|
What of NCI?
Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and
purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? -- 73 de Bert WA2SI |
Bert Craig wrote:
Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? No Test International. -- Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com http://web2news.com/?rec.radio.amateur.policy |
"Penny Traytion" wrote ...
No Test International. __________________________________________________ ________ Dang it, Penny. You took my answer. ;-) Arnie - KT4ST Member of "Know Code" International |
"Bert Craig" wrote in message t...
Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? Welp, since the name of the operation is No Code Test *International* their work is far from done. Seems like code tests will continue in a number of countries, Russia, Germany, China, the Arab states, etc. NCI will have to schmooze the likes of Putin (Col, ret. KGB), Jiang and the lop-yer-head-off Arab sweethearts before they can claim mission complete. Squiggy gets Yemen, Sohl gets Mongolia for openers. Oughta be interesting. w3rv |
"Arnie Macy" wrote in message ...
"Penny Traytion" wrote ... No Test International. __________________________________________________ ________ Dang it, Penny. You took my answer. ;-) Arnie - KT4ST Arnie, go ahead and let her take your answer. No sense in both of you being wrong. Brian |
Brian wrote:
"Arnie Macy" wrote in message ... "Penny Traytion" wrote ... No Test International. ________________________________________________ __________ Dang it, Penny. You took my answer. ;-) Arnie - KT4ST Arnie, go ahead and let her take your answer. No sense in both of you being wrong. Actually as a point of interest, and maybe a little trolling, Just WHY should there be testing for a ham license? Isn't limiting access to the Airwaves to only those who pass some kind of test Elitist? What of those who simply aren't smart enough to pass a test? are they not human and have rights? As for RF safety, I would point to the successful efforts of Motorcycle riders to abolish helmet rules. It should be the individual's responsibility to decide if RF safety matters are important to him or her. As for mode specific questions, they have no business asking me about modes of operation that I am not interested in. No Test International could be born now! Thoughts? - Mike KB3EIA - |
Mike Coslo writes:
Actually as a point of interest, and maybe a little trolling, Okay, I'll bite. Just WHY should there be testing for a ham license? Isn't limiting access to the Airwaves to only those who pass some kind of test Elitist? Worse, isn't it a violation of the first amendment? Isn't forbidding me to operate a transmitter the same as forbidding me to operate a printing press? As for mode specific questions, they have no business asking me about modes of operation that I am not interested in. Right--they should only cover high-power broadcasts, comsat hijacking and signal-jamming my rivals... No Test International could be born now! Anarchy forever! --Len. |
Their next step should be joining up with a terrorist group. They could be
used as human bombs. Dan/W4NTI "Bert Craig" wrote in message ... Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? -- 73 de Bert WA2SI |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Brian wrote: "Arnie Macy" wrote in message ... "Penny Traytion" wrote ... No Test International. ________________________________________________ __________ Dang it, Penny. You took my answer. ;-) Arnie - KT4ST Arnie, go ahead and let her take your answer. No sense in both of you being wrong. Actually as a point of interest, and maybe a little trolling, Just WHY should there be testing for a ham license? Isn't limiting access to the Airwaves to only those who pass some kind of test Elitist? NO What of those who simply aren't smart enough to pass a test? are they not human and have rights? That is what CB is for. As for RF safety, I would point to the successful efforts of Motorcycle riders to abolish helmet rules. It should be the individual's responsibility to decide if RF safety matters are important to him or her. At 1500watts output don't you think the neighbors would have some input? As for mode specific questions, they have no business asking me about modes of operation that I am not interested in. Agreed. That way you can only operate the basic modes. CW or SSB. And take another test when you want to move ahead. No Test International could be born now! No, the terrorists need them. Thoughts? - Mike KB3EIA - |
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Brian wrote: "Arnie Macy" wrote in message ... "Penny Traytion" wrote ... No Test International. ________________________________________________ __________ Dang it, Penny. You took my answer. ;-) Arnie - KT4ST Arnie, go ahead and let her take your answer. No sense in both of you being wrong. Actually as a point of interest, and maybe a little trolling, Just WHY should there be testing for a ham license? Isn't limiting access to the Airwaves to only those who pass some kind of test Elitist? What of those who simply aren't smart enough to pass a test? are they not human and have rights? As for RF safety, I would point to the successful efforts of Motorcycle riders to abolish helmet rules. It should be the individual's responsibility to decide if RF safety matters are important to him or her. As for mode specific questions, they have no business asking me about modes of operation that I am not interested in. No Test International could be born now! Thoughts? - Mike KB3EIA - Mike, looks like trolling to me. Let it be known that the PCTA want no written exams. OK, to use a little PCTA logic, we have exams because the test always gets thru when nothing else will. If that reason won't work, then we do it to be in compliance with ITU requirements, an answer which has worked for eons. And mortorcyclists do take exams, both written and practical. You're welcome to take the cover off of a 3k amplifier and put it over your head while riding a motorcycle. Have fun, and be sure to wear it to SD. Brian |
"Arnie Macy" wrote in message ...
"Brian" wrote ... Arnie, go ahead and let her take your answer. No sense in both of you being wrong. __________________________________________________ ___________________ Not so fast there, Brian. NCI has been on the record as saying that the tests should be made less technical. Not a far leap at all to presume they will try and "dumb" them down even more. Arnie - KT4ST Arnie, citation please. It is the disgruntled PCTA that have advocated a "No Test International" concept. I do not speak for NCI, but am on record for saying that the entry level exam is far to technical for an entry level license, and the entry level priveleges of 1,500 watts of UHF radiation are far too great for an entry level safety. Of course, the Technician license was never meant to be an entry license, being the consolation prize for General-level knowledge w/o the outdated, superfluous and irrelevant psycho-motor skills to twiddle a paddle at 13wpm. Brian |
|
"Brian" wrote in message
om... (Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com... "Bert Craig" wrote in message t... Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? Welp, since the name of the operation is No Code Test *International* their work is far from done. Seems like code tests will continue in a number of countries, Russia, Germany, China, the Arab states, etc. NCI will have to schmooze the likes of Putin (Col, ret. KGB), Jiang and the lop-yer-head-off Arab sweethearts before they can claim mission complete. Squiggy gets Yemen, Sohl gets Mongolia for openers. Oughta be interesting. w3rv What do I get? State sanctioned QRM. -- 73 de Bert WA2SI |
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 01:46:08 -0400, Arnie Macy wrote:
"Penny Traytion" wrote ... No Test International. _________________________________________________ _________ Dang it, Penny. You took my answer. ;-) That's where I draw the line...... -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane |
|
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
Actually as a point of interest, and maybe a little trolling, Just WHY should there be testing for a ham license? Because we already know what happens with no testing. Isn't limiting access to the Airwaves to only those who pass some kind of test Elitist? Nope. What of those who simply aren't smart enough to pass a test? are they not human and have rights? Everyone has the right to take the test. Nobody has the right to a guaranteed pass on the test. As for RF safety, I would point to the successful efforts of Motorcycle riders to abolish helmet rules. It should be the individual's responsibility to decide if RF safety matters are important to him or her. Actually, that makes sense IF the effects can be contained to just the person making the decision. But that's rarely the case. As for mode specific questions, they have no business asking me about modes of operation that I am not interested in. I learned about televison screen aspect ratio and interlaced scanning because it was in the Extra study guide back when. I've never operated ATV. No Test International could be born now! Thoughts? See my rant on replacing the code test with a Smith Chart test. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Bert Craig wrote:
Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? EXTINCTION. |
Robert Casey writes:
Why do people outside the USA call countries "states"? Because "state" means "country". It meant that to the US founders, too: in 18th century English, they named us "The United Nations of America", and envisioned each state as sovereign except in matters of war and commerce. Subsequent developments robbed states of their autonomy, and reduced them to provinces. Pity. Regards, Len. |
