Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Residence vs. Mailing Address
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. 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? 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? 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. What do the Postal Regulations say about it? 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, and there was no misunderstanding. It was poor amateur practice. 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. 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. 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, then defrauds his friend and the FCC. Jim, N2EY |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Residence vs. Mailing Address
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. 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. 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. 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. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Residence vs. Mailing Address
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. 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. 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. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Residence vs. Mailing Address
On Feb 17, 4:29�pm, wrote:
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. I try to fit in with the group. :-) 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.orgsiteCOUNTED. *Poor Mikey D. * *was way down on the list...but still there. He's an underachiever. He'll get over it. 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? Maybe he whimpered to hisself? * *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. CODE-TESTED extras, Brian, CODE-TESTED. :-) Try to imagine what he is going to bitch about AFTER 23 Feb 07! Heh heh heh...ripe field for mucho knuckle- spanking by the Ruler! :-) Damn...now I HAVE to stay in here to see what the uberextras will come up with! :-) LA |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
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... *:-( Sure you can, Len. There's no FCC requirement for a PO Box nor residence address. Just a valid mailing address. You could use your Lanark Street address or the address of your "northern house" if you can receive mail from FCC there. No problem at all. But I don't think you will ever be a radio amateur. Just a hunch. 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. FCC rules do not limit the number of clubs that someone may be a trustee for. 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. Was it really a dozen? * *But he DID notice once and that got on the "notices." "Enforcement letters". Now if all this was so "legal" as Mikey D sez, why would it * *get into the "notices?" "Enforcement letters". It appears FCC wanted more information about the clubs. *If it was so "legal" then it should * *never have been there. Only if you assume guilt without proof. In the USA, there's a basic principle of "innocent until proven guilty". * *No sweat, the Guru and Reknowned Historian is all for * *code-tested amateur extras...they can do no real wrong * *in his eyes. Who is this "Guru and Renowned Historian"? I do not know the person. Also, there are no non-code-tested Amateur Extras at all. Not yet, anyway. That situation will soon change - just watch the thread "ARS License Numbers" for updates. Perhaps I will update the numbers there more frequently than twice-per- calendar-month. Perhaps not. As for me, it appears that there was a misunderstanding about the intent of the Part 97 rules concerning vanity calls for clubs - particularly in what a group must do to meet FCC's defintion of a "club" and qualify for a club callsign. *All "very legal." *barf Who was harmed by the assignment of those vanity callsigns? It is clear that some callsigns, such as four-character ones, are considered more desirable by many amateurs. Were any of the disputed callsigns part of a desirable group? Were other amateurs wanting the callsigns, but unable to get them because of the "clubs" having them? Have any of those callsigns been reassigned under the vanity program? It is interesting that you identify the trustee of those callsigns as a "code tested extra", but not as a no-code-test advocate. Jim, N2EY |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Residence vs. Mailing Address
wrote:
Who was harmed by the assignment of those vanity callsigns? For the record, none of the club callsigns I have ever trusteed for have been "vanity" callsigns. 73 kh6hz |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Let the Lying Begin, was: Residence vs. Mailing Address
On Feb 18, 1:28 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote: Who was harmed by the assignment of those vanity callsigns? For the record, none of the club callsigns I have ever trusteed for have been "vanity" callsigns. 73 kh6hz QRZ.COM disagrees. Is the following callsign sequentially issued? WE1RD Lookups: 434 MICHAEL P DEIGNAN REPEATER ASSOCIATION 39 SUTTON ST APT 1 PROVIDENCE RI 02903 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Residence vs. Mailing Address
On Feb 18, 1:28?pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote: Who was harmed by the assignment of those vanity callsigns? For the record, none of the club callsigns I have ever trusteed for have been "vanity" callsigns. Ooops - looks like I was mistaken about the vanity aspect. If they were not vanity callsigns, then they were all sequentially issued, right? I will reword my questions, then: Who was harmed by the assignment of those sequentially-issued club callsigns? If someone was harmed by the assignment of those sequentially-issued club callsigns, how were they harmed? Have any of those callsigns been reissued, either sequentially or through the vanity system? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
3rd RFD: rec.radio.amateur.moderated moderated (LAST CALL FOR COMMENTS) | Antenna | |||
3rd RFD: rec.radio.amateur.moderated moderated (LAST CALL FOR COMMENTS) | Dx | |||
You don't need any more proof. | General | |||
Radio call letters: What do they mean? | Shortwave | |||
The Pool | Policy |