In article ,
Dave Platt wrote:

I'd say it's in the "tongue in cheek" category. The final sentence
says it: "My gratitude... to all of the above for contributing valuable
jargon with which to obfuscate the subject."

The jargon is made up; the antenna was real. So was the radiation
pattern. (We drove around Sunnyvale taking measurements.) I don't
recall why "73" published the article in April. A similar article
appeared in an Australian ham magazine, probably not in an April
issue.


Patty

Michael J. Coslo wrote:
On Jan 24, 1:10 pm, Ralph E Lindberg wrote:

A point to consider, if there are CC&R (say like banning antenna''s),
but there is no HOA. In most localities the CC&R has to be enforced by
private court action of another home owner. Since their court costs have
to come out of their personal pocket, it does really reduce the odds of
the CC&R being enforced

It's a very good point, Ralph. A person who lives in a place with an
HOA at some level wants to live there and is accepting of that fact.
One of the other less pretty aspects of human nature is that there are
people who either want to mess with the HOA, or want it, but want
special privileges. I would personally find it a little odd that a
person who is accepting of such intense outside control would under
normal circumstances both live in such a place, and simultaneously
want to put up a AR antenna.

So far I've read much about the radio amateur who buys a place with
restriction and then tries to circumvent them. I've seen almost no
comments about someone already living in such a place and who then
develops an interest in amateur radio.

Dave K8MN

"Dave Heil" wrote

So far I've read much about the radio amateur who buys a place with
restriction and then tries to circumvent them. I've seen almost no
comments about someone already living in such a place and who then
develops an interest in amateur radio.

I was living in a townhouse development (adjoining units side by side, each
with their own flat roof) in southern Arizona when I resurrected my
interest. I went up on the roof, installed a 7' length of 1" pvc tubing for
the support for an inverted-V, and ran ladder line inside the tubing. The
tubing was supported by tv mast clamps attached to a parapet wall that
separated my unit from one of my neighbors'. The tubing and antenna wires
were visible from many directions from the street, and no one ever said
anything. It was up there for six years. The CC&R's did prohibit antennas,
but it may have said "no antennas without permission." I never asked for
permission.

Same thing in the place I moved to across town, this time in a single family
home, with CC&R's stating "no antennas without permission." I put up a
2m/440 antenna on the flat roof (same arrangement as above), and on a 5 foot
mast in my small back yard I erected an MFJ Hi-Q loop, vertically oriented.
It was very visible from the street! Although I referred to it as my "yard
sculpture," I told neighbor friends what it was, and no one ever said
anything.

I did not live in one of the ridiculously restrictive developments. So while
just about any new housing (except for custom homes on land you buy) are
developments that come with CC&R's that almost always say "no antennas," you
can find developments that are not overly restrictive and operate more
loosely. Just don't expect to put up a serious structure. The MFJ Hi-Q Loop
works very, very well, and doesn't look like an antenna. Many other
low-profile options are available for use in such developments.

Howard N7SO

On Jan 25, 10:56 pm, Dave Heil wrote:

So far I've read much about the radio amateur who buys a place with
restriction and then tries to circumvent them. I've seen almost no
comments about someone already living in such a place and who then
develops an interest in amateur radio.

Another good point, and largely the reason that I support the efforts
to mitigate the antenna restrictions. A person who doesn't think one
thing or another about restrictions and then becomes interested is the
loser in this situation. That is why it has to be fixed.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Michael J. Coslo wrote:
On Jan 25, 10:56 pm, Dave Heil wrote:

I've seen almost no comments about someone already living
in such a place and who then develops an interest in amateur
radio.

A person who doesn't think one thing or another about
restrictions and then becomes interested is the loser
in this situation. That is why it has to be fixed.

Which was point to begin with.

Mitigation, NOT circumvention.

Jeff


--
“Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.”
Frank Leahy, Head coach, Notre Dame 1941-1954

http://www.stay-connect.com

When I was shopping for my house in Pahrump, NV, I already was a ham so
I knew enough to look into CC&Rs against antennas. Whenever I found a
likely prospect, I went to the County Recorder's office to look up the
deed and any other documents like CC&Rs and easements. The house I
finally bought did have CC&Rs, but they were mainly about minimum house
size and setbacks; not a word about antennas.

Another development in Pahrump had a no-antennas clause in the CC&Rs.
And this was not a upscale hoity-toity area: the CC&Rs restricted
houses to be mobile homes, i.e., manufactured and trucked to the site.
A ham I knew lived here. The house belongs to his current live-in
woman friend, so in a sense he did not have much choice in the matter.
:-) There is no restriction on antennas on vehicles parked in the
driveway, so for VHF and UHF he ran cables out to the antennas on his
motorhome. For HF, he ran a long wire from the house to the detached
garage using very fine wire. While we were in his back yard, he
pointed it out to me from about 10 feet away, and I could not see it!