Jim,
I'm going to have to look up that one. I recently went to Burger King (sigh ....). They were running a special - two burgers and two small fries for $2.22. I ordered four burgers and four small fries only onions and ketchup on the burgers (this is a very difficult problem; break out the slip stick and multiply $2.22 times two). Now add two Whopper Juniors at $0.99 each. Um ... about 2 seconds to come up with $6.42. Then the sales tax. Ok. This poor gal starts pressing all these buttons and comes up with something very close to $10.00. I asked her what the sales tax was. 8%. Wrong. 8.25%, but I was being accessed nearly 50%. She looked hopelessly lost, so I offered that it should be $6.42 plus 8.25%, or something short of $7.00. She started pressing more buttons. She smiled, hit enter (or whatever) and then expressed dismay as the total was now around $15.00. She called the manager over. He explained what she did wrong, hit some buttons, smiled ... and stared at the total - now over $29.00. I was beginning to think I'd be better off at Radio Shack. This problem is a *lot* bigger than amateur radio. They threw out the regents math test in New York since so many kids failed. I recall one point was made that it included geometry (unfair). Huh? I don't know what folks think math includes, but if it is button pushing, I've met one manager that would have failed button pushing 101 :) Say, have you seen the ad on TV touting one quick oil change place (was it Jiffy Lube?). They have folks that have been 'certified' by an organization called something like 'oil change specialists of America'. Seeing these sort of events lately, I'm wondering if others have had similar experiences. If they have, is there a chance they might see some wisdom in having some kind of exam before turning someone loose with 1.5 KW of RF and perhaps thousands of volts in their amp? Yep, I didn't think so either. :) As to the ATV, remember the flying spot scanner? :) 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 7/4/03 |
Robert Casey wrote in
: Bert Craig wrote: State sanctioned QRM. Well, there's the Broadband over Power Line (BPL) proposal. Which is essentially "State sanctioned QRM". Why do people outside the USA call countries "states"? I think the Palestinians really want their own country, not just a state. ("State" meaning "New York", "New Jersey", "Idaho", etc) State originally meant country, but then you formed a union. |
In article , "Dan/W4NTI"
writes: Their next step should be joining up with a terrorist group. They could be used as human bombs. Dan/W4NTI Dan: The problem with that is, if Carl Stevenson's brain were composed of Semtex, he couldn't blow his nose! 73 de Larry, K3LT |
On 9 Jul 2003 03:19:48 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:
State originally meant country, but then you formed a union. Actually we formed a confederation. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane |
(Brian) wrote in message . com...
(Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com... "Bert Craig" wrote in message t... Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? Welp, since the name of the operation is No Code Test *International* their work is far from done. Seems like code tests will continue in a number of countries, Russia, Germany, China, the Arab states, etc. NCI will have to schmooze the likes of Putin (Col, ret. KGB), Jiang and the lop-yer-head-off Arab sweethearts before they can claim mission complete. Squiggy gets Yemen, Sohl gets Mongolia for openers. Oughta be interesting. w3rv What do I get? You just HAD to do that din ya? |
"Bert Craig" wrote in message . net...
