RadioBanter - View Single Post - Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235

October 29th 05, 12:44 PM

wrote:
From: on Thurs, Oct 27 2005 3:41 pm
wrote:
From: on Tues, Oct 25 2005 2:30 am
wrote:
From: on Oct 24, 3:39 am
Alun L. Palmer wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in
wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 16:41:58 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 14:23:24 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

It's about *your* 'scorecard', Len.

Yes, it is.

Well, at least you finally admit to that plain and simple fact.

Did you think someone ELSE bothered to read ALL
the filings on WT Docket 05-235 and compile a day-by-day
tabulation of them?

I don't think that. I know it's true. I've seen the compilation
done by someone else and it's more informative than yours.

YOU did NOT.

Why does that matter?

You've never been a radio amateur but you tell us How Amateur
Radio Should Be. Which is your right of free speech.

The thing you seem to have trouble with is when others use their
right of free speech.

Do those 'filings' include only Comments, or other things like Reply Comments?

ALL the filings, Jimmie-James.

Who is "Jimmie-James", Len? An imaginary friend of yours?

ALL of them. Even those filings
which aren't about amateur radio! :-)

Finally! An answer to a straightforward question! Thank you.

So what you're really writing about is how many total documents have
been filed, not just comments. The term "comment" has a specific
meaning in the context of FCC NPRMs.

But it's not about me, Len. I'm not posting a 'scorecard' and making any claims. You are.

Tsk, tsk...Jimmie-James, you ARE making "claims"
of "inaccuracy" and implications of badness. :-)

Well, maybe your imaginary friend is doing that.

But I, Jim/N2EY, am simply asking questions about your 'scorecard'
process, and pointing out the *potential* for
inaccuracy.

That sort of thing seems to really bother you, Len.

But, you've NOT made one single filing on WT Docket 05-235 as
of 5 PM EDT on 28 October 2005.

So? Is the filing of comments with FCC a requirement for asking
questions and posting comments here?

Who made you the moderator?

In fact, the LAST time you
filed ANYTHING with the FCC ECFS was over 12 months ago on a
Petition. Tsk, tsk.

What's so "tsk tsk" about that?

It's not about me, Len. I'm not posting a 'scorecard' and
making any claims. You are.

Tsk, tsk...I'm NOT "making claims."

Yes, you are, Len. You're claiming your 'scorecard' is accurate
but you won't answer questions about how it is prepared. That may
be changing, which is a good thing.

I'm doing READING and
counting and tabulating what I find.

So you claim, anyway.

If you dislike the
results, DON'T READ THE "SCORE CARD." [simple solution]

Here's another solution, Len: If you don't want commentary on
things you post, don't post them.

You seem to want everyone to just accept what you write here
without question, even though you don't behave that way
towards others. Doesn't work that way.

That seems to unduly upset you. Tsk. If it bothers you so
much, just stop reading this thread! [easy solution to your
apparent problem]

You are the one getting upset, Len. Not me.

Why is that so important to you?

Why is YOUR HECKLING "so important" to YOU? :-)

You aren't even discussing the opinions in all those 3,199
filings. All you do is try to trash-mouth those who've
bothered to look at ALL the filings. Tsk, tsk.

Seems to me that asking questions is defined as "heckling" and
"trash-mouth" by you...

I read those notes. They are not comprehensive. They do not
answer several questions I have raised.

Why is that "so important to you?"

I'm just asking you to clarify your process. Is that so difficult
to understand?

YOU are NOT in the FCC. YOU are NOT on the ARRL BoD.

Neither are you, Len.

Since this is a private compilation, I do my
own "checking"
prior to each posting. Those can be verified by ANYONE who
bothers to READ ALL of the filings in WT Docket 05-235.

In other words, nobody checks your work.

No, dearie, that is NOT "in other words."

Nobody checks your work.

All you are doing
is simple-minded heckling of ME...which seems "so important
to you." :-)

Nobody checks your work.

It's a very simple question.

...from a VERY unsatisfied simple person... :-)

You've filed at least 5 different comments
and reply comments, all of which are in support of the NPRM.

Yes, and...? Are you FORBIDDING my communications with my
own government?!?

Of course not. Are you forbidding my free speech?

Do they show up as a count of 1 or 5 on the tally of "for"
filings?

Tsk, tsk...you understand very poorly.

Incorrect. I understand very well. You explain very poorly.

I've already said I count ALL the filings.

In other words, your own comments and reply comments are counted as 5
filings *for* the NPRM, not 1. Also means you're counting the multiple
filings of others, including one person who was "for" the NPRM and
filed no less than 17 filings.

An alternative compilation that I have seen indicates multiple filings
by the same person. Last time I looked, multiple filings by those "for"
the NPRM exceeded multiple filings by those "against" it by at least 32
comments. That's about 1%.

