Email Detail

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/A56XQ7AVPDXIQ5D4B3N4LPLFI25VDYHI/",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "A56XQ7AVPDXIQ5D4B3N4LPLFI25VDYHI",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/A56XQ7AVPDXIQ5D4B3N4LPLFI25VDYHI/",
    "sender": {
        "address": "JHBRTOO (a) aol.com",
        "mailman_id": "41ce78b43fe54c779981d25875ca13f6",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/41ce78b43fe54c779981d25875ca13f6/emails/"
    },
    "sender_name": "[email protected]",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb]  Portable Sat Antennas",
    "date": "2011-05-07T03:57:56Z",
    "parent": null,
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "My two cents worth-- I like the ELK for portable operation first because it \n lays flat in the trunk and it is a single feed line antenna (although the  \nfront line is unusual) I do use an Arrow also with two feed lines to a  \nCombiner/Duplexer/Diplexer/ Whatever mainly or when I use two rigs for  CW/SSB. \nI think both antennas are\nvery comparable operationally, the ELK being a little easier to haul  \naround. Nuf Said bout that\nThanks to all for your info on many subjects-- hams helping hams.\nDave WA6EKR\n",
    "attachments": []
}