[BC] Documented harmful interference

Sat Jan 21 13:21:16 CST 2006

At 11:28 AM 1/21/2006, Kent Winrich, K9EZ wrote
>Fine I guess I have been out voted.

         I don't think so.

>If you folks consider Jabba The HD, IBUZ, et al to be a quality 
>discussion about how we can improve the situation, then I have not 
>much else to say.

         I think most of those that do are merely reflecting their
         frustration at what they see as a "broken process."
         However, the reality is that the FCC has mandated what
         we have right now.

         NOTHING SAID ON THIS LIST will mean anything unless
         the various proponents get out and DO something.

         Does someone support IBOC?  Start installing them.
         Does someone detest IBOC? Give us the reference number of
         the petition you filed with the FCC.

         We KNOW there are problems.   We KNOW this can be
         done better from a technical aspect.

         Who is going to do it?

>All I was trying to do folks is to generate quality discussion on 
>improvements.

         Then let's get it on.

         How would *you* improve things?  What do you see
         as the first step?

>There is nothing really to learn here...... and that is why I was a 
>part of this.

         That is totally untrue, and a very unfortunate generalization.
         For example, Steve Davis (you've maybe heard of him?) has taken
         the time and effort (several times) to share information with this
         group. Is there nothing you can learn from Steve?
         Some took the opportunity to merely deride him.

         Frankly, there are days when I look at the posts on this
         list and heave a sigh.

         As I've mentioned before, we have several options, some of which
         I consider poor. We can set the list for "vetting" each post, and we
         can prevent any negative views (and remember, depending upon
         your position, this can mean quite different things) from reaching
         the list.  If someone wants to pay me to sit and do that all day,
         we can reach a suitable arrangement. <g>

         I can save about 60-90 minutes a day by not moderating, not
         trapping some threads and re-directing them (many of you know
         that I send out many private emails each day, trying to help
         keep things in a positive spirit) and just letting anything through.
         That would kill the list in about a week.

         I'm open to constructive thoughts, but unless this is a very
         "confined" list, with no chat, no dissension, narrowly focused
         (remember, we are trying to bridge engineering, IT, and programming
         folk on this list) topics, there is going to be some "wandering" of
         the threads.

         One thing is for sure ....
         Those whose reaction to anyone posting information is
         merely to attack will be finding themselves invited elsewhere.


>Dave Dunsmoor wrote:
>
>>>I won't lose any sleep but I'll miss you. Fire up the filter. If the
>>>rest of the list would like me to go, just let me know and I'll
>>>
>>unsubscribe.
>>
>>
>>>Rich
>>>
>>
>>
>>    You stay put. I don't  always agree with everything you say or how you
>>say it, but in my view, yours is the voice of reason regarding IBOC and it's
>>negative effects on AM radio. I personally have heard very little IBOC, but
>>what I've heard I don't like. The infatuation that the powers that be seem
>>to have with "all things digital" has severely clouded their judgment. Had
>>they done this IBOC correctly, I'd be all over it, and would have bought one
>>(or more) of the receivers already. As it is, when my MANY analog radios in
>>the house, car and office go silent, (or buzzy, whichever the case may be),
>>I'll find something else to listen to, and as others have said, there are
>>MANY alternate options.
>>
>>    We just bought our son an IPOD for his birthday. What a neat gadget. I
>>would have never looked at one before, but I do see it's attraction for the
>>younger folks, and they're all over the place now. Shortwave radio will
>>certainly increase it's presence in my listening. I currently listen to AM
>>while on the road (40 - 50 k miles/year), FM in the office, and AM/shortwave
>>at home and in the shop.
>>
>>    But IBOC will not likely ever sell ads to my household. I won't pay $$$
>>for radio that doesn't provide me with something interesting/useful. If the
>>next car I buy has it installed, so be it, but not being able to listen to a
>>specific station a long way off for the content I want to hear as I drive
>>around the country will just cause me to eliminate AM from my selection
>>list. Currently, and in the past, AM radio has made $$$ by me buying based
>>on their ads. Won't likely happen in the future.
>>
>>    Just my humble opinions....take them or leave them as you see fit.
>>
>>Dave Dunsmoor
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>>To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>>For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: 
>>http://www.radiolists.net/
>>
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: 
>http://www.radiolists.net/


_______________________________________________________________________
Barry Mishkind     -       Tucson, AZ    -   520-296-3797