In article .net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:


"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:

The suffix of Kim's call sign spells
out a word which is commonly
regarded as a vulgar reference to
a woman's breasts. Therefore,
her call sign is very inappropriate
for a family-oriented activity such
as the amateur radio service.


By whose standards of inappropriateness, Larry? And who made that person
the judge of what is appropriate in this radio service? The FCC issued the
callsign. As far as I'm concerned, that is the only "judge" that matters in
this regard.

Dwight:

My own, and several other regular participants of this newsgroup, not to
mention a handful of lurkers who communicate me regularly to let me know
I'm right on track. In fact, one of them just posted here recently, and
quite unexpectedly.

The fact that the FCC issued the callsign is totally irrelevant. The FCC is
a governmental agency which is driven by a total commitment to political
correctness and the need to keep it's ass out of drafts. If they would
decline to issue a call sign such as Kim's, they could be sued for big bucks
for any number of reasons, most likely the violation of her First Amendment
rights. Therefore, it is not the FCC's onus to take responsibility for an
objectionable call sign. That is the responsibility of the person to whom it
was assigned, if a sequentially-assigned call, or the person requesting a
specific Vanity Call Sign. If I were to request a new, sequentially-
assigned call, and got something like K3KKK or K3FUK, I would immediately
return that license to the FCC and demand a reassignment which did not
contain that particularly objectionable suffix. If Kim had any class at all,
that is precisely what she would do with her present call. This is on Kim,
not the FCC. The FCC is not in a position to sanction or disapprove any
particular call sign.

73 de Larry, K3LT