On 26 Feb 2007 10:10:20 -0800, "
wrote:

From: Leo on Sun, Feb 25 2007 10:57 am

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 22:15:28 -0500, Leo wrote:
On 13 Feb 2007 16:43:31 -0800, wrote:

On Feb 13, 5:13?pm, Leo wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:12:59 -0500, Leo wrote:
On 8 Feb 2007 18:01:57 -0800, wrote:


The Technician class is *not* now bigger
than all other US license classes combined.
And if present trends continue, it never will be.

Perhaps! Perhaps not.

Hmmm.....no rebuttal comments regarding the points listed above for 12
days now.

Hope you enjoyed the math lesson - we'll do it again soon!

I don't think he did...probably because he can't
control the subject being argued, especially the
comparisons he insists on using. :-)

Good point!


Just in looking at www.hamdata.com figures from 22 Feb
to 25 Feb, the barest trend might be showing up.

Overall USA totals went from 721,781 (22nd) to 721,745
(25th), a loss of 42. That was despite a tiny peak on
the 24th to 721,839. Club calls increased by 6 from
10,349 (22nd) to 10,355 (25th)...so thats a small
stabilizing influence. :-)

The number of no-code-test Techs went from 311,851 (22nd)
to 311,948 (25th) for a gain of 97. That despite a drop
of 30 between 311,978 (24th) to 311,048 (25th) which may
explain the slight rise in General class: 142,031 (22nd)
to 142,043 (25th) for an increase of 12. Extra class went
from 111,464 (22nd) to 111,497 (25th) for a gain of 33.
That raises a question of just WHERE did those increases
come from?

His (apparent) home-made software just doesn't tell him
from where. He keeps implying that "no-code-test Techs
are all dropping out after 12 years" but yet those same
numbers are RISING. Since that is apparent, then the
number of new licensees coming in that way must be LARGER
than the 97 gain indicated by raw hamdata.com numbers!

At present data on the 25th, the total of no-code-test
Techs to Tech-Plus is 352,210 (40,262 Tech Plus). The
number of INDIVIDUAL licensees (less Club calls) on
the 25th is 711,390. Combined, Tech and Tech-Plus are
49.51% of the total. Yes, that is NOT 50.01% but it is
so damn close to 50% that only an unreasonable pedant
would make a case for it "not being larger!" :-)

Agreed.


What hasn't been made clear is EXACTLY where and with
what Miccolis gets his data, data that he posts with
implied "accuracy." I just go to www.hamdata.com and
get their raw numbers...no sweat, no bother tying up a
line (one needs DSL or equivalent to handle multi-MB
files daily) and there is inherent TRUST with their
numbers. On the other hand, there ain't no "trust" with
Miccolis data. Does he use raw FCC database files and
do sorting/tabulating from that? Or does he crib from
some other, as yet unidentified source?

....as Mark Twain* said - "there are lies, damn lies, and statistics".
Too bad he never got the chance to discover RRAP - he never knew how
right he was!

* (or Benjamin Disraeli.....who knows?)

Regardless of the source of the numbers, the results would be more
believable if the calculations were shown for each
category.....otherwise, the numbers are just that - numbers. Numbers
which can be tailored to support one's own agenda, should they wish to
do so....

Plus, our resident - ahem - statistician does not have much of a track
record here in the rigorous calculations area......lol


Miccolis claims to "know" which and how many licensees
are still within the 10-year license period. If he can
"know" that, then a few days of raw data comparison can
show "upgrades" from a "lower" class to a "newer." That
would be a good indicator of WHERE the changes come from.
He doesn't do that. He just makes noises implying that
"all the decreases" are coming from the no-code-test
class "dropouts." Yet the raw hamdata numbers show
increases in that class. He hasn't been able to explain
that yet.

Agreed. Refer to the 'average distance to the Moon' that I called him
on......I presented detailed reasoning to show his error - he simply
restated his position over and over, as if doing do made it correct!

Looks like a familiar pattern.


Miccolis keeps talking about the "not counting" those in
the 2-year grace period. He hasn't explained HOW he
determines this. It is possible to determine since the
data fields ARE there in the database...just as there are
indicators of not having been licensed before, thus are
newbie entries. The once-newbies in no-code-test Tech
who actually drop out after 12 years can be determined
but all we get from him is the unquantified general-case
ambiguous stuff about "they are just dropping out." :-(

There appears to be a belief amongst some here that the removal of
code testing will open the floodgates, resulting in an influx of new
hobbyists who saw code as a barrier, and up to now stayed out of
Amateur Radio.

I don't believe that this is likely to happen. Of course, there are
some who may have been held back by Morse code testing alone (which
may have been true in 1960, but not in communications rich 2007) - but
I'd say that the vast majority of people interested in becoming hams
have already done so.

Considering the paradoxical manner in which Morse code testing was
dropped in the US, new wannabe hams still have the hurdle of two exams
to pass before they hit the General level and have significant access
to the HF voice subbands. The Tech and Tech Plus licensees gained very
little when code was dropped - a small voice allotment on 10m (not
worth the expense of setting up an HF station for...), and (here's the
paradox...) access to three HF CW subbands, which are useless to them
without the ability to use Morse code! For this reason alone, I would
expect to see a decrease in the Tech categories, and a proportionate
increase in the General category (and to a lesser degree, Extra),
representing the Techs who wish to take advantage of the Morse-free HF
access at that level. After this correction, it should level off -
then it's dead guys and decreases for the forseeable future, unless
the younger members of society get r-e-a-l-l-y bored with the
Internet, cellphones, text messaging and IM!


Regardez,
LA

73, Leo