Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The good ol' days  (Read 11488 times)
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 169




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: October 18, 2017, 07:56:10 PM »

I am not the only one that thinks HOA's have got to go http://pvtgov.org/pvtgov/downloads/hoasamerica.pdf ....

This must be Sen. Nelson's thinking, he likes private government, homeowners with rights are dangerous...

We're all just slowly boiling in the pot with the frog!!!
« Last Edit: October 18, 2017, 07:59:26 PM by KN6SD » Logged
WA7PRC
Member

Posts: 1845


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #16 on: October 18, 2017, 10:48:27 PM »

"For those who do not know, amateur radio operators play a vital role in disaster communications during hurricanes and other natural disasters."

I agree. Some hams CURRENTLY provide needed communications during (and after) hurricanes and other natural disasters. Further, according to Mike Urich KA5CVH (ARRL South Texas Section Public Information Officer) in a recent interview on WGMD radio (link), the trend is for LESS public need.

It looks like some people in Florida get it.......
The author is a recently licensed ham, who conflates fulfillment of current/past public need with projected increased future public need (that is not substantiated).

And of course there was a comment made by a CAI shill, that said, "You bought it, you eat it".......
"Here we go again with someone who has a problem with his/her HOA contract. You voluntarily decided to live in this community knowing, or at least should have known, the restrictions. The special interests you claim Senator Nelson is bowing to are owners of their homes in these communities and the guidines that were established and agreed upon. The real special interest group in this case would be your ham radio group, whatever name they go by."
CAI shill? Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: October 18, 2017, 10:52:06 PM by WA7PRC » Logged
KK4GGL
Member

Posts: 1293




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: October 19, 2017, 05:42:53 AM »

I agree. Some hams CURRENTLY provide needed communications during (and after) hurricanes and other natural disasters. Further, according to Mike Urich KA5CVH (ARRL South Texas Section Public Information Officer)
South Texas is not the world.
 in a recent interview on WGMD radio (link), the trend is for LESS public need.
[/quote]
In some areas,  at some time, maybe. But even so ...
SO WHAT?
Logged

73,
Rick KK4GGL
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 169




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: October 19, 2017, 06:04:55 AM »

shill


/SHil/

North American informal


noun

noun: shill; plural noun: shills



1.


an accomplice of a hawker, gambler, or swindler who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others.



•a person who pretends to give an impartial endorsement of something in which they themselves have an interest.
"a megamillionaire who makes more money as a shill for corporate products than he does for playing basketball"




verb

verb: shill; 3rd person present: shills; past tense: shilled; past participle: shilled; gerund or present participle: shilling



1.


act or work as a shill.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2017, 06:08:17 AM by KN6SD » Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 4458




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: October 19, 2017, 06:11:18 AM »

https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

I blame cable TV.

Looking at that picture, I can't tell what kind of antennas are on those towers. But my guess is that most if not all of them are TV antennas.

Judging from the cars and the baggy pants, that picture is from the early 1950s. Back then, TV stations were relatively few and far between, relatively low powered, and TV sets didn't have the best front-ends. In most places you needed a good outdoor antenna to get a clear TV picture.

So homes all over America had TV antennas of every description aloft. Some had several, for stations on different channels in different directions. How big they were, and how high, depended on distance to the TV station and topography. Towers such as those were common in "fringe areas".

Having a TV antenna on your house was a status symbol in those keep-up-with-the-Joneses times - it told the world you had a TV set! Those with really big TV antennas probably had COLOR sets, which was even more of a status symbol.

Then cable TV became The Big Thing. Originally, cable TV was a way for folks in "fringe areas" to have good TV pictures without having to put up a tower and big antenna. (It was developed in a hilly part of Pennsylvania, far from TV stations, where the towns tend to be in valleys). And all it did was provide the "local" stations.

But then, in the 1970s, cable spread to places where a simple TV antenna on the roof would get you a great picture. It began to include distant channels and special, cable-only channels. People everywhere began signing up for "cable" - and TV antennas began disappearing from the rooftops of American homes.

