THE OFFICIAL 147.450 FLAMEBOOK! THEFLAMEBOOK.COM
W0RKF / AA0IN - THE RETARD Ron Foster
450 Sunday Night Trivia
With your host Sue KD6UVD
8PM Pacific
Listen to 147.450 LIVE:
23,007 Entries
Comments: In reply to "Not the FCC" with regard to the offerings of the so-called "Dark Fleas"... I would be cautious of giving too much legitimacy to anything presented by the "Dark Fleas", in particular the "Snitchboi" spammer who typically appropriates my handle, KA6JMM's call letters, the call letters of other amateur radio operators, the proper names of people who they aren't and all while spreading falsehoods, half-truths and spun truths. They're known for highly selective editing of their audio clips. That said, with what's been provided via the "JMM the Model Ham" Soundcloud page - which falsely asserts to be controlled by KA6JMM and which falsely portrays an innocent Youtuber by the moniker of "Boogie" [who also portrays a character called "Francis"] as though he is JMM to viciously and needlessly mock JMM [and, in effect, "Boogie"] for being overweight - is an example of poor operating practices. Indeed, persons who purport to be model hams should not engage with unidentified stations. In this instance their criticism of JMM is warranted. Unfortunately, this same "group" [of, at best, three people] who refer to themselves as "Dark Fleas" has also followed KA6JMM to multiple repeaters, harassing him with - often vulgar and obscene - recordings over a period of time much longer than the 22:00 minutes of that video, and they've done it while themselves failing to ID - I suspect this is because they don't actually have licenses - and while interfering with licensed operators engaged in legal QSOs. So, consider that when you determine how much weight to give to the ostensibly legitimate criticisms of people known for much more egregious rule violations across a much longer period of time - months, if not years - as compared to these entirely tame technical violations.
Comments: Dark Fleas! These tapes have left me a bit dismayed about ham radio. I had no idea such poor operating behavior extended beyond 435 and 450. I appreciate all the effort to share the recordings and had no idea about the amount of effort required to satisfy my somewhat naive request. I am looking forward to discussing these audio tracks with Hammy Sammy and how the individual hams clearly violated FCC rules by repeatedly communicating with an unidentified station. Someone pointed out to me that sometimes hams will attempt to keep unidentified stations on the air as a means to perform RDF triangulation. However, I would think that would not involve four different hams chatting so casually in the late hours with this "squeeky" character over so many months. I can't believe that the control op woke up in the middle of the night to RDF/chase a few minutes of the squeekies conversation. It would have to be a much larger and coordinated effort; not easy to gear up at 2 in the morning. As I understand it, most repeater groups prefer not to acknowledge the squeekies at all and will keep all RDF efforts a secret.
Comments: Hammy Sammy is SO ANXIOUS for attention he is barfing up posts from "Ham Sandwich" attacking "Hammy Sammy". I guess no one was interested when "Ham Sandwich" was challenging BB to fights that never were to occur. ---This recent "Ham Sandwich" post is pure Hammy Sammy, full of big words and bizarre sentence structure. Especially notable is Hammy Sammy's Signature Accusation of "projection" which is all he ever accomplishes in his limitless manifestos of innuendo and unsubstantiated imputations: "Casual conversation does not require justification of your motives or invasive inquiries of others. Your perspective or projection of your purpose Hammy Sammy on Flamebook is not congruent with the truth. You can post your lengthy and colorful sales pitches here all day but in the end you have sold nothing. NO SALE! Again and again."
Comments: Question: What if I don't use a Baofeng but another radio brand for the SPARC alarm contest? Is this acceptable per rules of the contest? Answer: Other brands might be acceptable if you can perfectly emulate the childish wail of the cheap Baofeng siren. If you really want to follow KA6JMM's questionable advice and achieve maximum points you should consider the purchase of "..100 Baofengs for right around three hundred bucks.." although only Our Dear Lord knows where JMM could truly obtain that price or if the cheap loser ever spends that much groceries money in one go. 24-Slevin
Comments: Nothing like listening to an old fucking liar tell his lies 24 7 What a shitshow Lie and give money to a pussy.. all while pretending not to know anything That lying old kook has the victim routine down better than a millenial Even his wife cant stand him. Goes on vacations to other countries to avoid his statin riddled adipose diabetic ass.
