|
|
In article , Leo
writes: On 16 Jul 2004 22:02:42 GMT, (Len Over 21) wrote: In article nSQJc.1002$fB4.54@lakeread01, "Da Shadow" writes: Sorry, PØRKY is not a valid call (;-) However, NØPIG is a valid call -- check QRZ Sorry if this is a BØAR -- Lamont Cranston Sunnuvagun! Really? :-) Does Warner Brothers know about this? :-) [loved your show in the old days on AM BC... :-) ] Yup - that guy sold an awful lot of Blue Coal, Wildroot and Camels.....:) "Wildroot" and "Camels" I know. What be "Blue Coal?" Not that I was buying much then as a youth of a lad in Illinois way back when... :-) Forgive me, I digress. This thread is all about the IMPORTANCE of being famous through amateur radio... :-) LHA / WMD |
In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes: "Lumushahs" wrote in message ... From: n2ey Also, some of the people on the list may not be hams. No, they're all hams. Maybe, maybe not. Don't assume that they all are. Just because they have a call sign does not mean they are "hams", either. Yes, it does. One can still like radio (amateur or professional), and not be a "ham". "Amateur radio operator" and "ham" mean the same thing. Perhaps in a limited view. Or it may be an attempt to limit other people's options. By declaring there is no other options, these other amateur radio amateurs (must) subsrcibe to the ham culture. From: Fred Garvin Just because they have a call sign does not mean they are "hams", either. Ummm, yes it does. One can still like radio (amateur or professional), and not be a "ham". Sure. So all people with a call sign must like to be called "ham", worship morse code, love contests, hate CBers, and believe all things that are "ham"? Some people do not identify with those things, and have their own interests. There is no requirement, formal or informal or otherwise, to follow any particular, so-called culture. Peer pressure! Especially from the Exxtras (dos equis or otherwise) The term "ham" is, and has been for approximately 100 years, a term meaning amateur radio operator. According to the ARRL the word "ham" was applied by PROFESSIONAL morsemen on amateurs for their poor sending. It was a term of DERISION (scorn, ridicule). One hundred years ago, there was no CB and there were no contests. Radio, as a communications medium, is 108 years old. There were contests of all sorts 108 years ago! Sunnuvagun! First Modern Olympic Games were held in 1896...same year as the first demonstrations of radio. No radio per se at the first of the Modern Olympic Games. How about that? Morse was a necessity but hams were working diligently on better transmitters and working towards developing voice transmissions. First radio voice transmission was in 1906...done by a pro, not an amateur. Reginald Fessenden. The Pros developed the "better transmitters" and the better tubes for those better transmitters. It's in all the text books. When the term was coined, none of the factors that you list were pertinent and some didn't even exist. ...and Mama Dee was THERE! :-) "What day was it? A day like all days, filled with those events that alter and illuminate our times...and you were there...!" - tag line for CBS radio/TV show "You Are There." |
In article , Radio Amateur KC2HMZ
writes: On 17 Jul 2004 13:56:20 GMT, PAMNO (N2EY) wrote: If they hold a valid amateur radio license, they're hams. By definition. The definition, as it appears in part 97, recently changed. By law, now, a ham is anyone who is listed on the FCC database as being licensed to serve as the control operator of an amateur radio station. You are correct, sir! The definition of "holds a valid amateur radio license" is that you are in the appropriate database. Actually having the paper document is not the determining factor - the databese is. Thnaks for the update 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"Lumushahs" wrote in message ... N2EY wrote: If they hold a valid amateur radio license, they're hams. By definition. There is no such definition. Check a decent dictionary and you will find it. Then (William) replied: Just reviewed Part 97. I must have missed it. Kindly direct me to the proper paragraph. Thank you. You are correct. There is no mention of the word "ham" in Part 97. Government documents always use formal English. "Ham" is an informal term so is not used in government documents. However just check a good dictionary and you will find the definition of "amateur radio operator." Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
|
Nor is there a mention of hobby -- it is the Amateur Radio Service.
-- Lamont Cranston The Shadow Knows "Lumushahs" wrote in message ... N2EY wrote: If they hold a valid amateur radio license, they're hams. By definition. There is no such definition. Then (William) replied: Just reviewed Part 97. I must have missed it. Kindly direct me to the proper paragraph. Thank you. You are correct. There is no mention of the word "ham" in Part 97. |
In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes: In article , (Lumushahs) writes: From: n2ey Also, some of the people on the list may not be hams. No, they're all hams. Maybe, maybe not. If they hold a valid amateur radio license, they're hams. By definition. Don't assume that they all are. Just because they have a call sign does not mean they are "hams", either. Yes, it does. One can still like radio (amateur or professional), and not be a "ham". "Amateur radio operator" and "ham" mean the same thing. Perhaps in a limited view. No, they mean exactly the same thing by definition. To be one is to be the other. Your attempt to redefine what certain words mean is futile. Give it up. Or it may be an attempt to limit other people's options. No, it's just a word. By declaring there is no other options, these other amateur radio amateurs (must) subsrcibe to the ham culture. Being an amateur radio operator/ham does not mean one must subscribe to any "culture". From: Fred Garvin Just because they have a call sign does not mean they are "hams", either. Ummm, yes it does. One can still like radio (amateur or professional), and not be a "ham". Sure. So all people with a call sign must like to be called "ham", worship morse code, love contests, hate CBers, and believe all things that are "ham"? Nope. Not at all. Some people do not identify with those things, and have their own interests. And if those people have amateur radio licenses, they are hams. If they do not have amateur radio licenses, they are not hams. |
In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes: In article , PAMNO (N2EY) writes: In article , (Len Over 21) writes: First radio voice transmission was in 1906... Wrong, Len. It was in 1900. By 1906, two-way transatlantic voice radio communication was being carried out. Jimmie! Your Time Mashine got it all wrong. WRONG. No, it's quite right. You're the one who's wrong, Len. "Two-way" in 1906? Yes. Two way transatlantic in 1906. Voice radio transmission was first demonstrated by Fessenden in 1900, not 1906. You're reference is six years late. Simply wrong. In error. Mistaken. When, between December 26 and 31 that year?!?!? Nope. November. Look it up. You probably won't do that, because doing so would prove you to be wrong. Must be. You wrote that. You are never "wrong." :-) Wrong yet again, Len! Are you going for a record? done by a pro, not an amateur. Reginald Fessenden. Wrong again, Len! Fessenden held an amateur license. He was a ham as well as a "pro". Not in 1900 or 1906, Alex Trebek. WRONG. I didn't say *when* he held the amateur license. Just as you never said when you were getting that Extra licesne out of its box. Been more than 4-1/2 years now. Yes, that new Tech written must be a real toughie...... Fessenden was 1XS and later VP9F. See: http://users.tellurian.com/gjurrens/famous_hams.html But you probably won't. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:48 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com