![]() |
Docket Scorecard
From: on Oct 20, 3:53 am
wrote: From: Leo on Oct 15, 9:36 am On 14 Oct 2005 15:02:32 -0700, wrote: Leo wrote: On 14 Oct 2005 12:39:50 -0700, wrote: From: on Oct 14, 9:20 am Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message wrote: One of the reasons repeatedly given for the elimination of the code test is that it is supposedly a "barrier" to "otherwise qualified people" who would bring "fresh, new blood" and *growth* to amateur radio. Were all those people wrong? Only to old morsemen who can't grow and have old tired blood... "Growth in numbers" is not a raison d'etre for the elimination or retention of the code test. Tell that to NCI... WHY? I'm not afraid of any dues increas at NCI... :-) ARRL is very much concerned with growth and numbers. If the ham numbers decrease, their publishing business will suffer. The lack of love and worship of morsemanship should be enough. IOW, since *you* don't have a high regard for Morse Code skills, there should be no test... Tsk, tsk, tsk...you are jumping over tall conclusions thinking you are getting somewhere. You aren't. Having BEGUN in HF communications 52 years ago and NEVER having needed any morse code skill then or in all the years since, I just don't see why it remains an amateur radio licensing test. No other radio service bothers with using morse code for communications now, why should amateur radio still retain a code test because of one national membership organization and a bunch of old morsemen fearful of losing their exclusive radio playground? I don't know when Leo was a kid, but I know that when I got my ham license in 1967 at the age of 13, there were only about a quarter-million US hams - less than 40% of today's total. The US population back then was a lot more than 40% of what it is today. TODAY's laws are not governed by conditions of 38 years ago. You remain in total denial that no-code-test Technician licensees numbered as many as 200 thousand and that the present-day U.S. amateur radio license totals would be definitely smaller without them. Your problem, not mine. today, there are too many other far-more-glamorous things competing with it. Such as? There was all sorts of competition when I was a kid, too. Not at the seminary for the order of the Church of St. Hiram. One thing for sure, you didn't have any interest in a military experience, did you? One of the first signs of that outside amateur radio was the USA's creation of Class C and D CB in 1958. NO test of any kind, just a Restricted Radiotelephone license form needed for anyone to use the 22 channels (23rd shared with radio control). Excellent in large urban areas before the offshore products appeared about four years later and the trucking industry started buying them. But what happened after that? You stopped the story at the most important part, Len. Soon to be a major motion picture? :-) 27 MHz cb was pretty well behaved at first. But by the mid 1960s that service had big problems with rules violations. When the oil embargoes of the early 1970s hit, cb became a major tool for truckers and others to avoid law enforcement of the 55 mph speed limit, weigh stations, etc. Jimmie, Jimmie, Jimmie...show us WHERE the truckers stay UNDER their "legal speed limit" of 55 MPH. Having gone cross country a few times since 1974 by motor vehicle (over 2000 miles one-way each time), the truckers do NOT obey those "55 MPH limits." The presence or absence of a CB in their cab has NOTHING to do with getting their cargo from one place to its destination...so they can quickly pick up another load and make another run...for PROFIT. The use of radio to intentionally violate local, state or federal law is clearly a violation of the Communications Act. So...what have YOU done about this "violation of the law," Mr. Holier-than-Thou Morseman? Did you join the PA Highway Patrol and get a spiffy uniform in which to catch all those evil violators? Did you join the FCC or the Federal Marshall's Service to ENFORCE THE LAW? I don't think you did. You LIKE to sit in here as a holier- than-most everybody person and talk down to others. Other violations (unlicensed operation, "shooting skip", failure to identify, use of power far above that authorized for the service) became more the rule than the exception on 27 MHz cb. Indeed, some began to use frequencies near but outside the authorized cb channels, including the 10 meter amateur band. Well? What did YOU do about it? CB on the old 11m band became a reality in 1958, 47 years ago. If this so offends you, why haven't you written a "sharp" report and submitted it to the FCC? Or the ARRL? Or your elected Congresscritter? IMHO, one of the main reasons for that behavior was the lack of any sort of license test for a cb permit. Oh, dear, I guess that shoots down about 100 million USA citizens who use little two-way transceivers called "cell phones!" No license, no TEST required for those! How about those evil, NO-LICENSE-REQUIRED R/C transmitters on their 72 MHz region channels? Aren't you worried about UNLAWFULL ACTIVITY there, perhaps causing TVI while we still have analog TV? How about NO-LICENSE-REQUIRED FRS transceivers? [etc., etc...] That's nice, Len. But how well did the cell phone work away from the major interstates? Very well, Jimmie. :-) Had you been ON THE ROAD you would have seen lots and lots and lots of cell site towers, some of them quite far away from the Interstate highways. In Wyoming. In Nebraska. In Nevada. In Utah. In many states. Or maybe not. The growth of US amateur radio in the 1980s (without a no-code-test license or medical waivers) was about the same if not greater than the growth in the 1990s. How do you explain that? I "explain that" by pointing out you are still in denial that all those no-code-test Technicians made a sizeable impact on U.S. amateur radio license totals. I "explain that" by pointing out you are wayyyy too deep into love/honor/obeying old, old morsemen "rules" of yesterday by trying to retain outmoded standards and practices in licensing. I "explain that" by telling you and other staunch old-timer morsemen that you will LOSE your self-perceived status as high- rate code-tested "experts" in radio if the code test is gone. So what are your new paradigms, Len? Besides "dump the code test"? To quote what another old-timer said, the amateur rules might open up with: "Here's your rules, have a nice day." :-) Problem really is, you old-timer morsemen fanatics just CAN'T envision amateur radio WITHOUT any code test. It is the "heart and soul of amateur radio!" according to a few Commenters on WT Docket 05-235. Should amateur radio become like cb? No test at all? We've seen how well that worked... Tsk, tsk, tsk...still using the "dropping the code test is the end of all testing" ploy, aren't you? Dumb thing to do, Jimmie. You've predicted a growth of 20% in a few years if the code test goes away. I "predicted it?!?" Did you get a GUARANTEE on the "prediction?" I can't read the future, Jimmie. You apparently can, knowing all of electronics hobby life before you ever existed. You are a Radio god and "know all." :-) Will you admit you were wrong if the code test goes away and there isn't that much growth? Tsk, tsk, tsk...still being the argumentative sore loser, aintcha? :-) Will YOU admit you are full of snit about the efficacy of morse code in radio even when all the other radio services have given up on it (if they ever used it from their beginning)? No, you haven't yet and all those other radio service HAVE given up on morse code for communications. It's predictable that you will NEVER apologize for anything you've said..."everyone else makes mistakes, but you never have." :-) I don't care one way or the other what the growth of U.S. amateur radio is AFTER the code test is eliminated. However, you think that idle speculation is some kind of "official prediction" so you want to make a Big Issue out of it. You already have. :-) Why are you sitting around playing with your computer in the middle of the day, being argumentative to others? Can't you play with your "Southgate" thingy, working DX on HF with CW? |
Docket Scorecard
From: on Oct 20, 9:15 am show options
Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message Bill Sohl wrote: Given the numbers that have been tallied so far, even a margin of error of 5% misanalyzed would not result in a majority in favor of keeping morse. Actually, if 5% were miscategorized, there would be a very slight majority in favor of keeping at least some code testing. WRONG! If the current majority of 1311 (54%) went down by 5%, the number would then be (1311 -66 = 1245) which still gives a 52% majority in favor of the NPRM. I wrote: "if 5% were miscategorized" meaning if 5% were in the wrong category. Fixing that problem would remove 5% from one category and add 5% to another. Remove 5% from the anticodetest column and add 5% to the procodetest column and the majority changes. Whoa! Whose tabulation are you talking about, Jimmie? My own voluntary tabulation doesn't have any "anticodetest" column nor any "procodetest" column. You must be using someone else's that aren't posted in this newsgroup... (SNIP of repeated "what if's) Why? Are any of them unreasonable? [ludicrously argumentative, they are... :-) ] Why? FCC ignored majority opinion on the issue in 1999 - do you really think the majority opinion matters now? Actually no I don't, but it doesn't hurt the nocode test cause to have a majority favoring the change. True, but note how narrow it is. Tsk, tsk...that shouldn't matter. The World According to Jimmie had the Restructuring NPRM Comments "favoring higher code test rates" than the across-the-board restriction to 5 WPM. THAT was a slim majority. PCTAs