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/2GQRFYYGX6UWGKO3LMOZZI7BDH6STGCP/?format=api",
    "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/?format=api",
    "message_id": "[email protected]",
    "message_id_hash": "2GQRFYYGX6UWGKO3LMOZZI7BDH6STGCP",
    "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/2GQRFYYGX6UWGKO3LMOZZI7BDH6STGCP/?format=api",
    "sender": {
        "address": "wb4gcs (a) amsat.org",
        "mailman_id": "87014499e012476c8198fad186f7f963",
        "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/87014499e012476c8198fad186f7f963/emails/?format=api"
    },
    "sender_name": "Jim Sanford",
    "subject": "[eagle]  TeamSpeak conference for Tuesday 10 Oct",
    "date": "2006-10-10T02:18:11Z",
    "parent": null,
    "children": [],
    "votes": {
        "likes": 0,
        "dislikes": 0,
        "status": "neutral"
    },
    "content": "Team:\nSince many of you will be still at SFO or travelling back, I don't think \nthere's a point in having a conference.\n\nHOWEVER, tomorrow represents a GREAT opportunity to brief those who \nweren't there on Symposium.\n\nSO, I will be there.  I ask all of you who were at Symposium to attend.  \nThere will only be one agenda item -- to brief those who weren't there \non Symposium.  And the discussions can range from there . . . .\n\nNEW SUBJECT:\n\nI've read the feedback on my \"classes of service\" note.  Several people \ntold me to just do it, I'm glad I didn't.  Here's where I am.\n\n1.  I feel VERY strongly that we need a concise class of service \ndesignation.  I don't much care what the designations are. \n2.  It was very clear to me, particularly in watching Matt's \npresentation at Symposium, the value of having such designations.  \nThings like \"mode U/V\" have precise meanings to our designers, members, \nand users.  We need similar precision in defining our classes of \nservice.  \"Analog\" is very confusing when we're talking about an SSB \ntransponder that is more digital than analog.\n3.  Some are offended by calling the traditional or old analog \ntransponders \"class 0\".   I think that's crap, but remember that \nperceptions are reality.\n4.  I'm going to make and publish a decision in the next few days.  I'm \ngoing to tell the members and readers of the web site and -bb what those \nare, so we can all speak from a common understanding of terminology.\n5.  The proposal I sent was the best I could come up with to get the \ndiscussion started.\n6.  I've seen some good suggestions.\n\nI'll digest the suggestions tomorrow night, send a proposal before the \nteamspeak conference, and we can go from there.\n\nThanks & 73,\nJim\[email protected]\n\n",
    "attachments": []
}