Re: [IRCA] Cheater term and the FCC

["Tim Hall" <timhall1@xxxxxxxxx>]

Good discussion.

I think the "glitches" that happen and only last a night or two are kind of
fun - mini-DX tests really.  As long as the station figures it out (or reads
it here) and corrects the problem, no foul.  I'm not perfect either (no
matter what everyone says, LOL).  These short-term accidents will never come
close to matching the interference that IBOC will produce night after night.

I try to save the "C" word for stations that are brazen about it, like KILE
Bellaire, TX (Houston suburb).  When I was in Houston for a week in 2004,
they were selling brokered programs at least 4 hours after sunset each night
(no accident there!) and leaving their carrier on all night to boot.  It's
disappointing that they were recently rewarded with a CP for legitimate
night operation.

I personally like the HS FB "rule" - it's one of the few times we get to
hear programming that actually serves the community.  Talk radio and snake
oil salesmen don't meet that description.

73, Tim

On 9/22/07, Craig Healy <bubba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Very good comments. But both the IRCA & NRC lists are indeed Googled. 10
> > minutes after I post something on either list, it ends up on
> > broadcasting lists per several engineers I know. They see and read all
> > about us and what we hear and report. That is another reason I try to
> > keep away from terms that would be offensive to radio stations.
>
> Well, never having bothered to look, I didn't know that.  Not that it
> makes
> a whit of difference to me.  If someone takes offense to what I've
> written,
> I'm perfectly happy to debate the point.  I'm sure my dislike of IBOC has
> gathered me no fans.  But, until they come up with something that doesn't
> trash the neighbors, and actually covers as well as analog, then I won't
> budge.  I put it as a parallel to a neighbor with a loud stereo that
> intrudes into your house and disrupts your life.  Why stations actually
> put
> up with that is quite beyond me.  I truly applaud people like Bob Savage
> who
> speak up to try to save their own skins.
>
> >    We seem to have a certain amount of CEs in this day that know all
> > about DXIng and most are active Hams. Yet they refuse to QSL reports. I
> > would think the CEs that are Hams would be more than happy to QSL, but
> > they don't. A far cry from 40 years ago, which is sad to see.
> > One CE told me that he would QSL, but only his Ham station. Strange.
>
> A QSL is always a favor, and not anything required.  It's their
> choice.  If
> they wanted to QSL reports only coming from people whose last name began
> with M, then there isn't a bloody thing to be done for it.  Years ago
> there
> were at least several engineers per station, even low power daytimers.
> Today there are several stations per engineer.  I have close to a dozen
> stations for whom I do work or consult.  Add the increasing demands of
> life
> in general, and there's not a whole lot of time left.  I don't think I've
> asked for a QSL for many years, not even for tests.  Heck, I really don't
> even keep a formal log any more.  Haven't done that for a couple of
> decades.
> However, I remember what I've heard, and that's good enough for me.  There
> is no need for me to bug someone to verify what I already know.  Other
> people derive great pleasure from QSLs, so more power to them.  It's how
> you
> want to do the hobby.
>
> I have to wonder how many engineers have realized that someone is on to
> their cheating by reading these lists.  And how many of them have been
> saved
> a visit from the FCC because we have served as an early warning system for
> them.  From that perspective, they owe us.  Anyone remember any station
> written about in here as a cheater or as broken and then having them go
> back
> to correct operation?  If so, here's something for them:  You're Welcome!
>
> Craig Healy
> Providence, RI
>
> _______________________________________________
> IRCA mailing list
> IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
>
> Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the
> original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the
> IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
>
> For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
>
> To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx