[MilCom] Interesting USAF AETC Letter Frequency Removal

[Ken]

Hmmm  -- Thanks!!!. couldn't initially find this on the site along with the 
action taken.  Actually the reference to it came from a Civil Air Patrol 
public forum that hot keyed back to this specific letter.  So I guess some 
CAP members are all "fired up" about it!!!

Once again I think that IF any information is posted that has been obtained 
by ON AIR active radio monitoring, I see no reason to remove it.  HOWEVER, 
IF the information was obtained from "insider" information (which most 
likely is For Official Use Only Information) than it should be removed.  I 
guess the problem that Blanton faces is determining where the information 
posted actually come from for inclusion in the database.

When your the "big dog" in town, you are the guy they are going to go 
after.. That's why there's an advantage to having separate websites, 
mailist forums, & blogs!  Also I think there's an advantage if the 
information gets published in a national type hobby magazine and/or 
commercial publications -- freedom of the press (to accredited 
newspapers/magazine's) is still very powerful!!

Ken

Check out my blogs:
"Western Massachusetts Military Communications" 
http://westernmass-milcom.blogspot.com/
"Adventures in Radio Scannerland" http://radioscannerland.blogspot.com/


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "scanlists ." <scanlists at hotmail.com>
To: <milcom at mailman.qth.net>
Cc: <rfinder1 at verizon.net>
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: [MilCom] Interesting USAF AETC Letter Frequency Removal

Ken wrote:
> >It interesting to note that radio reference seems to be the target of 
> >every communications chief in the military, yet there's plenty of other 
> >website sites, maillists, & blogs, that basically have much of the same 
> >information.

Scanlist wrote:

> This is because RR.com is extremely popular and heavily
> used.  Heck, you can even find their database and forum
> contents with a simple search engine.
>
> BTW,  Lindsay Blanton, owner of RR.com, basically
> told the requester to stuff it.
>
> Also RR.com's is/has changed their policy to now
> require that requests to have data be removed are
> resubmitted every year because "Commanding Officers
> are promoted, retired, and PCS often," said Blanton.
>
> http://www.radioreference.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31846
>