So your counting method overstates the support for the NPRM by at least
that percentage.

You post your results to four significant figures, yet if your counting
method is as described above, it's inaccurate by at least 1% from that
one source of error.

Why does what I have posted matter at all?

Tsk. You talk MUCH in HERE about this NPRM yet you have
said NOTHING to the FCC on NPRM 05-143.

*Why* does that matter?

You make a lot of noise about amateur radio but you've never been a
radio amateur. And from all appearances you're never going to get an
amateur radio license.

So why do are you so obsessed with it?

It would seem you are all about gabbling and heckling and
don't have the guts to make yourself heard to the FCC.

Quite the opposite is true, Len.

That description is more about you than me.

Do you think proposals to the FCC write themselves?

Seems to me you'd
be proud to show how your totals came about, but instead
you attack the messenger.

Tsk. I "attack the messenger?!?" :-)

Yes.

What do you call YOUR remarks in HERE, then, Jimmie-James?
Some kind of self-appointed morals-ethics "policeman" when
all you are is a petulant, whiny little heckler.

As you've pointed out (more than once), the "score card" is
MINE, isn't it? :-) If so, then I make up the rules,
don't I? :-) You don't like the results? Don't read the
"score card."

What you're really saying is that you cannot tolerate
opposing opinions, questions, or facts that contradict your
assertions.

The results of the NPRM and its final Report and Order will
NOT AFFECT YOU, will it?

It may. Changes in the rules of the amateur radio service may
have a profound effect on me, because I'm an active licensed
radio amateur.

There's very little chance that changes in the rules of the amateur
radio service will have *any* effect on you, because
you're not a licensed radio amateur, and it doesn't appear
that you'll ever be one.

You have your beloved badge, title,
rank, attendant privileges, and a neat certificate (suitable
for framing).

What does all that refer to. Do you mean my Amateur Extra class radio
license issued by FCC in 1970 (35 years ago!) and renewed/modified ever
since?

Nobody can take that away from you.

Yes, they can. FCC can refuse to renew a license, or even revoke it,
for cause. I've never given them cause.

FCC can also decide to change license privileges, subbands, etc., all
of which can have a profound affect on those who actually operate in
the licensed service.

The results
of the final R&O will NOT affect you insofar as amateur radio
operating, will it?

They could. For example, if rules changes cause the ARS to become more
like cb, my amateur radio operating could be profoundly affected.

I'm not saying that *will* happen, just that it *could* happen.

Some days back, you posted a description of your experiences with
cb radio back in the late 1950s and early 1960s. You told us how
you installed a manufactured cb transceiver and antenna in your car and
used it. You told us the performance was *excellent* - for about four
years. Then it wasn't so excellent anymore.

Where did the excellence go, Len?

Do you see how the same could happen to amateur radio?

I'm not saying that *will* happen, just that it *could* happen.

Existing licensees can be profoundly affected by rules changes.
Since your are not a radio amateur and not likely to become one
regardless of rules changes, the NPRM results don't really affect you.

Your name is James P. Miccolis.

That's one way to write it.

You have OTHER ways to write your legal name? :-)

Yes. My middle name could be spelled out, for one...

But for some reason you have extreme difficulty calling people by their names.

I wrote "your name is James P. Miccolis." No problem to
me. It was easy to write. :-) NOT "extreme difficulty."

Judging by how often you call people by other than their legal names,
it's clear you have a lot of difficulty in that area.

Y'know, Len, you seem to miss the point on a lot of things.

"Miss the point?"

Yes.

I've never been to West Point.

I have. Under it, too.

A comment to FCC is not a vote. Citizenship is not required
to comment.

Did you fail high school Civics class?

No - I got all A's.

You "claim." :-)

It's at least as accurate as your 'scorecard' claims...

FCC accepts comments from noncitizens too. They don't
*have* to do
that, but they do it anyway.

So...you have it on "good authority" that the FCC actually
CONSIDERS those comments in deciding on a final R&O?

I didn't say that. I wrote that FCC *accepts* those comments.

Tell us more, Mr. Insider. You ARE with the FCC, aren't you?

I'm as "with" FCC as you are.

If FCC is willing to accept comments from foreigners, why
don't you list them as part of the total?

Tsk, tsk, tsk, Jimmie-James, they ARE listed.
Have been since the first of them showed up.

Just not *counted* by you...

Looks like the prevailing opinion is in support
of code testing. For
Extras, at least.

Why is that "so important to you?"

Why does it matter at all to *you*, Len.

It won't affect YOUR amateur privileges.

How do you know?