The biggest problem with cable TV was installing the cable itself - particularly in customers' homes. Developers and cable-TV operators saw an opportunity: A developer would wire an entire development for "cable" while it was being built - or allow the cable-TV operator to do it - saving installation costs. The developer could then market the homes as "cable ready", the cable-TV operator could say "no installation fee", and the homeowners would sign up in droves (once they found out how poorly indoor TV antennas worked in those houses).

To seal the deal, the developers put "no antennas" deed restrictions, covenants, HOA rules, etc., on the properties. Win-win!

73 de Jim, N2EY

 

Logged
K7JQ
Member

Posts: 965




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: October 19, 2017, 07:54:42 AM »

https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

I blame cable TV.

Looking at that picture, I can't tell what kind of antennas are on those towers. But my guess is that most if not all of them are TV antennas.

Judging from the cars and the baggy pants, that picture is from the early 1950s. Back then, TV stations were relatively few and far between, relatively low powered, and TV sets didn't have the best front-ends. In most places you needed a good outdoor antenna to get a clear TV picture.

So homes all over America had TV antennas of every description aloft. Some had several, for stations on different channels in different directions. How big they were, and how high, depended on distance to the TV station and topography. Towers such as those were common in "fringe areas".

Having a TV antenna on your house was a status symbol in those keep-up-with-the-Joneses times - it told the world you had a TV set! Those with really big TV antennas probably had COLOR sets, which was even more of a status symbol.

Then cable TV became The Big Thing. Originally, cable TV was a way for folks in "fringe areas" to have good TV pictures without having to put up a tower and big antenna. (It was developed in a hilly part of Pennsylvania, far from TV stations, where the towns tend to be in valleys). And all it did was provide the "local" stations.

But then, in the 1970s, cable spread to places where a simple TV antenna on the roof would get you a great picture. It began to include distant channels and special, cable-only channels. People everywhere began signing up for "cable" - and TV antennas began disappearing from the rooftops of American homes.

The biggest problem with cable TV was installing the cable itself - particularly in customers' homes. Developers and cable-TV operators saw an opportunity: A developer would wire an entire development for "cable" while it was being built - or allow the cable-TV operator to do it - saving installation costs. The developer could then market the homes as "cable ready", the cable-TV operator could say "no installation fee", and the homeowners would sign up in droves (once they found out how poorly indoor TV antennas worked in those houses).

To seal the deal, the developers put "no antennas" deed restrictions, covenants, HOA rules, etc., on the properties. Win-win!

73 de Jim, N2EY

 



And now we've come full circle in TV reception with the OTARD ruling. The powerful satellite industry lobbied (and paid) to have the FCC superceed the "no antennas" CC&R provision, allowing small satellite dishes AND outside TV antennas necessary to effectively receive TV broadcasts. If you're talking aluminum now allowed on HOA community's roofs, why not "reasonable" ham radio antennas? Sounds like discrimination to me.

Another situation on the horizon...the growing popularity of Internet streaming of TV content. People fed up with the rising prices of cable and satellite services, and having the availibility of also watching TV on portable computing devices, are now "cutting the (cable) cord", and canceling satellite service. When the satellite and cable companies eventually go out of business, will we be going back to "no antennas of any kind" in future CC&R's? Stay tuned..... Wink

73,  Bob K7JQ
Logged
WA7PRC
Member

Posts: 1845


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #21 on: October 19, 2017, 05:03:21 PM »

Quote
I agree. Some hams CURRENTLY provide needed communications during (and after) hurricanes and other natural disasters. Further, according to Mike Urich KA5CVH (ARRL South Texas Section Public Information Officer) in a recent interview on WGMD radio (link), the trend is for LESS public need.
South Texas is not the world.
It's not... but IMO, the Gulf Coast states are fairly representative of the greatest amount of need.

Quote
In some areas,  at some time, maybe. But even so ...
SO WHAT?
STX is one of the more/most needy areas, at this time and looking forward. That means there is less need for hams using outdoor antennas at their homes. Put that together with the glowing reports of hams currently filling the need for communications, and there appears to be NO public need for any legislation.
Logged
KK4GGL
Member

Posts: 1293




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: October 19, 2017, 05:14:04 PM »

Quote
I agree. Some hams CURRENTLY provide needed communications during (and after) hurricanes and other natural disasters. Further, according to Mike Urich KA5CVH (ARRL South Texas Section Public Information Officer) in a recent interview on WGMD radio (link), the trend is for LESS public need.
South Texas is not the world.
It's not... but IMO, the Gulf Coast states are fairly representative of the greatest amount of need.