Comments: Not The FCC We saw the discussion about hams who flaunt the FCC rules so they can have (illegal) fun talking to unidentified stations called squeakies. We are sharing a sound basis for criticism of KA6JMM and others for their regular and outright friendly conversations with an unidentified station they called "Squeakers", "Squeaky", “KI6Squeaky”, “our own personal Squeaky” and often declared “We love our Squeaky”. This "Squeaky" person operated for at least three years on the W6CDW repeater during KA6JMM's tenure as the Control Op and up to the point KA6JMM was permanently banned from the repeater. As a control operator he condoned his repeater friends’ (KM6ACH, N6FTW & KE6RXE) similar behavior when communicating with the unidentified station they identified as “Squeaky” and occasionally an unidentified station they called "CW Guy". Our sources have told us that the repeater owner, Cliff Wallace overheard JMM talking to “Squeaky” and ordered JMM to “get rid of him by any means necessary”. Incredibly, JMM did not stop talking to the unidentified station and Cliff took note of it. These LEGAL recordings were captured on 3/11/18, 8/01/18, 12/31/18, 1/29/19, 2/07/19, 2/17/19, 3/01/19 by various stations, hence the differing quality of audio. Each clip is separated by the repeater ID. There are too many hours of original material to audit and parse so we offer these 7 examples of what occurred almost nightly as this unidentified "Squeaky" drove to and from work. Interception and rebroadcast of amateur transmissions is specifically allowed under FCC rules, Title 18 of the USC . FCC rules specifically prohibit use of the amateur bands with a view toward a pecuniary interest; Richard Bebout can't copyright said transmissions without having a pecuniary interest. Because this is a recording of an Amateur Radio broadcast Richard Bebout cannot have any monetary interest nor does he own a company that can claim ownership of the audio content from an amateur radio broadcast. See §97.3(4): "Amateur service. A radio communication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs,that is, duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest." [See also §97.113(3)] Also see 18 USC §2511(2)(g)(i): "It shall not be unlawful under this chapter or chapter 121 of this title for any person—to intercept or access an electronic communication made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that such electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public" ...and 18 USC §2511(2)(g)(iii)(III): "It shall not be unlawful under this chapter or chapter 121 of this title for any person—to intercept ANY radio communication which is transmitted—by a station operating on an authorized frequency within the bands allocated to the amateur, citizens band, or general mobile radio services" ...and also reference §97.113(c):
Comments: Hammy Sammy I'm a bit embarrassed by your praise. I'm sort of a newbie ham trying to reconcile what I hear on some repeaters with the FCC rules that should be of concern to amateur operators displaying poor operating practices. So possibly for the sake of discussion I'd like to ask anyone at all to share an audio recording that we might examine for a direct application of the rules. Definitely illustrating someone who blatantly communicates on ham frequencies with unidentified and possibly unlicensed stations (squeakies) on a long term basis. So more than one example would be needed along with some sort of timeline of the recordings.
Comments: In reply to "Ham Sandwich" who said... honestly, I'm not sure what most of what you said is supposed to mean. "Casual conversation does not require justification of your motives or invasive inquiries of others." While what goes on here may in abstract be classified "casual" conversation, when you get to the point you're accusing people of, among other things, child molestation, when we know, if nothing else, that there is no sound basis for such an accusation, the motives of the defaming party are a legitimate subject for discussion. Also, the defaming party has dropped hints as to the reasons for his obsessive, creepy campaign of stalkerish harassment; attempting to discern if there is merit to those hints is hardly "invasive". When you stand up in the public square and you point the finger of blame for, among other things, ugly, despicable, criminal sex acts against others, you best be prepared to defend your claims, even if you do it while cowering behind a mask. If you imagine that these questions are "invasive" because the answers may in some way serve to identify the anonymous blowhard who has been spamming here for at least five years, you might consider that if there is, in fact, any legitimate basis for his claims, then KA6JMM already knows who he is. Beyond that, one of this person's claims is that JMM obtained personal information about him from something he carelessly discarded. If that claim is true, JMM not only knows who he is, but he knows that he is responsible, in part if not in total, for the harassment JMM has been subject to on multiple amateur radio repeaters, as well as for that person's stalkerish following of him and photographing of his property. "Your purpose is not congruent with the truth". Huh? What's my purpose? What's "the truth"? Which truth? The objective, verifiable, unimpeachable truth based on fact, or subjective, unsubstantiated, unverifiable, unbelievable anecdotes that some people mistakenly label "truth"? "...you have sold nothing." If I were selling something, that might be a problem. I'm seeking knowledge on a particular subject. If you have any, please share. It would be much more interesting than your non-responses.
