Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Alun Palmer wrote: Not quite. The rule is the same, but the 'international requirements' it refers to have changed. How you interpret that is another thing, but the FCC chose to write a rule that incorporates by reference the rules that were changed in the WRC. Here's an idea for an analogy. Anyone here ever write any code of the computer kind? Say you write something that makes a call to another object/subroutine, etc. The ITU have re-written the subroutine, and the FCC code includes a GOSUB that calls it (revealing my BASIC roots here). You obviously don't understand the FCC rules any better than Keith. Until the FCC eliminates the code test requirement, everything remains the same for U.S. hams. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
JJ wrote in message ...
Alun Palmer wrote: Not quite. The rule is the same, but the 'international requirements' it refers to have changed. How you interpret that is another thing, but the FCC chose to write a rule that incorporates by reference the rules that were changed in the WRC. Here's an idea for an analogy. Anyone here ever write any code of the computer kind? Say you write something that makes a call to another object/subroutine, etc. The ITU have re-written the subroutine, and the FCC code includes a GOSUB that calls it (revealing my BASIC roots here). You obviously don't understand the FCC rules any better than Keith. Until the FCC eliminates the code test requirement, everything remains the same for U.S. hams. What are you babbling about, JJ? He made it quite clear (except for morons): 1. The FCC Rules & Regs make reference to the code requirement as spelled out by the WRC. 2. The WRC no longer requires any code. 3. Ergo, the FCC Rules & Regs no longer require code. What's so difficult to understand? (Other than English, that is.) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Richard Cranium wrote:
JJ wrote in message ... Alun Palmer wrote: Not quite. The rule is the same, but the 'international requirements' it refers to have changed. How you interpret that is another thing, but the FCC chose to write a rule that incorporates by reference the rules that were changed in the WRC. Here's an idea for an analogy. Anyone here ever write any code of the computer kind? Say you write something that makes a call to another object/subroutine, etc. The ITU have re-written the subroutine, and the FCC code includes a GOSUB that calls it (revealing my BASIC roots here). You obviously don't understand the FCC rules any better than Keith. Until the FCC eliminates the code test requirement, everything remains the same for U.S. hams. What are you babbling about, JJ? He made it quite clear (except for morons): 1. The FCC Rules & Regs make reference to the code requirement as spelled out by the WRC. 2. The WRC no longer requires any code. 3. Ergo, the FCC Rules & Regs no longer require code. What's so difficult to understand? (Other than English, that is.) There's a fourth step he 4. Since there is no international requirement any more, no one can meet that [now nonexistent] requirement. Therefore, under this logical application of the regulation and the events effective July 5, 2003, there is no operating authority for any Novice or Technician (Plus or with an element 1 CSCE) for any frequency below 30MHz, since said authority contains a requirement that cannot be met (because there is no such requirement anymore, having been repealed). |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Dickhead Craniumless blubbered again and said: What are you babbling about, JJ? He made it quite clear (except for morons): 1. The FCC Rules & Regs make reference to the code requirement as spelled out by the WRC. 2. The WRC no longer requires any code. 3. Ergo, the FCC Rules & Regs no longer require code. What's so difficult to understand? (Other than English, that is.) What are you babbling about dickieboy? Maybe his misconceptions are clear to idiots like you (why does that suprised anyone?), but the fact remains, until the FCC goes through the procedures necessary to eliminate the code requirement for the amateur radio service, it is still required and everything is just as it has been. Just because the WAC no longer requires the code, does not automatically drop it from the FCC requirements. Try reading more carefully and you might learn something, like how to find the 10 meter band. Lets see a newbie go for the General license and see if he can get one without taking a code test. You are as dense as this keith bird. You both must be really good on cb. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
JJ wrote in :
Dickhead Craniumless blubbered again and said: What are you babbling about, JJ? He made it quite clear (except for morons): 1. The FCC Rules & Regs make reference to the code requirement as spelled out by the WRC. 2. The WRC no longer requires any code. 3. Ergo, the FCC Rules & Regs no longer require code. What's so difficult to understand? (Other than English, that is.) What are you babbling about dickieboy? Maybe his misconceptions are clear to idiots like you (why does that suprised anyone?), but the fact remains, until the FCC goes through the procedures necessary to eliminate the code requirement for the amateur radio service, it is still required and everything is just as it has been. Just because the WAC no longer requires the code, does not automatically drop it from the FCC requirements. Try reading more carefully and you might learn something, like how to find the 10 meter band. Lets see a newbie go for the General license and see if he can get one without taking a code test. You are as dense as this keith bird. You both must be really good on cb. You display a complete lack of understanding. Try actually reading 97.301(e) and then you might understand the discussion. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Alun Palmer wrote: JJ wrote in : Dickhead Craniumless blubbered again and said: What are you babbling about, JJ? He made it quite clear (except for morons): 1. The FCC Rules & Regs make reference to the code requirement as spelled out by the WRC. 2. The WRC no longer requires any code. 3. Ergo, the FCC Rules & Regs no longer require code. What's so difficult to understand? (Other than English, that is.) What are you babbling about dickieboy? Maybe his misconceptions are clear to idiots like you (why does that suprised anyone?), but the fact remains, until the FCC goes through the procedures necessary to eliminate the code requirement for the amateur radio service, it is still required and everything is just as it has been. Just because the WAC no longer requires the code, does not automatically drop it from the FCC requirements. Try reading more carefully and you might learn something, like how to find the 10 meter band. Lets see a newbie go for the General license and see if he can get one without taking a code test. You are as dense as this keith bird. You both must be really good on cb. You display a complete lack of understanding. Try actually reading 97.301(e) and then you might understand the discussion. And you understand just about as much as dickboy does. Until the FCC changes it, nothing has changed, code is still required. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 27 Jul 2003, JJ wrote:
Alun Palmer wrote: JJ wrote in : Dickhead Craniumless blubbered again and said: What are you babbling about, JJ? He made it quite clear (except for morons): 1. The FCC Rules & Regs make reference to the code requirement as spelled out by the WRC. 2. The WRC no longer requires any code. 3. Ergo, the FCC Rules & Regs no longer require code. What's so difficult to understand? (Other than English, that is.) What are you babbling about dickieboy? Maybe his misconceptions are clear to idiots like you (why does that suprised anyone?), but the fact remains, until the FCC goes through the procedures necessary to eliminate the code requirement for the amateur radio service, it is still required and everything is just as it has been. Just because the WAC no longer requires the code, does not automatically drop it from the FCC requirements. Try reading more carefully and you might learn something, like how to find the 10 meter band. Lets see a newbie go for the General license and see if he can get one without taking a code test. You are as dense as this keith bird. You both must be really good on cb. You display a complete lack of understanding. Try actually reading 97.301(e) and then you might understand the discussion. And you understand just about as much as dickboy does. Until the FCC changes it, nothing has changed, code is still required. That requirement, by itself, is NOT enough. See other replies, and the sub-thread titled "Alternate interpretation." |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|