Subject: [NEXTEL-1] 'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths- Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely Inconsiderate,

From: Marcel <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 18:42:40 -0400

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate,' FCC Says:

from The ARRL Letter, Vol 22, No 16
Website: http://www.arrl.org/ on April 18, 2003

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely Inconsiderate,' FCC
Says:

The FCC has sent advisory notices to four enthusiasts of what's
become known as "enhanced SSB"--the practice of engineering
transmitted single-sideband audio to approach broadcast quality.
Letters went out earlier this month to amateurs in Illinois, Florida and
New Jersey who are aficionados of enhanced SSB, also known as
"upper wideband" and "lower wideband."

"The Commission has received numerous complaints regarding the
operation of your station," FCC Special Counsel Riley Hollingsworth
wrote Paul Christensen, W9AC, John Anning, NU9N, Anthony
Latin, W4NSG, and Sareno Salerno, W2ONV, on April 3.
Hollingsworth said complaints to the FCC alleged that the
bandwidths of the stations' enhanced SSB emissions were "wider
than necessary and contrary to good engineering practice."

"Wideband overly-processed audio, especially when coupled with
the high intermodulation levels of certain amplifiers, results in the use
of bandwidths extremely inconsiderate of other operators,"
Hollingsworth said. Such transmissions may violate FCC rules and
may be at odds with what Hollingsworth described as "the
expectation that the Amateur Service be largely self-regulated."

Occupying more bandwidth than necessary in a heavily used amateur
band, Hollingsworth wrote, not only could generate ill will among
operators but lead to petitions asking the FCC to establish
bandwidth limits for amateur emissions. At present, the FCC
imposes no specific bandwidth limits on various amateur modes.

Hollingsworth cited §97.307(a) of the Amateur Service rules that
requires the signal of an amateur station not occupy "more bandwidth
than necessary for the information rate and emission type being
transmitted, in accordance with good amateur practice." Some
amateurs have complained that enhanced SSB signals can take up 8
kHz or more of spectrum, cause splatter and unnecessarily interfere
with other stations.

"The Amateur Service is not a substitute for the Broadcast Service,"
Hollingsworth said, "and the frequencies allocated to the Amateur
Service were not allocated for a 'broadcast quality' audio emission or
sound." Hollingsworth suggested the enhanced SSBers operate when
the bands are less busy or on bands that are not heavily used.

The many complaints the FCC has been getting--20 or so per
week--leads to the conclusion that the stations' enhanced SSB
operation is having "a negative impact" on the Amateur Service,
Hollingsworth said. He requested that the four amateurs "fully review
the rules" and make sure their stations conform to them.

Source:

The ARRL Letter Vol. 22, No. 16 April 18, 2003

Member Comments: Add A Comment

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by K9COX on April 19, 2003

W2ONV appears to have the narrowest signal of the group. He
consistently strives to adhere to good amateur practices, and is very
conscious of keeping his bandwidth to a minimum within reasonable
audio limits. His only nemesis is usually just a tremendously strong
signal. Only my opinion.

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by K0PP on April 19, 2003

Finally! Glad to see the FCC is paying at least some attention to this
festering sore in the middle of 20M. I'm angered and amazed that
Bob Heil is endorsing them in his new "Here's Proof" ad campaign
by making part of the group "poster boys" in his ads. I've bought my
last Heil product.

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by KE4TSP on April 19, 2003

"Hollingsworth cited §97.307(a) of the Amateur Service rules that
requires the signal of an amateur station not occupy "more
bandwidth than necessary for the information rate and emission type
being transmitted, in accordance with good amateur practice." Some
amateurs have complained that enhanced SSB signals can take up 8
kHz or more of spectrum, cause splatter and unnecessarily interfere
with other stations. "

Let me start out by saying that I do not use any external
audio-enhancing equipment, and I currently have no plans to do so,
and my opinion of whether it is a positive step or negative one, is
just that, an opinion.

