Re: [sarex] Tolerence

[Rich <ranger@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Steve and the Group

Boy I liked your comment to the issue of ISS.  When I posted that I have
made 2 contacts with Susan you would not believe the messages I received
from Hams claiming I broke the rules.  The one that got to me is from the
Houston AMSAT Net stating that 1 CONTACT PER EXPEDITION.

My contacts have been once a week and no more than 30 to 45 seconds for
each one and each was at a lower power level. My last contact 5-10-01
at 18.41 utc was 20 watts and my next attempt will be with the HT in a 
week or two.  I do hope to be able to talk to others on this EXPEDITION
and hope that Houston AMSAT Net would get a life.

I don't believe you should be in every pass or on everyday.  But this thing 
about THOU SHELL NOT COMMUNICATE BUT ONCE PER EXPEDITION is FREQ COPs at
work.




At 10:35 AM 5/12/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>On 5/11/01 6:39 AM Stan Vandiver (Stan@Vandiver.com) wrote:
>
>>Finally, (FINALLY!!!!) let me fill you in on what I'm *NOT* doing... I am 
>>not 
>>making multiple voice contacts, but I have noticed that there are many who 
>>are. Susan is starting to learn some people's names now. 
>
>Generally, I agree with your main point, more people should be enjoying 
>ARISS. However, the above statement is an example of my problem with many 
>of the messages posted to this list lately.
>
>The amateur station abord the ISS is an wonderful resource for our hobby. 
>However, I've noticed hams typically show little tolerance of people with 
>aims different than their own. Rather than trying to understand people's 
>motivation and making allowances for it, they try to convince everyone 
>that their views are right, or the best.
>
>One recent example was when, as part of building ariss.net, I was running 
>tests to determine what power level could get through so I could provide 
>guidance to those people that were asking me questions. Someone chose to 
>take public exception to my use of the digi without bothering to find out 
>who I was, what I ws doing, or why I was doing it.
>
>In this case, Stan appears to imply that multiple contacts are bad. If 
>the sole purpose is to say "I talked to Susan 153 times", then I think 
>most people would say such a ham is greedy. Still, no one in this 
>discussion has the right to say even this is an inappropriate use of the 
>resource. I've not tried to make any voice contact yet, I don't know who 
>Stan is referring to, so I'm not defending myself or anyone else, but 
>perhaps there is other motivation at work here.
>
>Personally, I find little interest in the typical DX style contact, with 
>the ISS or elsewhere. As Stan points out, all it takes is luck, 
>equipment, and skill. Well, I've been pretty lucky through my life so 
>far, I've managed to accumulate a pretty good station, and a bit of skill 
>using it. I don't need a bunch of QSL cards on the wall, or a "Worked All 
>Expeditions" certificate to prove it. 
>
>What I do enjoy more than short acks is getting to know the people I talk 
>to on the radio. Anyone who's ever worked me on the air knows that I drag 
>the conversation off of the normal name-rig-weather script quickly. In 
>the past, I've had long, ongoing conversations with a couple of the 
>cosmonauts onboard Mir. Discussion about schooling, families, 
>lives...this is far more interesting to me than a 15 second 
>acknowledgement that they heard me. I think it is also a lot more 
>satisfing on the space end as well.
>
>Maybe this person was just trying to develop a relationship with Susan 
>that goes a little deeper than a trophy hunt. 
>
>What I'm saying here is that all users of ISS need to understand there 
>are many different uses for the ISS station, and many different 
>motivations among the users. Whether it is collecting wallpaper, rallye 
>tracking, QSOs, promoting APRS, or systems work, all have an equal right 
>to use the resource. All users need to show a little tolerance and 
>consideration for your fellow hams that are different than you.
>
>Each ham needs to first follow the rules of their licensing body. In the 
>US this includes using the minimum power to complete the intended 
>communication. Next, they need to look at their own operation and make 
>sure they are not causing undo interference to others in their pursuit of 
>whatever their goal is. Finally, when a ham sees another ham doing 
>something they think is wrong, rather than issue a public condemnation, 
>they ought to take the time to see if there is some legitimate reason for 
>that which they find objectionable.
>
>Steve K4HG
>----
>Via the sarex mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
>To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe sarex" to Majordomo@amsat.org
>
>
----
Via the sarex mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe sarex" to Majordomo@amsat.org