Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mk05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 994E238000089; Sat, 26 May 2012 14:45:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SYLyP-0008M7-6k for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 26 May 2012 19:44:21 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SYLyO-0008Lu-Gv for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 26 May 2012 19:44:20 +0100 Received: from out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.243]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SYLyL-0003m9-T9 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 26 May 2012 19:44:19 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApgFAMMjwU9cHnye/2dsb2JhbABFhTaYRoULkhGBCIISBQEBBQgBAQMWJg0CLAEBAwUCAQMRBAEBCiECAhQBBBoGDAoIBhMKAQICAQEBAodpAw8HpW2IGwMIAolOiiFiGgGEEoESA406iGyJaIR6gmCBXw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,663,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217";a="36103424" Received: from host-92-30-124-158.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.30.124.158]) by out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 26 May 2012 19:44:16 +0100 Message-ID: <00c701cd3b6f$8c390c50$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <4FBE62F1.9020203@psk31.plus.com> <4FBE6D2A.6000907@usa.net> <006b01cd39e2$0b66efe0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <003601cd39e7$3be9d060$1502a8c0@Clemens04> <4FBEA22E.2020007@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <1411CA501261403BBD6CB75A773E19ED@AGB> <2976E82A-73EF-436A-9C02-0CF67B5711BE@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 18:44:14 -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: 0.0 (/) 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 am afraid OM you do not have the Fire Power you think you have. Gunpower and fuses DAMP g3kev ----- Original Message ----- From: Roger Lapthorn To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:18 PM Subject: LF: LF-reflector Yahoo group [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [62.24.128.243 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FSL_XM_419 Old OE version in X-Mailer only seen in 419 spam -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 FSL_UA FSL_UA X-Scan-Signature: 01689d080f7c72ae346b011e9b322bfa Subject: LF: Re: LF-reflector Yahoo group Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00C4_01CD3B6F.8C06FFD0" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE 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-SCOLL-SCORE: 1:2:506715968:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 1 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d61894fc124c32d7c X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00C4_01CD3B6F.8C06FFD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am afraid OM you do not have the Fire Power you think you have. = Gunpower and fuses DAMP g3kev ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Roger Lapthorn=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:18 PM Subject: LF: LF-reflector Yahoo group As expected, there are views for and against, but I think more would = now favour a move than not. A decision would need to be taken by whoever runs the current = blacksheep reflector. As said earlier, setting up a Yahoo group would = take minutes, but this is definitely something to be done by the current = LF-reflector owner (or not if decided against). I suspect those against don't understand how current well run Yahoo = groups work. They really work very well indeed and honestly would be an = extremely helpful resource for this community.=20 73s Roger G3XBM -- Via my 2.4GHz transceiver -- On 24 May 2012, at 22:41, "Graham" wrote: Of course, there already is a yahoo group for 136 Band users = , open to all to Join in : ) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/O_P_E_R_A_/ From: Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer=20 Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:03 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEASE = NOT I vote for a active LF band! Amateur radio on 137 kHz! 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 24.05.2012 21:55, schrieb Clemens Paul:=20 >Do what you like but leave me OUT >G3KEV I vote for yahoo.) 73 Clemens DL4RAJ ----- Original Message -----=20 From: mal hamilton=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 9:17 PM Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead = .....PLEASE A moderator !!!!!!!!!!!!! or a censor !!!!!!!!!! and if you have = an opinion that differs from others you should be BANNED. No discussion, no debate in other words a DICTORSHIP, hardly = democratic. What next ??????????? I can manage without any of it and get on with amateur radio and = experimentation. These past few days without the reflector has not = hindered my amateur radio activities and I do not need to be vetted by = others !! Do what you like but leave me OUT G3KEV ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Alberto di Bene=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 5:17 PM Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead = .....PLEASE On 5/24/2012 6:33 PM, g3zjo wrote:=20 Why not go for it and start it yourself. We know some will not move so it will be an additional = facility. Please make sure it is has no taboo, f frequencies, modes, opinions, or subjects rules, and no = childish sulking. Another suggestion is to not make it an open group, meaning = that each request for membership should be accompanied by a very short introductory message explaining = why that membership is requested. Then the moderator(s) of the group will decide whether to = accept it or not. I suppose the same is done presently with the Majordomo mailer. And, if that introductory message is convincing, but up to a = point... then the moderator can accept the individual, but putting him in moderation status, meaning that every = message from him must be examined by the moderator(s) before being published. The moderation status can be removed = after a couple of legitimate messages from the guy, showing that he is not a troll or spammer. I use this method on my soft_radio Yahoo group =20 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/soft_radio/ with more than 2300 subscribers, and, if memory serves, I had = just a couple of cases where a spam message=20 got through in more than 8 years of the existence of that = group. 73 Alberto I2PHD E-Mail ist virenfrei. Von AVG =C3=BCberpr=C3=BCft - www.avg.de Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virendatenbank: 2425/5019 - Ausgabedatum: = 24.05.2012=20 ------=_NextPart_000_00C4_01CD3B6F.8C06FFD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =EF=BB=BF
I am afraid OM you do not have the Fire Power = you think=20 you have. Gunpower and fuses DAMP
g3kev
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Roger=20 Lapthorn
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 = 10:18=20 PM
Subject: LF: LF-reflector Yahoo = group

As expected, there are views for and against, but I think more = would now=20 favour a move than not.

A decision would need to be taken by whoever runs the current = blacksheep=20 reflector. As said earlier, setting up a Yahoo group would take = minutes, but=20 this is definitely something to be done by the current LF-reflector = owner (or=20 not if decided against).

I suspect those against don't understand how current well run = Yahoo=20 groups work. They really work very well indeed and honestly would be = an=20 extremely helpful resource for this community. 

73s
Roger G3XBM



-- Via my 2.4GHz transceiver --

On 24 May 2012, at 22:41, "Graham" <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>=20 wrote:

Of course, there  already  is a  yahoo  = group =20 for  136 Band  users , open to all  to  = Join=20 in  : )
 
http://groups.yahoo.co= m/group/O_P_E_R_A_/
 
 

From: Stefan = Sch=C3=A4fer=20
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:03 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20
Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead=20 .....PLEASE NOT

I vote for a active LF band!
Amateur radio = on 137=20 kHz!

73, Stefan/DK7FC


Am 24.05.2012 21:55, schrieb = Clemens=20 Paul:=20
>Do what you like but leave me = OUT
>G3KEV
 
I vote for yahoo.)
 
73
Clemens
DL4RAJ
 
 
 
-----=20 Original Message -----
From:=20 mal hamilton To:=20 rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Sent:=20 Thursday, May 24, 2012 9:17 PM Subject:=20 Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEASE

A moderator !!!!!!!!!!!!! or a censor = !!!!!!!!!!=20 and if you have an opinion that differs from others you should = be=20 BANNED.
No discussion, no debate in other words = a=20 DICTORSHIP, hardly democratic.
What next ???????????
I can manage without any of it and get = on with=20 amateur radio and experimentation. These past few days without = the=20 reflector has not hindered my amateur radio activities and I do = not need=20 to be vetted by others !!
Do what you like but leave me = OUT
G3KEV
 
-----=20 Original Message ----- From:=20 Alberto di Bene To:=20 rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org = Sent:=20 Thursday, May 24, 2012 5:17 PM Subject:=20 Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead = .....PLEASE

On 5/24/2012 6:33 PM, g3zjo wrote:=20
Why not go for it and start it = yourself.
We know=20 some will not move so it will be an additional facility. = Please make=20 sure it is has no taboo, f
frequencies, modes, opinions, = or=20 subjects rules, and no childish = sulking.
Another=20 suggestion is to not make it an open group, meaning that each = request=20 for membership should be
accompanied by a very short = introductory=20 message explaining why that membership is requested.
Then = the=20 moderator(s) of the group will decide whether to accept it or=20 not.  I suppose the same is done
presently with the = Majordomo=20 mailer.

And, if that introductory message is = convincing, but up=20 to a point... then the moderator can accept the = individual,
but=20 putting him in moderation status, meaning that every message = from him=20 must be examined by the moderator(s)
before being = published. =20 The moderation status can be removed after a couple of = legitimate=20 messages from the guy,
showing that he is not a troll or=20 spammer.

I use this method on my soft_radio  Yahoo = group  
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/soft_radio/with=20 more than 2300 subscribers, and, if memory serves, I had just = a couple=20 of cases where a spam message
got through in more than 8 = years of=20 the existence of that group.

73  Alberto =20 I2PHD

E-Mail ist = virenfrei.
Von=20 AVG =C3=BCberpr=C3=BCft - www.avg.de
Version: 2012.0.2176 = /=20 Virendatenbank: 2425/5019 - Ausgabedatum: 24.05.2012=20 =

------=_NextPart_000_00C4_01CD3B6F.8C06FFD0--