Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-ma01.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 7E31A3800008A; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 06:58:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Tr5u9-0002j1-VI for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:57:41 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Tr5u8-0002il-Vt for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:57:40 +0000 Received: from nm25-vm3.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com ([212.82.109.204]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Tr5u5-0008FH-3Y for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:57:39 +0000 Received: from [77.238.189.53] by nm25.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2013 11:57:15 -0000 Received: from [212.82.108.124] by tm6.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2013 11:57:14 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1033.mail.ird.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jan 2013 11:57:14 -0000 X-DKIM-Result: Domain=yahoo.co.uk Result=Good and Known Domain X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 358731.95361.bm@omp1033.mail.ird.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 3856 invoked by uid 60001); 4 Jan 2013 11:57:14 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.co.uk; s=s1024; t=1357300634; bh=69mbnIUI+5D/dvzFUErVM2qOwB9GK7uvuNLcmMZaqFY=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=asDba2vZ6lpiU9pYmCqMlFQHjUZy6Axmj3OUvFtQ7kHONYszvtYvJpjpu5ijycBy2VSyT9d35NwoScbk/FSZ5SHh3WLMowQjSpceacMuIN+a2fH2gq6MBBpV+ywGhzixvJapf4TQ7KZxV/Kw2hGbWixhj5DdQr0HikZRhqJ4b1I= DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.uk; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=bRdRRX7nyMZUJQjBy7jQKMyREglh2/oLXxmGnYNMQF3mB3+/f2MVI70j/omWnZIz9YylllL7CsS3Vnw9Bu1Z+lCQ47qRKxnYFpZB0hwVb/bnI1BHdub8lXvZmTIcxasid1LiDPSqr2ROvQg3eYqP9NyJsDhD+8Ooy2ztv9szg60=; X-YMail-OSG: CPR.64wVM1mnRNkgVXTd8PJV_p.JlSgfHKVKdRLaAjrDQn2 JVO.nPthSHTDWNSUeskJIX7uWgw_tTnf5Vwf..h3rJagb6MIKwe.83dD6fyk nq0VHE9.1j0c8QzcAdiuWzu0K8grQl0H2vjZfDeFD62yXA8X5yD3DmSF1p1G s2pCpSGaotPVP9oT2y6WjOnMfyaz8dD0y0Szk2YBV1Y_qB__nXCSzOPqGnm2 Ve6jjSlBfyFU7Whb8a7A0EUk6pdSPpEL7tkzMHducATnyXqIQvt7GKyARcX7 S_5wxbw0W5dBfU4CfpGH3fcwcnnoYMRdzzG9w1jvgoPFJ9XNF0vqSdD1EfEq fld6u30wXhZajubJcPsOwfKowa.PlkAF_xINTGhj_6wReE6t9hu6CHwi7sFk gkwBc98mGakS9gZdrPbg.QEm95HYEF5M2Cv9F3LyF5.YxiUcNignPm3DCwnb cRqIxokr3U8PGw95pem6ArWlT5Udx4yXQ1FPfoHcNYCzxgGm8c.DgOqRTYJK J8STY6ZLNwwKW7ou6wGkCi8RGRwXcguNOatk8J0n6jr5lpcg- Received: from [86.155.211.73] by web133203.mail.ir2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 11:57:13 GMT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 001.001,SGkgQ29saW4gCsKgCldoYXQgY2VudHVyeSBkbyB5b3UgbGl2ZSBpbj8gVGhlIGRheXMgb2YgZGVmZXJlbmNlIGFyZSBsb25nIGxvbmcgZ29uZS4gSXQgaXMgYSByaWdodCB0byBoYXZlIGFjY2VzcyB0byB0aGUgUkYgc3BlY3RydW0gdGhlcmUgaXMgbm8gcHJpdmlsZWdlIGFib3V0IGl0LiBXZSBhY2NlcHQgZ292ZXJubWVudGFsIGNvbnRyb2wgaW4gYSBzZWxmIGludGVyZXN0ZWQgd2F5LiBUaGUgQ0JlcnMgdGF1Z2h0IHVzIHRoYXQhCsKgCkhhdmluZyBzYWlkIHRoYXQgeW91IGhhdmUgYSByaWdodCB0byB5b3UBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.129.483 References: Message-ID: <1357300633.2269.YahooMailNeo@web133203.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 11:57:13 +0000 (GMT) From: M0FMT To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 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: Hi Colin  What century do you live in? The days of deference are long long gone. It is a right to have access to the RF spectrum there is no privilege about it. We accept governmental control in a self interested way. The CBers taught us that!  Having said that you have a right to your opinion of couse. But band planning it's like the family trees in companies, you are given one when you join and over time find out how the outfit really runs and it usually looks nothing like that nice neat box chart!! And so it will be on 472/9.  73 es GL Pete M0FMT IO91UX [...] 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 [212.82.109.204 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (m0fmt[at]yahoo.co.uk) 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: a9e4bd9ac17cf989edb1e222c85d2247 Subject: Re: Re[3]: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="313692494-1168520588-1357300633=:2269" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=5.0 tests=HTML_90_100,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-AUTHENTICATION: mtain-ma01.r1000.mx.aol.com ; domain : yahoo.co.uk DKIM : fail x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d600950e6c3e400d9 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none --313692494-1168520588-1357300633=:2269 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Colin =0A=C2=A0=0AWhat century do you live in? The days of deference are= long long gone. It is a right to have access to the RF spectrum there is n= o privilege about it. We accept governmental control in a self interested w= ay. The CBers taught us that!=0A=C2=A0=0AHaving said that you have a right = to your opinion of couse. But=C2=A0 band planning it's like the family tree= s in companies, you are given one when you join and over time find out how = the outfit really runs and it usually looks nothing like that nice neat box= chart!! And so it will be on 472/9.=0A=C2=A0=0A73 es GL Pete M0FMT IO91UX= =0A=0A=0A>________________________________=0A> From: M5FRA - Colin =0A>To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org =0A>Sent: Friday, 4 Janu= ary 2013, 11:07=0A>Subject: Re[3]: LF: 477 A local SSB chat band ?=0A> =0A= >=0A> =0A>I am sorry but I did not express myself very clearly in the last = couple of posts and there were lots of typos. I will attempt to explain why= I am opposed to digital voice/SSB on 630m. =0A>=C2=A0 =0A>The main reason = is that although it is technically possible it is impractical as it will ta= ke up a disproportionate amount of bandwidth which will effectively deny ot= her people the space to operate. =0A>=C2=A0 =0A>The idea that it could be d= aylight hours only, VOX only etc etc=C2=A0as a gentlemen=E2=80=99s agreemen= t is wildly optimistic in light of the abuse of the other gentlemen=E2=80= =99s agreements called bandplans. =0A>=C2=A0 =0A>I also feel strongly that= we are on the bands as a privilege and not a right. I know for sure that t= here is a lot of abuse of license conditions and have heard ops openly admi= t to running 1kw+ in order to work DX or to =E2=80=98level the playing fiel= d=E2=80=99 in contests. That sort of abuse will only do us harm and althoug= h some argue that Ofcom are not interested in such things let me assure you= that they are. =0A>=C2=A0 =0A>The new 630m band is allocated on a seconda= ry basis to aeronautical mobile users. There are still NDBs within the band= and some countries impose restriction or deny access to 630m altogether be= cause of the shared use. It will only take somebody to either accidentally = or deliberately QRM to an aeronautical user for us to lose the band or face= more restrictions. I can see the headlines now! =0A>=C2=A0 =0A>Finally, an= d I will not post here again on this subject, I am not anti SSB, anti conte= sts, anti much else, but do believe we need a responsible attitude to how w= e use the bands. We should not be constantly pushing for change to suit our= own interests or deliberately flouting the law, in the long term that will= only lead to loss of privilege not more access. =0A>=C2=A0 =0A>And to ans= wer an aggressive=C2=A0direct email which suggested I **** off and play som= ewhere else, yes I do operate digital modes and have done for 40+ years sta= rting with a Creed 7B. I also use SSB, CW, QRP and QRO and even microwaves.= =0A>=C2=A0 =0A>Colin - G8FRA/M5FRA =0A>=0A>m5fra.org.uk=0A>=0A> --313692494-1168520588-1357300633=:2269 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Colin
 
