🚀 go-pugleaf

Hank Montgomery <wb4exq@scott.net> made some comments.  I am going to
limit my response to SKYWARN-related matters and not babble about
amateur radio too much.

>Since you are soliciting comments.....
>
>I agree that codes are useful for a number of reasons -- BUT, the regs
>explicitly prohibit codes and ciphers.  I don't have my copy of part
>97 in front of me at this time, but if I remember correctly somewhere
>it lists exceptions - baudot, ASCII, Morse code, international Q
>signals, etc.  I don't remember seeing skywarn codes listed.

Hank, you are one of those people that takes FCC rules too literally.
Several years ago I had a local ham go up against me saying that it
was illegal to have weather nets because the FCC rules specifically
prohibit rebroadcasting of weather bulletins.  The rules, at the time,
made it illegal to rebroadcast NOAA weather radio over the air but
did not say anything about reading weather bulletins.  I ended up
contacting the FCC and ARRL about this issue and was told that the FCC
wants to stay out of things like weather nets and let the hams decide
what's best.  In other words, the FCC does not want to get involved
unless there's interference problems or improper use (language, commercial
use etc).   The ham who gave me all that grief ended up dropping back
into the shadows  --with his tail between his legs.

The *intent* of the codes and cyphers rule is so that the FCC and law
enforcement agencies can monitor the traffic and to prevent ham radio
from being used for illegal purposes --like arranging drug smuggling
dropoffs or passing national secrets to "unfriendly nations".

That you, a casual listener, do not understand the words and "codes"
being used on a SKYWARN net does not mean they are illegal.  As long as
the information can be received openly and its content can be understood
(or made understandable to government authorities upon inquiry) there
is no problem.  I call a thunderstorm a "Cb" and cloud-to-ground
lightning "CG".  These terms are standard meteorological shorthand,
they are not intended to deceive or disguise meaning.  The same is true for
tactical "coding" of information like using azimuth/radius coordinates to
identify spotter locations.  These coordinates are operational shorthand
and are not intended to deceive anyone.  Any government agency wanting to
know what these "codes" mean can ask the net control station or NWS office.
That the general public doesn't understand what I'm talking about is not my
problem  --they are not ham radio operators and technically as a ham my
net is not intended for their reception.

>We are licensed to be communicators.  We are not licensed to be judges
>of the intent or ability of the news media, nor to be censors of what
>sensitive information should be broadcast publicly.  That's not to say
>these are not issues to be dealt with, just that in these cases
>discretion has always been the rule, not codes and ciphers.  If it
>isn't suitable for others ears -- don't broadcast it, use the
>telephone, or since Morse code is explicitly allowed - use CW.

When amateur radio operators are performing public safety missions
(and I don't mean helping at a parade) they must keep public safety
in mind.  The function of a SKYWARN net is to provide local emergency
managers and the NWS with timely, tactical, weather information.  It
is up to these agencies to disseminate it to the general public.  As
an amateur radio operator I know the general public is listening to
my net on scanners.  I also know that often times we get reports of
tornadoes from "trained" spotters that prove to be false.  If I feel that
false information will unduly panic the public and/or that the local
media will go on the air with reports intercepted from our net then it
is within my right to modify the information --in the interest of
public safety.  On my weather net we do not use the word "tornado".
Instead we use the term "suspicious activity".  All the people
participating in the net know what the term "suspicious activity" means
while at the same time we do not panic the public --whom 9 times out of 10
will get the message wrong because they're only paying partial attention.
You might argue that we should use the word "tornado" and that we are doing
a public disservice by not speaking in plain language.  Again, our net
is not intended to be received by the public and therefore they have no
real or implied right to understand what we are discussing.  ..Chris..


*====================================================================*
Chris Hayes Novy - WA9V   Internet: chris@siu.edu
Southern Illinois Univ.             chris@lib.siu.edu
Systems Administration       Phone: (618) 453-1683 (work)
Morris Library                      (618) 457-6149 (home)
Carbondale, IL 62901-6632      FAX: (618) 453-3440
*====================================================================*