Subject: Care To Try Again, Steve?
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 11/23/2004 5:23 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:

Subject: Care To Try Again, Steve?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 11/23/2004 9:47 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net



"Steve Robeson K4YZ" wrote


So...that means that if we can use this sampling as a basis for
survey,
the available 2 x 2 Extra Class calls falls far short .......


Perhaps a review of RF Exposure Guidelines at your station is in order,
Steve. When that's complete, along with any medical attention indicated
as a result, then perhaps a review of the FCC sequential callsign
assignments (as they pertain to license class) is also in order.

You can be as insulting as you care to, Hans.

The FACTS are that you made a stupid assertion that was easily refuted
by
a
bit of time spent researching the database.

Extra class or othrwise, your "greeater than half" assertion is/was
wrong.


OK, fine. Hans made a mistake.

The bigger question is: Should we put up with the system as described?

Seems to me that all that would be required to fix it would be to require
that
FCC would only issue or renew licenses for those persons who were either US
citizens or resident aliens. And all VEs must meet the same criteria.

That way, N3KIP can have his license and US military personnel can take their
exams in Tokyo, but the giveaway stops.

It's not just about callsigns - it's about the integrity of the system.

Again with the allegations of lack of integrity.

I am asking this sincerely...Does ANYone have ANY evidence that these
"tests" were NOT administered in accordance with FCC rules and regulations?
And "giveaways"...Did the applicant's NOT pay the appropriate VE fee at the
time of the exam and did they NOT pay the appropriate fee if their "trophy"
call is other than from the sequential system...?!?!

If you're going to insist that the FCC NOT allow this to happen, other
changes will have to fall in to place too. The interpretations that allowed
THIS to happen are the same interpretations that force the FCC's hand to have
"open pools" of test questions.

I'm all for doing both...requiring some sort of residence requirement for
licensure and closing the test poools, but who's going to foot the bill for the
legal challenges that will be required to get it done...?!?!

73

Steve, K4YZ