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:44:10 EST, "Michael J. Coslo"
wrote:

On Jan 25, 8:22 am, wrote:
What I mean is that if your job is at X and your spouse's job is at Y
and the decent schools are at Z, there's a practical limit on where you
can live and not spend your entire life commuting. On top of that, most
people have definite money and time limitations.

And I suspect that they have a strong sense of "Right now!"

Sometimes "Right now" is imposed on people.

My brother-in-law worked for IBM, and he was promoted and transferred
every 3 years to a different state. (Inside IBM, the joke is that IBM
stands for "I've been moved!") IBM sold his old house for him and paid
all of the expenses of buying a new house. But if he didn't buy right
away, he would lose out on these benefits in purchasing the new one.
My sister and he literally had 2 weeks to finalize their selection of a
new house in an unfamiliar city and sign the purchaseagreement.

Dick AC7EL

On Jan 26, 1:43 pm, Dick Grady AC7EL wrote:
When I was shopping for my house in Pahrump, NV, I already was a ham so
I knew enough to look into CC&Rs against antennas. Whenever I found a
likely prospect, I went to the County Recorder's office to look up the
deed and any other documents like CC&Rs and easements. The house I
finally bought did have CC&Rs, but they were mainly about minimum house
size and setbacks; not a word about antennas.

Another development in Pahrump had a no-antennas clause in the CC&Rs.
And this was not a upscale hoity-toity area: the CC&Rs restricted
houses to be mobile homes, i.e., manufactured and trucked to the site.
A ham I knew lived here. The house belongs to his current live-in
woman friend, so in a sense he did not have much choice in the matter.
:-) There is no restriction on antennas on vehicles parked in the
driveway, so for VHF and UHF he ran cables out to the antennas on his
motorhome. For HF, he ran a long wire from the house to the detached
garage using very fine wire. While we were in his back yard, he
pointed it out to me from about 10 feet away, and I could not see it!

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:44:10 EST, "Michael J. Coslo"

wrote:
On Jan 25, 8:22 am, wrote:
What I mean is that if your job is at X and your spouse's job is at Y
and the decent schools are at Z, there's a practical limit on where yo
u
can live and not spend your entire life commuting. On top of that, mos
t
people have definite money and time limitations.

And I suspect that they have a strong sense of "Right now!"

Sometimes "Right now" is imposed on people.

My brother-in-law worked for IBM, and he was promoted and transferred
every 3 years to a different state. (Inside IBM, the joke is that IBM
stands for "I've been moved!") IBM sold his old house for
him and paid
all of the expenses of buying a new house. But if he didn't buy right
away, he would lose out on these benefits in purchasing the new one.
My sister and he literally had 2 weeks to finalize their selection of a
new house in an unfamiliar city and sign the purchaseagreement.

I'd certainly try to negotiate needed time. If they only have two
weeks, I wonder if IBM has a whoops! clause. A person can have their
life turned into a train wreck by buying a house that turns into a
money pit, or is a a meth neighborhood, or the like. Otherwise it
makes a company that forces you do make such gambles a bit less
desireable to work for.

While this is veering off into OT territory, we all have choices. I
won't live in a antenna restricted neighborhood. I'd buy a house in
the countryside first, I'd rent and wait. In the end, it's all about
choices. For me, some things that I consider choices, other might
consider that it is something that they are mandated to do and that
they have no choice. That's pretty sad IMO, because I think that
people actually have more choices than they think they have.

But my hobbies are as important to me as my vocation, so I will live
in a place where I can enjoy Ham radio.
- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Jan 25, 3:44�pm, Bill Horne wrote:
My wife and I looked at over 100 houses before
we selected the one I
live in now. I have *no* HOA, *no* CC&R's,
and *no* problem putting up
antennas: I had to fire three agents who hadn't
heard me when I told
them what *my* requirements were.

Thanks for proving the point, Bill.

Having to look at 100 houses after telling an agent what you want means
something's really wrong somewhere.

Having to fire three agents after telling them what you want means
something's really wrong somewhere.

I don't think the problem was that you were excessively choosy; I think
the problem was a lack of suitable houses, so the agents showed you
"almost good enough" houses.

You had the resources and patience to go through all that. Many folks
don't. If you spent just 1 hour per house on research, that's over
2-1/2 weeks work before the actual job of buying and moving begins.

Michael is right: the agent represents the *SELLER*,
not the buyer. He
is legally obligated to disclose _some_ things, but professionally
obligated not to disclose anything else that might lower the house's
value. Agents are not your friends.

I disagree; they can be. But the main point is that the agent, whether
a buyer's agent or a seller's agent, doesn't make any money until a
sale happens.

I think all this is having a negative impact on amateur radio.
Here'swhy:

1) Lots of people who live in restricted homes never pursue an interest
in amateur radio because they don't want the antenna hassle. Not every
restricted home has a suitable attic or yard where an antenna can be
hidden. Many restrictions are such that flagpoles, birdhouses, awnings
and other things are prohibited too. Plus Gladys Kravitz type neighbors
who look for *any* infractions (it only takesone).