thought it "okay" since it favored code testing. :-) And note that the criteria used are quite vague in places. For example: Do the totals include reply comments as well as comments? They do, but the ONLY way to CHECK that is to READ THEM, Jimmie. ALL of them. A mere 2600+ filings. If the same person submits multiple comments that are not identical, or comments and reply comments, are they all counted, or does each commenter get counted only once? Yes, no, and maybe. :-) The ONLY WAY to CHECK that is to READ THEM, Jimmie. ALL of them. A mere 2600+ filings. How is it determined if a person submits a "valid address"? If the ECFS Comment submission ACCEPTS it and it appears on the record. Tsk, tsk, all "FCC Insiders" should KNOW that! Why is the NPRM considered a comment? What should it be considered as? :-) Why are the comments of an Australian not counted? NPRM 05-143 is about UNITED STATES radio regulations, Jimmie. Is Australia part of the United States? No? Why not? Is citizenship a requirement to be counted? How about residency? Why? Tsk, tsk, tsk...all that CHILDISH questioning, like a petulant four-year-old kid bothering Mommy. :-) Jimmie still has to CHECK it all out by READING ALL the filings on WT Docket 05-235. He should. He just can't accept "un- verfied" tabulations without his decreeing that everything comes out as he wants it. :-) |
Docket Scorecard
On 20 Oct 2005 09:40:10 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote: On 15 Oct 2005 14:02:03 -0700, wrote: From: Leo on Oct 15, 9:36 am On 14 Oct 2005 15:02:32 -0700, wrote: Leo wrote: On 14 Oct 2005 12:39:50 -0700, wrote: From: on Oct 14, 9:20 am Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message wrote: snip When were you a kid, Leo? Ham radio is far more popular today than when I was a kid. About the same time as you were - I was born in 1955. Comparing the total number of amateur licenses existing today is an apples-to-oranges comparison, and not a true indicator of the "popularity" of the hobby then or now. In the '60s, morse code was a mandatory requirement for an amateur license (up here anyway) - and at a difficult 13 words per minute, not our easy 5. Today, there are vast numbers of amateurs who hold licenses where no code test was required - around half of the total. How many amateur licenses would have been issued back then if a 'no code' license had been available? - I'd speculate that there would have been a lot! As far as populatity goes, I'd say that the general public back then seemed to be far more aware of even the existence of the hobby than it appears to be today (wonder if there's a survey available anywhere on this anywhere.....). For example, all of my friends and I knew about amateur radio back then - both of my teenage sons indicate that the majority of their contemporaries have no idea at all that the hobby even exists. Those who are aware are pretty much disinterested in the activity - they have more fun and interesting things to do! snip 73 de Jim, N2EY 73,Leo |
Docket Scorecard
Leo wrote: On 20 Oct 2005 09:40:10 -0700, wrote: Leo wrote: On 15 Oct 2005 14:02:03 -0700, wrote: From: Leo on Oct 15, 9:36 am On 14 Oct 2005 15:02:32 -0700, wrote: Leo wrote: On 14 Oct 2005 12:39:50 -0700, wrote: From: on Oct 14, 9:20 am Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message wrote: snip When were you a kid, Leo? Ham radio is far more popular today than when I was a kid. About the same time as you were - I was born in 1955. Comparing the total number of amateur licenses existing today is an apples-to-oranges comparison, and not a true indicator of the "popularity" of the hobby then or now. In the '60s, morse code was a mandatory requirement for an amateur license (up here anyway) - and at a difficult 13 words per minute, not our easy 5. Today, there are vast numbers of amateurs who hold licenses where no code test was required - around half of the total. How many amateur licenses would have been issued back then if a 'no code' license had been available? - I'd speculate that there would have been a lot! indeed at least some more I would clearly have had a license 20 years beore I did without code test requirement As far as populatity goes, I'd say that the general public back then seemed to be far more aware of even the existence of the hobby than it appears to be today (wonder if there's a survey available anywhere on this anywhere.....). For example, all of my friends and I knew about amateur radio back then - both of my teenage sons indicate that the majority of their contemporaries have no idea at all that the hobby even exists. Those who are aware are pretty much disinterested in the activity - they have more fun and interesting things to do! or preahps worse think that Ham radio is CB radio (IMO CB is ok but it very limited compared to ham radio) snip 73 de Jim, N2EY 73,Leo |
Docket Scorecard
