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/YF5MRNKJTVZTTODSOXDGQPNSOENUNMVR/",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "YF5MRNKJTVZTTODSOXDGQPNSOENUNMVR",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/Z7BE2T65XPV3XRSDKEWRADE7CTXW4R64/",
    "sender": {
        "address": "w6zkh (a) att.net",
        "mailman_id": null,
        "emails": null
    },
    "sender_name": "John Neeley",
    "subject": "[amsat-bb] Re: Elk vs Arrow",
    "date": "2011-01-12T20:27:45Z",
    "parent": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/Z7BE2T65XPV3XRSDKEWRADE7CTXW4R64/",
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "You sure that fellow didnt spell engineer---\"injuneer'....afterall, he was \nlooking for an Arrow...  ahemmmmm..\n\n\n\n\n\n\n________________________________\nFrom: Clint Bradford <[email protected]>\nTo: [email protected]\nSent: Wed, January 12, 2011 12:03:25 PM\nSubject: [amsat-bb]  Elk vs Arrow\n\n>> ... The Arrow does not publish any gain numbers ...\n\n>> ... ELK publishes the normal numbers you would expect ...\n\nNow, after reading previous posts the past day on this, the FIRST thing that \ncomes t mind is whether or not the writer got his antenna as a freebie as he \ndemeans other antenna alternatives ... AND I WISH NONE OF US HAD TO THINK LIKE \nTHIS.\n\nBecause a writer here wrote a mini-review of the Elk, and stated it was \"very \nimpressive\" as compared to the Arrow. I have to tip my cap to him for his \nhonesty - he apparently (and hopefully!) won't let \"availability of freebies\" \nsway his opinion of actual performance. But another AMSAT member is \"impressed\" \nwith receiving free equipment - which is being shown to cloud the truth as to \nperformance between competing equipment.\n\nSome think Arrow's owner is \"arrogant\" in that he didn't commission a formal \ntest on the gain of his antennas. On the other hand, those of us that have used \nthem know that they work. I had an engineer client purchase one from me back \nwhen I worked for HRO about five years ago. He was standing outside, waiting for \nme to open shop the next morning, carrying his Arrow to return. \"This cannot \npossibly work,\" he adamantly exclaimed. \"It is engineered all wrong. I want a \nrefund.\"\n\nBecause i had recommended the product due to me own personal experience with \nthem, part of me wanted to professionally \"challenge\" him and learn more about \nhis overnight experience with the Arrow. But seeing how determined he was about \nit being \"engineered all wrong,\" I changed my thinking to, \"Hey, I can purchase \nit myself at a \"open item\" discount.\"\n\nAnd I did. And it is the VERY SAME antenna I use to this day for demos and \npresentation.\n\nBUT - back to the last few messages. What should we all learn? Unfortunately, we \nnow have to think \"behind the scenes\" when we read felow AMSAT members' product \nreviews. We're seeing the fact that some vendors give away products has been \nable to sway and taint honest reporting.\n\nClint Bradford, K6LCS\n909-241-7666\n_______________________________________________\nSent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author.\nNot an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!\nSubscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb\n",
    "attachments": []
}