RadioBanter - View Single Post

[email protected] · December 30th 06, 02:03 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:
From: on Tues, Dec 19 2006 6:30 pm
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Sun, Dec 17 2006 3:22 pm
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Jim Hampton wrote:

Perhaps now we can discuss N2EY's proposal for a No-Test service.

There was never any such proposal. You are mistaken, in error, and just
plain wrong.

sure there is you have often said

Jim/N2EY was the very first to roll that one out, at least that I am
aware of.

I am not in favor of a "No-Test" amateur radio service. Nor have I ever
advocated such.

Anyone who says I have is mistaken - in error - just plain wrong.

So when you trotted that one out way back when, it really was a
strawman as I described it then. Yet you said it wasn't.

Brian, we have to quit trying to make

admit to doing
wrong.

What "doing wrong" do you mean, Len?

Brian Burke says I came up with a proposal for a "No-Test" amateur
radio service. Yet nobody seems to be able to show us that alleged
proposal.

"never" does wrong. He is a morse-tested
amateur extra...ergo, he never has done anything wrong. :-)

What "doing wrong" do you mean, Len?

Ahem...three things as I saw them, Brian:

1. That "they [FCC] MIGHT just as well eliminate writtens" was
such a COMMON rejoinder by pro-coders that it became
another myth in the minds of the 1930s-standards-retro
folk. To them everything was about the code test.

That's not true about me.

Like Dee a couple of weeks ago, it's what "other hams" were saying.

Tsk, nobody admits to the "follow-on" of "[they] might just
as well eliminate the writtens." :-)

Give us an exact quote, Len. I don't think you can.

Nobody admits to having written that so - in their mind -
they never wrote it. :-)

Then show where they did write it.

Google never forgets.

by his tacit admission (and self-praise) never
ever done anything wrong nor ever expressed a bad attitude
(dictated by the Elders of the Church of St. Hiram).

Len, that's what *you* do. Not me.

Len is no Elder of the Church of Saint Hiram.

Heh heh heh...I'm more like good old Marty Luther, he what
hammered up his Theses on the front doors of his church.

Sounds like you have delusions of grandeur, Len.

For all your hundreds of pages of commentary to FCC, they did not cite
any of your
arguments or facts in the recent Report and Order. All you got was your
name in the
comment list, same as me and several others.

Tsk, tsk,

was merely some germ plasm when I first
fired up a KW on HF

So what? If I were older than you, would it make any difference?

Why,
if pinned to the wall by someone, he will self-righteously
(and in 'outrage') demand for 'proof' by going into thousands
upon thousands of old, old Google archives and copying the
'proof.' [AS IF this was evidenciary in some mythical
court of law]

The facts are what they are. You don't seem to like facts, Len, if they
disprove your cherished opinions.

"Facts are stupid things." Ronald Raygun

Brian, I think it should be worded "some stupids think they
know 'facts'" but those 'facts' are just very selected
little items of information which said stupids then use to
make their point. Erroneous use of such selected quanta.

IOW, you don't have any proof at all.

3. Several others well back before 1998 were using the general
remark of "if the code test is eliminated, then the writtens
will be 'next' because it 'follows the progression.'"

That has already happened.

In 2000, the *written* testing for the three classes of license still
available was reduced significantly.

Yet the QP can be increased infinitely.

uses "reduced 'significantly'" as if the "significant"
amounted to nearly half. NEVER so.

Well, let's see:

IIRC:

Before the 2000 restructuring:

Technician required 2 written tests totalling 65 questions

General required 3 written tests totalling 100 questions

Extra required 5 written tests totalling 190 questions

After the 2000 restructuring:

Technician requires 1 written test totalling 35 questions. That's a 50%
reduction in the number of tests and a 46% reduction in the number of
questions.

General requires 2 written tests totalling 70 questions. That's a 33%
reduction in the number of tests and a 30% reduction in the number of
questions.

Extra requires 3 written tests totalling 120 questions. That's a 40%
reduction in the number of tests and a 37% reduction in the number of
questions.

He exaggerates more than
"significantly." :-)

No exaggeration.

[Out of 41 pages of FCC 06-178, only 20 pages concern the
R&O itself...the remaining half is a listing of ALL who
commented on the NPRM...

Yet FCC never quoted anything you wrote, Len.

if

read, really read,
not just skimming, even a tenth of those comments, I would
be surprised...

Why?

I read ALL of them and keep them on a CD]

So what?

