wrote:
From: on Sun,May 15 2005 5:43 am
wrote:
From: on Thurs,May 12 2005 3:26 pm
wrote:
Why, Len? I don't claim to be the only accurate voice. Just
more accurate than you.
Heh heh heh...only by YOUR "authority!" :-)
Which is more reliable than *your* "authority", Len....;-) ;-) ;-)
The FCC doesn't appear to think as you do, Jimmie.
Sure they do.
Tsk, tsk, Jimmie...in the REAL reality of now they
do NOT think as you do.
Yes, they do.
The ONLY one who "thinks like you do" is YOU. :-)
Prove it.
I've pointed out that the numbers I post are of currently-
licensed
individuals. You fail to mention that the numbers
on hamdata.com include clubs and other non-individual licenses
(over 9,000 of them) and expired-but-in-the-grace-period
licenses.
Tsk, tsk. Early symptoms of Alzheimer's?
Not in me.
I've written "exclusive of club calls" on quoting
the Hamdata statistics.
Jimmie, get your definitions correct. Those amateur
licensees who are IN the 2-year grace period for
renewal are NOT "expired."
The licensees may or may not have expired. Their
licenses *have* expired.
The FCC doesn't call them that.
Yes, they do.
Quoting FCC rules, 97.21 iii:
"b) A person whose amateur station license grant has expired may apply
to the FCC for renewal of the license grant for another term during a 2
year filing grace period. The application must be received at the
address specified above prior to the end of the grace period. Unless
and until the license grant is renewed, no privileges in this Part are
conferred."
The licensee may not have expired but the license sure has.
I suggest you actually read Part 97, Len.
If those renewals are done within that grace
period, they retain their old call.
Of course. But until FCC acts on the renewal application,
the license is expired.
"Expired" applies AFTER the total 10-year plus 2-year
grace period.
No, it doesn't. See 97.21. FCC also uses the term "expire"
elsewhere in Part 97, to refer to licenses that have reached
the end of the 10 year term, but not the grace period.
Just answer the question, please.
No. :-)
Then why should I answer any of yours?
That's simply not true, Len.
You're just making up bull****. Typical jackass behavior for
you.
Tsk, tsk, very Very VERY WRONG, Jimmie Noserve.
No Len. Would you prefer if I called you a diminutive nickname?
Try to use CIVIL language in here...
I have - for years. It doesn't work with you, Len. You exhibit
jackass behavior in accordance with a predictable profile
regardless - if a person disagrees with your opinions and/or
points out errors in your postings here.
I've repeatedly said that "radio amateur" means anyone licensed
in the Amateur Radio Service. License class, band and mode
don't
matter. VHF/UHF is as much "real amateur radio" as HF.
No, you have NOT.
Sure I have. You're in error again, Len.
I just quote
it from the public database downloaded by one website
from the FCC.
So you accept hamdata.com without question...
NO. You are WRONG!
I question almost everything. I accept Hamdata figures
for the simple reason that they do NOT go into ARRL-
style sinning-by-omission on radio history and their
minority viewpoint on How Amateur Radio SHOULD Be.
I see, You use ad-hominem criteria.
Does the ARRL download the daily FCC database on
U.S. amateur radio licensees?
Yes.
But I do point out
the holes in your arguments, and your factual/logical mistakes,
which seems to enrage you no end..
No, No, NO, Jimmie, you got it WRONG again.
All you do is engage in some odd word play to try
and "justify" your rationalizations of your fantasy
ideas about a hobby. That is NOT "correcting
mistakes."
See above about the word "expire" as used by FCC in Part 97.
You made a mistake, Len. I pointed it out.
Maybe I might want to get a ham license someday?
Nope. We can rule that right out.
Who are YOU to judge?
Who do I have to be? You judge everyone else here, why shouldn't I?
You are NOT in the FCC.
Neither are you.
You are NOT an official in the ARRL.
Neither are you.
All you are is acting like a snide little hamlet who
can't accept that you do NOT "rule" anything (except
with a pencil and paper).
That's more a description of you than me, Len.
So what? You're not a radio amateur, never been one, and it
appears
that you'll never become one either. That's the TRUTH.
WHO said "I will never become one?" :-)
It appears you will never become one. Just an observation.
Jimmie, I've been an UNLICENSED radio-electronics
hobbyist longer than you've been alive...and that IS
the truth...in REALITY.
So what? All that means is that you are old and that you
have fooled with some electronic stuff. Lots of people
can say the same thing.
I've been a LICENSED PROFESSIONAL in radio-electronics
about as long as you've been alive...and that IS the
truth...in REALITY.
So what? All that means is that you are old and that you
passed a written test for an FCC *commercial* license once upon a time.
Lots of people can say the same thing.
I was OPERATING on HF BEFORE you were born, Jimmie,
IN the military...the military you've NEVER been in.
That is reality...whether or not you care to accept it.
So what? All that means is that you are old and that you
once served in the Army, where you were trained to do certain
transmitter adjustments, as part of a large team of specialists. Lots
of people can say the same thing.
