[net.ham-radio] Hams and SWLs

HOFFMANN%MIT-MARIE@sri-unix.UUCP (10/02/84)

I can only speak for myself.  I enjoy both listening, and
having myself heard.  I was a shortwave listener long before
I was a ham, and SWL was a big impetus to my becoming an
amateur radio operator.

It does not appear that this mailing is being overwhelmed
with material about SWL, and I would cast my personal vote
to welcome discussion of a topic of possible interest to 
other hams, and of definite interest to me.

Elias@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA (10/02/84)

(setq *flame-mode* t)

I agree with WA2EYC (amazing...  I did't kill your call sign this time,
Ron...); I also was a SWL for many years before getting my ticket, and
as a matter of fact still am (that's why I got a Kenwood 430).  For
example, there has been worthy information on this net about
NASA/Shuttle frequencies, "confidential" lists, etc.  I even enjoy the
scanner exchanges!...  (I didn't know about some state's ham exceptions
from the mobile scanner blue laws).

You purists out there offended by the stink?  Want to start a new net on
SWL?  Fine by me, I'll be reading both of them... maybe you should also
start a CW-only net, a phone only net, a 160 net, etc. etc.  not to
mention a ham-flaming-net...

(setq *flame-mode* ())

          Antonio/KA1LLM

          P.S.  I still think you should get a license, Richard, maybe
even just a novice; not only you will find it is FUN, but also you
can add those impressive letter/digit groups at the end of your name...

jhs%Mitre-Bedford@sri-unix.UUCP (10/02/84)

I vote for setting up a separate list for SWLs.  I already voted once, but I
always like to vote as early and often as I can.

There's nothing to stop anybody from belonging to both lists, or N lists.

						-John S., W3IKG