Leo wrote:
On 20 Oct 2005 09:40:10 -0700, wrote: Leo wrote: On 15 Oct 2005 14:02:03 -0700, wrote: From: Leo on Oct 15, 9:36 am On 14 Oct 2005 15:02:32 -0700, wrote: Leo wrote: On 14 Oct 2005 12:39:50 -0700, wrote: From: on Oct 14, 9:20 am Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message wrote: snip When were you a kid, Leo? Ham radio is far more popular today than when I was a kid. About the same time as you were - I was born in 1955. Then we're almost exactly the same "vintage". Comparing the total number of amateur licenses existing today is an apples-to-oranges comparison, and not a true indicator of the "popularity" of the hobby then or now. Why? I realize that we have to allow for the population increase. But when you do that, the inescapable conclusion is that the ratio of the number of hams to the total population is more now than it was in 1955, or 1965, or 1975, etc. Only very recently has the growth curve flattened out. In the '60s, morse code was a mandatory requirement for an amateur license (up here anyway) - and at a difficult 13 words per minute, not our easy 5. It was a requirement for all US ham licenses until 1991, when the Technician lost its code test requirement. Whether 13 wpm is "difficult" or not depends on the person and the training methods. Today, there are vast numbers of amateurs who hold licenses where no code test was required - around half of the total. In the USA or Canada? Slightly less than half of US hams hold Technician licenses, but there's no way of knowing how many have passed the code test. How many amateur licenses would have been issued back then if a 'no code' license had been available? - I'd speculate that there would have been a lot! Maybe. And if the written test were trimmed down to almost nothing, there may have been more, too. And you'd think that increasing the testing requirements would have reduced the number of hams significantly, right? Yet here in the USA, the exact opposite happened in the 1970s. There's also the factor of how long somebody stays interested. And what they do when they have the license. As far as populatity goes, I'd say that the general public back then seemed to be far more aware of even the existence of the hobby than it appears to be today (wonder if there's a survey available anywhere on this anywhere.....). For example, all of my friends and I knew about amateur radio back then - both of my teenage sons indicate that the majority of their contemporaries have no idea at all that the hobby even exists. Those who are aware are pretty much disinterested in the activity - they have more fun and interesting things to do! But are you and your friends a representative sample? When I was growing up, most people, kids or adults, had no idea what ham radio was unless they were related to or good friends with a ham. I grew up in a suburb of Philadelphia that was mostly blue- and white-collar middle class families. Lots of kids, houses ranging from rowhomes to big single Dutch Colonials. Yet there were less than a dozen hams in the whole township then, all spread out, and about half were inactive or minimally active. In my high school (grades 9/10/11/12), which had over 2500 boys and emphasized math and science, there were perhaps a half-dozen hams in the 4 years I was there. The main problem wasn't code or theory, for those who were interested. It was space for an antenna and money for equipment. Most people, young or old, thought ham radio looked like a kind of fun thing, when they found out about it. But not enough to spend the necessary time and money to set up a station, let alone get a license. IMHO one of the biggest reasons ham radio isn't better known is that it's not a very "visual" thing - it doesn't translate well to TV or a movie. Maybe we're using the wrong term - perhaps instead of "popularity", what you are describing is better described as "visibility" or "recognition by the public". 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Docket Scorecard
From: on Oct 21, 4:25 pm
Leo wrote: On 20 Oct 2005 09:40:10 -0700, wrote: Leo wrote: On 15 Oct 2005 14:02:03 -0700, wrote: From: Leo on Oct 15, 9:36 am On 14 Oct 2005 15:02:32 -0700, wrote: Leo wrote: On 14 Oct 2005 12:39:50 -0700, wrote: From: on Oct 14, 9:20 am Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message wrote: Comparing the total number of amateur licenses existing today is an apples-to-oranges comparison, and not a true indicator of the "popularity" of the hobby then or now. Why? "Why?" ...it shoots down your rationalizations for one... :-) I realize that we have to allow for the population increase. But when you do that, the inescapable conclusion is that the ratio of the number of hams to the total population is more now than it was in 1955, or 1965, or 1975, etc. Tsk, tsk...the "inescapable conclusion" obtained from comparison of filings on WT