Quote
In some areas,  at some time, maybe. But even so ...
SO WHAT?
STX is one of the more/most needy areas, at this time and looking forward. That means there is less need for hams using outdoor antennas at their homes.
SO WHAT? You keep harping on this, wrongly, I might add.
Put that together with the glowing reports of hams currently filling the need for communications, and there appears to be NO public need for any legislation.

So... if a system provides a service there is no need to improve it.
You have this bug up your as ....
People provide a service... a service is being provided... so no more providers are needed.
I call BS.

 ... here we go...
You spouting your BS , me and hopefully others countering it and the thread goes down the drain.
Logged

73,
Rick KK4GGL
WA7PRC
Member

Posts: 1845


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #23 on: October 19, 2017, 05:37:59 PM »

Quote
SO WHAT? You keep harping on this,
It's evidence and testimony provided by your side, that you misinterpret.
Quote
wrongly, I might add.
Your opinion.
Quote
So... if a system provides a service there is no need to improve it.
[uncalled-for personal insult snipped]
People provide a service... a service is being provided... so no more providers are needed.
[unnecessary vulgarity snipped].
Yes, when a service appears to be needed less and less. That's what appears to be the case, according to evidence and testimony your side has provided.
Quote
... here we go...
You spouting your ** , me and hopefully others countering it and the thread goes down the drain.
I'm not the one spouting personal attacks and vulgarities...
Logged
KK4GGL
Member

Posts: 1293




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: October 20, 2017, 04:44:22 AM »

I haven't misrepresented any evidence.

That's right, my opinion. My opinion is that your opinion is wrong.

I listened to traffic being passed during Marie. Did you? Traffic was passed from residences. Homes. The same as with Irma and Matthew.  But, so what? Hams should be able to have reasonable antennas at their residences. Period.

I didn't spout any vulgarities , I typed as... If I'm going to be accused of something, I guess I might as well do.

Telling you are wrong is not a personal attack.

No more replies to you in this one. I do not want to be part of the reason for this thread being locked, or derailed, so you can have  your last anti-ham word.

Logged

73,
Rick KK4GGL
N2EY
Member

Posts: 4458




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: October 20, 2017, 09:59:36 AM »

https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22405575_1667796463284607_88633101065355356_n.jpg?oh=5338781771ba05caf951113415c9f61c&oe=5A72DF9E



 Look!!! All of those towers in the background and no one has painted their home in orange stripes. How did we survive before Home Owners Associations told us that everything must be exactly the same. Oh look, someone left their garage door open and there are cars left on the street. Here a fine there a fine everywhere a fine, fine.

I blame cable TV.

Looking at that picture, I can't tell what kind of antennas are on those towers. But my guess is that most if not all of them are TV antennas.

Judging from the cars and the baggy pants, that picture is from the early 1950s. Back then, TV stations were relatively few and far between, relatively low powered, and TV sets didn't have the best front-ends. In most places you needed a good outdoor antenna to get a clear TV picture.

So homes all over America had TV antennas of every description aloft. Some had several, for stations on different channels in different directions. How big they were, and how high, depended on distance to the TV station and topography. Towers such as those were common in "fringe areas".

Having a TV antenna on your house was a status symbol in those keep-up-with-the-Joneses times - it told the world you had a TV set! Those with really big TV antennas probably had COLOR sets, which was even more of a status symbol.

Then cable TV became The Big Thing. Originally, cable TV was a way for folks in "fringe areas" to have good TV pictures without having to put up a tower and big antenna. (It was developed in a hilly part of Pennsylvania, far from TV stations, where the towns tend to be in valleys). And all it did was provide the "local" stations.

But then, in the 1970s, cable spread to places where a simple TV antenna on the roof would get you a great picture. It began to include distant channels and special, cable-only channels. People everywhere began signing up for "cable" - and TV antennas began disappearing from the rooftops of American homes.

