"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
ink.net...

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:
[snip]

I've already gone on record as *personally* favoring the ARRL plan over
the
NCVEC plan for a number of reasons.

I'll take that to mean you do not
support the "signed statement" idea, Carl?

Correct ... there is much about the NCVEC proposal that I don't like.

What's interesting about the NCVEC
proposal is that if you remove the "signed
statement" bad idea, and the "no home-
brew/30 volt final" bad ideas, and the
"additional unnecessary widening of the
phone bands at the expense of CW/data"
bad idea, and the "special beginner
callsign" bad idea, you wind up with a
proposal that's pretty darn close to the
ARRL one. (Yeah, I know about the 5
wpm for Extra thing).

I don't see the 5 wpm for Extra thing as a problem - because I don't think
it
has a snowball's chance in hell of getting approved by the FCC.

As to support of ARRL petition...
I'll let Carl speak for himself (although I believe we both agree).
Specifically, I support the ARRL petition almost 100%.
The ONLY aspect of the ARRL petition I disagree with is
(as you know already) the retention of a code test for Extra.

Ditto ...

Personally, I think many of the provisions
of the NCVEC proposal actually insult beginners.

Ditto ...

I agree completely.

Ditto ...

73,
Carl - wk3c