[TVARC] Cat5 patch cables

EJ reply.male at gmail.com
Sat Aug 29 14:12:17 EDT 2020 

I have a bin of Cat 5 patch cables that I want to get rid of. Between 50 to
75 cables. All different lengths. Not parting out.
$25 takes it all.
Cheers & 3s
Eric
K2BUI

On Sat, Aug 29, 2020, 11:59 <tvarc-request at mailman.qth.net> wrote:

> Send TVARC mailing list submissions to
>         tvarc at mailman.qth.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/tvarc
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         tvarc-request at mailman.qth.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         tvarc-owner at mailman.qth.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of TVARC digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Logging QSOs using a MAC (Frank M)
>    2. FW: [MVARBB] Possible FCC Fees (Jim Shaw)
>    3. fees (John Ellis)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 21:42:29 -0400
> From: Frank M <phrankxm at gmail.com>
> To: Steven Buhrow <steven.buhrow at pm.me>
> Cc: tvarc at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [TVARC] Logging QSOs using a MAC
> Message-ID: <475EB14C-BBB9-49CF-9364-9D4F6CC93A48 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> I also use MacLoggerDX and have done so for many years.  It is a GREAT
> logging program.
> However, I find that nothing beats N1MM for contest logging.
> Unfortunately, it is only available for that absolutely horrible Windows
> system.
> Therefore, I too use a PC with N1MM for contests and then transfer the PC
> logs to the Mac.
> Someday, MAC will have something as good or better than N1MM - I until
> then ????-
> Frank KA1AF
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Aug 28, 2020, at 2:30 PM, Steven Buhrow via TVARC <
> tvarc at mailman.qth.net> wrote:
> >
> > ?At the June meeting, there were a couple questions about logging
> contacts using a MAC.  I had just purchased Macloggerdx from Dogpark
> software and didn?t have that much experience with it, but now after a
> couple months I can rate it highly recommended.  It has several radio
> interfaces, but mostly I use it with FT-8.  It interfaces with WSJT-X, so
> as soon as I log a QSO it goes directly into my Macloggerdx log.  I also
> have a subscription to QRZ XML for the lookups.  I was doing everything
> manually, and now all I do is click on the WSJT-X QSO and that?s it.  It
> was definitely worth the few bucks I spent on it.
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Steve - WJ9G
> > <smime.p7s>
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > TVARC mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/tvarc
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:TVARC at mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 19:01:11 -0400
> From: "Jim Shaw" <jshaw1 at woh.rr.com>
> To: <tvarc at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: [TVARC] FW: [MVARBB] Possible FCC Fees
> Message-ID:
>
> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAOei1+QHz5FDpQXccREBpDXCgAAAEAAAAEbntRguQk1GjpNWxtij2mkBAAAAAA==@
> woh.rr.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
> FCC Proposes to Reinstate Amateur Radio Service Fees
>
>
> 08/28/2020
>
> Amateur radio licensees would pay a $50 fee for each amateur radio license
> application if the FCC adopts rules it proposed this week. Included in the
> FCC?s fee proposal are applications for new licenses, renewal and upgrades
> to existing licenses, and vanity call sign requests. Excluded are
> applications for administrative updates, such as changes of address, and
> annual regulatory fees.
>
> The FCC proposal is contained in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ( <
> https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-116A1.pdf> NPRM) in MD
> Docket 20-270, which was adopted to implement portions of the ?Repack
> Airwaves Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services Act? of 2018 ?
> the so-called ? <
> https://www.congress.gov/115/plaws/publ141/PLAW-115publ141.pdf> Ray
> Baum?s Act.?
>
> The Act requires that the FCC switch from a Congressionally-mandated fee
> structure to a cost-based system of assessment. In its NPRM, the FCC
> proposed application fees for a broad range of services that use the FCC?s
> Universal Licensing System (ULS), including the Amateur Radio Service that
> had been excluded by an earlier statute. The 2018 statute excludes the
> Amateur Service from annual regulatory fees, but not from application fees.
>
> ?[A]pplications for personal licenses are mostly automated and do not have
> individualized staff costs for data input or review,? the FCC said in its
> NPRM. ?For these automated processes ? new/major modifications, renewal,
> and minor modifications ? we propose a nominal application fee of $50 due
> to automating the processes, routine ULS maintenance, and limited instances
> where staff input is required.?
>
> The same $50 fee would apply to all Amateur Service applications,
> including those for vanity call signs. ?Although there is currently no fee
> for vanity call signs in the Amateur Radio Service, we find that such
> applications impose similar costs in aggregate on Commission resources as
> new applications and therefore propose a $50 fee,? the FCC said.
>
> The FCC is not proposing to charge for administrative updates, such as
> mailing address changes for amateur applications, and amateur radio will
> remain exempt from annual regulatory fees. ?For administrative updates
> [and] modifications, which also are highly automated, we find that it is in
> the public interest to encourage licensees to update their [own]
> information without a charge,? the FCC said.
>
> The FCC also proposes to assess a $50 fee for individuals who want a
> printed copy of their license. ?The Commission has proposed to eliminate
> these services ? but to the extent the Commission does not do so, we
> propose a fee of $50 to cover the costs of these services,? the FCC said.
>
> The Ray Baum?s Act does not exempt filing fees in the Amateur Radio
> Service. The FCC dropped assessment of fees for vanity call signs several
> years ago.
>
> Deadlines for comments and reply comments will be determined once the NPRM
> appears in the Federal Register. File comments by using the FCC?s
> Electronic Comment Filing System ( <https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings>
> ECFS), posting to MD Docket No. 20-270. This docket is already open for
> accepting comments even though deadlines have not yet been set.
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/tvarc/attachments/20200828/ba794cec/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2020 15:58:08 +0000
> From: John Ellis <john.np2b at gmail.com>
> To: villages reflector <tvarc at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: [TVARC] fees
> Message-ID:
>         <CABxhT4E=
> aJSg+ykJR+gz_quL3fw6qkonCox-u58UngESb7pBZg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I don't know how many of you picked up on this and how much of a chance
> this has of happening, but it looks like someone is trying to ramrod
> something thru. We should hear something from the League about this,
> because it could certainly kill ham radio as we know it. Although it sounds
> ridiculous, in today's political climate, I wouldn't take anything for
> granted.
>
>
>
> Amateur radio licensees would pay a $50 fee for each amateur radio license
> application if the FCC adopts rules it proposed this week. Included in the
> FCC?s fee proposal are applications for new licenses, renewal and upgrades
> to existing licenses, and vanity call sign requests. Excluded are
> applications for administrative updates, such as changes of address, and
> annual regulatory fees.
>
> The FCC proposal is contained in a *Notice of Proposed Rulemaking* (*NPRM*
> <https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-116A1.pdf>) in MD Docket
> 20-270, which was adopted to implement portions of the ?Repack Airwaves
> Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services Act? of 2018 ? the
> so-called ?*Ray Baum?s Act*
> <https://www.congress.gov/115/plaws/publ141/PLAW-115publ141.pdf>.?
>
> The Act requires that the FCC switch from a Congressionally-mandated fee
> structure to a cost-based system of assessment. In its *NPRM*, the FCC
> proposed application fees for a broad range of services that use the FCC?s
> Universal Licensing System (ULS), including the Amateur Radio Service that
> had been excluded by an earlier statute. The 2018 statute excludes the
> Amateur Service from annual regulatory fees, but not from application fees.
>
> ?[A]pplications for personal licenses are mostly automated and do not have
> individualized staff costs for data input or review,? the FCC said in its
> *NPRM*. ?For these automated processes ? new/major modifications, renewal,
> and minor modifications ? we propose a nominal application fee of $50 due
> to automating the processes, routine ULS maintenance, and limited instances
> where staff input is required.?
>
> The same $50 fee would apply to all Amateur Service applications, including
> those for vanity call signs. ?Although there is currently no fee for vanity
> call signs in the Amateur Radio Service, we find that such applications
> impose similar costs in aggregate on Commission resources as new
> applications and therefore propose a $50 fee,? the FCC said.
>
> The FCC is not proposing to charge for administrative updates, such as
> mailing address changes for amateur applications, and amateur radio will
> remain exempt from annual regulatory fees. ?For administrative updates
> [and] modifications, which also are highly automated, we find that it is in
> the public interest to encourage licensees to update their [own]
> information without a charge,? the FCC said.
>
> The FCC also proposes to assess a $50 fee for individuals who want a
> printed copy of their license. ?The Commission has proposed to eliminate
> these services ? but to the extent the Commission does not do so, we
> propose a fee of $50 to cover the costs of these services,? the FCC said.
>
> The Ray Baum?s Act does not exempt filing fees in the Amateur Radio
> Service. The FCC dropped assessment of fees for vanity call signs several
> years ago.
>
> Deadlines for comments and reply comments will be determined once the
> *NPRM* appears
> in the *Federal Register*. File comments by using the FCC?s Electronic
> Comment Filing System (*ECFS* <https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings>), posting
> to MD Docket No. 20-270. This docket is already open for accepting comments
> even though deadlines have not yet been set.
>
>
> 73,
>
> John, NP2B
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> John Ellis         (NP2B)
> 1149 Mockingbird Lane
> The Villages, FL 32163
>
> telephone 352 633-2910
> facsimile  352 633-0401
> mobile     340 513-4928
>
>
> <
> http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
> >
> Virus-free.
> www.avg.com
> <
> http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/tvarc/attachments/20200829/38ae280b/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> TVARC mailing list
> TVARC at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/tvarc
>
>
> End of TVARC Digest, Vol 42, Issue 27
> *************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/tvarc/attachments/20200829/77f9cbcd/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the TVARC mailing list