[eastforker]

So you are saying if they were stationary, like a com satellite, they wouldn’t be weightless?

[central_va]

Com satellites are not stationary they are in geosynchronous orbit.

[SES1066]

So you are saying if they were stationary, like a com satellite, they wouldn’t be weightless?

From this NASA website, talking about 'microgravity';

If you drop an apple on Earth, it falls at 1g. If an astronaut on the space station drops an apple, it falls too. It just doesn't look like it's falling. That's because they're all falling together: the apple, the astronaut and the station. But they're not falling towards Earth, they're falling around it. Because they're all falling at the same rate, objects inside of the station appear to float in a state we call "zero gravity" (0g), or more accurately microgravity (1x10-6 g.)

[CodeToad]

“So you are saying if they were stationary, like a com satellite, they wouldn’t be weightless?”

They are far from stationary. The station keeping they do requires fuel and is the primary reason they have a short lifespan.

[JPG]

I would say that since gravity is never negated and always exerts its effect,’weightless’, or ‘stationary’, are relative terms.