Don't even ATTEMPT to CONTROL
Control? Another mistake by you. I just observe and predict.
what I am "allowed" to
do in the FUTURE...because you CANNOT and you do NOT
know the future.
I do know your behavior here, though, and that's a clear predictor of
what you will and won't do. For example, I've
predicted that you'll make up insulting nicknames for those
who disagree with you no matter how they address you. So far
you've proved that prediction 100% correct.
Quit acting like a spoiled child who demands obediance
to you and your ideas.
"Don't even ATTEMPT to CONTROL what I am "allowed" to
do in the FUTURE...because you CANNOT and you do NOT
know the future." - Len Anderson
Apply your own rules for others to your own behavior, Len.
Why no, Len, it's not about me at all.
This thread is about the ARRL and the FUTURE, Jimmie.
"Don't even ATTEMPT to CONTROL what I am "allowed" to
do in the FUTURE...because you CANNOT and you do NOT
know the future." - Len Anderson
It isn't about the PAST that you glorify.
It is about NUMBERS and who is getting what license
in amateur radio. [the Technicians are getting the
overwhelming majority of new licenses,
That's true. But so what?
upsetting
your cherished ideals of How Amateur Radio Should Be]
Not true.
The fact is that a lot of those Technicians are going on to other
licenses.
Some time back you posted the snippet that the Technician class was
growing at a rate of 26 per day. I asked how many Technician Pluses
were being renewed as Technicians, but you didn't answer.
It turns out that the Technician Plus class is *losing* about 26 per
day. Of course not all of them are renewing as Technicians - some are
upgrading and some are being removed from the database. (the above is
from hamdata.com)
I never made a SACRED VOW in HERE on anything,
"Sweetums."
No, you didn't. I never claimed you did.
You are trying to MANUFACTURE that
condition.
Nope - I'm simply pointing out what you claimed you would do,
but haven't done yet.
You aren't being CONSISTENT. Try to get it straight.
Is it what *I* "might" do or is it about "what I will
'never' do?"
You claimed you were going for Extra "right out of the box". January
19, 2000, more than 5-1/4 years ago. But you haven't even got a
Technician license yet.
As I wrote befo
You're not a radio amateur, never been one, and it
appears that you'll never become one either. That's the TRUTH.
Note the phrase "it appears that you'll never".
You are (seemingly) bringing up an OLD piece of a
posting to IMPLY that I "must" do it...EXACTLY as
I wrote it. :-)
Not at all, Len. I'm simply pointing out what you said you would
do, but haven't done yet. And that it appears you'll never do it.
YOU be the "jackass" when you keep
on doing that.
Hmmm...now who doesn't like the truth?
Jimmie, this thread is NOT about me. Why do you want
to convene a kangaroo court? Are you that unhappy
with things that you NEED to antagonistically "pick
on" others? Get CONTROL of YOUR life. Get OFF of
mine.
Sounds like you're telling me to shut up. Here's a clue, Len:
"Don't even ATTEMPT to CONTROL what I am "allowed" to
do in the FUTURE...because you CANNOT and you do NOT
know the future." - Len Anderson
Nope. I'm simply pointing out what you claimed you would do,
but haven't done yet. And will probably never do.
See? That's what you want to control.
That TRUTH appears to bother you a lot.
See, that OLD piece of posting is still sticking to the
roof of your brain. Are you an Effluent?
FANTASY doesn't bother me. You have much FANTASY
going...especially when you come up with What Amateur
Radio Should Be (according to your god-like perceptions
and beliefs). Fantasy can be FUN as entertainment.
FANTASY should NOT be any basis for REGULATIONS...yet
that is what you think is "truth."
TRUTH is what the FCC database has...the FCC grants
the licenses, can tally up what it grants. The TRUTH
is that the increase in NEW Technician licenses in the
USA is averaging about 26 per day, over four times the
total of other-class licenses put together.
No, that's not what hamdata.com says. You're wrong, Len.
Hamdata.com says that the number
of Technician licenses is increasing at the rate of about 25
per day - *from all sources*. Not just new licenses - *ALL* sources.
Got that?
It means Technician Pluses
renewed as Technicians, Novices who pass Element 2, and new
licenses.
Hamdata.com also shows that the Tech Plus license class is
*decreasing* by about 25 per day over the same time period.
You misinterpreted hamdata.com.
The ARRL
is still busy keeping up the charade that U.S. ham
radio is like it was many decades ago.
How are they doing that?
It isn't. They
aren't really trying to entice Technician class
licensees into League membership.
How do you know?
The post that Hans
Brakob made addresses that FACT.
YOU don't seem to like that TRUTH. You want to call
such facts "wrong" because they are against your
BELIEFS. You want to "strike back" at those that
present the TRUTH because such TRUTHs are uncomfortable
to your fantasy.
Not me.
You're simply saying that your *opinions* about ARRL are "THE TRUTH".
That's just bull**** on your part. No other word to describe it.