"Brian" wrote in message om... (Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com... "Bert Craig" wrote in message t... Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? Welp, since the name of the operation is No Code Test *International* their work is far from done. Seems like code tests will continue in a number of countries, Russia, Germany, China, the Arab states, etc. NCI will have to schmooze the likes of Putin (Col, ret. KGB), Jiang and the lop-yer-head-off Arab sweethearts before they can claim mission complete. Squiggy gets Yemen, Sohl gets Mongolia for openers. Oughta be interesting. w3rv What do I get? State sanctioned QRM. Wouldn't do any good, he doesn't know how to put up antennas. |
Brian wrote: Mike Coslo wrote in message ... Brian wrote: "Arnie Macy" wrote in message ... "Penny Traytion" wrote ... No Test International. ______________________________________________ ____________ Dang it, Penny. You took my answer. ;-) Arnie - KT4ST Arnie, go ahead and let her take your answer. No sense in both of you being wrong. Actually as a point of interest, and maybe a little trolling, Just WHY should there be testing for a ham license? Isn't limiting access to the Airwaves to only those who pass some kind of test Elitist? What of those who simply aren't smart enough to pass a test? are they not human and have rights? As for RF safety, I would point to the successful efforts of Motorcycle riders to abolish helmet rules. It should be the individual's responsibility to decide if RF safety matters are important to him or her. As for mode specific questions, they have no business asking me about modes of operation that I am not interested in. No Test International could be born now! Thoughts? - Mike KB3EIA - Mike, looks like trolling to me. Let it be known that the PCTA want no written exams. hmmm, asking questions is a statement like that? OK, to use a little PCTA logic, we have exams because the test always gets thru when nothing else will. If that reason won't work, then we do it to be in compliance with ITU requirements, an answer which has worked for eons. That's not my reasoning. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Jim Hampton wrote:
Jim, I'm going to have to look up that one. I recently went to Burger King (sigh ...). They were running a special - two burgers and two small fries for $2.22. I ordered four burgers and four small fries only onions and ketchup on the burgers (this is a very difficult problem; break out the slip stick and multiply $2.22 times two). Now add two Whopper Juniors at $0.99 each. Um ... about 2 seconds to come up with $6.42. Then the sales tax. Ok. This poor gal starts pressing all these buttons and comes up with something very close to $10.00. I asked her what the sales tax was. 8%. Wrong. 8.25%, but I was being accessed nearly 50%. She looked hopelessly lost, so I offered that it should be $6.42 plus 8.25%, or something short of $7.00. She started pressing more buttons. She smiled, hit enter (or whatever) and then expressed dismay as the total was now around $15.00. She called the manager over. He explained what she did wrong, hit some buttons, smiled ... and stared at the total - now over $29.00. I was beginning to think I'd be better off at Radio Shack. This problem is a *lot* bigger than amateur radio. They threw out the regents math test in New York since so many kids failed. I recall one point was made that it included geometry (unfair). Huh? I don't know what folks think math includes, but if it is button pushing, I've met one manager that would have failed button pushing 101 :) It's not just stupid people - tho' there are enough of them around. In your cited case, the techno-weenies that designed the cash register accounting system have made things both too simple and too complicated. So every time there is a special, or if a mistake is made, then all h**l breaks loose. The weenies who put those systems together have made it unnecessary to think most of the time. So a mistake comes along, and the person behind the register has to use a muscle they may not have excercised in weeks - their mind. Say, have you seen the ad on TV touting one quick oil change place (was it Jiffy Lube?). They have folks that have been 'certified' by an organization called something like 'oil change specialists of America'. Now there is some wallpaper I'd like to get. Sign me up! Seeing these sort of events lately, I'm wondering if others have had similar experiences. If they have, is there a chance they might see some wisdom in having some kind of exam before turning someone loose with 1.5 KW of RF and perhaps thousands of volts in their amp? Yep, I didn't think so either. :) Hoo, that would weed out the dummies quickly! ;^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
"Penny Traytion" wrote in message ... Bert Craig wrote: Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? No Test International. WRONG... NCI still has the individual administration decisions to address... and for the uninformed... NCI's charter does NOT address written testing. If anyone is going to propose a "No Test International" they'll not get my support nor (IMHO) the support of any other NCI directors. Cheers, Bill K2UNK Director NCI |
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message ... In article , "Dan/W4NTI" writes: Their next step should be joining up with a terrorist group. They could be used as human bombs. Dan/W4NTI The problem with that is, if Carl Stevenson's brain were composed of Semtex, he couldn't blow his nose! 73 de Larry, K3LT Larry, Sure sounds like sour grapes to me. Did you know that Carl was in Geneva as a member of the US delegation? Seems pretty respected in ITU circles to me. Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
"Phil Kane" wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 13:21:41 GMT, wrote: Isn't forbidding me to operate a transmitter the same as forbidding me to operate a printing press? ...no. The Supreme Court of the United States has so ruled... That isn't necessarily final, of course. It is theoretically possible for the Supremes to rule contrary to the framers intent. Some justices seem eager to do so. So the question merely changes to whether we should seize the airwaves, as the Constitution provides, and then defend the Constitution from "all enemies, foreign and domestic", by taking out the supremes. Anyone? Anyone? --Len. PS I gather there's a weapons cache at Concord, Mass... |
"Bert Craig" wrote in message . net...
