![]() |
Residence vs. Mailing Address
On Feb 16, 11:54�pm, wrote:
On Feb 16, 5:49 pm, wrote: On Feb 16, 3:55?pm, " wrote: * *fraudulently claimed a Hawaiian Post Office Box address as being his "residence," one that would allow him to obtain a Hawaiian amateur radio station call sign. ? Len: I suggest you read Part 97 again. I suggest you go to your local Post Office and ask them about renting a PO Box then using it for other people. Why? What matters is what the regulations were back then, not what they are now. The regulations do not require that someone give the FCC their "residence". All the FCC requires is a valid mailing address. Just any valid mailing address? That question has already been answered. See (1) below In the case of certain callsigns, the mailing address must be in certain locations, such as Hawaii, but there is no residence requirement. Just any valid mailing address? That question has already been answered. See (1) below FCC used to care about where a licensee lived, and the actual station location. But all that changed many years ago, and all they have required for may years is a valid mailing address where the licensee may receive mail from FCC. (1) a valid mailing address where the licensee may receive mail from FCC. What do the Postal Regulations say about it? I don't know what they said about it in 2000. That's what matters. There are a number of retired "RV" people nowadays who don't really have a "residence" in the classic sense. They live in their RVs, travelling the country as they see fit, and living wherever their travel leads them. At least some of them are radio amateurs. Of course they have a "mailing address", which is often just a post office box. Someone checks their mail regularly, and deals with important items as needed. FCC and the post office have no problem with this, and no fraud is involved. In some rural areas, people maintain post office boxes "in town" and pick up their mail there when they get to town. FCC and the post office have no problem with this, and no fraud is involved. How are these cases any different from the use of a Hawaiian post office box? After all, the FCC did accept and process the vanity call applications, and did issue the callsigns. Perhaps it was simply a misunderstanding of the intent of the rules, rather than the letter of the law. The government can be defrauded as well as anyone, That's true. and there was no misunderstanding. How do you know? Obviously the vanity callsign applications met the letter of the law - otherwise FCC would not have processed them nor issued the callsigns. Whether the met the *intent* of the law is another issue, and intent is a matter of interpretation. *It was poor amateur practice. Why? Were the callsigns that were cancelled ones that other amateurs wanted, but could not get? Have any of the cancelled callsigns been reissued through the vanity callsign program? FCC has issued some vanity callsigns that some consider inappropriate for the amateur radio service. Those callsigns would not normally be issued in sequence, so the FCC is aware of the controversy, yet they issued those callsigns when requested through the vanity program. We're not talking about Kim, we're talking about Michael P. Deignan of the RF Commandos. The subject is the letter of the law regarding vanity callsigns versus the intent of that law. There's also the question of good vs. poor amateur practice. Kim is not the only amateur, nor the first, to have a callsign that some consider inappropriate. Indeed, she was not the first to have a callsign with a certain particular suffix. MD is not the only amateur to be trustee of multiple club callsigns. There was lengthy discussion here about the appropriateness of certain Amateur Radio vanity callsigns. The defense was that if the FCC issued the callsigns, they were appropriate. Although I was initially unconvinced, I changed my mind. Is that not correct? Besides - all that stuff about the club calls is more than six years old. Why are you living in the past? In ham years that was barely yesterday. If it is OK to discuss those old callsign events, then it's also OK to discuss other old events, such as boasts of getting an Extra out of the box, or of opposing real estate zoning changes. Etc. Is it because the person who held all those calls was and is an advocate of complete Morse Code test elimination? It's because the individual incessantly tells others how to live their ham-lives, Where? The person involved hadn't posted here for *years*. His posts are rather few in number, and quite short and to-the-point. Other individuals who post here, including one who isn't even a radio amateur, incessantly tell others how to live their ham-lives. Is that wrong? then defrauds his friend and the FCC. How was anyone defrauded? Was there some sort of penalty, such as a forfeiture of money or an operator license suspension/revocation? What brought the whole issue to FCC's attention, anyway? Did someone want one of those callsigns? Jim, N2EY |
Residence vs. Mailing Address
wrote:
