| |
KD5NJR > PACKET 07.04.16 01:16l 89 Lines 4630 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 1V4A9H1QL7D2
Read: GUEST
Subj: Is this what packet is now?
Path: IZ3LSV<I0OJJ<N6RME<N0KFQ<AE5ME
Sent: 160407/0003Z 35133@AE5ME.#NEOK.OK.USA.NOAM BPQ1.4.64
I'm pretty thrilled there is still any kind of packet at all....
1) I was an elementary / middle school student in the mid to late 1980s. My dad WA5OUF had Bob WB5AOH down to SW OKlahoma to go water skiing. And he checked his messages with TRS-80 Model 100 and an Icom HT. WOW !! I thought that was just about the coolest thing. And it was in no small part one of the reasons I followed them into electrical engineering. My first jobs out of school were with telecommunications firms.
2) And packet (and I) survived the wait until the no-code ham licenses and for me to get "time" to get my license after college. 56k modems and AOL took their toll (as did the disassembly of the network to form APRS, I'd suspect) but it didn't completely fade away.
3) Then my first modes of interest were APRS and the "bent pipe" FM satellites (thanks N5TEX)
4) finally interest around my part of NEOK (thanks AE5ME) rose up enough where we're doing "packet" again...
FLDIGI / MFSK for NVIS comms down in the noise.
UZ7HO Soundcard and EasyTerm for VHF chatting and "manually" logging into nodes and digis.
RMS Express for "reading" mail both over Packet (2m FM) and WINMOR ( 2 / 40 / 80m SSB.) ... MORE TO COME !! (tnx 'BPQ)
I've got to swap messages with KO, Jerry, and Peter out in Vegas... all from the laptop and using whatever I have happen to be near: the FT-817 or the wifi. And a handful of other guys too.... Pretty cool getting the TODAY and TECH Bulls from near and Far.
5) and there are still people to talk to today, (I'm 40 now) some 30 years (give or take) after I first saw the mode running under a picnic shelter alongside that lake in Southwest Oklahoma.
Thanks guys and keep up the good work !
Scott
kd5njr
----- Message from n9lya@n9lya.#sin.in.usa.na sent 2016/04/06 22:21 -----
Message ID: 3119_N9LYA
Date: 2016/04/06 22:21
From: n9lya@n9lya.#sin.in.usa.na
To: packet@ww
Source: AE5ME
Subject: RE: Re:Is this what packet is now?
R:160406/2221Z 35121@AE5ME.#NEOK.OK.USA.NOAM BPQ1.4.64
R:160406/2221Z 89867@N0KFQ.#SWMO.MO.USA.NA BPQ1.4.65
R:160405/2203Z 3119@N9LYA.#SIN.IN.USA.NA
Wow endorsing the death of Packet Radio are we K.O.
You would best be served to stay out of it as well.
First you criticize someone for their opinion and it is mine as well . That their pointing out that packet is no place for large 7+ files of anything readily available over the internet...
Then you redirect this bull and completely change its To and @ Fields.
All Bradd is doing is trying to encourage good operating practices..
Sheesh. Maybe its time Packets regrowth had some mentoring... and not just posting 108 7+ files .. and having complacency , "well ok what ever K.O. says must be the only way."
Besides what happens when someone just does as you say THEY PLEASE and posts illegal content.. Are you endorsing that as well.
Copy right...
Porn...
etc
And no the sender HAD no legit reason.. 7+ messages should never be sent as BULLETINS..
Now if he knew a ham that wanted it and sent it as PMAIL maybe a few messages would be ok... NOT 108. But there are better ways to disseminate Binaries over packet... REQFIL for one. Again goes to a single user not the whole world to plug up Packet even on VHF let alone HF these would take a while, or drop the whole net to a pile of pooo.. A lot of work.. and headaches for a network not capable of supporting silly acts..
But stand knowing NO 7+ Type files will be supported by this BBS. And I am furthest form a packet cop then you would ever know. I reject stations on a last resort basis.. same for 7+ if they would not get out of hand I would probably let them pass on AXIP/UHF 9600 baud.. But no.. Not happening..
So no your statement(S) is/are non sequitur...
73 Jerry N9LYA
-----Original Message-----
From: N0KFQ
To: PACKET@WW
Sent: 4/5/2016 13:45
Subject: Re:Is this what packet is now?
R:160405/1746Z 1585@W9ABA.#WCWI.WI.USA.NOAM BPQK1.4.65
R:160405/1745Z 11980@N9PMO.#SEWI.WI.USA.NOAM BPQ6.0.12
R:160405/1745Z @:N6RME.#NCA.CA.USA.NOAM #:31636 [El Dorado] $:89731_N0KFQ
R:160405/1745Z 89731@N0KFQ.#SWMO.MO.USA.NA BPQ1.4.65
It just really doesn't matter what you think about it. You would better
serve the packet community if you would more carefully mind your own
business.
If the sender of Easyterm had a reason for sending that over packet,
then that is his business.. and he DOES NOT need your permission.
I thought that we had rid ourselves of the "packet cops", but it looks
like they are crawling back out of the woodwork.
Best thing for you to do is just "butt out".
73, K.O. n0kfq
[End of Message #3115 from N0KFQ]
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
