| |
N9LYA > PACKET 07.04.16 00:26l 55 Lines 2511 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 3119_N9LYA
Read: GUEST
Subj: RE: Re:Is this what packet is now?
Path: IW8PGT<IZ3LSV<F1OYP<SR1BSZ<OK0NBR<OK2PEN<CX2SA<N0KFQ<N9LYA
Sent: 160405/2203Z 3119@N9LYA.#SIN.IN.USA.NA
Wow endorsing the death of Packet Radio are we K.O.
You would best be served to stay out of it as well.
First you criticize someone for their opinion and it is mine as well . That their pointing out that packet is no place for large 7+ files of anything readily available over the internet...
Then you redirect this bull and completely change its To and @ Fields.
All Bradd is doing is trying to encourage good operating practices..
Sheesh. Maybe its time Packets regrowth had some mentoring... and not just posting 108 7+ files .. and having complacency , "well ok what ever K.O. says must be the only way."
Besides what happens when someone just does as you say THEY PLEASE and posts illegal content.. Are you endorsing that as well.
Copy right...
Porn...
etc
And no the sender HAD no legit reason.. 7+ messages should never be sent as BULLETINS..
Now if he knew a ham that wanted it and sent it as PMAIL maybe a few messages would be ok... NOT 108. But there are better ways to disseminate Binaries over packet... REQFIL for one. Again goes to a single user not the whole world to plug up Packet even on VHF let alone HF these would take a while, or drop the whole net to a pile of pooo.. A lot of work.. and headaches for a network not capable of supporting silly acts..
But stand knowing NO 7+ Type files will be supported by this BBS. And I am furthest form a packet cop then you would ever know. I reject stations on a last resort basis.. same for 7+ if they would not get out of hand I would probably let them pass on AXIP/UHF 9600 baud.. But no.. Not happening..
So no your statement(S) is/are non sequitur...
73 Jerry N9LYA
-----Original Message-----
From: N0KFQ
To: PACKET@WW
Sent: 4/5/2016 13:45
Subject: Re:Is this what packet is now?
R:160405/1746Z 1585@W9ABA.#WCWI.WI.USA.NOAM BPQK1.4.65
R:160405/1745Z 11980@N9PMO.#SEWI.WI.USA.NOAM BPQ6.0.12
R:160405/1745Z @:N6RME.#NCA.CA.USA.NOAM #:31636 [El Dorado] $:89731_N0KFQ
R:160405/1745Z 89731@N0KFQ.#SWMO.MO.USA.NA BPQ1.4.65
It just really doesn't matter what you think about it. You would better
serve the packet community if you would more carefully mind your own
business.
If the sender of Easyterm had a reason for sending that over packet,
then that is his business.. and he DOES NOT need your permission.
I thought that we had rid ourselves of the "packet cops", but it looks
like they are crawling back out of the woodwork.
Best thing for you to do is just "butt out".
73, K.O. n0kfq
[End of Message #3115 from N0KFQ]
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
