I don’t think ‘get out of the way’ was quite the sentiment Zach was going for.
I doubt his post was quite as ill-intentioned as that...
Perhaps live and let live is better?
There are aspects of Ham 2.0 that infringe on Ham 1.0, but you can’t put the
genie back in the bottle, and there’s nobody holding a gun to your head to put
away that C-Line.
73, kelly, ve4xt
> On Jun 28, 2017, at 12:44 PM, Tom Osborne <w7why1@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Zack
>
> If all us old curmudgeons who don't really care for 'Ham Radio 2' and we
> just
> 'get out of the way of the ones who do', who are you going to talk to in a
> contest?
>
> Probably a lot of us out there that prefer 'Ham Radio 1', where you
> actually had to look for your own contacts instead of depending on
> technology to find them for you.
>
> Pretty soon the contest bands are going to sound like most of the SSB ops
> on FD - 'Please Copy'. 73
> Tom W7WHY
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 7:08 AM, Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ward Silver N0AX gave a presentation at the annual SMC get-together
>> last year called "Ham Radio 2.0" which is what ham radio is in the
>> 21st century. It was a fascinating, thought-provoking presentation.
>> The basic jist of it by my understanding was that, although Ham Radio
>> 2.0 embraces Ham Radio 1.0 (ham radio in the 20th century), ig goes
>> far beyond that in technology. The "youngsters" in the hobby never
>> knew Ham Radio 1.0. They have technology that was not available in the
>> year 2000, some of it not even dreamed of. So, if you don't happen to
>> like the technology available in Ham Radio 2.0, at least get out of
>> the way of those who do and let them do their thing.
>>
>> 73, Zack W9SZ
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|