Hey folks! Yesterday, I tried to join the Kenwood discussion group / mailing list at: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/TS-520_820_530_830/
I sent two - that's right two - messages, using an anonymized name. Promptly, I got yelled at for not using my call. I replied that I didn't want to connect my anonymized name & call, and was promptly banned.
That's understandable - I get that they have their rules, and even if I disagree with them, they're to be respected.
SO - to eliminate the source of the issue, I created a new e-mail address, signed up, and sent this message to the list owner:
Subject: Whoops, call missing!
I managed to hit 'enter' before I'd finished!
I'm KB1YSQ. And - I wanted to be clear - I'm "(Name Redacted)." I didn't want to join from a new name as an attempt at 'ban evasion,' but as a way of addressing the actual root issue. I was too hasty in my initial response, but I think more critically I was *unclear.*
In theory, I'm a big proponent of anonymity online - I think this is a generational thing, and I've seen *huge* differences in opinion of it in the ham community.
However - I'm 100% fine with abiding by the group rules, regarding signatures / identification - if it's from *this* (newly created) address. My concern was with linking my semi-anonymous internet 'handle' / screenname "Overand" with my call, and as a result my QTH. (Which is a post office box all of 3 miles from my home, in a very small town).
Anyway - I do understand if you won't accept my membership request here given the wrong-foot getting-off-upon, but I think you'll find I'm a quite good community member. (I can provide references from other ham internet communities, or other non-ham internet communities I've helped organize).
A difference of opinion about internet anonymity & privacy shouldn't be enough to keep me separate from the group. At 32, I'm from the "sort of grew up with the modern internet in its various phases" generation, and as such tend to have quite different attitudes about privacy than folks younger *or* older than me.
Incidentally, if references / history matter, I'm an ARRL member, and you can drop me a line over at KB1YSQ@arrl.net
- or even ask at the ARRL about me, as my company (and I) worked with their IT department for a number of years, providing internet service & other things.
Anyway, sorry about forgetting my call in the recent application!
KB1YSQ / Geoff
My membership has been denied - without explanation. I suspect they don't want me there because I disagreed with the policy. THAT BEING SAID - I don't know if the message above actually made it to the list owner / moderators, as I sent it through the list addresses. (But, the message didn't bounce). (I did this twice, as the first time I had hit 'send' before my message was complete. The second time, I made sure to include my Call, but there's inadequate room to put much besides that in the 'join request) form.
It's pretty frustrating - I'm an actual ham, a Kenwood Hybrid owner, and not in fact an ass. I've provided the options of references, and clearly am making a good effort to abide by the group policies - as long as it's not from my anonymized address!
I'm wondering if any of the moderators or list-owners can comment here as to why I'm being denied membership.
The group looks lively and friendly.
Per the list's info page, these are the folks I suppose have the ability to deny or authorize my attempt to join, via my (firstname.lastname@example.org
Joe WB7UQU Group Co-Owner
Walt N9WB Group Co-Owner
Ellen AF9J Group Moderator
Jon KD5SFA Group Moderator
Mike W5RKL Group Moderator
My thought is that the message I sent (wherein I explained why I was re-joining and that I don't feel I'm attempting to 'ban evade' as I'm not trying to do this 'in secret.') may not have made it through, so I suspect maybe they think I'm trying to "sneak in?"
Anyway, I disagree with their decision to deny me membership, given my obvious intent to use my call for all messages going forward. I'd at least like to hear some explanation - if it's merely a matter of "You publicly disagreed with our policy, so we're not going to ever let you in?" That seems kinda vindictive, so I'm really hoping this is just a misunderstanding.
I'm optimistic about this - why *wouldn't* a group of hams want to encourage a relatively young (32) fresh owner of a nice Kenwood Hybrid (TS-830s) from being a part of a ham community?