Docket 05-235 of 2005 is that the Belief in the efficacy of morse code is less than it was in 1975, 1965, or 1955. Only very recently has the growth curve flattened out. In the last two and a half years, this "growth" has been negative. In the '60s, morse code was a mandatory requirement for an amateur license (up here anyway) - and at a difficult 13 words per minute, not our easy 5. It was a requirement for all US ham licenses until 1991, when the Technician lost its code test requirement. That code test is STILL an absolute pass-fail separate test for any amateur radio privileges below 30 MHz. The Technician DID NOT LOSE its code test requirement. The former Technician class got RENAMED to "Technician Plus." :-) Whether 13 wpm is "difficult" or not depends on the person and the training methods. Riiiiiiight...ALL human beings have the SAME aptitudes and abilities! All one has to do is "work hard" in order to pass a federally-mandated morse test in order to transmit below 30 MHz as an amateur. Tsk. That is NOT required for General Radiotelephone (Commercial) Radio Operator license holders at HF and below. That is NOT required for UNLICENSED CB radio operators on 27 MHz, yet their signals can - during certain propagation conditions - be heard all over the world. Slightly less than half of US hams hold Technician licenses, but there's no way of knowing how many have passed the code test. A mere 48+ plus percent of ALL USA amateur radio licensees are Technician class. The Technician class (exclusive of the Technician PLUS class) is over TWICE as numerous as General class (most numerous of the "code tested" classes). There's also the factor of how long somebody stays interested. And what they do when they have the license. That's NOT a LEGAL requirement, is it? :-) The ONLY requirement I can find in all of Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R. as to "doing" when a person has an amateur radio license is to OPERATE LEGALLY ACCORDING TO THE REGULATIONS. Is there something I missed in Part 97 about "building from scratch," "devotion to morse code," or being an acolyte at the Church of St. Hiram? As far as populatity goes, I'd say that the general public back then seemed to be far more aware of even the existence of the hobby than it appears to be today (wonder if there's a survey available anywhere on this anywhere.....). For example, all of my friends and I knew about amateur radio back then - both of my teenage sons indicate that the majority of their contemporaries have no idea at all that the hobby even exists. Those who are aware are pretty much disinterested in the activity - they have more fun and interesting things to do! But are you and your friends a representative sample? Why not? YOU seem to hold yourself as a "representative sample" of the very model of a modern major marvel in amateur radio. :-) [apologies to Gilbert & Sullivan] When I was growing up, most people, kids or adults, had no idea what ham radio was unless they were related to or good friends with a ham. In 50 years little has changed in that regard... :-) Where is the ARRL Public Relations effort when it is sorely needed? I grew up in a suburb of Philadelphia that was mostly blue- and white-collar middle class families. Lots of kids, houses ranging from rowhomes to big single Dutch Colonials. Yet there were less than a dozen hams in the whole township then, all spread out, and about half were inactive or minimally active. "Typical?" :-) Tsk, didn't you claim to have begun amateur radio in another state? In my high school (grades 9/10/11/12), which had over 2500 boys and emphasized math and science, there were perhaps a half-dozen hams in the 4 years I was there. Ah, an "all boys" school. That may explain a lot...? In my high school in the middle west (northern Illinois), only three grades (we had a "junior high school" now known as a "middle school" for some kind of PC reason). We had a mere 900 or so of mixed gender and NONE were licensed as radio amateurs. [sunnuvagun!] At the Big 50th Reunion my high school class had in 2001, NONE mentioned anything about "getting a ham license" after graduation. However, to be fair about it, one did become the manager of a supermarket which had a meat department selling ham. The main problem wasn't code or theory, for those who were interested. It was space for an antenna and money for equipment. Amazing how the story changes as time goes on... :-) NOBODY had an "attic antenna" back in those ancient days? Tsk, the "beer can vertical" started in the 1950s... NOBODY managed to attend a Field Day exercise back then? [were there any parks to hold them in?] NOBODY scrounged for "old radio parts" to build a whole station for $100 then? Most people, young or old, thought ham radio looked like a kind of fun thing, when they found out about it. But not enough to spend the necessary time and