"Brian" wrote in message om... (Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com... "Bert Craig" wrote in message t... Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? Welp, since the name of the operation is No Code Test *International* their work is far from done. Seems like code tests will continue in a number of countries, Russia, Germany, China, the Arab states, etc. NCI will have to schmooze the likes of Putin (Col, ret. KGB), Jiang and the lop-yer-head-off Arab sweethearts before they can claim mission complete. Squiggy gets Yemen, Sohl gets Mongolia for openers. Oughta be interesting. w3rv What do I get? State sanctioned QRM. Darn, I thought I'd get my own country to tackle. |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
Actually as a point of interest, and maybe a little trolling, Just WHY should there be testing for a ham license? Because your transmissions travel on a "public thoroughfare", there is a requirement to ensure that you have demonstrated the knowledge to operate without negative impact on the other users of that resource, sort of like you need a drivers license to operate a motor vehicle on public highways. 73, de Hans, K0HB -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
"Bill Sohl" wrote in
: "Penny Traytion" wrote in message ... Bert Craig wrote: Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? No Test International. WRONG... NCI still has the individual administration decisions to address... and for the uninformed... NCI's charter does NOT address written testing. If anyone is going to propose a "No Test International" they'll not get my support nor (IMHO) the support of any other NCI directors. Cheers, Bill K2UNK Director NCI Switzerland down, how many to go? BTW, apparently the Swiss no-coders are HB3 calls, a new one for WPX |
"Alun Palmer" wrote in message ... "Bill Sohl" wrote in : "Penny Traytion" wrote in message ... Bert Craig wrote: Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? No Test International. WRONG... NCI still has the individual administration decisions to address... and for the uninformed... NCI's charter does NOT address written testing. If anyone is going to propose a "No Test International" they'll not get my support nor (IMHO) the support of any other NCI directors. Bill K2UNK, Director NCI Switzerland down, how many to go? About 150 or so by my count :-) Ironically, as commented elsewhere by Phil Karn, the USA treaty approval process may resut in the USA being one of the last to actually change. BTW, apparently the Swiss no-coders are HB3 calls, a new one for WPX So it appears. Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
"Hans K0HB" writes:
"Mike Coslo" wrote: Actually as a point of interest, and maybe a little trolling, Just WHY should there be testing for a ham license? Because your transmissions travel on a "public thoroughfare"... Very well said. In other words, spectrum is a limited resource, like water, and unlike printed matter, and is therefore protected similarly to our lakes and streams. Regards, Len. |
Bill Sohl wrote: "Hans K0HB" wrote in message news:21581ca121ce6e1a0cb83d94148bf23d.128005@mygat e.mailgate.org... "Mike Coslo" wrote in message Actually as a point of interest, and maybe a little trolling, Just WHY should there be testing for a ham license? Because your transmissions travel on a "public thoroughfare", there is a requirement to ensure that you have demonstrated the knowledge to operate without negative impact on the other users of that resource, sort of like you need a drivers license to operate a motor vehicle on public highways. 73, de Hans, K0HB Well said Hans. Well said indeed, but what if enough people just reject that logic? What if it is decided that the licenses just need to be bought? Say 200 bucks a shot? Or maybe a yearly sort of thing. Why have any other qualifications for the license? - Mike KB3EIA - |
