Mike Coslo wrote:
N2EY wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Lenof21 wrote:

In article . net,
"Gr=FCmw=EEtch
th=EB =DCnfl=E3pp=E5bl=EA"
writes:

"Lenof21" wrote in message
...

: The license holder isn't prohibited from doing anything
after
: midnight of the last day of his/her 10-year-active-license
: period...and
: for two more years into that grace period.
:
Untrue. (Some would say an outright lie) They are certainly
prohibited
from
operating their amateur radio station without supervision, since
they
possess no valid operator license.

Now what did I write that was UNTRUE? Hmmm?

The untrue part is that a license holder isn't prohibited from
doing anything.

You wrote in an earlier message:

Lenof21 All licensees are perfectly legal to continue operating in

Lenof21 their grace
Lenof21 period. There is no necessity (nor sense) to eliminate
those
Lenof21 in the
Lenof21 grace period from those in the normal 10-year license
period from
Lenof21 any class totals.

Then you appear to have modified it to say:

"The license holder isn't prohibited from doing anything after
midnight of the last day of his/her 10-year-active-license
period."

Was anything written about "operating an amateur radio
station?"
No. :-)

Yes, because you wrote the above mentioned quote in an earlier
message

They could have a valid commercial license and not be
prohibited from using that.

Do commercial licenses have 10 year terms and 2 year grace periods?

And if so, should you be required to include them in your ARS license

numbers? 8^)

Doesn't matter. The quote was that they are "not prohibited from doing
anything"

Note: A commercial license does not
allow operation IN the amateur bands...just like an amateur
license
does NOT allow operation outside of amateur bands.

Irrelevant

In any event, a license holder *is* prohibited from doing something
when the license is in the grace period.

Yes, and that is operation within the privileges of their expired
license.

So. They *are* prohibited from operating in the amateur bands. That
is
significantly different than "not being prohibited from doing
anything"

Yep. Len is flat-out wrong - again.

ALL of Title 47 C.F.R. applies to ALL USA citizens. Yes, that
includes amateur radio licensees. :-) In that you will find
that, if
there is a REAL emergency situation, there is NO prohibition
against anyone using any frequency, any mode for help.

Doesn't change the fact that a licensee with a license in the
grace period is prohibited from operating an amateur station
in a non-emergency situation.

I guess the "only ones who count" in here are the Regulars, the
life-stylers, those who eat-breathe-sleep amateur radio. They
are
NEVER wrong. Their words are TRVTH itself, engraved in eternal
marble. Their shall be no discourse with them...of course.

In that you are incorrect. I don't mind having a good discussion,
and
even enjoy a good argument. But I do expect a good argument with
proper
give and take. Some times I am wrong, and some times right. But
your
case would be better served if you were to simply admit your
mistakes
and move on to good debate.

Agreed. Len made a mistake about 97.21(b), but he seems reluctant
to
admit it.

Note that the position he is taking is modifying.

You mean evading.

I've worked with a few
who do this. They really hate being wrong, but when they are proven
wrong, they slowly modify their stance so that eventually they either

agree with you, or " you just didn't understand" what they were
saying
in the first place

That's called "evading".

Think about *why*

A couple possibilities:

1. He was genuinely wrong.

That's been proven already.

He made an incorrect statement, and is
embarrassed about it. Some people absolutely *hate* being incorrect
on
anything.

That's Len to a capital L. Particularly when the person pointing out
the error is someone he considers inferior.

2. He is making deliberate incorrect statements simply to invoke
others
in arguments.

That's not inconsistent with 1).

This could be an entertainment issue, or perhaps a
loneliness thing.

Possibly.

Or perhaps it's an attempt to bring others down to his level, get them
fighting with each other, etc.

Consider that Len is not a ham, has never been one, and probably
never will be one. He isn't even very knowledgeable about Part 97,
as illustrated by his ignorance of 97.21(b).

So why is he preaching to the FCC and the online world about
how ham radio should be? He won't tell us his motivation.
73 de Jim, N2EY