Someone here asked the question, how do you transmit on a lower frequency and half of you flamed him because he never had a license to use that frequency...

Would it not be better to answer the question? and then state doing so COULD land him a prison sentence?, Well fine, but if you strongly disagree, don't answer, there's really no point in REPEATING 50 times in a single thread 'this is illegal'....

As far as I'm concerned If i asked a similar question, once is fine, but anything else should be 'how' if you know how, and the reason why is simple, he/she's been told once no need to drone on and on, it's been said, now if that person chooses to break the law by making a 1000watt transmitter to broadcast on a lower frequency they can... it's no different to anyone else breaking the law he's been told...

But as far As I'm concerned, the person is learning something he does not know about, just because he's taught how, does not mean he's going to break the law!

 

Actually you are wrong on all counts. It was clearly stated he wanted to build it. The TOS also clearly states this site does not condone illegal actions. We do not teach how to perform illegal actions. We will take action against illegal actions.

What we did was inform him how to do it legally. Where is your problem with that? I would say more, as I feel you are pretty out of line, but I'll leave it at that.

This was not a moral issue, it was a legal one. It also happened to be morally correct.

 

You feel as though I'm out of line? you're out of line.... I'm not the one asking the question so don't start giving me crap over it...

You're out of line for suggesting that anyone who asks that kind of question is going to use it for illegal purposes...

Maybe someone should have stopped you from buying your computer just incase you might download an illegal file, you're out of line

 

So what is it that you actually want other forum members to do or write? My apologies, but I don't understand what "Only Answer if it's Morally Right?" means.

 

So what is it that you actually want other forum members to do or write? My apologies, but I don't understand what "Only Answer if it's Morally Right?" means.

I suggest you go look over a few threads where members here have flamed someone for asking a question where it's perfectly fine to ask the question based on the rules here.... eg non dangerous, car, etc etc, but a valid question but over a certain threshold, be power or something else but still legal within the rules specified here.

 

Cjdelphi, could you cite a specific thread where you believe what you're describing has occured? I seem to remember participating in one that had a similar flavor but can't recall the specifics.

 

It comes down to the usual, you don't like it you can leave. Until then you and he has to abide by the rules. You don't have to like them, but you will abide by them. It really is as simple as that.

The other thread explained how to accomplish what he wanted to do with no heartburn. In a nutshell that was the correct answer.

Judging from other requests for power RF in India I suspect the regulatory apparatus is weak there concerning radio transmission. This is not the case in the USA and UK. In the USA and the UK the enforcement is very active, and the fines (common and expensive) or prison sentence (rare, but it can happen) is real. Radio technology is a well understood science with some aspects of art, it would take very little time to find the transmitter once it started broadcasting.

Some one mentioned that Hams are very jealous of their prerogatives, this is true. They are also among the ones who would turn someone in. For someone following the rules however, they can be the nicest bunch of guys you will ever meet, and they both encourage and support experimentation. They just don't want some yahoo ruining the spectrum for every one.

You will note the gentleman above me is a Ham. I have let my license laps (KB5BNW), but am working on getting it back. Most of the other people in that thread were also Hams. Like I said, we take the issue seriously.

You feel as though I'm out of line? you're out of line.... I'm not the one asking the question so don't start giving me crap over it...

You're out of line for suggesting that anyone who asks that kind of question is going to use it for illegal purposes...

Maybe someone should have stopped you from buying your computer just incase you might download an illegal file, you're out of line

Excuse me, but if you follow this site we regularly have threads closed for copyright violations, for books, programs, and files. The thread in question was specific about the request, which makes your point null and moot. The original thread was not closed, information was given how to do it, legally.

You will note your questions are being answered. You don't like the answers, but that doesn't make them incorrect.

 

I didn't see ant "Flaming" lots of warnings and get your ducks in a row type comments, but nothing I would classify as flaming.

 

I didn't see ant "Flaming" lots of warnings and get your ducks in a row type comments, but nothing I would classify as flaming.

I agree. There was no flaming in this case. It was just friendly cautioning from what I read.

Also, the warnings about "being careful" did not get "repeated 50 times" as claimed. It was just the usual case of many people providing similar responses to a question. Further, the claim that a single warning is enough is unreasonable. That's not how a forum, or any conversation, works. Since when do we try to enforce the notion that, "Once I say it, you don't need to say it."? Normal conversation often leads to many people saying similar things and agreeing. Other times normal conversation leads to strong debating. That's just how it is with humans.

We see this many times in forums in general. One person responds and then another says a very similar thing, either to support the previous comments, or simply because the person did not read the previous comments. Redunduncy is often a good thing in communications. One person giving an opinion is easy to ignore as a possible error, but many people giving similar responses is harder to ignore.

However, if it ever does get to 50 times repeated, then a friendly comment to not be so redundant would be in order. I don't know what is the exact range of appropriate number between 1 and 50, but it's in there somewhere and it did not get violated in this case. - At least, that's one man's opinion.

 

If I were to help a person operate illegally (even if it was just telling him how to do it), it could jeopardize both my Commercial license and my Ham license.
I can warn a person that what he wants to do is illegal, but I would never assist in any operation that is clearly illegal.
I worked too hard to pass the FCC examinations to just throw everything away.

 

Morally? I don't recall any moral questions on these forums.

Ethics, yes.

Like PatM said, there are licensed individuals here who will not place their license in jepardy.

I'm sure quite a few have read the Ethics of some professional societies, like ETA, and choose to abide by them.

 

As in any situation of dispute it's always worthwhile to attempt to come to an agreement as to what a particular word or phrase actually means.

I asked myself "What is flaming?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaming_%28Internet%29

[I guess we then have to agree if Wikipedia is a reliable source.]

So is this what actually happened with respect to the various threads under consideration?