Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mb06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 8628A380000A5; Thu, 24 May 2012 18:19:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SXgMT-0000Vg-S6 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 23:18:25 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SXgMT-0000VT-43 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 23:18:25 +0100 Received: from mail-wg0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-MD5:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SXgMQ-0002wF-Os for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 23:18:24 +0100 Received: by wgbds1 with SMTP id ds1so6483379wgb.4 for ; Thu, 24 May 2012 15:18:19 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:references:from:content-type:x-mailer:in-reply-to :message-id:date:to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=oTbbVTIuWcSnYXtFUVtFWj+ztyNPBO86H9F1f3oWXIs=; b=QIbdylBbe57iwNSfe26ANO5BYtEIRBBNVXw6GevYetxkC18kTdhxH1SwndHpok79G8 GB0urBahNdGsSoWASNk0+P1H6gpMU35o9Dbhm9LKp/nQzHt+Xocgq2nkT+iidr7txHri ediTGEsVDqlf62s99DCs+bpVu7mV3wE3wqqttAul7GeEZefv3MamRcZ/l2JmiW8g1Nm+ Yt26kLm1qAtozxGrCN1QC52OzmbUcKkiWwL3Se8DEggEvl2oDVZP8DfQMtHe8gyEK/zA Ulf+FDJygMUi310H6JOVFCEJ71R9NC37M4zvGAQQLBHAgtX9D7x4tKpqzYVSL+og9W/v yxfg== Received: by 10.216.210.34 with SMTP id t34mr500181weo.171.1337897892296; Thu, 24 May 2012 15:18:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (cpc6-cmbg17-2-0-cust624.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com. [86.30.58.113]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q6sm42438668wiy.0.2012.05.24.15.18.10 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 24 May 2012 15:18:11 -0700 (PDT) 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> From: Roger Lapthorn X-Mailer: iPod Mail (9B206) In-Reply-To: <1411CA501261403BBD6CB75A773E19ED@AGB> Message-Id: <2976E82A-73EF-436A-9C02-0CF67B5711BE@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 23:18:10 +0100 To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) 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: 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). [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [74.125.82.41 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rogerlapthorn[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: c7a664e36c9ca637ce420897bb72a08a Subject: LF: LF-reflector Yahoo group Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-22BBB6B4-4E3D-4D11-A03C-738D3FAF22E1 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=0.8 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL 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: 1:2:506227776:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 1 X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-m006.2 ; domain : gmail.com DKIM : fail x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d601a4fbeb3e54be6 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : temperror --Apple-Mail-22BBB6B4-4E3D-4D11-A03C-738D3FAF22E1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 As expected, there are views for and against, but I think more would now fav= our a move than not. A decision would need to be taken by whoever runs the current blacksheep ref= lector. As said earlier, setting up a Yahoo group would take minutes, but th= is is definitely something to be done by the current LF-reflector owner (or n= ot if decided against). I suspect those against don't understand how current well run Yahoo groups w= ork. They really work very well indeed and honestly would be an extremely he= lpful 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 : ) > =20 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/O_P_E_R_A_/ > =20 > =20 >=20 > From: Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:03 PM > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEASE NOT >=20 > I vote for a active LF band! > Amateur radio on 137 kHz! >=20 > 73, Stefan/DK7FC >=20 >=20 > Am 24.05.2012 21:55, schrieb Clemens Paul: >>=20 >> >Do what you like but leave me OUT >> >G3KEV >> =20 >> I vote for yahoo.) >> =20 >> 73 >> Clemens >> DL4RAJ >> =20 >> =20 >> =20 >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: mal hamilton >> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 9:17 PM >> Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEASE >>=20 >> A moderator !!!!!!!!!!!!! or a censor !!!!!!!!!! and if you have an opini= on 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 experime= ntation. These past few days without the reflector has not hindered my amate= ur radio activities and I do not need to be vetted by others !! >> Do what you like but leave me OUT >> G3KEV >> =20 >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Alberto di Bene >> To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 5:17 PM >> Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEASE >>=20 >> 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 m= ake 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 req= uest for membership should be >> accompanied by a very short introductory message explaining why that memb= ership is requested. >> Then the moderator(s) of the group will decide whether to accept it or no= t. I suppose the same is done >> presently with the Majordomo mailer. >>=20 >> And, if that introductory message is convincing, but up to a point... the= n 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 cou= ple of legitimate messages from the guy, >> showing that he is not a troll or spammer. >>=20 >> 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 coup= le of cases where a spam message=20 >> got through in more than 8 years of the existence of that group. >>=20 >> 73 Alberto I2PHD >>=20 >> E-Mail ist virenfrei. >> Von AVG =C3=BCberpr=C3=BCft - www.avg.de >> Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virendatenbank: 2425/5019 - Ausgabedatum: 24.05.20= 12 --Apple-Mail-22BBB6B4-4E3D-4D11-A03C-738D3FAF22E1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
As expected, there are vie= ws for and against, but I think more would now favour a move than not.

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

<= div>I suspect those against don't understand how current well run Yahoo grou= ps work. They really work very well indeed and honestly would be an extremel= y helpful resource for this community. 

73s
Roger G3XBM



-- Via my 2.4GHz transc= eiver --

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

<= /div>
Of course, there  already  is a  yahoo  group = =20 for  136 Band  users , open to all  to  Join in&nbs= p; :=20 )
 
 
 

Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: LF: An "LF-reflector" Yahoo group instead .....PLEA= SE=20 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
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 !!!!!!!!= !! and=20 if you have an opinion that differs from others you should be=20 BANNED.
No discussion, no debate in other words a DICT= ORSHIP,=20 hardly democratic.
What next ???????????
I can manage without any of it and get on with= amateur=20 radio and experimentation. These past few days without the reflector has= not=20 hindered my amateur radio activities and I do not need to be vetted by=20= 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 <= /div>
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=20 not go for it and start it yourself.
We know some will not move s= o it=20 will be an additional facility. Please make sure it is has no taboo,= =20 f
frequencies, modes, opinions, or subjects rules, and no childis= h=20 sulking.
Another suggestion is to not make it an ope= n=20 group, meaning that each request for membership should be
accompani= ed=20 by a very short introductory message explaining why that membership is= =20 requested.
Then the moderator(s) of the group will decide whether t= o=20 accept it or not.  I suppose the same is done
presently with t= he=20 Majordomo mailer.

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

I u= se=20 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= of=20 cases where a spam message
got through in more than 8 years of the= =20 existence of that group.

73  Alberto =20 I2PHD

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

= --Apple-Mail-22BBB6B4-4E3D-4D11-A03C-738D3FAF22E1--