Certainly I do not appreciate someone 8KC wide operating 3KC
away, but the the sad truth is, poor operating practices rarely have
anything to do with "enhanced audio".
For the most part,those who interfere with other amateurs by
excessive Tx bandwidth are most often "slob" operators that have
little concern for their own audio, let alone other amateurs, and really
are not so technically involved in amateur radio as to experiment
with enhancing audio quality.

Looking back a few years, few radios came with internal
processors, and the external audio processor was a "necessity" for
the DX operator trying to keep on top the DXCC list. The "
whiners" who complained then were recognized for what they were,
impediments to technichological advances, and were by-and-large
ignored.

Looking further back, we see the same attitude displayed by many
CW-ops when Amateur phone Tx grew in popularity. The predicted
"end of amateur radio as a result" never occured. These naysayers
were also recognized for their "contribution" and were ignored.

In todays Politically-Correct enviornment where the selfish
complaints of 10-20% of the population are given equal or greater
consideration than the vast 80-90% majority ( can you say "In God
we trust"?)we find the very Tenents of Democracy are turned upside
down.

Now we find that regulatory enforcement action by the FCC seems
to now rely on the same "politically-correct"
knee-jerk reactionism using subjective interpretation to cater to the
minority.

It would seem to me that phrases such as "good amateur practice"
when used as a legal regulatory term is a subjective, vague, and
potentially discriminatory phrase that may be more suited to the
"whim" of the intrepreter.

In this day of easily-measurable technology, why not take the
subjective intrepretation out of the picture, and substitute a
measurable technical specification ?

A 3kc wide envelope IS a 3KC wide envelope, (or 2KC or 8KC
for that matter) and clear, properly-( not over-)driven audio within
that passband should be acceptable to ANY ham/SW listener
regardless of how it is processed, whether by in- radio
audio-compandering
(built-in processors), or externally- added devices.

Anyone in violation of a fair, clearly-defined regulation for eack
emission type, is in violation, period- no references to Tx audio
processing methods is required.

If we contine down this path, we will all find ourselves in violation
someones "opinion", and soon we will only be allowed to operate a
specific commercially-produced radio in a certain emission type, and
any and all home-brewing will be in violation, and you can forget any
technical advances (such as spread-spectrum, or narrow-bandwidth
digital modes) to the hobby.

I cannot think of a quicker way to kill this hobby.

I bet the spectrum auction of amateur allocations to commercial
interests would certianly ease the Federal budget woes !!

I think we should be ever vigilant for those that attempt to "divide
and conquer" through selective enforcement.

This is by far a greater threat to amateur radio than "enhanced
audio" !!!

Leon Hall
KE4TSP

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by WA2JJH on April 19, 2003
Mail this to a
friend!
I agree with Leon. The four HI-FI hams were singled out. There is a
back story to this. Seems that Riley is a stooge for the ARRL. It is
also true that the same complaints came from the same people. The
impact
that the 14.178 group had on 20M was nothing worse than a ham
with too much mic gain. Imagine four hams
using one frequency would destroy 20meters!

The ARRL has been losing membership. This is just a cheap
publicity stunt. If the HI-FI group did not have a web page, they
never would have been bothered with!

The four had the cleanest HI-FI signals. Their signals were no worse
than NON HI-_FI others I have heard using power mics, and
overset speech processors.

This HI-FI group had a high profile. A very informative web page,
and they stuck to ONE frequency
14.178mhz. This made them an easy target, for chicken little
cowards. They made sure their audio chains kept their TX audio
within 3 KHZ.

Maybe it was just jealousy. Most in the group had virtual small
market AM stations in thier shacks.
So what! If you want lots of external audio bells and whistles to play
with, that is not a sin.

The mailing compain was organised and biased.

Ham Radio is about experimentation. I think picking
on a group that tells you up front what they are doing
is not in the spirit of ham radio, and sets dangerous
parameters.

Think about it. Lets say you come up with a ham radio web page
that offends someone. Then they will find someway to justify you
getting in trouble with the FCC.

I am a member of the QCJSNT-QST!. Quarter Century Just SAY
NO to QST subscribtion!