money to set up a station, let alone get a license. Too busy playing with car fix-ups? They couldn't get part-time jobs to afford $100 to build a "Southgate" transceiver? Well, I have to give you slack on that. "Surplus" in the late 1940s was very inexpensive: $6 for a brand-new Command Set receiver, $12 for a brand-new Command Set transmitter, $18 for the Command Set antenna tuning unit and modulator...at H&H Electronics, co-owned by Gene Hubbel (then W9ERU, later W7DI and then SK...a VERY high-rate tested morseman). Tsk, I used my part-time earnings to buy and convert (to 110 VAC power) TWO Command Set stations...sold them quickly at a very modest profit by 1950. "Surplus" radios cost much more 30 years later. IMHO one of the biggest reasons ham radio isn't better known is that it's not a very "visual" thing - it doesn't translate well to TV or a movie. Really? Ernest Lehman didn't think so. He wrote a fairly popular novel entitled "The French Atlantic Affair" which was made into a two-part TV movie on one of the networks. Lehman was a respected award-winning screenwriter ("North by Northwest" is perhaps the most notable). Lehman was also a licensed ham. Of course, CB Radio has been featured in many a TV show and movie such as "Convoy," "Smokey and the Bandit," and (would you believe this title) "Flatbed Annie and Sweetiepie"...not to mention an essential part of "The Dukes of Hazzard" series. A later movie, "Frequency" used amateur radio as essential to enable communications time-travel between deceased father and son, but that was more science-fantasy in its plotline and didn't really showcase radio as much as the supernatural. Maybe we're using the wrong term - perhaps instead of "popularity", what you are describing is better described as "visibility" or "recognition by the public". Tsk. You should have a long heart-to-heart talk with ARRL Public Relations (excuse me, "Media Advisors") people on getting amateur radio more popular with the general public. ARRL hasn't done much in THAT regard for the last half century...they've spent most of their time preaching to the choir to try and enlarge their membership numbers (haven't done too well there, either, still only 1 out of 5 licensed U.S. radio amateurs are members). But, you are NOT offering any possible solutions to either popularity, visibility, or recognition by any public. Your aim is to disrupt any talk of eliminating the code test by any means possible. NOT a democratic-principle effort on your part. But, it's par for the course in this newsgroup. |
Docket Scorecard
KØHB wrote:
wrote Heck, most people with computers don't write software, they simply use applications written by others. "Heck, most hams don't build radios, they simply use radios built by others." Hardware vs. software, but right you are, Hans. Of course some of us do build radios - and computers... but in late 1962 TYPO! 1952 the FCC gave all ham operating priviliges to Generals and above. No they didn't. Yes, it was 1952. Actually, the announcement of the change was in December of 1952 but didn't go into effect until February of 1953. Some privs (satelite stations, as at least one example) were reserved for Amateur Extras into the 70's. I checked my 1962 copy of the ARRL License Manual, which has a reprint of the entire FCC section on regulations for the amateur service, plus selected parts of the Communications Act. There's no mention of special privileges for Advanceds or Extras at all. No specific mention of satellite or repeaters, either. The rules changed in 1967 with the first phase of incentive licensing, so maybe somewhere in there the verbiage about satellites got put in. But other than some isolated privs like that, General, Conditional, Advanced, and Extra all had very similar "full" privileges going back to the early 50's. Yep. February 1953 to November 1968. Disincentive licensing changed that in the late 60's. November 22 1968 and again in 1969 - when Generals, Conditionals and Advanceds lost access to parts of some bands. I remember well - I'd just earned the Advanced in the summer of 1968, had full privilges for a few weeks, and then they were gone. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Docket Scorecard
|
Docket Scorecard
My oh MY....he agrees. Must be on his meds finally.
Dan/W4NTI "an_old_friend" wrote in message oups.com... wrote: KØHB wrote: cut I remember well - I'd just earned the Advanced in the summer of 1968, had full privilges for a few weeks, and then they were gone. and you are still taking no chance that the rest of us will know you were cheated back then I agree you were cheated and the ARRL with the FCC ****ed up and realy screwed Ham radio, and ham could we please move on to say this century sometime 73 de Jim, N2EY |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:30 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com