To All SECC:
Normally I'd figure that Gordon just had a run-in with some disgruntled
idiots. Yes, the phone bands are rife with them. But, this is too much.
As a current VE (active since 1984) I know there are NO provisions in PART
97 (Part 95 regulates Citizen Band) that allow ANYONE to claim ANY FREQUENCY
except by prior occupancy. N4LR established prior occupancy and provided
that his signal was compliant with respect to spectral purity, the
frequency was his until he relinquished. If you doubt this, ask K1MAN. If
they heard N4LR from 10+ khz away, someone had a problem. Again, nets
with published schedules have no claim to any frequency, regardless of
their purpose.
As a veteran also, that crap would make me angry too. One wonders what his
service record is, or is it as imaginary as the call sign.
This sort of behavior erupts during almost every SSB contest. Expect it and
deal with it. As I heard once on 75, " You can have the frequency if you
can take it!"
Thanks to all who worked us at WW4LL this weekend. W4NTI was plenty loud
Sunday night in Sharpsburg on 20.
Tom NN4RR
----- Original Message -----
From: "Macie, Gordon" <GMacie at innotrac.com>
To: <secc at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 10:21 AM
Subject: [SECC] I am a LID
>I had a run it with a net on 40 meters Sunday morning.. I was on freq
>someting like 7.244.75 and the net control started up on 7255. In the next
>hours several stations came to my freq some identified , some not accusing
>me on qrming them. I tried to slide down but about 1/2 kc was all I could
>move without qrming someone else. It amazes that people on a net wouldn't
>be able to find their net if it was 1 kc up... So they are nowing
>discussing me on a yahoo group as a lid... It was apparently some kind of
>ex military net. One station came on freq (no call of course) and told me
>that was no way to treat a veteran. I not sure what that has to do with
>radio etiquette. Of course I informed him that I was also a veteran... Oh
>well....
> I have received from one of their group a private email. I haven't decided
> whether I want to respond to it or not.. They were comments about a ham
> test question about moving for a net... I really cant believe that is in
> the fcc rules or on a test but I will dowload the latest part 95 and
> research... One of the guys pointed out he had been a ham 35 years and
> hadn't seen any one refuse to move for a net... The net control who
> started taking pre checkins was in texas and 20 over nine so Im sure he
> heard me when he continuouly asked for pre checkins... No one has claimed
> I wasn't there first... They weren't not running any traffic emergency or
> otherwise.. It seems like a holier than though attitude that their
> activity is more important than mine... Oh well.... just venting.. I have
> to admit the veteran comment ticked me off...
>
>
> Gordon N4LR
> _______________________________________________
> SECC mailing list
> SECC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/secc
>
|