As far as a "statistical fact,"

cribbed right from
Joe Speroni's website, inferring he did the stat summary

No, that's not true at all. You assumed what was neither stated nor
implied.

(after the fact) but he never did a day-by-day collection
and running status of opinions as I did (posting them in
this newsgroup).

The significant facts a

1) Nobody checked your work.
2) The details of your count are kept secret. For example, if the same
person submitted several different comments, did you count each
comment, or just the submitter?
3) The AH0A tabulation showed a detailed breakdown by comment
submitter, and told how duplicates were counted. You did not.
And now the big one:

*Both* your count and the AH0A count showed majority support for the
retention of
at least some code testing. But you want the majority to be pushed
aside and the
minority to rule.

As a point of FACT, Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R. has included the
rule ONLY ON A MINIMUM NUMBER of questions in the written
test pool. That since privatized testing began. At present,
the VEC Question Pool Committee ONLY makes the MINIMUM number
of questions. There's NO LIMIT on what the VEC QPC could
legally and rightly produce, plus no real problem on
distribution of the QP to outlying VEC locations electronically.

But there *is* a limit on the size of the actual exams. And that size
was significantly reduced in 2000.

Yet that wasn't enough for some. At least one recent proposal (NCVEC's
second proposal) claimed the 35 question multiple-choice Technician was
'too hard' and that a new license class with even less *written*
testing is needed.

The Technician License is not entry level.

Yes, it is.

True.

False.

Never was the intention of that Class.

Tell it to FCC. They think Technician is just right for the entry level
license class.

However, its
growth (since 1991) has been so enormous that it is way
more populous than any other US amateur radio license class.
Lots of folks have been calling the Tech license "entry level"
because that is what it has become in recent years.

The FCC has repeatedly turned down proposals to add license classes.

Tell *them* Technician isn't "entry level".

picked up on that, reworded it, but repeated it...apparently
making certain he couldn't be found 'guilty' of EXACT wording.

Show us.

It's what you do.

Poor

he's been sipping at the sour grapes again. :-)

"Outraged"

always DEMANDS that any challenger (to
his noble-godlike opinions) SHOW EVERYONE EXACTLY where

wrote something in the past. If we don't bother
with redux-infinity quoting His Words, he feels "vindicated"
(if not smug and triumphant). [see, he never wrote anything
that his accusers say he did...therefore he never did!] :-)

IOW, you cannot back up your claims. You misattribute, then try to
blame
others.

Google never forgets.

Pointing out that the written requirements have been reduced is not the
same thing as advocating a 'no test' amateur radio service. Not the
same thing at all.

as do most of the ProCoders that the
NoCode would be followed your proposal to end testing

They think that there might as well be no testing at all now that the
code exam is gone.

I'm as pro-code-test as they come, and I do not think that at all.

And the Morse Code test in the USA isn't gone yet. It will take a few
weeks at most
for the bureaucratic wheels to turn and make the change effective.

See how many you can recruit before it goes away. Anyone should be
able to learn 5WPM and take a 13-15WPM exam in a couple of weeks,
right?

AB-SO-LUTELY sayeth all the pro-coders, practically en masse.

:-)

The pro-coders did it so "everybody" can do it!

Almost everybody.

As usual, the morsemen think of themselves as Role Model for
the US amateur radio service. As such, they had all the
courage/gumption/smarts/aptitude to be extra-super-special
morsemen. All who didn't do as They did are "lazy" and/or
"stupid." :-)

Your words - not mine.

If the times were of the 1930s and 1940s they would be
correct. However, we are living now 70+ years AFTER
that time.

Has there been no use of Morse Code since the 1940s?

To the pro-coders EVERYTHING in amateur radio was about morse
code use, venerating the mode of on-off keying CW, and
generally making them "masters of the radio waves" by their
skill at a DEFUNCT radio communications mode once championed
in the 1930s and 1940s.

Not true at all. There's a lot to amateur radio besides Morse Code.
Which is not 'defunct' at all.

...a few weeks.

Morse code won't be defunct in a few weeks.

USES morse code regularly. He champions that singular
mode.

What's wrong with that?

Is that the "doing wrong" you referred to earlier?

He must feel that "all" amateurs must do as he does and
is ****ed that all do NOT. Tsk, tsk.

Oh no, Len. I don't feel that way at all.

You are mistaken - again. Tsk, tsk.

The VEC QPC has made up ALL the written test elements for years
but not a single pro-coder seems to admit to ever contacting
the VEC QPC about that content...at least not in here.

That doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

Not everyone brags on and on like you, Len ;-)

Ahem, seven hostile actions...

I've never claimed such.

Tsk,

is doing the finger-pointing misdirection thing
again...and FAILING to acknowledge his 'brethren' in the code
wars who (almost daily) commit atrocities of personal insults
and BRAGS of things they can't prove.

So what?

I don't see you acknowedging your anticode "brethren" here either.

I'm not responsible for what others post here. Only what I post here.

You don't seem to want to be responsible for what you post here, Len.

If you are really only against the *test*, what's wrong with *using*
Morse Code?

It's perfectly legal.

Of course it is legal. But

INFERRED that no-code-
test advocates were "against the USE" of morse code.

Where did I infer that?

Show us.

All the
pro-coders were using the rationalization about the Archaic
Radiotelegraphy Society (ARS) and the 'necessity' to keep
code testing. Forever.

What's wrong with wanting to keep a good thing?

I thought it was the ITU rule that was the stumbling block?

Actually, Radio Regulation S25...most of it got revised
3 1/2 years ago at WRC-03. That included the artifact of
all nations having to test radio amateur license applicants
for morse code ability for any license privileges below
30 MHz. The IARU promoted it. ARRL did NOT. And that is
historical fact of 3 1/2 years ago.

What's your point in all that, Len?

"Forever" is about to cease. The "End of the World As They
Know It" is about to happen. Their sky will fall. Chickens
Little will scamper about, shouting epithets and nastywords
at evil, loathsome no-coders and the "failure" to "keep
standards high"..."standards" that have been drilled into
their psyches for decades by the Elders of Newington.

No, not at all.

"Slow Code" is an artifact from the chicken little syndrome.

Wince Ficus is one story,

is another. Both have
been brainwashed and don't see it (conditioned thinking
leaves that impression on the washed brains).

Not agreeing with you doesn't mean someone is "brainwashed".

It's just another bad decision by FCC.

A good decision.

Not at all.

It is MODERNIZATION of some of the many USA civil radio
regulations.

No, it's just a bad decision.

By now Part 97 might be entering the world
of about 1970... :-)

Was anyone using Morse Code in 1970, Len?

They make some good decisions
and some bad decisions.

True enough. And the Code Free HF license with almost exclusively CW
priveleges is an artifact of the piecemeal approach that the FCC uses
WRT the ARS.

Good point, Brian. However, that came into being several
years ago as a result of some relatively obscure lobbying
efforts of some pro-coders.

No, that's not true at all.

The FCC appeased those lobbyists
by creating the code-only 6 and 2 meter band slivers.

??

Those are not HF. And they are decades old.

Do you think their BPL decisions are good ones?

No. Do you?

Tsk, more diversion from the subject. Broadband over Power
Lines is NOT under discussion. BPL has NOTHING to do with
code testing.

It has everything to do with FCC's making bad decisions.

I've been gone for a few days, didn't hear about it until
late Friday night and then only in a casual remark over a
telephone call. Got on a friend's computer and saw that
the End of Code Testing was the #1 news item on the FCC
home page. [it doesn't appear on the Amateur page under
Wireless Bureau, but then little happens there in keeping
up to date] Wonder upon wonders! :-)

Guess who broke the news here on rrap, Len, by starting this thread?

"QUOTE

2.

by his tacit admission (and self-praise) never
ever done anything wrong nor ever expressed a bad attitude
(dictated by the Elders of the Church of St. Hiram).

Len, that's what *you* do. Not me.

"UNQUOTE

...and self-praise

Was it wrong-doing to break the news on rrap?

The MEDIA NOTICE was posted on 15 Dec 06 and the R&O text was
posted on 19 Dec 06...on the FCC website. It was there for all
to see whenever they could get to that website. Some of us (in
fact, MOST of us) also do other things and don't "live" in the
ham bands nor have adopted some kind of Lifestyle of Everything
Evolves Around Amateur Radio.

I think you're just ticked at being scooped on the Big News, Len.

Okay, now I'm reflecting about the GLORY of the democratic
process in petitioning our government for a redress of
grievances. IT WORKS!

Not really.

Seems to.

The majority is overruled means it works??

Seems that way to me, too. I'm still a believer in the form
of government we Americans have in the USA.

So if the minority overrules the majority, that's OK with you?

An agency of our government
believed the words of our citizens in wanting change and
is about to rule on that change.