There are worse offenders with 6khz bandwidth. They just did not
have a WEB PAGE and CLUB! Many create far worse with
2.2KHZ with the DSP set for too much bass.

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by WA2JJH on April 19, 2003

I agree with Leon. The four HI-FI hams were singled out. There is a
back story to this. Seems that Riley is a stooge for the ARRL. It is
also true that the same complaints came from the same people. The
impact that the 14.178 group had on 20M was nothing worse than a ham
with too much mic gain. Imagine four hams
using one frequency would destroy 20meters!

The ARRL has been losing membership. This is just a cheap
publicity stunt. If the HI-FI group did not have a web page, they
never would have been bothered with!

The four had the cleanest HI-FI signals. Their signals were no worse
than NON HI-_FI others I have heard using power mics, and
overset speech processors.

This HI-FI group had a high profile. A very informative web page,
and they stuck to ONE frequency 14.178mhz. This made them an easy target, for chicken
little
cowards. They made sure their audio chains kept their TX audio
within 3 KHZ.

Maybe it was just jealousy. Most in the group had virtual small
market AM stations in thier shacks.
So what! If you want lots of external audio bells and whistles to play
with, that is not a sin.

The mailing compain was organised and biased.

Ham Radio is about experimentation. I think picking
on a group that tells you up front what they are doing
is not in the spirit of ham radio, and sets dangerous
parameters.

Think about it. Lets say you come up with a ham radio web page
that offends someone. Then they will find someway to justify you
getting in trouble with the FCC.

I am a member of the QCJSNT-QST!. Quarter Century Just SAY
NO to QST subscribtion!

There are worse offenders with 6khz bandwidth. They just did not
have a WEB PAGE and CLUB! Many create far worse with
2.2KHZ with the DSP set for too much bass.

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by KG6AMW on April 19, 2003

Whether or not you believe the problem exists, apparently enough
people complained to the FCC which caused them to respond.

KG6AMW

RE: 'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths
'Extremely Inconside
Reply
by K8LQ on April 19, 2003

Many advancements in communication can be attributed to Amateur
radio. The guys experimenting on 14.178 stay on 178. It is the other
operators who know these guys are wide...plunk themselves into the
178 passband of the wideband operators. What do they expect??
These fellows need bandspace for their experiments...they are not
out causing malicious interference across all of 20m, they stay right
on 178. You complainers should know this by now...so just give
these guys some breathing room. The 20m band is not that
crowded.

The same wideband argument can be made for the 10-20KC wide
AM operators! These guys plop themselves all over the all-ready
crowded 75M band not just on 3885 where they belong. How
come no crackdown here?

Speaking of the bandspace issue...where is the ARRL and the FCC
with regard to the HUGE 75M CW band or for that matter the
other bands. The ARRL has effectively killed the CW requirement
for licensing so why don't they allocate it to phone! Except for the
ARRL contestors...no one is using it!

The buracracy at the League has poisoned amateur radio and now
their cronies seek to destroy what made the hobby
great........experimentation!

RE: 'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths
'Extremely Inconside
Reply
by K8LQ on April 19, 2003

I assume from this revelation that the ARRL is with the guys on
178??? After all, it looks like they have interest in broadcast audio.
Or are the newcomers at the ARRL just discovering that there is a
common link between broadcast engineering and Ham
radio...Hmmmmmm

ARRL President Jim Haynie, W5JBP, headed the League's
contingent to the 2003 National Association of Broadcasters (NAB)
convention in Las Vegas April 5-10. Haynie said he was impressed
to note the number of Amateur Radio operators in the crowd of
some 90,000.
"I got a chance to meet with quite a number of Society of Broadcast
Engineers members and tell them about The Big Project," Haynie
said. "My job is to go to these things and develop closer ties with
these folks and let them know that Amateur Radio is a resource they
can draw from when they're looking for the next generation of
engineers."

I CAN'T BELIEVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by N0PG on April 19, 2003

Dear Mr Hollingsworth,

And I use the term “Mr.” loosely I might add.

