To: | tentec@contesting.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [TenTec] ARRL "regulation by bandwidth" |
From: | roncasa@verizon.net |
Reply-to: | Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com> |
Date: | Thu, 14 Apr 2005 09:33:35 -0400 |
List-post: | <mailto:tentec@contesting.com> |
On Thursday 14 April 2005 08:54 am, Tommy wrote: > Me also! You know if they are trying to regulate by bandwidth, they have > something up there sleeve that probably is not going to be good for the > hobby! Well there is a statement that does not make sense, or is not logical. Logic dictates (or common sense reveals): ARRL presence is dependant on the hobby of ham radio. Why would "they" be planning something thats "not good for the hobby"? Ron wb1hga "CW, an esoteric experience" _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [TenTec] Heil Studio One, Steve Baron - KB3MM |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [TenTec] ARRL "regulation by bandwidth", Geoffrey S. Mendelson |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [TenTec] ARRL "regulation by bandwidth", Tommy |
Next by Thread: | Re: [TenTec] ARRL "regulation by bandwidth", Geoffrey S. Mendelson |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |