In my last encounter on this website I became informed there is some kind of a clamp down on technical detail, of which I was not aware, so I hope not to seem naive now as I say what I say.
In my last encounter on this website I became informed there is some kind of a clamp down on technical detail, of which I was not aware, so I hope not to seem naive now as I say what I say.
The daily operation of my radio station and its several transmitters grew beyond the game plan I often voiced, namely, that I was/am the sole listener of my programming.
Why would one guy need 3-AM signals, 3-FM signals and shortwave and longwave besides?
See what I’m saying?
I agree with myself in saying that there will be a change, effective immediately.
From now on I will only broadcast on the frequency I am hearing, and not on multiple unheard channels.
Tonight I’m on this frequency, tomorrow another.
Perhaps I have come to a reasonable frequency management plan that fits my declared purpose.
Listeners Choice…
But Carl, just think about it.
You can station hop from one to another as I’m sure your programming differs somewhat from station to station if only the timing of such programs.
I have two stations running. I like to switch between them occasionally depending upon what I’d like to hear at the moment.
And besides, the more hooks you put in the water the better chance of making a catch. Someone other than you may be listening.
They Must Leave At Once
Hey You!
Listener!
This is my personal private station. Pick another station!
These airways may be public, but this program is mine alone.
Oops. I have an open carrier on after hours. I’d better shut it off.
Clamp down on technical detail?
I believe any “clamp down” on technical detail is just a perception left along the trail by a very few posters (maybe just one) who have chosen to defend their opinions by discredit other technical-detail posters by referring to a technical post with calculation results as a “paper flood”.
This board is lightly moderated and that seems to be working. People are posting on almost any subject, even subjects not related to part 15 radio. It would be a sad day if pseudoscience took over this forum and detailed technical posts were banned!
I’m 99.9% sure that would never happen and pseudoscience will continue to coexist with real science here. If anyone doesn’t understand or doesn’t want to spend the time, they can just skip the “paper flood” posts.
In Many Places
“pseudoscience will continue to coexist with real science here.”
In other venues too. For example..a certain group trying to convince everyone that their exhales and having babies and driving SUV’s cause global warming and the Sun has nothing to do with global warming or the warming of the other planets in the solar system. That if you contribute to a tax, it saves the planet.
That if you take away guns from honest people, it will reduce crime.
But the one that tops it all, though not exactly pseudoscience, but rather “pseudopolitics”, which creates problems to cause reactions to justify solutions keeping everyone safe. Poking and groping at the airports is normal, and outsourcing supports economic growth. That its ok to bail out big companies that take the money and run overseas to avoid taxes and not bother to reinvest back into those that saved them, and that a financial system designed to forever be in debt is a good thing and can be maintained no matter how big the debt gets regardless if the nation is bankrupt.
Lot’s of pseudo going on.
Let’s see what pseudo we end up with in a couple months!
At least here, there is a real choice one can make and actually be in control of that choice. Read the detailed info, or not.
Ain’t America great!
RFB
Psuedo! Bless you.
Upon further consideration…
Perhaps MRAM is right after all.
He has been right before, he may be right again.
Yes, I believe my new frequency management plan will include some periods of transmitting on all frequencies, interspersed with times on select frequencies.
Small thoughts ahead of large.
My large thought of the moment is to head for Bermuda to help out with Hurricane Leslie.
Clamp Down?
At present there is no “clamp down” or any other action of which I am aware being done by the board admins. to suppress technical discussion. It has been done in the past by previous admins. but not currently except when a topic is being “beat to death” in long exchanges which get repetitive..
Post away!
Neil
I Wondered About That
You will no doubt run across the other thread where rich said he was not going to follow up on a technical question because of a “clamp down” on technical detail. Oh good, I found the link….. see item 2
http://www.part15.us/node/3856
This threw me a curve, and I am not a baseball fan, because I had not heard of any such clamp.
Glad to hear there is no clamp.
What would help is if rich comes on and points to the clamp notice to which he refers.
Help
carl wrote: What would help is if rich comes on and points to the clamp notice to which he refers.
I did not identify any formal “clamp” on technical posts, nor did I attribute the quote I did reference as being originated by site moderators.
carl blare is the one who introduced the term “clamp” in the opening sentence of this thread: New Plan.
All I ever posted on this subject until now is included in the thread linked earlier by carl ( http://www.part15.us/node/3856 ).
To save the effort of reading through all of that text, below are the applicable parts.
___________
Loading of Buried Radials
Submitted by Rich on September 5, 2012 – 16:51.
These are good questions, for which accurate responses could be posted.
However in light of recent comments about detailed technical posts on Part15us, some may hesitate to respond to such questions.
Then carl asked “…perhaps you can inform me as to the inhibiting element.”
I answered:
Inhibiting Element
Submitted by Rich on September 5, 2012 – 17:44.
Without putting too fine a point on it, check the posts on this board of yesterday, 4 Sep 2012, which included this clip:
There’s an old saying that certainly applies here. When you want to look extremely knowledgeable, you baffle them with BS.
Perhaps that author would be willing to post his responses to your questions, as a model for others to follow.
_______________
It All Comes Back
I do remember your reply now that we’ve re-traced everything, and that explains it.
i’ll back neal up. he doesn’t
i’ll back neal up. he doesn’t run around locking or censoring threads.
those last few threads (including a few i started) were locked because i had seen us all go down this same road before with the rangemaster and ground lead and i had politely requested via email to jon and neil that they be locked because they had just become repetitive and were getting beat to death and making no further progress toward resolving the issue.
so go easy on neil. he is a patient moderator. there are many threads here that if this was another forum would have been censored/moderated by now.
for the most part we all seem to self moderate our posts.
the only posts i have ever seen get out of hand is posts relating to the 15219 ground lead length and the recent iAM/THII ATU.
the THII/iAM issue is not over either there are a few here still working behind the scenes to get to the truth surrounding that units certification parameters.
just stay patient on that one. we will get an answer one way or another just like we did with the ground lead length.
This is a Different Thing
Oh no, my remark about “clamping down” was nothing about the closed threads from last week or two weeks ago.
And as Rich explained it was me who used the words “clamp down” in response to a posting by rich saying
“These are good questions, for which accurate responses could be posted.
“However in light of recent comments about detailed technical posts on Part15us, some may hesitate to respond to such questions.”
And as rich just explained, he had in mind this statement by somebody who said
“There’s an old saying that certainly applies here. When you want to look extremely knowledgeable, you baffle them with BS.”
The idea there is that detailed technical posts might appear by some to be BS.
I don’t happen to find detailed technical posts to be BS, but there we have the nutshell picture.
All is well, no one is on the hook (except me, I fear) and we can go on with earthly existence.
Back to business:
I printed and read the whole article on shortened elevated radials, which is a good article, but it doesn’t say anything about loading coils on elevated radials.
I hope I’m in the right thread.
It probably doesn’t need stating, but….going to anyway.
nope – no clampdown of any sort 🙂