I find the letters and citations sent out to W2ONV, NU9N, W9AC,
and W4NSG appalling and ridiculous. It is my belief that you need
to go on record and remit your letters of poor amateur radio
practice to these individuals.

I had lost all interest in amateur radio, and was about to sell all of my
radio gear and give up the hobby, but then I crossed paths with SSB
AUDIO and my interest in the hobby was rekindled. This aspect of
the hobby brought back the passion and fascination for the hobby
that I had lost. But now you want to remove this part of the hobby
that is the ONLY part of the hobby I find interesting!! How dare
you Riley and shame shame on you!!! Your personal opinion on this
matter is irrelevant and you are doing more damage to the hobby
than good at this point. I felt your position was to help and clean up
the amateur radio bands, I thought you were here to help us keep
our hobby alive and strong. But instead you are singling out those of
us that appreciate SSB AUDIO and you are trying to banish us from
the airwaves! Censorship?? I’m starting to wonder if this is the real
issue.

I thought part of this hobby, and the founding principle of ham radio,
was experimentation. Wasn’t this all started due to experimentation
Mr. Hollingsworth? And I ask you, where would we be now if
someone like YOU prevented experimentation 50 or 60 years ago?
Where were all of the wide band bashers when FSK came along,
where were they when SSTV came out, why are they not
compaining about 10 meter FM, why am I not hearing of AM
signals with heterodyne? Where were they when all of the WIDE
modes started hogging up band width? They weren’t complaining
then, and I ask you to think about that. Just for a minute ask yourself
why there were no complaints about other wide band modes of
operation. I will tell you, because this isn’t about Bandwidth, it’s
about those that do not like hi fi ssb audio. We could use up 3kc
bandwidth or 4 kc bandwidth and these people would still complain,
it’s their personal position that hi fi ssb audio doesn’t have a place
on the amateur bands. If this were a point of bandwidth the
complaints would have been rolling in when any wider bandwidth
mode of operation was occurring on the bands. If it’s a matter of
bandwidth, why are these anti bandwidth bandits complaining of
AM signals that occupy more bandwidth and produce heterodyne?
Why? I will tell you why, because these are anti hi fi ssb audio
bandits.

If you wish to remove wide band audio from the airwaves then you
should start sending notices to those that operate SSB, SSTV,
FSK, AM, FM and all SSB signals that are over 1.8 K. A reliable
signal is intelligible with 1.8 K bandwidth Mr Hollingsworth, so why
are you not taking that position and forcing all signals to be no wider
than that? If you wish to site from the the fcc guildine then so will I:

Hollingsworth cited §97.307(a) of the Amateur Service rules that
requires the signal of an amateur station to not occupy "more
bandwidth than necessary for the information rate and emission type
being transmitted, in accordance with good amateur practice."

This is 1.8 K is it not???? Is it not???????????????????

I have listened and partaken in conversations on 14.178 with 6 K
wide audio. On hundreds of occasions we would set up on 14.178
and start transmitting and there would be no signals within 10 kc up
or down of .178. After setting up our passband on 178 others
would intentionally set up WITHIN our passband. Why? Strictly so
they could say that they were being interfered with. But in reality
they were causing intentional QRM to US!!!

I think what is taking place here is that you receive letters from
individuals that are anti hi fi ssb audio, and this is the only side you
are hearing from. You don’t receive the letters from those of us that
enjoy this part of the hobby. So your only hearing one side of the
story. I think you will be amazed at the numbers that you are
affecting by taking this stance of anti hi fi ssb audio. We are much
stronger in numbers that what you are aware. I cannot force others
to write you, but I hope that you receive a letter from every single
PRO HI FI SSB AUDIO proponent so you can be made aware
that you, Mr. Hollingsworth, are making a big mistake.

HI FI SSB does belong on the airwaves!! This aspect has brought
more people into the hobby, and kept more operators active in the
hobby than any other aspect of amateur radio to date.