Comments: Casual conversation does not require justification of your motives or invasive inquiries of others. Your perspective or projection of your purpose Hammy Sammy on Flamebook is not congruent with the truth. You can post your lengthy and colorful sales pitches here all day but in the end you have sold nothing. NO SALE! Again and again.
Comments: What if I don't use a Baofeng but another radio brand for the SPARC alarm contest? Is this acceptable per rules of the contest?
Comments: is Buzz t-hunting for SPARC?
Comments: In re: to "Not the FCC" - who SHOULD be with the FCC, but for the fact that the FCC doesn't generally employ people with common sense and critical thinking skills - who said: "Amateur radio is ONLY for communicating with other licensed amateur stations who clearly identify with their amateur service call sign. Any amateur displaying poor operating practices and even better yet who is _documented_ displaying such poor behavior is to be condemned. Wouldn't you agree?" Generally I would. That said, the criticism of RXZ for talking to an "unlicensed" station attached to that video may - MAY - have been a misstatement. In that specific instance, an argument could - COULD - be made that Joan should be classified as "third-party-traffic". Now, obviously, she herself did not specifically identify as third-party traffic, nor did any licensee ID and specifically refer to her as TPT operating via their station, or via a non-RF input to the repeater. But it's my understanding that she was getting in via a Roger Blight-approved medium. Now, we know that Roger Blight allows a great many things that are properly classified as rule violations to go on on his repeater, that he allows people who he likes to have "priority" access through VOIP, "private" RF inputs and phone patches, and he has no problem with them violating the rules - specifically not identifying - and that he even encourages his control operators [who are all unrepentant rulebreakers, persons who have boasted of being "bootleggers" (the way Roger has), persons who on a near daily basis jam stations they don't like or who they imagine are jamming them] to violate Part 97 with impunity under the doctrine of, "your repeater, your rules". I believe it's pretty clear that "your repeater, your rules" does not mean that you can violate Part 97, but it doesn't seem to be that Roger or his control operators understand that. So while it may be "approved" by Roger, and while it's clear that he fundamentally misunderstands the doctrine of "your repeater, your rules", AND while it doesn't appear that there was a legitimate operator exercising proper station control during that audio capture, I can see where the FCC's position would be that while there might have been a failure to ID, you're still - effectively - dealing with a person who is operating as third-party traffic. All other criticisms of Henry's poor behavior remain valid as a basis for criticism. And let me take this opportunity to thank you for your well-reasoned thoughts on the matter, and your gentlemanly way of conversing. You get bonus points for your choice of warning letters to cite as a reference.
Comments: I don't care so much about the squeakies as it is the FCC's paid jobb to catch them. Hams who don't want to volunteer there time to help catch the unidentifieds should not be talking to them and ultimately encouraging the squeakies to continue. Screw WA6RXZ. I hope he gets a warning letter from the FCC.
