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.

John D. Kasupski, Tonawanda, NY, USA
Amateur Radio (KC2HMZ), HF/VHF/UHF Monitoring (KNY2VS)
Member ARATS, ARRL, WUN

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

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.


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".

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 ,
(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.

"Two-way" in 1906? When, between December 26 and 31 that
year?!?!?

Must be. You wrote that. You are never "wrong." :-)

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.

The first USA radio regulating agency didn't exist until 1912!

Hi hi. and a hearty Hiyo Ho Ho!

Get that Time Mashine FIXED, Jimmie. Before you get into Jeopardy.

LHA / WMD

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.