What matters is what the regulations were back then, not what they are now. Exactly. I've had a PO Box for years. Having a rural mainland address, there are times when my mail will collect for weeks at a time when I'm not home (having that ocean-going trawler based in WA takes a lot of my time...) I also don't like having clients mail me checks to my mainland home, so I use a PO Box. From time to time, folks I work on projects with also receive mail at my PO box. Case in point: About a year ago I was working on a project with "Mark". We needed a piece of software to complete the job, so "Mark" ordered the software for us on my company credit card. Rather than it coming addressed to "My Company, My PO Box" (the correct ship-to address which is also my CC billing address) it was shipped to "Mark, My PO Box". The USPS delivered it just fine. Now, from time to time, "Mark" gets mail at my PO Box. Apparently the company sold his name on a mailing list. Still haven't heard a peep from the Postmaster. I suspect "Mark" could also receive non-junk-mail at my PO box just fine. I suspect the Postmaster doesn't care. After all, if anything "bad" was ever associated with my PO Box, the Postmaster knows where to find me. How are these cases any different from the use of a Hawaiian post office box? Brian doesn't have one? MD is not the only amateur to be trustee of multiple club callsigns. Only 1 club callsign at the moment, which is used exclusively on our beacons used for DF foxhunts. What brought the whole issue to FCC's attention, anyway? Riley's first letter to me references coorespondence from Jeff. Since there is no official coorespondence in the record to suggest otherwise, it is my personal opinion that Jeff did. 73 kh6hz |
Residence vs. Mailing Address
On Feb 17, 7:24�am, wrote:
On Feb 17, 6:52 am, "KH6HZ" wrote: wrote: I suggest you go to your local Post Office and ask them about renting a PO Box then using it for other people. Perfectly 100% legal within postal regulations. Sure it is. What do the Postal Regulations say about it? Since you're the "expert" Brain, why don't you tell us? Free clue: Be sure to refer to the pre-9/11 / Patriot Act postal regulations. My PO Boxes were all pre-9/11 Patriot Act. *Thanks for the distractor. Darn! I don't have a Post Office Box! I guess I can't be an amateur... :-( The government can be defrauded as well as anyone, and there was no misunderstanding. *It was poor amateur practice. Says you. But then, you don't count. Someone counted. *Someone counted up your call signs and mailed you a letter. Tsk, even the www.ah0a.org site COUNTED. Poor Mikey D. was way down on the list...but still there. It's because the individual incessantly tells others how to live their ham-lives, then defrauds his friend and the FCC. Neither the FCC nor my friend were defrauded, despite your repeated foot-stomping and tantrums to the contrary. I don't think he's your friend anymore, or at least he's not defending you. *But now you have Jim. The FCC? *Riley takes care of that business like he took care of you. Riley Hollingsworth, Special Counsel to the FCC, has about 700,000 (give or take) licensees to "count" and "take care of." I doubt he would even blink twice at Mikey D's dozen. But he DID notice once and that got on the "notices." Now if all this was so "legal" as Mikey D sez, why would it get into the "notices?" If it was so "legal" then it should never have been there. No sweat, the Guru and Reknowned Historian is all for code-tested amateur extras...they can do no real wrong in his eyes. All "very legal." barf |
Residence vs. Mailing Address
You must have seen the awesome "Who's Morky?" remark. Jim stood toe to toe with the Robesinner and didn't blink (Tom Petty playing "Won't Back Down" in the background). Thanks for the memory jog. I always liked that song. Guess I'll have to fire up Limewire and see if I can d-load it. Yup, Markie, before you jump, I am willfully violating copyright laws by downloading old songs such as this. Old? It doesn't seem old to me. How many ham-years ago did Tom release it? Like you, who conveniently blames everybody else, I'll blame HH&C for putting me in mind of this great old song. He made me do it. Flip Wilson, "The Devil Made Me Do It!" Thanks, HH&C. Have you any more songs to suggest?- Anything by David Hasselhoff. OK. Hasselhoff it is. Hop In My Car will be first up. Maybe later I can get some Boy George for Mark. |
Residence vs. Mailing Address
On Feb 17, 2:10 pm, "
wrote: On Feb 17, 7:24?am, wrote: On Feb 17, 6:52 am, "KH6HZ" wrote: wrote: I suggest you go to your local Post Office and ask them about renting a PO Box then using it for other people. Perfectly 100% legal within postal regulations. Sure it is. What do the Postal Regulations say about it? Since you're the "expert" Brain, why don't you tell us? Free clue: Be sure to refer to the pre-9/11 / Patriot Act postal regulations. My PO Boxes were all pre-9/11 Patriot Act. ?Thanks for the distractor. Darn! I don't have a Post Office Box! I guess I can't be an amateur... :-( You're welcome to act amateurishly like most in RRAP. The government can be defrauded as well as anyone, and there was no misunderstanding. ?It was poor amateur practice. Says you. But then, you don't count. Someone counted. ?Someone counted up your call signs and mailed you a letter. Tsk, even thewww.ah0a.orgsite COUNTED. Poor Mikey D. was way down on the list...but still there. He's an underachiever. It's because the individual incessantly tells others how to live their ham-lives, then defrauds his friend and the FCC. Neither the FCC nor my friend were defrauded, despite your repeated foot-stomping and tantrums to the contrary. I don't think he's your friend anymore, or at least he's not defending you. ?But now you have Jim. The FCC? ?Riley takes care of that business like he took care of you. Riley Hollingsworth, Special Counsel to the FCC, has about 700,000 (give or take) licensees to "count" and "take care of." I doubt he would even blink twice at Mikey D's dozen. But he DID notice once and that got on the "notices." Now if all this was so "legal" as Mikey D sez, why would it get into the "notices?" If it was so "legal" then it should never have been there. If it was legal, why did Mike let all those callsigns go without so much as a whimper? No sweat, the Guru and Reknowned Historian is all for code-tested amateur extras...they can do no real wrong in his eyes. All "very legal." barf- RHIP, but only for Extras. |
