You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

Message

"Case closed. Wideband audio on amateur radio is 100% legal and within the regulations."

I can certainly see why you would want to 'close' this 'case'. That's one of the options used for an unsupportable argument. It tends to get the desired information/view point into 'play', and then takes advantage of people's opinions/attitudes about the so-called argument accepted as some sort of 'proof' that the argument was valid. Good way to put across an unsupportable, non-factual argument! It's been done for a very long time that way in the popular press. (And at the risk of getting 'dirty', a very good example of what we're fed by politicians.)
I do have to agree with you on one point though. The 'case is closed', part. I'm finished with it, no sense trying to correct someone who obviously knows he's incorrect to start with and want's to advance a silly idea for their own purpose. If you don't like a 'rule' and want to change it there's really is a 'set'/'right' procedure to do that changing. It isn't easy, but it's established and has precedent.
- 'Doc

<blockquote data-quote="W5LZ" data-source="post: 417543" data-attributes="member: 129">&quot;Case closed. Wideband audio on amateur radio is 100% legal and within the regulations.&quot;I can certainly see why you would want to &#039;close&#039; this &#039;case&#039;.&nbsp; That&#039;s one of the options used for an unsupportable argument.&nbsp; It tends to get the desired information/view point into &#039;play&#039;, and then takes advantage of people&#039;s opinions/attitudes about the so-called argument accepted as some sort of &#039;proof&#039; that the argument was valid.&nbsp; Good way to put across an unsupportable, non-factual argument!&nbsp; It&#039;s been done for a very long time that way in the popular press.&nbsp; (And at the risk of getting &#039;dirty&#039;, a very good example of what we&#039;re fed by politicians.)I do have to agree with you on one point though.&nbsp; The &#039;case is closed&#039;, part.&nbsp; I&#039;m finished with it, no sense trying to correct someone who obviously knows he&#039;s incorrect to start with and want&#039;s to advance a silly idea for their own purpose.&nbsp; If you don&#039;t like a &#039;rule&#039; and want to change it there&#039;s really is a &#039;set&#039;/&#039;right&#039; procedure to do that changing.&nbsp; It isn&#039;t easy, but it&#039;s established and has precedent.&nbsp;- &#039;Doc</blockquote>

[QUOTE="W5LZ, post: 417543, member: 129"] "Case closed. Wideband audio on amateur radio is 100% legal and within the regulations." I can certainly see why you would want to 'close' this 'case'. That's one of the options used for an unsupportable argument. It tends to get the desired information/view point into 'play', and then takes advantage of people's opinions/attitudes about the so-called argument accepted as some sort of 'proof' that the argument was valid. Good way to put across an unsupportable, non-factual argument! It's been done for a very long time that way in the popular press. (And at the risk of getting 'dirty', a very good example of what we're fed by politicians.) I do have to agree with you on one point though. The 'case is closed', part. I'm finished with it, no sense trying to correct someone who obviously knows he's incorrect to start with and want's to advance a silly idea for their own purpose. If you don't like a 'rule' and want to change it there's really is a 'set'/'right' procedure to do that changing. It isn't easy, but it's established and has precedent. - 'Doc [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom