RadioBanter - View Single Post - CW-forever Guys are gonna go balistic!

[email protected]

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

They do read all of the comments.

Highly unlikely particulary in cases like Anderson's nonsense *and*
I'll only believe it when I see it. Unless you gots documentation to
the contrary or you've been there yourself.

Yer missing the point.

*Somebody* at FCC reads 'em. That's all.

Some of course but like I sed I'll believe it when I see it in many
cases.

My guess is that the FCC doesn't even start reading the comments until
after the comments close. Then they sort them by commenter, because
some folks send multiple copies and there's no point reading the same
thing more than once.

Then, I think, somebody goes through them weeding out the obvious
cranks and fakes, as well as the dupes. Also, they probably pile up the
simple "rubber stamp" ones ("I agree with ARRl/NCI/NCVEC").

What's left are the ones that need a bit of serious reading.

Seems probable.

Much
smaller pile. You think Len's stuff makes it to that pile?

Scan, identify commenter, flick his garbage on sight . .

Then he's even more off the wall than I've given him credit for.

Not my problem. Not yours, either.

That I agree with.

Ya broke da code.

You'd think he wouldn't bend over so far backward to make such an ass
of himself in public but nah . .

(e) They are ticked off at the 18 petitions, lack of consensus and
mountains of commentary.

I doubt that there's much (e) involved, they've been patrolling up and
down our back road in the RF wilderness for decades and they're quite
used to it. Used to us and our level of noisy BS.

Today's FCC isn't the FCC of 20-30-40 years ago.

Neither are we and neither is ham radio. But don't underestimate their
grasp on history and current realities and the relationships between
the two.

In any event thee and
me are bulletproof, we're 20WPM Extras so I could care less when they
bite the bullet and do whatever they're gonna do about the code test.

Code test is a completely different issue.

Not when it comes to the likelihood of ever having to take another code
test to upgrade in order to retain our operating privleges.

I used to think the code test thing was a slam dunk. Maybe it still is.
But the fact that FCC has taken so long so far makes me wonder. For all
we know, they could keep it just because. Or they could do what Canada
did. Or something else.

Or they could simply sit on it forever which would be the really easy
way out of that swamp.

'Course I thought I was bulletproof in 1967 too when I had a General .
. .

Heck I was just a Novice and I saw it coming. I wondered what all the
fuss was about. I still do.

I'd probably see Incentive Licensing the same way if I was a kid in
your shoes. However you came into ham radio when it was already old
news and were something like 14 years late to the Novice game I played
in in all it's nooks and crannies. You can read about it and talk about
early '50s ham radio it but since you didn't actually live it I
wouldn't expect you to fully appreciate what a huge deal Incentive
Licensing was to my Novice class. It was even more of a kick in the
butt for for the old-timers of those days.

Somebody wrote in a post in QRZ.com that they'd been in direct e-mail
contact with the FCC about the anomalies and confusion in the R&O and
the FCC agreed that the R&O needs more work before it goes to the
Register. That'll push implemetation of a cleaned-up version out until
God knows when. Reset: Game started over.

Roger that! The whole thing may have been a bit of a mind-game. ARRL
gripes, so they put out a messy R&O that makes ARRL look bad.

The FCC doesn't play silly games like that. If the guy in QRZ.com has
it right they screwed up a bit and need to tweak the R&O. No relections
on the ARRL one way or the other but the FCC will come out of it a bit
of egg on it's face.

I noticed in another of your posts that you didn't understand why the
80M CW band and 75M phone band are called what they are. Or something
akin to that.

I was asking why FCC treats them as two separate bands in Part 97,
that's all.

Because historically we've also been treating 80 & 75 as two separate
bands. Convenient ancient custom.

Time to bail away from the trashheads, I'm outta here and back to the
paint, varnish and antenna work.

poof:gone

73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv