Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dan Finn" wrote in message ... Well-written petition. I personally oppose it, but it is well-written with what might be considered a logical rationale giving all of the justifications for the NCI position. It deserves a chance to be considered, in my opinion, and I hope that the FCC does issue a call for comments. Thanks for the kind words, Dan ... and for the spirit of faireness your comments above show. They probably will not, believing that the recent reduction to very-slow-code (5 wpm) was a good compromise, i.e. not acceptable to either side. I have ZERO doubt that the FCC will consider this matter. It's merely a question of how soon and how quickly they move. Carl - wk3c |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
NCVEC explains their licensing petition | Equipment | |||
NCVEC explains their licensing petition | Equipment | |||
FYI: QRZ Forum - NCVEC Petition & Comments | Policy | |||
Some comments on the NCVEC petition | Policy | |||
Sign in the petition against the abuse of the Band Plan forward this message to your buddies) | Dx |