Residence vs. Mailing Address
On Feb 17, 1:09 pm, wrote:
On Feb 16, 11:54?pm, wrote: On Feb 16, 5:49 pm, wrote: On Feb 16, 3:55?pm, " wrote: ? ?fraudulently claimed a Hawaiian Post Office Box address as being his "residence," one that would allow him to obtain a Hawaiian amateur radio station call sign. ? Len: I suggest you read Part 97 again. I suggest you go to your local Post Office and ask them about renting a PO Box then using it for other people. Why? What matters is what the regulations were back then, not what they are now. Back in 1990/91, the PO Boxes on Guam were for the person listed on the card for that box, not for friends, neighbors, and people who wish to defraud the US Governemnt. When you sign for the box, you sign an AGREEMENT. Hopefully, you read the agreement. Apparently Hermann did not. Hermann got a KH2 call because he was "interested" in a job on Guam. He had never been there. The regulations do not require that someone give the FCC their "residence". All the FCC requires is a valid mailing address. Just any valid mailing address? That question has already been answered. See (1) below The mailing address where the FCC can reach you. In this case, the FCC could reach Jeffrey Hermann at the listed address, not Michael Deignan. In the case of certain callsigns, the mailing address must be in certain locations, such as Hawaii, but there is no residence requirement. Just any valid mailing address? That question has already been answered. See (1) below FCC used to care about where a licensee lived, and the actual station location. But all that changed many years ago, and all they have required for may years is a valid mailing address where the licensee may receive mail from FCC. (1) a valid mailing address where the licensee may receive mail from FCC. That is correct. Now see above. What do the Postal Regulations say about it? I don't know what they said about it in 2000. That's what matters. So you don't know. Shouldn't that be the end of the discussion for you? There are a number of retired "RV" people nowadays who don't really have a "residence" in the classic sense. They live in their RVs, travelling the country as they see fit, and living wherever their travel leads them. At least some of them are radio amateurs. Just because something may be common doesn't make it legal. Of course they have a "mailing address", which is often just a post office box. Someone checks their mail regularly, and deals with important items as needed. FCC and the post office have no problem with this, and no fraud is involved. Says you. Did you check? In some rural areas, people maintain post office boxes "in town" and pick up their mail there when they get to town. FCC and the post office have no problem with this, and no fraud is involved. Newsflash... That has nothing to do with Deignan's intent to defraud the FCC. How are these cases any different from the use of a Hawaiian post office box? The intent was fraud, a KH6 callsign. After all, the FCC did accept and process the vanity call applications, and did issue the callsigns. Perhaps it was simply a misunderstanding of the intent of the rules, rather than the letter of the law. The government can be defrauded as well as anyone, That's true. and there was no misunderstanding. How do you know? Obviously the vanity callsign applications met the letter of the law - otherwise FCC would not have processed them nor issued the callsigns. Has the government never received a bad check? A fraudulent tax return? Do they process them? Whether the met the *intent* of the law is another issue, and intent is a matter of interpretation. Poor amateur practice. ?It was poor amateur practice. Why? Were the callsigns that were cancelled ones that other amateurs wanted, but could not get? Have any of the cancelled callsigns been reissued through the vanity callsign program? It's like having to use the least amount of power to accomplish the communication. One amateur callsign can't be used to accomplish the desired communication? Well, Riley saw a problem with it. FCC has issued some vanity callsigns that some consider inappropriate for the amateur radio service. Those callsigns would not normally be issued in sequence, so the FCC is aware of the controversy, yet they issued those callsigns when requested through the vanity program. We're not talking about Kim, we're talking about Michael P. Deignan of the RF Commandos. The subject is the letter of the law regarding vanity callsigns versus the intent of that law. There's also the question of good vs. poor amateur practice. Kim is not the only amateur, nor the first, to have a callsign that some consider inappropriate. Indeed, she was not the first to have a callsign with a certain particular suffix. MD is not the only amateur to be trustee of multiple club callsigns. There