On Mar 11, 3:52�pm, "
wrote:
From: on Sun, Mar 11 2007 8:34 am

And even when AF6AY pointed out the story to
FCC in his Reply Comments to 98-143, FCC still
believed it.

* *NOBODY with the callsign AF6AY replied to FCC 98-143
* *on, before, or after 13 Jan 99. *It wasn't issued yet. *:-)

You're right, Len! I was mistaken about that. My bad.
Apologies all around.

It was Leonard H. Anderson, a non-radio amateur
at the time, who wrote those Reply Comments to FCC. And even though
Reply Comments aren't
supposed to bring up new subjects, the age limit
thing was presented to FCC.

There have been other verified stories about
young amateurs. Since 2000, a six-year-old has
passed the General, and a seven-year-old has
passed the Extra. Both stories in QST.
FCC had no problem believing either.

In fact that seven-year-old broke the previous record,
held by an eight-year-old who passed the old pre-2000
Extra, complete with 20 wpm code and five written tests.

All those young amateurs still have their licenses. They
haven't gotten into any problems with FCC.

* *Wonderful. *

I agree - it *is* wonderful.

I'll just think of all you worshippers
* *of St. Hiram as pre-teeners, mentality and reasoning
* *"maturity" to match... *:-)

Why?

* *Now, just WHY are you continuing your "age limit"
* *diatribe past the 8 year and 2 months time of that
* *particular Comment on an NPRM that got settled by
* *a Report and Order?

How was it "settled", Len? FCC did not refer to your
Reply Comments at all.

* *Is it the usual "nyah, nyah" to be followed by a
* *call to mommy by all you mental pre-teeners?

No, Len - that's you projecting your own motivations
and mentality on others. Again.

Here's why I brought up the "age limit" thing:

"hot-ham-and-cheese" claimed that nobody
but me believed the story about the young
amateurs. He said the whole thing was preposterous.

I pointed out that not only did I believe it, but
so did the FCC.

Not only did FCC accept and process those
licenses, but they took no action after Leonard
H. Anderson pointed out the story on the ARRL
website.

So "hot-ham-and-cheese" was simply mistaken
about me being the only one who believed the
story.

The "age limit thing" also has a direct bearing on the
VE system. You accused complete strangers of
"fraud" and "hypocrisy" with no evidence at all.

It would be interesting to see the reaction of the
VEs who administered your testing to your
accusations of "fraud" and "hypocrisy" aimed at
the ARRL and some Indiana VEs.

Say - got that LP and tower up yet Len?
How do you like the Icom IC-7800?

Jim, N2EY