Sincerely,

N0PG
Anthony Whitmore

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by WA2JJH on April 19, 2003

K8LQ, All I can say I have had arguments with ARRL honchos
about Hi-Fi SSB. They think anybody who has a transmitter wider
than 2.2khz is a war crimial!
Check out a previous poster from 1 land.

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by WA2JJH on April 19, 2003

K8LQ, All I can say I have had arguments with ARRL honchos
about Hi-Fi SSB. They think anybody who has a transmitter wider
than 2.2khz is a war crimial!
Check out a previous poster from 1 land.

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by KA7GKN on April 19, 2003

This letter is terribly skewed and is influenced by a group of Hams
that have a hateful specific agenda to discredit quality radio
operators.
Come by 14.178 and even with your dx audio your are welcomed
to join the conversation.
You will have to fight through the music, swearing, jamming, and
other malicious interference that is doing more harm to ham radio
than listening to fidelity SSB. And we know who the jammers are
yet the FCC is unwilling to respond.

By the way how come the so called wide operators on 75,40,& 17
meters were not mentioned?

Finally the Kachina does 8khz, the jupiter and Orion does 3.9khz
and they are fcc approved!

Martin

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by WA2JJH on April 19, 2003

To the past post,I know what you mean. I have worked the 14.178
Hi-Fi group. They were nice to me. I did notice malicious
interference. Why does not REILLY go after them.

I thick you will see this thread will run PRO 14.178
when all is said and done. Those who "KNOW WHAT TIME IT
IS" know how much effort the HI-FI hams that were singled out,
made sure thier spectra was A-OK.

WHO VOTED THIS REILLY GUY IN. WHEN IS HE UP FOR
OUSTER! I MEAN ELECTION!

Some of the complaint letters came from an organised group. Same
letters. Some letters did have legimate gripes. Some PROBLEMS
WERE CAUSED BY THOSE THAT DO NOT KNOW WHAT
THEY ARE DOING, on other frequencies.

The 14.178 group was singled out, because of people that do not
know the facts. It is just envey.
Some morons just go looking for any problem, too much trouble to
have a QSO.

Also a common mistake is with the TS-850S. If the wrong combo
of filters are punched up, the rig transmits DSB with out the operator
knowing about it!

Yes those with 6-8khz are the true problem.

Not those that can get an excellent AM Clear channel
commercial simulation in less than 3KHZ.

To all the hi-fi biggots, HI-FI when done right, will be maybe 600hz
wider than then the 2.2-2.4 KHZ standard.
Some collins rigs are 3khz wide.

Use too much of your el-cheapo AUDIO SPEECH PROCESSOR
WILL PROODUCE ALL SORTS OF SPECTRA OUTSIDE
3KHZ.

Even factory fresh 2.2khz rigs can produce spectra way outside
3khz.

Also DSP misuse will produce un wanted artifacts.
Is the FCC going after them? NO!!!

It smacks of McCARTHYISM to single out 4 Hams who create no
more interference than any body else.

SHAME ON THE FCC. McCARTHYISM IS BACK!!!!!!!!!

RE: 'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths
'Extremely Inconside
Reply
by KG6AMW on April 19, 2003

References to McCarthyism, FCC employees controlled by the
ARRL, and hate groups banding together to attack the hi-fi crowd. I
guess I missed something in the article. I thought it was only an
advisory notice that was sent.

KG6AMW

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by WA2JJH on April 19, 2003

Yes, there has been much animousity. Check out other EHAM
threads. Many of the letters were from the same people.

You have missed much

It is McCarthyism by definition. Four hams get a letter frm the FCC.
It was their imitators, and others
that the are breaking FCC law.

RE: 'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths
'Extremely Inconside
Reply
by N1YRK on April 19, 2003

This is an example of the friction between wide-band and
narrow-band modes. I think it has come time for the ARRL and
FCC to address the way the bands are divided up. Instead of
CW/phone/data etc., how about rationalizing the whole system?
modes with similar bandwidth share the same area. If a wide signal
(data/sstv/hifi-ssb) is in the proper area, not complaints from the
narrow-band folks.