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message ... "Penny Traytion" wrote in message ... Bert Craig wrote: Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? No Test International. WRONG... NCI still has the individual administration decisions to address... and for the uninformed... NCI's charter does NOT address written testing. If anyone is going to propose a "No Test International" they'll not get my support nor (IMHO) the support of any other NCI directors. Cheers, Bill K2UNK Director NCI Bill is exactly correct ... NCI is NOT "No Test International" ... we have NO intention of trying to weaken or eliminate the written tests ... ONLY to eliminate the Morse test requirement. Now that that's gone from the ITU Radio Regulations (effective July 5, 2003, the day after the WRC closed), administrations are free to drop Morse testing. (see http://www.nocode.org/Articles.html for the changes to S25.5 and the entire text of the new Article 25 ... the amateur part of the ITU Radio Regs) Word is that a number of administrations intend to move promptly (surprisingly promptly for governments ...) to eliminate Morse testing from their national rules. NCI's work is not done just because the ITU requirement has been eliminated. We will continue to work with administrations around the world to get the Morse test dropped from national regulations. 73, -- Carl R. Stevenson - wk3c Grid Square FN20fm http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c ------------------------------------------------------ NCI-1052 Executive Director, No Code International Fellow, The Radio Club of America Senior Member, IEEE Member, IEEE Standards Association Chair, IEEE 802.18 Radio Regulatory Technical Advisory Group Member, Wi-Fi Alliance Spectrum Committee Co-Chair, Wi-Fi Alliance Legislative Committee Member, QCWA (31424) Member, ARRL Member, TAPR Member, The SETI League ------------------------------------------------------ Join No Code International! Hams for the 21st Century. Help assure the survival and prosperity of ham radio. http://www.nocode.org |
Mike Coslo writes:
Perhaps Hams and anyone who want to be a ham should have to pay for the spectrum we want. Pay who? Where is the owner? Milton Friedman, in his work "Free to Choose", would argue that this is a case, like the case of "clean air", which could properly be assigned to government: there is a clear public interest in conserving this resource, but no clear way to allocate costs. He would probably propose a consumption tax, based on bandwidth, power, duty cycle, etc., which automatically allocates bandwidth (in the long run) according to its most profitable use: if the people badly want a service which consumes piles of bandwidth over a vast area for most of the time, then they would pay enough to offset the immense consumption tax on the provider. Of course, the effect is that hams will all start using CW. C'mon! You can pay tax on 150 Hz, or pay over 20 times as much for SSB. CW wins, hands down. Regards, Len. |
Carl R. Stevenson wrote: "Bill Sohl" wrote in message ... "Penny Traytion" wrote in message ... Bert Craig wrote: Now that the ITU treaty requirement re. CW is gone, (For all intents and purposes.) does that mean NCI's job is done? If not, what's next? No Test International. WRONG... NCI still has the individual administration decisions to address... and for the uninformed... NCI's charter does NOT address written testing. If anyone is going to propose a "No Test International" they'll not get my support nor (IMHO) the support of any other NCI directors. Assuming success, what then? A big party and then disbandment? - Mike KB3EIA - |
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message ...
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message ... In article , "Dan/W4NTI" writes: Their next step should be joining up with a terrorist group. They could be used as human bombs. Dan/W4NTI The problem with that is, if Carl Stevenson's brain were composed of Semtex, he couldn't blow his nose! 73 de Larry, K3LT Larry, Sure sounds like sour grapes to me. Did you know that Carl was in Geneva as a member of the US delegation? Seems pretty respected in ITU circles to me. Blather, he was just another observer with some commercial interest group he's involved with, had absolutely nothing to do with ham radio, not even close. Cheers, Bill K2UNK w3rv |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com