Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
What's a "top post" and what section of the FCC codes is that rule found?
Once I know this information, I will comply fully with the regulation. "Barry OGrady" wrote in message ... On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:11:13 GMT, "Wayne P. Muckleroy" wrote: It's never a good idea to use vigilante tactics to solve a problem. There are rules for which all of us must abide. One of those rules is that we must never top post. One of those rules is that we must not intentionally block or interfere with another transmission that is in progress. We must all share the frequencies in an orderly fashion. These are the rules. If we were to all ignore these rules and transmit whenever, however, and wherever we pleased, there would be mass chaos on most bands. The rules are structured and enforced by the FCC. I cannot condone any other approach to eliminating unruly examples like K1MAN--as frustrating as that approach may be. A: Top posting Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet? Wayne P. Muckleroy (KC8UIO) "AMEN" wrote in message news:j5iYe.357189$_o.126093@attbi_s71... "N9OGL" wrote in message oups.com... It is FAR from over, after the FCC makes it's decision it goes to Court of Appeal where he can challenge the FCC rules and or decision. If he transmits, he will be unlicensed which can speed the process to the court systems like I said it's FAR from over. Todd N9OGL The N9OGL Show 14.321.00 Mhz Wayne Green had by far the best solution to the problem back in 1992: Wayne Green W2NSD/1 WGI Center Peterborough NH 03458 Sep. 13, 1992 "While I can appreciate your frustration with Baxter, which I share, your approach to disenfranchising him seems to indicate that you either do not read my editorials or at least don't remember them. I've God knows how many times been quite blunt about NOT annoying the FCC with our problems. That's not only a waste of time, it's downright dangerous... and can cause far more trouble than poor little Baxter. Please remember that we keep trying to convince the FCC that we are self-regulating. Note the term "self." If a few hams ever want to get rid of Baxter that's not all that difficult... and you don't even have to pay a hit man to clean off 14,275. All it takes is a little creativity and some coordinated effort. As a matter of fact it would be fun to wipe out Baxter. And you wouldn't even have to have a small group of like-minded hams drive to Maine with hack saws for his coax and tower or a concentrated campaign to turn his neighbors against him with propaganda. No, all it would take is a few hams with good signals and some coordination. I'm sure you can come up with much more fitting tortures for Baxter than anything I could dream up, but my mind turns to getting the channel about ten minutes before his broadcasts with my own anti-IARN broadcasts. I'll bet I could come up with some material which would burn Baxter, yet would not quite be actionable. Or I might tape one of his broadcasts and just repeat it as a "service" right on top of him and wipe him out. I've got as good a signal as anyone and I'm only a couple hundred miles from him. Knowing the love they have for him in Maine I'm sure you can find one, two or even three strong stations fairly near him to join in the effort to "help" him get his broadcasts out. Of course if you don't know anyone capable of outsmarting Baxter, then you have no choice but to give up and take up stamp collecting. Baxter may be loud, but I haven't yet seen any signs of a three digit IQ behind the mess he's been making for several years. If you do decide to actually do something instead of wasting your time on the FCC and ARRL, please let me know. " Cheers ... Wayne Barry ===== Home page http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og |
#32
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks, Barry, for the reminder.
"Barry OGrady" wrote in message ... On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:11:13 GMT, "Wayne P. Muckleroy" wrote: It's never a good idea to use vigilante tactics to solve a problem. There are rules for which all of us must abide. One of those rules is that we must never top post. One of those rules is that we must not intentionally block or interfere with another transmission that is in progress. We must all share the frequencies in an orderly fashion. These are the rules. If we were to all ignore these rules and transmit whenever, however, and wherever we pleased, there would be mass chaos on most bands. The rules are structured and enforced by the FCC. I cannot condone any other approach to eliminating unruly examples like K1MAN--as frustrating as that approach may be. A: Top posting Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet? Wayne P. Muckleroy (KC8UIO) "AMEN" wrote in message news:j5iYe.357189$_o.126093@attbi_s71... "N9OGL" wrote in message oups.com... It is FAR from over, after the FCC makes it's decision it goes to Court of Appeal where he can challenge the FCC rules and or decision. If he transmits, he will be unlicensed which can speed the process to the court systems like I said it's FAR from over. Todd N9OGL The N9OGL Show 14.321.00 Mhz Wayne Green had by far the best solution to the problem back in 1992: Wayne Green W2NSD/1 WGI Center Peterborough NH 03458 Sep. 13, 1992 "While I can appreciate your frustration with Baxter, which I share, your approach to disenfranchising him seems to indicate that you either do not read my editorials or at least don't remember them. I've God knows how many times been quite blunt about NOT annoying the FCC with our problems. That's not only a waste of time, it's downright dangerous... and can cause far more trouble than poor little Baxter. Please remember that we keep trying to convince the FCC that we are self-regulating. Note the term "self." If a few hams ever want to get rid of Baxter that's not all that difficult... and you don't even have to pay a hit man to clean off 14,275. All it takes is a little creativity and some coordinated effort. As a matter of fact it would be fun to wipe out Baxter. And you wouldn't even have to have a small group of like-minded hams drive to Maine with hack saws for his coax and tower or a concentrated campaign to turn his neighbors against him with propaganda. No, all it would take is a few hams with good signals and some coordination. I'm sure you can come up with much more fitting tortures for Baxter than anything I could dream up, but my mind turns to getting the channel about ten minutes before his broadcasts with my own anti-IARN broadcasts. I'll bet I could come up with some material which would burn Baxter, yet would not quite be actionable. Or I might tape one of his broadcasts and just repeat it as a "service" right on top of him and wipe him out. I've got as good a signal as anyone and I'm only a couple hundred miles from him. Knowing the love they have for him in Maine I'm sure you can find one, two or even three strong stations fairly near him to join in the effort to "help" him get his broadcasts out. Of course if you don't know anyone capable of outsmarting Baxter, then you have no choice but to give up and take up stamp collecting. Baxter may be loud, but I haven't yet seen any signs of a three digit IQ behind the mess he's been making for several years. If you do decide to actually do something instead of wasting your time on the FCC and ARRL, please let me know. " Cheers ... Wayne Barry ===== Home page http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og |
#33
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
but has anyone actually heard k1man on the air in the last few months????
