|
I am afraid OM you do not have the Fire Power you think
you have. Gunpower and fuses DAMP
g3kev
----- Original Message -----
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.
73s
Roger G3XBM
-- Via my 2.4GHz transceiver --
Of course, there already is a yahoo group
for 136 Band users , open to all to Join
in : )
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:03 PM
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:
>Do what you like but leave me OUT
>G3KEV
I vote for yahoo.)
73
Clemens
DL4RAJ
-----
Original Message -----
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 -----
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:
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
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
got through in more than 8 years of
the existence of that group.
73 Alberto
I2PHD
E-Mail ist virenfrei.
Von
AVG überprüft - www.avg.de
Version: 2012.0.2176 /
Virendatenbank: 2425/5019 - Ausgabedatum: 24.05.2012
|
