On 16 Jul, 22:51, Spike <Aero.Spike@S&T.invalid> wrote:
> Len GM0ONX wrote:
> >luci...@eternal-flames.gov wrote:
> >> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:51:00 퍝, Len GM0ONX 
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> Say no morehttp://www.dx.ardi.lv/VHF-bandplans.pdf
>
> >> But unless and until, the contents of that document are added to the
> >> Schedule of the UK amateur licence, it is not legally enforceable in
> >> the UK.
>
> >> Nick.
>
> >Your right Nick, but that wasn't my point. My point was it is nowt to It
> >is a IARU matter.
>
> Only a week or two ago you were defending the RSGB against the charge
> that thay are now irrelevant, by saying such things as
> "...<gasp>...but who would liaise with the IARU... <cough>
> <splutter>...".
>
> Now it turns out you don't seem to know what the limits of the RSGB or
> the IARU actually are. Amazing. Not.
>
> --
>
>  from
>  Aero Spike

Not at all, just correcting another inaccurate anti RSGB rant ;-)

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 10:41:50 +0100, Spike <Aero.Spike@S&T.invalid>
wrote:

>Sometimes, paying for a product can result in obtaining superior
>performance. e.g. Agent newsreader and news.individual.net.

Pay?  For Agent newsreader?
How does that work then.

Nick