The question is, should narrow modes be allowed to operate in
space designated for a wider mode? should there be mixed areas,
and some 'reservations' for wide mode signals?

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by W4CNG on April 19, 2003

If real facts were in hand, there would be citatons issued. The letters
were notices without any declarations from the FCC, as have been
seen in previous Citations and Notices of Violations. It is nothing
more than Reactive comments based on mostly what sounds like is
bickering from folks who's radio's do not have better than good
adjacent selectivity.

I personally have more than 10 SpectraPlus shots of NU9N and
W2ONV. None show a signal occupying more than 0-3K. I also
operate Processed SSB and have only had 4-5 complaints. I gave
them the Atlanta FCC Office number and the local OOC both of
which are in a less than 10 mile radius of my station location. Yes,
there are a very few stations operating and using spectrum that
causes problems, for the 99+% of the rest, it's all in your radio. My
Jupiter will go out to 3.9Khz., unfortunately there is no audio leaving
my voice box above 2.4Khz. Sorry folks there is no Modulation
Index on SSB. BTW my Motorola R-2660-C shows that I occupy
the same spectrum that the SpectraPlus software does. Not bad for
$300 of software and a good laptop. I do not listen to complaints
about my audio, it's better than 98% of what is out there on the air,
that last 2% I envy.
Steve W4CNG

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by KR2Q on April 20, 2003

Long live CW!

While I have not heard this "gang of four" on the air (though I do
recall hearing ONV and some other locals playing around with audio
years ago, usually late at night), I have a hard time imagining that
they are ruining all of 20m. Is this practice more widespread than
these four? If yes, any clues why these four were singled out?

Bandwidth is easy to check. Do a study of all bandwidths on 20m
ssb over a given timeframe (random selected) and then see if they
are statistical "outliers" (using the correct statistical calculations to
see if they are).

If they are, then one might consider that they should "get back in
line" (not be an "outlier"). If they are not, just leave them alone. This
should be a completely black/white case.

See you at the bottom 25 of the cw bands (or .060).

de Doug KR2Q

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by KE5V on April 20, 2003

I enjoy listening to them. I find their traffic regarding their audio and
equipment very interesting. I would hate to see them limited or shut
down. But I also like AM and seek out that mode before switching
to SSB. At last count we had 15 bands to chose from. No need to
hang around any portion of 20m if what you hear offends you. Just
push the button and move on...

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by N9SRL on April 20, 2003

NU9N lives two miles north of me here in Illinois. I have never been
interefered with, or been subjected to "splatter" from his station. I
think the FCC's efforts would better serve the amateur community if
they concentrated on other matters such as the fiasco called 75/80m
where so called "amateur radio operators" tune up on top of
on-going qso's, foul language is the course of the day and plain and
simple rudeness abounds. There is no need to run 1.5 KW+ just
because you can!!!!.

I have listened to John and the rest of the guys on 178 and never
heard a foul word, never heard one of them cuss someone out for
some infraction of an unwritten rule, and more often than not I have
learned something about the technical aspect of our hobby, which is
something I thought ham radio was about; LEARNING AND
EXPERIMENTING.

There are alot worse signals coming out over the airwaves from
poorly adjusted transmitters, over driven amplifiers and sloppy
operating practices in general. Where is the stink about that?

Jack Stout
N9SRL

'Enhanced SSB' Bandwidths 'Extremely
Inconsiderate
Reply
by K3PZ on April 20, 2003

OK, now its my turn to be offended. I'm offended that a very small
group of hams are offended by the gang on 14.178. So who do I
call to complain about them complainig about the gang on 14.178?
Some people have nothing better to do but spend their whole day
looking for ways to be offended. W2ONV and the gang are a good
bunch of guys that will help anybody if asked. The real problems are
the deliberate QRM'ers, music players, and trash mouths a little
further up the band.

Paul Zora
K3PZ

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Make Money Online Auctions! Make $500.00 or We Will Give You Thirty Dollars for Trying!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/yMx78A/fNtFAA/i5gGAA/61FxlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/