The effect is particularly strong on young people, who can't just move
and whose resources are usually less.

2) Lots of hams who live in restricted homes are much less active
amateurs than they would be if they didn't have the hassle.

3) Certain areas become "no-hams" zones, because more and more hams
steer clear of them.

4) The publicity and visibility of amateur radio decrease over time,
because nobody sees antennas, and hams operating stealth don't
talkabout it.

How many of us first discovered amateur radio, or found our first
Elmer, by seeing his/her antenna(s)?

For decades the trend in amateur radio has been to make the licenses
easier to get, the equipment less expensive, more reliable and higher
performing, and the choices of activities greater. But at the same
time, there's been a slow but steady trend to make more and more homes
ham-radio-unfriendly. That's not a good thing.

I'm not sure how to meet the challenge head-on; we don't have the
resources of the satellite-dish folks.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
I don't think the problem was that you were excessively choosy;

You had the resources and patience to go through all that.

When I decided to move out of the Los Angeles area, My wife and I
spent almost 6 months looking for property online. We had a basic
set of "conditions" to meet (as it were).

I fly out here in June last year to look at the properties and
when I got home told my wife, "I think I just bought the farm."

How many of us first discovered amateur radio, or found our first
Elmer, by seeing his/her antenna(s)?

Slight topic drift, but in my case it was because my dad worked
for North American Aviation. He took me to the employee recreation
park and I wandered into the Amateur Radio Club station. W6UUI.
End of story, I was "ruined".

Jeff-1.0
wa6fwi


--
“Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.â€

Frank Leahy, Head coach, Notre Dame 1941-1954

http://www.stay-connect.com

On Jan 27, 8:29 am, wrote:

Having to look at 100 houses after telling an agent what you want means
something's really wrong somewhere.

Having to fire three agents after telling them what you want means
something's really wrong somewhere.

Yes, there is, but it's what we have to work with. All the agents I
worked with were of the big picture on the billboard type. It would
veer way OT, but my XYL who works in the flooring industry and has
regular contact with contractors and RE agent, could tell you stories
that would make you hair stand on end. The closest comparison I can
make is that there is a strong "carny vs rube" relationship going on.
And they are the carney.


You had the resources and patience to go through all that. Many folks
don't. If you spent just 1 hour per house on research, that's over
2-1/2 weeks work before the actual job of buying and moving begins.

Thanks for proving my point, Jim. I spent a lot of time researching my
house. When a house reached "serious status", I took measurements, I
talked to the neighbors, I had my lawyer go to the courthouse to check
over the deed - in addition to the completely worthless deed insurance
they make you buy. And he found an issue that we made the owners pay
for. But the point is there is a choice, and if a person lacks the
patience to find out what they are buying into, then I don't know how
to advise them.

There's the old saying about buy in haste and repent at leisure.


1) Lots of people who live in restricted homes never pursue an interest
in amateur radio because they don't want the antenna hassle. Not every
restricted home has a suitable attic or yard where an antenna can be
hidden. Many restrictions are such that flagpoles, birdhouses, awnings
and other things are prohibited too. Plus Gladys Kravitz type neighbors
who look for *any* infractions (it only takesone).

hehe, I was wondering when Gladys would come up... 8^)

But you brought us back to Ham radio specifically, so that's great.

I agree wholeheartedly. Old Mr Bloom from up the road was my
introduction to two way radio. He had a tower with one of those triple
vertical dipoles on it that you could switch the pattern on - I forget
what they are called. But a friend and I knocked on his door, and
politely asked if we could see his radios. He told us to have our
parents call him to make sure it was okay, and then we stopped by
again to see his shack. Pure magic! Lights and glowing meters and that
electronic smell of tubes that whenever I smell tube equipment these
days it takes me right back.

Otherwise I agree with all those points.


For decades the trend in amateur radio has been to make the licenses
easier to get, the equipment less expensive, more reliable and higher
performing, and the choices of activities greater. But at the same
time, there's been a slow but steady trend to make more and more homes
ham-radio-unfriendly. That's not a good thing.

I'm not sure how to meet the challenge head-on; we don't have the
resources of the satellite-dish folks.

For as much charm as our introduction to Ham radio was, it is going to
be different today.

If we decide that we need to get young people interested in Ham radio,
it will have to be in a manner in which they are used to.

I had an idea about making a 2 meter HT that had texting ability, as
well as voice. The texting mode would be PSK-31. Note that PSK31
actually does work with FM - it isn't as useful as the SSB version,
but it still works. A kid with a Technician license and his/her
friends of like qualifications would use these things similarly to
cell phones, but it would be their own channels. After starting, the
more adventurous might look into repeater construction. Regular Ham
type stuff. Eventually they would likely gravitate to HF if they found
that interesting.

It would certainly be a different paradigm than what most people who
became Hams when very young went through. But we don't have novice
class any more, and have to come up with something else.

Some Hams I have pitched this to have been vehemently oppose to the
idea.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -