Return-Path: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25])
by mtain-mp04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 6F065380001AB;
Thu, 20 Dec 2012 08:17:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14)
id 1TlfzB-0000ZD-Dr
for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:16:29 +0000
Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net)
by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14)
id 1TlfzA-0000Z2-VI
for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:16:28 +0000
Received: from out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.243])
by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77)
(envelope-from <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>)
id 1Tlfz9-0006Ut-0g
for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:16:27 +0000
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AucRACEN01BcHYoe/2dsb2JhbABEimiyBwN6F3OCGQUBAQQBCAEBA0kCJgYBAQMFAgEDEQQBAQEJJRQBBAgSBhYIBhMKAQICAQGHcAMJCq9NDYlVi2lpQFqDKQOILYVRhjeNDYURgnQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,322,1355097600";
d="scan'208";a="57209055"
Received: from host-92-29-138-30.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.29.138.30])
by out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 20 Dec 2012 13:16:05 +0000
Message-ID: <00a501cddeb4$270e98c0$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
From: "mal hamilton" <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <001e01cddea6$9598aa00$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <50D2FB08.3000704@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <003401cddea9$2d337a00$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <CAO19VgOYcDcxb2qOUQHST0PkhrL2R_bW+wfG_KsDzGv8QQ5F0Q@mail.gmail.com> <50D30B9E.8080305@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:15:59 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Spam-Score: 3.8 (+++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: I agree with this. Why would this NOV be different from all
others issued. The date on the NOV has always been the effective date to
commence operating and cease operating. I have several issued over the years
for other bands. I suggest we let sleeping dogs lay and not make an issue
out of this. If some feel unhappy then do not do it. [...]
Content analysis details: (3.8 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
3.8 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2
X-Scan-Signature: 5f132ffce194fb93f2267a462d849f2b
Subject: Re: LF: NOV 472
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
x-aol-global-disposition: G
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1dc14850d30fe46612
X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25
X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none
I agree with this. Why would this NOV be different from all others issued.
The date on the NOV has always been the effective date to commence operating
and cease operating.
I have several issued over the years for other bands.
I suggest we let sleeping dogs lay and not make an issue out of this. If
some feel unhappy then do not do it.
de mal/g3kev
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Pumford-Green" <gm4slv@gmail.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: LF: NOV 472
> On 20/12/2012 12:51, DAVE PICK wrote:
> > Important note
> >
> > Please note that the 5MHz and 472-479kHz NoVs can be applied for at any
> > time but do not come into effect until 1 January 2013.
> >
> >
> > Copied from the RSGB NOV page...
> >
>
>
> What counts in legal terms though - a notice on the RSGB's website or
> the actual document bearing OFCOM's "stamp"?
>
> I'd say the Notice of Variation itself is what determines what is allowed.
>
> I'd also say that the person who knocked up the web application service
> made an error and the "Valid From" date should have been set, in the
> software that processes the applications, to be :
>
> "January 1st 2013 or date of application, whichever is the latest".
>
> Nonetheless, the legal document called a Notice of Variation is quite
> clear, and nowhere in the W/T act does it say you must take notice of a
> few lines of text on the RSGB's website.
>
> John
> GM4SLV
>
> >>
> >
>
>