Comments: Hammy Sammy! Regarding the topic of: "WA6RXZ engaging with unidentified [unlicensed?] persons" The FCC has sent out numerous warning notices and sometime levied fines for hams that violate Section 97.1 and in particular Section 97.111(a)(1). This applies to hams who claim they knew the unidentified station had a valid amateur license or even if they ask the unidentified station for a call sign but still continue to communicate with them. Amateur radio is ONLY for communicating with other licensed amateur stations who clearly identify with their amateur service call sign. Any amateur displaying poor operating practices and even better yet who is _documented_ displaying such poor behavior is to be condemned. Wouldn't you agree? Notes: Section 97.111(a) provides for two-way communications. In summary, amateur stations are authorized to exchange messages with other stations in the amateur service Every control operator in the Amateur Radio Service (with few exceptions) is required to broadcast a station identification (call sign) at least once every ten minutes during periods of communication. §97.119 Station identification. (a) Each amateur station, except a space station or telecommand station, must transmit its assigned call sign on its transmitting channel at the end of each communication, and at least every 10 minutes during a communication, for the purpose of clearly making the source of the transmissions from the station known to those receiving the transmissions. No station may transmit unidentified communications or signals, or transmit as the station call sign, any call sign not authorized to the station. ---------------------------------------- One example out of the many I researched for the discussion: March 31, 2014 Mr. Daniel G. Churovich (Address withheld) Ripley, TN 38063 Re: WARNING NOTICE Amateur Radio License N9RSY EB-FIELDNER-14-00014749 Dear Mr. Churovich: On Friday, March 28, 2014, you were heard by staff at the Commission's High Frequency Direction Finding (HFDF) Center communicating repeatedly on 14.313 MHz with an individual who you identify only as "cowboy." This individual failed to provide his call sign during your conversation, a fact that you were aware of as you repeatedly demanded that he provide his name, call sign and location. Despite being aware of the rule violation on the part of this other individual, you continued communicating with him for an extended period of time.^ This incident constitutes unauthorized transmissions in violation of the Commission's rules. Your operation as described above is contrary to the basis and purpose of the amateur radio service as set out in Section 97.1 and is a violation of Section 97.111(a)(1) of the Commission's rules, which states in pertinent part "[a]n amateur station may transmit the following types of two-way communications: [t]ransmissions necessary to exchange messages with other stations in the amateur service . . . ".^ There is no evidence that the individual with whom you were communicating with on March 28^th was an amateur radio operator as he failed to provide his call sign as required by Commission rules. Please be advised that the Commission expects you to abide by its rules This letter serves as notice that, if operation of this type reoccurs after receipt of this letter, you could be subject to severe penalties, including license revocation, monetary forfeiture (fines),^ or a modification proceeding to restrict the frequencies upon which you may operate. Sincerely, Laura L. Smith, Esq. Special Counsel Enforcement Bureau Cc: Atlanta Field Office South Central Regional Director ^ The Commission employee used direction finding equipment and confirmed the transmissions were coming from your location. The employee recorded the offending transmissions, and provided undersigned counsel with recordings of the incident in question. Should you desire a copy of the recording, one will be made available to you. ^ See 47 C.F.R. SS 97.1 and 111(a)(1). ^ Fines normally range from $7,500 to $10,000.
Comments: If you disagree with what darin isbdoing to 435 Please call the jamming hotline at 323-877-8977 Darin will personally guide you to the right customer service rep I approve of kc6ubp jamming the 435 rptr night and day. Sincerely. Roger Bly
Comments: Just a couple of other bits of audio for those people - all three of them - who imagine there isn't a sound basis for criticism of, among others, N6UZS and KE6RJI: KE6RJI expanded verbal abuse of K6NEC: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_z_UOPiIGOd5q60OFEuqZMecP_7V2lqk/view?fbclid=IwAR0Z4VT1dZBm1MpSiGP2l-0y4Du-WLmhbULjIIeURfeRstHuT-A9n_e6xZI N6UZS uses racial slurs and is "banned" from K9KAO [on SPARC]: https://garchives1.broadcastify.com/20400/20200523/202005230149-354970-20400.mp3
Comments: Here's my new selfie 
Comments: My son was arrested. 
Comments: YOU CAN TALK ON 450, BUT YOU CAN'T TALK ON 450, THAT'S NOT RENEGADE HAM RADIO !!!
Comments: |
| < Previous 20 | Next 20 > |
Back to THE OFFICIAL 147.450 FLAMEBOOK!