A majority of those who commented on the Morse Code test issue
wanted at least *some* Morse Code testing to remain. The majority
did *not* want complete elimination.

Leadership doesn't mean taking a poll.

DECISIONS on Reports and Orders aren't made by 'votes' on who
comments on what and for which 'side.' All those DECISIONS in
FCC 06-178 are clearly and unambiguously stated by the FCC in
that Report and Order. [by the way, Brian, you are mentioned
in it, footnote 48 on Page 8...:-) ]

Report and Order DECISIONS are influenced by the REASONS
presented by commenters (to NPRM 05-143). "Reasons" that
have become mythos in US amateur radio of the 1930s do NOT
necessarily apply in the year 2006.

So what the majority wanted doesn't matter?

If so, why did you bother to count the comments, Len?

Yet FCC ignored the majority and will completely eliminate Morse
Code testing very soon.

Explain how ignoring the majority means "IT WORKS".

"Serves no regulatory purpose" was the key point.

There are several key points and brought out by the FCC in
06-178.

All of which are simply FCC's opinion overruling the majority.

CHANGE will happen,
despite the former ruling party of pro-coders' spitting
and snarling about "spamming" the government with "anti-
ham" attitudes wanting the code test gone. :-)

Your wordy piles of commentary to FCC amounted to spam, Len, and
probably slowed down the process.

"Wha, wha, whaaaa" cried the imbiber of whine of sour
grapes. Tsk, tsk.

There were some 3900 (give or take) commenters on NPRM
05-143 and all are listed on Pages 21 to 41 of 06-178.
Only ONE of them is me. :-)

On more reflections, FCC 99-412, the R&O establishing
the Restructuring of 2000, was released on 30 Dec 1999.
I wouldn't be surprised if the FCC releases the R&O on
code testing elimination about that same date...the
news release (not a law, just a 'media advisory') was
done on 15 Dec 2006, almost 7 years later. I think of
it as a Christmas Present or the Start of a New Era
along with a New Year. Glory in Excelsus!

The announcement was made at the end of the business day on a Friday.
That way FCC doesn't have to deal with the responses right away.

I wonder if the emnergency rooms across the nation were deluged with
stroke victims?

:-) Not hardly. However, morsemen DO experience some
strange "hardening of the arteries" supplying their brains.
Few are able to think beyond the 1930s and 1940s' standards
and practices in AMATEUR radio. :-)

Modernization is Happening in US amateur radio. Regs
are finally catching up to late-1900s standards!
[catching up, they will be approaching 1980 when the
code elimination R&O is released]

Did amateurs stop using Morse Code in 1980, Len?

They could have.

But they did not.

tried to DIVERT the subject again. One of the basic
parts of FCC 06-178 is the elimination of morse code
TESTING. TESTING, not "use."

The tests should be about what hams do. Hams use Morse Code.

is loathe to admit
that and inserts his little "bon mots" here and there to
show "others" the error of their ways. :-)

Well, you *do* make a lot of errors here, Len.

A majority of "the People" did *not* want complete Morse Code test
elimination, Len.

FCC gave "the People" what they did not want.

They sure didn't listen to the ARRL, thank God!

Poor
..he thinks HE is "the people!" :-)

The majority. Look at your own count of the comments.

In a few days the official Report and Order will be released, and in a
few weeks it will be effective. The only surprise is how long it has
taken for FCC to make the change. Three and a half years since the
treaty changed!

Those darned treaties.

How about that?!? :-) Them darn treaties just didn't
give "the people" "what they wanted?!?" :-) Oh, my!

So, the International Amateur Radio Union - who prompted
for the S25 rewrite were "WRONG" in
estimation?

All the treaty change did was allow each country to decide for itself.

How many countries have eliminated Morse Code testing for all amateur
radio licenses?

How many countries have retained at least some Morse Code testing for
at least some amateur radio licenses?

Sunnavagun! The "whole world" is "wrong" when the morse-
men don't get their way! :-)

"The whole world" hasn't changed their rules about Morse Code testing.

And once the Morse Code test is completely gone, what will you do, Len?
You won't have anything to carry on about on rrap anymore.

Nor you. Sayonara.

There are plenty of other issues for me to discuss.

FCC 06-178 has NOT YET been published in the Federal Register
(at least to 20 December 2006). Therefore nothing has changed
in amateur radio up to that date.

Sooner or later it *will* become effective.

Then what will you have to carry on about, Len?