick Knol
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:50 AM
> To: Pete Smith
> Cc: amps at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [Amps] AMP Reflector Quality of Information
> 
> 
> Pete,
> 
> Thanks for the contribution, we will see when this subject 
> will be killed by 
> the Administrator. It's getting morning time in Georgia.
> My statement is not a matter of taking sides. However, I 
> oppose dictatorship 
> and censorship. As a free man in a free world I strongly support free 
> speech. If that is taking sides so be it.
> 
> Cheers, Dick
> PA3DUV
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Pete Smith" <n4zr at contesting.com>
> To: <amps at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 1:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [Amps] AMP Reflector Quality of Information
> 
> 
> >I don't want to take sides here, as Dick seems to, but I 
> have been on this
> > amps reflector since it began.  There are some 
> extraordinarily strong egos
> > in the amps community, and some intense bad blood between 
> the participants
> > in a feud that now goes back about 10 years.  For many 
> years this feud
> > would ebb and flow, and most of us non-feuders either got 
> good with the
> > delete key or filtered out the e-mail addresses of the 
> participants.  I 
> > did
> > the latter, because my theory was that if there was 
> anything being said
> > that was of value, then a third party would probably be 
> involved, and I'd
> > see the gist of it from things that person posted with 
> quotes from the
> > others.  At various times, all of the players had useful 
> things to say, so
> > this worked well.
> >
> > Then the administration of the list changed.  I don't know 
> the details, 
> > but
> > the new admin decided to take a firmer hand.  Things blew 
> up, he banned
> > some people, and a lot of the group's participants moved to 
> the Yahoo
> > group.  I probably should sample its throughput to see how the
> > signal-to-noise ratio is.  But in any case, what you are 
> seeing is typical
> > of what happens when a group fragments - both remaining 
> parts suffer.
> >
> > 73, Pete N4ZR
> >
> >     At 02:58 AM 3/20/2007, Dick wrote:
> >>Sure it did. Once knowledgable people are kicked off and only the
> >>Administrators opinion can be aired the quality of the 
> contributions goes
> >>down the drain.
> >>For more interesting contributions concerning the subject: 
> (high) power
> >>amplifiers see the http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ham_amplifiers/ 
> >>reflector.
> >>
> >>Cheers, Dick
> >>PA3DUV
> >>
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "Bob Maser" <bmaser at tampabay.rr.com>
> >>To: "AMPS" <amps at contesting.com>
> >>Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 4:10 AM
> >>Subject: [Amps] AMP Reflector Quality of Information
> >>
> >>
> >> > Is it just me or has the quality of the content on this 
> reflector gone
> >> > downhill, bigtime?
> >> >
> >> > Bob W6TR
> >> >