Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-ma06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 223C43800009A; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:26:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Tljs5-0005JY-Te for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:25:25 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Tljs5-0005JP-FE for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:25:25 +0000 Received: from mail-bk0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Tljs3-00083M-Ui for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:25:24 +0000 Received: by mail-bk0-f46.google.com with SMTP id q16so1918906bkw.33 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 09:25:03 -0800 (PST) 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=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TreySJksW7WDpC7upcSQ4cZQ/1LQ2gHxOgzbWPGzWTM=; b=rNk3g3GtcAUjbmhOHZ67GSmSojcEaYittXAbCRGi7jzpG6v6FiBpOl1NlbTC1Fb+ug d83iePxWY5Qu9LpvF1+ONYgHFNrLW/VPARbfIX2xrRUSbbj1gQE6frVfdFfB44Emnviw aYa1vP97xgIqqM0jbz5Pnsz2HnC1DqCk3vHwlgj41XnLb5JrBR5Rk9HbY/sQZBL7yD1F 8rZ1iagRwXBpRZ7GhO7KkaLYsWlb0neuQg3wDm94EQ65NPgF2k2zN4SEZngQd9ffjDBz sxe9QFuunecSVuR1wgWWk0jZAMgKAeD8tZkrP9C4M4DCAw1gSStzIaT3tlKnI8f1VWnW rBFw== X-Received: by 10.204.130.87 with SMTP id r23mr4892785bks.90.1356024303161; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 09:25:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.21.4] ([87.115.110.60]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f24sm7885739bkv.7.2012.12.20.09.25.00 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 09:25:01 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50D349EB.5000109@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:24:59 +0000 From: John Pumford-Green User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120824 Thunderbird/15.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <1TlisQ-0d4JpA0@fwd11.t-online.de> <50D34621.4070805@gmail.com> <598519308-1356023657-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1327427466-@b27.c4.bise7.blackberry> In-Reply-To: <598519308-1356023657-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1327427466-@b27.c4.bise7.blackberry> 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: On 20/12/2012 17:14, > And perhaps if a fuss hadn't been made it may not have been noted? Unfortunately once of the consequences of the "mistake" could have led to illegal operation on 5MHz too - and unlike 472kHZ it's a bit more of a thorny area, what with it belonging to the MoD and all that. There is much potential for egg on face if the MoD decided they didn't like the fact that RSGB/OFCOM had seemingly released the new allocations early, by mistake. Not good for the image, in high circles, eh? [...] 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 [209.85.214.46 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gm4slv[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 925300287489a1d7272e62b121c112aa Subject: Re: LF: G3KEV and DK7FC in qso heard in JN68GN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed 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-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mtain-ma06.r1000.mx.aol.com ; domain : gmail.com DKIM : pass x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d600e50d34a3e3c0a X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none On 20/12/2012 17:14, james.cowburn@virgin.net wrote: > And perhaps if a fuss hadn't been made it may not have been noted? Unfortunately once of the consequences of the "mistake" could have led to illegal operation on 5MHz too - and unlike 472kHZ it's a bit more of a thorny area, what with it belonging to the MoD and all that. There is much potential for egg on face if the MoD decided they didn't like the fact that RSGB/OFCOM had seemingly released the new allocations early, by mistake. Not good for the image, in high circles, eh? John GM4SLV