In article , Mike Coslo
writes:
N2EY wrote:
In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:
In article ,
(N2EY) writes:
Quoting from the NCVEC restructuring petition (not the press release, the
actual petition):
(begin quote)
II. PROPOSAL
D. Creation of a new entry level license.
.......
19. Basic framework of the new entry level license:
.......
d. Power limits:
.......
no longer an issue.
(end quote)
"Quote" from WHAT?
From the actual NCVEC restructuring petition, Len. I downloaded it
yesterday and read it. Didn't you?
I think he's talking about th eNECVEC propoasal, not the NCVEC
proposal, Jim!
Something like that.
The link published by Bill Sohl in here is to Amateur Radio Newsline's
"new" items. Going there will get anyone a very nice copy of the
original NECVEC petition RM-10787 submitted on 29 Jul 03!
Both published links were in error. That was obvious from the first page of
the
petition. Didn't you notice that it wasn't a new petition, and that it did
not match the news release?
RM-10787 is toast just like all the other 13 RMs. The last comment
filed on RM-10787 was 4 November 2003.
They're not "toast", Len. Obviously, FCC is still gathering input for an
NPRM.
WHERE is this "new" petition proposal from NECVEC?
Len, it's "NCVEC". Only one "E".
You must be mistaken Jim.
Not me.
The new NCVEC petition is online and can be downloaded easily, once you
know where to look.
Got that one on all my computers.
Easy to find, wasn't it?
The NCVEC does indeed seem to have
power limits on the newbies.
100 W below 24 MHz, 50 W above.
The NECVEC proposal must be different.
Don't hold yer breath waiting to see the "NECVEC" proposal.
It isn't on the NCI website.
It's not an NCI petition.
Go figure, eh?
Exactly.
It doesn't show up on a Search of Amateur
Radio Newsline's website.
It's not a Newsline petition either.
LIB!
?? I don't know that one, Mike.
It doesn't show up on the W5YI Organization
website.
It's not a W5YI Organization petition, although you can bet your bippy that
every single word of the NCVEC petition had to be personally approved by
ol' Fast Freddie.
You bet.
There's a guy used to getting his way.
Is it on the ARRL website?
It's not an ARRL petition.
I don't know. That's not where I got it.
If so, provide the LINK for it.
Is that an order, Len? Sounds like one. Who are you to give me or anyone
else here orders?
It's not on the arrl website Jim. So I doubt you could provide a link! 8^)
I could provide a link in a few seconds. But why should I? Len's a
self-proclaimed "professional in radio" - he doesn't need my help, does he?
Why should I help you find the new NCVEC petition, Len, given the way you
behave here? Will you act in a civil manner towards me if I help you? Or
will I
simply be the target of more of your name calling, ridicule, bad jokes, and
other abuse?
Remember good manners are a sign of weakness, Jim!
Never heard that one.
Are you talking about the ARRL "new proposal?"
No.
I am referring to, and quoting, the new NCVEC proposal. The one mentioned
in
the news release. Don't you have a copy yet, Len? If not, why are you
commenting on something you haven't read?
The world wonders.
That "new proposal"
doesn't show up on any FCC Public Notices page for the morning of
18 Mar 04 ["Consumers & Governmental Affairs Bureau Reference
Information Center Petitions For Rulemaking Filed"].
That's not where I found it.
Is there an RM number for the "new" ARRL proposal?
I'm not talking about the ARRL proposal. I'm talking about the new NCVEC
proposal.
If there is, tell
us, don't let us accuse you of quoting from vaporware.
Is that an order? Who are you to give me or anyone else here orders?
I'm quoting from the new NCVEC petition. It's online, available for
download.
Took me about 2 minutes to find it, once I realized that the links posted
were
to the old NCVEC petition, not the new one.
ALL of these "new" petitions are nothing but vaporware until it shows
up at the FCC for public viewing with an assigned RM number.
Then what's your problem, Len? If it's not a real petition, why are you all
worked up about it?
Here's a hint: It's a real petition, not vaporware. It can be downloaded
from
an easily accessed site. I even printed it out this morning.
So what do you think of the NCVEC petition in its entirety, Mike? Not the press
release, the actual petition.
73 de Jim, N2EY
And note this: All of these petitions are simply delaying any new restructuring
NPRM. We won't even see an NPRM until both the ARRL and NCVEC petitions get RM
numbers and have comment periods.
And Hans hasn't done his proposal yet.
The ARRL estimate of two years looks like it was too soon!