"KØHB" wrote in message nk.net... Thanks, Barry, for the reminder. "Barry OGrady" wrote in message ... On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:11:13 GMT, "Wayne P. Muckleroy" wrote: It's never a good idea to use vigilante tactics to solve a problem. There are rules for which all of us must abide. One of those rules is that we must never top post. One of those rules is that we must not intentionally block or interfere with another transmission that is in progress. We must all share the frequencies in an orderly fashion. These are the rules. If we were to all ignore these rules and transmit whenever, however, and wherever we pleased, there would be mass chaos on most bands. The rules are structured and enforced by the FCC. I cannot condone any other approach to eliminating unruly examples like K1MAN--as frustrating as that approach may be. A: Top posting Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet? Wayne P. Muckleroy (KC8UIO) "AMEN" wrote in message news:j5iYe.357189$_o.126093@attbi_s71... "N9OGL" wrote in message oups.com... It is FAR from over, after the FCC makes it's decision it goes to Court of Appeal where he can challenge the FCC rules and or decision. If he transmits, he will be unlicensed which can speed the process to the court systems like I said it's FAR from over. Todd N9OGL The N9OGL Show 14.321.00 Mhz Wayne Green had by far the best solution to the problem back in 1992: Wayne Green W2NSD/1 WGI Center Peterborough NH 03458 Sep. 13, 1992 "While I can appreciate your frustration with Baxter, which I share, your approach to disenfranchising him seems to indicate that you either do not read my editorials or at least don't remember them. I've God knows how many times been quite blunt about NOT annoying the FCC with our problems. That's not only a waste of time, it's downright dangerous... and can cause far more trouble than poor little Baxter. Please remember that we keep trying to convince the FCC that we are self-regulating. Note the term "self." If a few hams ever want to get rid of Baxter that's not all that difficult... and you don't even have to pay a hit man to clean off 14,275. All it takes is a little creativity and some coordinated effort. As a matter of fact it would be fun to wipe out Baxter. And you wouldn't even have to have a small group of like-minded hams drive to Maine with hack saws for his coax and tower or a concentrated campaign to turn his neighbors against him with propaganda. No, all it would take is a few hams with good signals and some coordination. I'm sure you can come up with much more fitting tortures for Baxter than anything I could dream up, but my mind turns to getting the channel about ten minutes before his broadcasts with my own anti-IARN broadcasts. I'll bet I could come up with some material which would burn Baxter, yet would not quite be actionable. Or I might tape one of his broadcasts and just repeat it as a "service" right on top of him and wipe him out. I've got as good a signal as anyone and I'm only a couple hundred miles from him. Knowing the love they have for him in Maine I'm sure you can find one, two or even three strong stations fairly near him to join in the effort to "help" him get his broadcasts out. Of course if you don't know anyone capable of outsmarting Baxter, then you have no choice but to give up and take up stamp collecting. Baxter may be loud, but I haven't yet seen any signs of a three digit IQ behind the mess he's been making for several years. If you do decide to actually do something instead of wasting your time on the FCC and ARRL, please let me know. " Cheers ... Wayne Barry ===== Home page http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og |
#34
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
your the one who's ****ing stupid asshole
|
#35
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dave" wrote in message ... but has anyone actually heard k1man on the air in the last few months???? You will - for ten more sad years, if the FCC ever renews his license. |
#36
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't sponge of my parents, try again asshole
|
#37
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
i haven't heard him in quite a while, either on 75 or 20m... has anyone
else??? "AMEN" wrote in message news:9zYYe.359783$x96.294182@attbi_s72... "Dave" wrote in message ... but has anyone actually heard k1man on the air in the last few months???? You will - for ten more sad years, if the FCC ever renews his license. |
#38
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
N9OGL wrote:
The rules should also apply to W1AW who has also caused malicious interference. Todd, If you substitute "incidental" or "unintentional" for your use of *malicious*, I might agree with your premise, at least on the surface. However... N9OGL wrote: The problem is W1AW is allowed to interfere with on going transmissions and K1MAN isn't. ....the only other thing that can be said in defense of W1AW is that it is a *national* organization representing tens of thousands of hams that is presumably "broadcasting" for the common good (and follows a regular, *published* schedule, allowing others to dodge the "interference" if they so wish), while K1MAN is a --single--private--individual-- who has had some peculiar (shady ?) pecuniary interests associated with his "broadcasts" in the past. -73- Carter K8VT |
#39
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
N9OGL wrote:
your the one who's ****ing stupid asshole Aw toddieboy, you hurt my feelings. NOT!!! Still using your jr. high-school kewel language I see. Can you get any more stupid? Think you will ever grow up and stop sponging off your mommy and daddy? |
#40
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
N9OGL wrote:
I don't sponge of my parents, try again asshole So you keep saying, but why does a 30 something-year-old keep living with mommy and daddy? Why don't you get a real job and get out and fend for yourself for a change? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FCC SHUTS DOWN the 'Boy Broadcaster" from ME | General | |||
FCC SHUTS DOWN the 'Boy Broadcaster" from ME | Policy | |||
SW broadcaster at 3965, should it be there? | Policy | |||
Some major updates on the webpage of the music pirate broadcaster Alfa Lima international. | Shortwave | |||
Parody of a SW broadcaster | Shortwave |