[CAham] Is It Time To Ask These Questions?

[Bruce - KB6LWN/rcc]

On Fri, 22 Mar 2002, Dave Stephens wrote:

> well if you think for one second that VHF is totaly gentalmanly then you
                            (gentlemanly)
> havent turned your radio to 147.435. (laugh). no one has said here that
> RB's should be run off. and no one said that RB ops have run others off
> the freqs. and i dont think its anything like down on HF.

Don't hear much on 147.435 in this neck-o-the-woods.
Probably a 'local' problem there in your area.

> i dont think that you have really been paying attention to what we are
> talking about here. let me fill you in on the arguement here. its about
> having remote bases on national calling freqs such as 52.525,
> 146.52,446.000, ect. AND was about what the remote base owners are
> doing. there is a sertain person that owns a large repeater system that
                   (certain)
> has stearable remote bases. one of these RB's are on Frazier mt. IT HAS
     (steerable)
> NO CAVITY FILTERS ON THESE TRANSMITERS. and this specific RB is causing
> interferance to other agencies on the mountain. not to mention these
 (interference)
> remote bases are being used on repeater pairs and they are causeing
 (causing)
> problems to other repeater owners.

Then perhaps you should have made that clear in your post!
Especially since you were soliciting comments on the topic.
And I might add, with a NEW subject line ???

And.. If the station is causing interference with other
services, and refuses to 'work' within the framework of
a gentlemans agreement - there is a proper channel to
follow and action to take in order to solve the problem.

> oh and to believe that those down on HF are "HF lids!", and that VHF and
> up have been gentalmenly, is "i believe" to be a bit naive. its like
              (gentlemanly)
> saying that if i talk on VHF or up im better than my father and
> grandfather who use HF. if people on HF are trying to get some
> allocation for AM and SSB operation then great. i mean we have

Just trying to share the band w/o intentional
and malicious interference.

> allocation on VHF/UHF for FM, SSB, and CW. having band allocations are
> ment for one reason and one reason alone. TO MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY.
 (meant)

I didn't say ANYone was better that ANYone else,
so get off that crap.  And I didn't 'direct' my
post at anyone in particular, so why you gettin'
your panties in such a knot ?!?

What I insinuated is, that 'those down on HF' that
purposefully interfere with AM operations because
they 'personally don't think it (AM) has a place
on the band... blah blah blah' are the lids!

And I would apply that rule to ANYONE on ANY band
that is so narrow minded that they feel the mode
(or type) of operation that THEY prefer is the
only one worthy enough to occupy spectrum space!

So There!

nuf sed fm hr

Bruce