The official end of Comments on WT Docket 05-235 is 31
October 2005;
official end of Replies to Comments is 14 November 2005.
I am
posting this message on 28 October 2005. Whatever filings
are
there, I'm simply READING them ALL, counting them up,
tabulating them and posting the results.

Allegedly.

There's no age limit on an amateur radio license,
nor on commentary to FCC.

I'm NOT taking any "age limits" in my "score card," Jimmie. :-)

Why do you continue to make whiny little petulant remarks about
things NOT in the "score card?"

I see no need for a minimum age requirement for licensing in
the amateur radio service.

NPRM 05-143 is NOT about U.S. amateur radio license "age
requirements."

Neither was the previous restructuring NPRM. Yet you included
recommendations in your reply comments recommending such a limit.

Grow up.

What does that mean in this context, Len? Should I behave like
you do here?

You have stated here that you have always had problems
integrating
young people into what you consider an adult activity.

Like VOTING if one is below the age limit?

No.

I have NO "problem" with that.

Like getting a driver's license below the state law age
minimum? I have NO "problem" with that.

Like buying alcohol in a store by those below the state law
minimums? I have NO "problem" with that.

Like serving in the armed forces below the age minimum? I have
NO "problem" with that. [you should have NO "problem" with
that since you've never served]

Like getting married before the minimum legal age? I have NO
"problem" with that.

But you have "a problem" with 13 year olds getting amateur radio
licenses.

Because they're relevant to your attitude towards young people.

Tsk. LOTS and LOTS of ordinary folks are all FOR minimum age
requirements in MANY things, Jimmie. I have NO "problems" with
that. YOU have a big PROBLEM with that, though.

I'm not the one recommending an age requirement for a US amateur radio
license. You are. But you can provide no evidence of problems caused by
the lack of such an age requirement.

In fact, an examination of enforcement actions by FCC reveals that many
more serious violations in the ARS are committed by folks closer to
*your* age than by "teeners".

And that means your postings are fair game for comment and
question by
others. They are not somehow sacred and unimpeachable.
They are not
immune to question and/or debat.

Freudian slip, Jimmie.

Typo.

The word is "debate." :-)

That's right. Your postings are fair game for comment and
question by others. They are not somehow sacred and unimpeachable. They
are not immune to question and/or debate.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...then you should cancel my amateur radio
license
then, refuse to give me my amateur paycheck? :-)

It's really all about money to you, isn't it?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA.... :-

Poor Jimmie? Double-degreed "engineer" and you can't MAKE
ENOUGH to spend over $100 on a rig? :-)

It really *is* all about money to you, Len.

Guess what, Len - I stay up very late to operate my amateur
radio station.

Who cares? :-)

You seem to.

It's YOUR body you are abusing...

How?

[it isn't
working, Jimmie, get a new knuckle-spanking ruler for the
Nun of the Above]

Ah yes, you advocate violence against those who question your
statements and beliefs.

"Knuckle-spanking" is VIOLENCE?

Yes.

Leads me to believe you're counting reply comments too.
And not checking for dupes.

Speaking of "dupes," why are you trying to DUPE everyone into
thinking I'm "always in error?" :-)

Are you so ****ed off at certain posters in here you stay up
until nearly midnight to post nastygrams? :-)

Go ahead, READ ALL of the filings in WT Docket 05-235 and do
your own compilations/tabulations. Check it out.

So far, Miccolis has NOT CHECKED MY WORK,

Nobody can. You haven't shown it.

Yes I have. It's IN the ECFS in two different Replies to
Comments. You just haven't seen it yet. :-)

Want to check my numbers out for totals? Easy to do with the
FCC ECFS and proper use of the date blocks. ECFS does the
totals for that period for you. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

I'm simply pointing out that you're not going to get an
amateur radio
license.

How is that "important" to YOU? It sure isn't "important" on
NPRM 05-143 what any Commenter is "going to do." :-)

Had you READ ALL the filings, you would have seen some interesting
ones (other than mine, of course) by NON-radio-hobbyists! Try an
educational institution for starters...

If you wanted one, you'd have gotten one years ago.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Why? :-)

Get a ham license to "do a 'service' to my country?" :-) Done
the REAL service, Jimmie.

Well, I DID not follow the "accepted formal sequence" by getting an
amateur radio license BEFORE I operated all those transmitters at
ADA long ago...and messed that up by getting a Commercial radio
license after being released from Army service ten years after I
turned the magic age of fourteen. :-)

You don't want one and you're not going to get one.

I don't want your childish, petulant, whiny heckling in here but I
will EXPECT to get thousands of them... :-)

What you really want is something very different.

I want the FCC to make NPRM 05-143 into a Report and Order...without
changes to the basic precepts in the NPRM.

Why? Those changes won't affect you.