Would John Roberts, WB4AXY  please give me his RFC822 valid e-mail address.
The one in your header did not conform to RFC822 and part of it was lost.
Received: from BITNIC(MAILER) by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.23) id 1703;
          Sun, 19 Oct 86 23:47:23 CDT
Received: by BITNIC (Mailer X1.23b) id 2041; Mon, 20 Oct 86 00:30:43 EDT
Received: from UIUCVMD(MAILER) by BITNIC (Mailer X1.23b) id 1722;
Comment:      Mon, 20 Oct 86 00:23:48 EDT
Received: by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.23) id 1602; Sun, 19 Oct 86 23:23:12 CDT
Date:         Sun, 19 Oct 86 23:20:28 CDT
Sender:       (PHIL@UIUCVMD) via List Processor <LISTSERV@BITNIC>
Reply-to:     Distribution List <MAIL-L@BITNIC>
X-From:         Phil Howard <PHIL@UIUCVMD>
From:         PHIL@UIUCVMD
Subject:      Which network mail is more reliable?
To:            <MAIL-L@UIUCVMD> (Distribution: MAIL-L)
 
Which network has the more reliable mail delivery capability?
 
Is it the one that waits only 3 days for the ENTIRE path to be
online and in working order for delivery?
 
This is about the worst, but have have gotten many similar errors:
> Received: from SIMTEL20.ARPA by wiscvm.wisc.edu on 10/19/86 at 14:54:03 CDT
> Date: Fri 17 Oct 86 12:29:20-MDT
> From: The Mailer Daemon <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Message of 15-Oct-86 20:47:25
>
> Message undelivered after 1 day -- will try for another 2 days:
> [log in to unmask]: Cannot connect to host
> [log in to unmask]: Cannot connect to host
> [log in to unmask]: Could not send message within timeout
>  interval
> [log in to unmask]: Cannot connect to host
> [log in to unmask]: Cannot connect to host
> [log in to unmask]: Cannot connect to host
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
> [log in to unmask]: Device or data error
>         ------------
> Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SIMTEL20.ARPA with TCP; Wed 15 Oct 86
>  20:47:58-MDT
> Received: from (MAILER)UIUCVMD.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 10/15/86 at
>   21:46:13 CDT
> Received: by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.23) id 8985; Wed, 15 Oct 86 21:45:52 CDT
> Date:         Wed, 15 Oct 86 21:44:45 CDT
> From:           Phil Howard  <[log in to unmask]>
> To:  [log in to unmask]
>
> -------
Received: by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.23) id 1758; Mon, 20 Oct 86 00:05:22 CDT
Date:         Mon, 20 Oct 86 00:04:57 CDT
From:         Phil Howard <PHIL@UIUCVMD>
Subject:      LISTSERV at UIUCVMD
To:           Revised LISTSERV discussions <LSTSRV-L@UIUCVMD>
 
LISTSERV at UIUCVMD is now up to 1.5b + a couple files.
Received: from SIMTEL20.ARPA by wiscvm.wisc.edu on 10/19/86 at 23:57:24 CDT
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SIMTEL20.ARPA with TCP; Sun 19 Oct 86
 22:03:55-MDT
Received: from (MAILER)UIUCVMD.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 10/19/86 at
  23:02:34 CDT
Received: by UIUCVMD (Mailer X1.23) id 1405; Sun, 19 Oct 86 23:01:11 CDT
Date:         Sun, 19 Oct 86 22:50:21 CDT
From:           Phil Howard  <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      More: Miami air traffic perpetrator
To: Info-Hams <[log in to unmask]>
 
> From: Ed Schwalenberg <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: The Phantom of Miami Skies
> Message-ID: <[AI.AI.MIT.EDU].108205.861018.ED>
>
> While I agree that hams should not unjustly be accused, you don't present
> any evidence that the perpetrator of this event was NOT a ham.  Perhaps
> that should be part of the information package to USN&WR (and to INFO-HAMS).
 
No, I do not know that the perpetrator was NOT A HAM.  I also do not know
that the perpetrator was not a PILOT, or a disgruntled air traffic controller,
or a Libyan terrorist.
 
I don't think USN&WR knew, either.  If they did, they should have presented
more information than they did.  Even if they determined that despite knowing
that he was a ham and that the story was correct as is in their opinion, we
still must point out to them that valuable public services might suffer as
a result of the foreshortened story.
 
I spoke with someone at 73 magazine who told me that Cable News Network had
previously reported a story on this and referred to a ham radio operator.
Perhaps CNN needs to be included in the responses.  I did not personally
see such a report.
 
Just as it seems to be today too easy to just label anyone who breaks into
a computer system "a computer hacker" (a term normally associated with
people who are dedicated to working computer software modification and
developement without encouragement, money, or even sleep), it seems from
this story that some people already are labeling anyone who does anything
with radios as a "ham radio operator".  We don't need this bias on the part
of a journalist to creep into journalism that is supposed to be unbiased.
 
/Phil/  (future KA9???)