What century do you live in? The = days of deference are long long gone. It is a right to have access to the R= F spectrum there is no privilege about it. We accept governmental control in a self interested way. The CB= ers taught us that!
 
Ha= ving said that you have a right to your opinion of couse. But  band pl= anning it's like the family trees in companies, you are given one when you = join and over time find out how the outfit really runs and it usually looks= nothing like that nice neat box chart!! And so it will be on 472/9.=
 
73 es GL Pete M0FMT IO91UX
From: M5FRA - Colin <m5fra@btinternet.com>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sent: Friday, 4 January 2013, 11= :07
Subject: Re[3]: LF= : 477 A local SSB chat band ?

=0A=0A=0A =0A =0A
=0A
=0A
I am sorry but I did not express myself very c= learly in the last couple of posts and there were lots of typos. I will att= empt to explain why I am opposed to digital voice/SSB on 630m.
= =0A
 
=0A
Th= e main reason is that although it is technically possible it is impractical= as it will take up a disproportionate amount of bandwidth which will effec= tively deny other people the space to operate.
=0A
 
=0AThe idea that it c= ould be daylight hours only, VOX only etc etc as a gentlemen=E2=80=99s= agreement is wildly optimistic in light of the abuse of the other gentleme= n=E2=80=99s agreements called bandplans.
=0A
 
=0A
I also feel strongly th= at we are on the bands as a privilege and not a right. I know for sure that= there is a lot of abuse of license conditions and have heard ops openly ad= mit to running 1kw+ in order to work DX or to =E2=80=98level the playing fi= eld=E2=80=99 in contests. That sort of abuse will only do us harm and altho= ugh some argue that Ofcom are not interested in such things let me assure y= ou that they are.
=0A
 
=0A
The new 630m band is allocated on a secondary = basis to aeronautical mobile users. There are still NDBs within the band an= d some countries impose restriction or deny access to 630m altogether becau= se of the shared use. It will only take somebody to either accidentally or = deliberately QRM to an aeronautical user for us to lose the band or face mo= re restrictions. I can see the headlines now!
=0A
 
=0A
Finally, and I will= not post here again on this subject, I am not anti SSB, anti contests, ant= i much else, but do believe we need a responsible attitude to how we use th= e bands. We should not be constantly pushing for change to suit our own int= erests or deliberately flouting the law, in the long term that will only le= ad to loss of privilege not more access.
=0A
 
=0A
And to answer an aggres= sive direct email which suggested I **** off and play somewhere else, = yes I do operate digital modes and have done for 40+ years starting with a = Creed 7B. I also use SSB, CW, QRP and QRO and even microwaves.
= =0A
 
=0A
=0A
Colin - G8= FRA/M5FRA
=0A
 
=0A


= --313692494-1168520588-1357300633=:2269--