The biggest problem with cable TV was installing the cable itself - particularly in customers' homes. Developers and cable-TV operators saw an opportunity: A developer would wire an entire development for "cable" while it was being built - or allow the cable-TV operator to do it - saving installation costs. The developer could then market the homes as "cable ready", the cable-TV operator could say "no installation fee", and the homeowners would sign up in droves (once they found out how poorly indoor TV antennas worked in those houses).

To seal the deal, the developers put "no antennas" deed restrictions, covenants, HOA rules, etc., on the properties. Win-win!

73 de Jim, N2EY

 



And now we've come full circle in TV reception with the OTARD ruling. The powerful satellite industry lobbied (and paid) to have the FCC superceed the "no antennas" CC&R provision, allowing small satellite dishes AND outside TV antennas necessary to effectively receive TV broadcasts. If you're talking aluminum now allowed on HOA community's roofs, why not "reasonable" ham radio antennas? Sounds like discrimination to me.

Me too. And note this: If the satellite dish needs to be on the front of the house, in full view from the street - the OTARD ruling covers it.

But a ham who wants to string up a simple dipole in the back yard is somehow damaging property values and causing the neighborhood to decline. Yeah, right.

Another situation on the horizon...the growing popularity of Internet streaming of TV content. People fed up with the rising prices of cable and satellite services, and having the availibility of also watching TV on portable computing devices, are now "cutting the (cable) cord", and canceling satellite service. When the satellite and cable companies eventually go out of business, will we be going back to "no antennas of any kind" in future CC&R's? Stay tuned..... Wink

30+ years ago, I predicted that the day would come when every house would have its own dedicated fiber-optic communication. The telecom companies would provide whatever services you wanted - TV, phone lines, data comms, whatever. FiOs made that prediction come true.

We're seeing more and more program content being specifically created for various services (such as Netflix), too. Meanwhile, the percentage of people actually watching "broadcast TV" keeps declining.

One wonders if there may come a day when TV stations start shutting down because they cannot break even, let alone turn a profit.

Satellite has one big advantage: It requires very little Earth-bound infrastructure. You can be in the middle of a major city, or way out in the boonies, and all you really need is power and the ability to "see" the satellite.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Logged
WA7PRC
Member

Posts: 1845


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #26 on: October 20, 2017, 03:46:57 PM »

Quote
I haven't misrepresented any evidence.
YOUR opinion.

Quote
I listened to traffic being passed during Marie. Did you?
Yep. Several times, and afterward. And, during/after many other disasters over the past four decades.

Quote
Traffic was passed from residences. Homes. The same as with Irma and Matthew.  But, so what?
Yep. Hams passed LOTS of traffic. It was a success, more proof that the system works, as-is. Thanks for pointing that out.

Quote
Hams should be able to have reasonable antennas at their residences. Period.
I agree. Hams ARE doing that. Evidence/testimony YOU presented shows only that.

Quote
I didn't spout any vulgarities.
YOUR opinion. OTOH, most dictionaries define certain words you used as vulgar.

Quote
Telling you are wrong is not a personal attack.
Correct, if that's all you did. IMO, it's not.

Quote
No more replies to you in this one.
Thank you. Smiley
Logged
KN6SD
Member

Posts: 169




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: October 21, 2017, 09:33:06 AM »

PRC don't you have a SOCK to play with???

 Cheesy
Logged
K1ZJH
Member

Posts: 3327




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2017, 01:43:54 PM »

PRC don't you have a SOCK to play with???

 Cheesy

 Smiley Smiley Smiley Smiley Smiley Smiley
Logged
W9FIB
Member

Posts: 2105




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: October 24, 2017, 03:16:54 PM »

I agree...that back and forth has become quite old and useless. Both parties seem to never convey any usable information other then they can fight like little kids. Names and call signs withheld so only the guilty will comment negatively. And if they don't, all the better for the rest of us!
Logged

Happy being an Amateur Extra!
Nothing says CB on my printed license.
Ares/Races but no lights or crown vic.
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!