was lengthy discussion here about the appropriateness of certain Amateur Radio vanity callsigns. The defense was that if the FCC issued the callsigns, they were appropriate. Although I was initially unconvinced, I changed my mind. Is that not correct? Diversion. Besides - all that stuff about the club calls is more than six years old. Why are you living in the past? In ham years that was barely yesterday. If it is OK to discuss those old callsign events, then it's also OK to discuss other old events, such as boasts of getting an Extra out of the box, or of opposing real estate zoning changes. Etc. You would anyway, and have. Is it because the person who held all those calls was and is an advocate of complete Morse Code test elimination? It's because the individual incessantly tells others how to live their ham-lives, Where? The person involved hadn't posted here for *years*. He's back, and I'm here to remind him of his transgressions. His posts are rather few in number, and quite short and to-the-point. So? I don't like his bahavio[u]r. Other individuals who post here, including one who isn't even a radio amateur, incessantly tell others how to live their ham-lives. Is that wrong? He doesn't tell me that I should get off the computer and study Morse Code. then defrauds his friend and the FCC. How was anyone defrauded? My tax dollars went in to the enforcement actions against Michael P. Deignan and all the people like him. Don't you think an Extra should know better than try a stun t like that? Was there some sort of penalty, such as a forfeiture of money or an operator license suspension/revocation? Mike will tell you to look that up on the web. What brought the whole issue to FCC's attention, anyway? Did someone want one of those callsigns? Jim, N2EY My friend Jim, KH2D posted a nice essay on his KH2 website about the greedy jerks that glom up all of the DX callsigns for no practical purpose. |
Residence vs. Mailing Address
On Feb 17, 2:10 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote: What matters is what the regulations were back then, not what they are now. Exactly. No, not even close. We're not talking about now. Deignan signed an agreement with the USPS back then. Jeffrey Hermann signed an agreement with the USPS back then. I've had a PO Box for years. Then you know better. Having a rural mainland address, there are times when my mail will collect for weeks at a time when I'm not home (having that ocean-going trawler based in WA takes a lot of my time...) I also don't like having clients mail me checks to my mainland home, so I use a PO Box. That's certainly a legitimate use for a PO Box, but it is not Hermann's PO Box, and that is the box in question. BTW, there was a 12th callsign at your street address issued to a YL. Don't you trust her to keep your mail from stacking up or blowing away? From time to time, folks I work on projects with also receive mail at my PO box. Case in point: About a year ago I was working on a project with "Mark". We needed a piece of software to complete the job, so "Mark" ordered the software for us on my company credit card. Rather than it coming addressed to "My Company, My PO Box" (the correct ship-to address which is also my CC billing address) it was shipped to "Mark, My PO Box". Again, "Mark" and your PO Box are not the subject of this discussion. Hermann's box in Hawaii is. The USPS delivered it just fine. Now, from time to time, "Mark" gets mail at my PO Box. Apparently the company sold his name on a mailing list. Still haven't heard a peep from the Postmaster. I suspect "Mark" could also receive non-junk-mail at my PO box just fine. I suspect the Postmaster doesn't care. After all, if anything "bad" was ever associated with my PO Box, the Postmaster knows where to find me. So basically, until charges are filed, no crime has occurred. Nice diversion, nice defense. How are these cases any different from the use of a Hawaiian post office box? Brian doesn't have one? Not presently. MD is not the only amateur to be trustee of multiple club callsigns. Only 1 club callsign at the moment, which is used exclusively on our beacons used for DF foxhunts. Almost interesting. Most any other DF club seems to be able to get by with the callsign of the beacon owner with a "stroke B" to indicate that its a beacon. What brought the whole issue to FCC's attention, anyway? Riley's first letter to me references coorespondence from Jeff. Since there is no official coorespondence in the record to suggest otherwise, it is my personal opinion that Jeff did. 73 kh6hz Sounds like "Hot Water" and "Cold Feet." Greed cost Mike a friend. |
Residence vs. Mailing Address
wrote:
In this case, the FCC could reach Jeffrey Hermann at the listed address, not Michael Deignan. Odd, I received all the licenses mailed to me at the Hawaii address. Thus, clearly, the FCC reached me at that address just fine. Please play again soon! |
Residence vs. Mailing Address
|
Residence vs. Mailing Address
On Feb 17, 8:27 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote: In this case, the FCC could reach Jeffrey Hermann at the listed address, not Michael Deignan. Odd, I received all the licenses mailed to me at the Hawaii address. Thus, clearly, the FCC reached me at that address just fine. Please play again soon! You could have looked them up on-line. No need to make claims of receiving them at Hermann's PO Box. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com