|
FISTS petition to the FCC
"Dick Carroll;" wrote
http://www.qsl.net/n1ea/FIST_FCC_Petition_8-30-303.pdf Perhaps FISTS should consider sending this in as a comment to be considered with RM-10787, rather than a separate petition. If FCC grants the "no Morse test" petition, then it is unlikely to roll back that decision at a later date. 73, Hans, K0HB -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
"Hans Kohb" wrote in message news:b309ce148a7d07e18fe1e709110785b7.128005@mygat e.mailgate.org... "Dick Carroll;" wrote http://www.qsl.net/n1ea/FIST_FCC_Petition_8-30-303.pdf Perhaps FISTS should consider sending this in as a comment to be considered with RM-10787, rather than a separate petition. If FCC grants the "no Morse test" petition, then it is unlikely to roll back that decision at a later date. 73, Hans, K0HB I suspect that this will work equally as well as a comment since the FCC will be required to weigh all the diverging and conflicting petitions that have already been submitted to come up with whatever ruling they may decide to put out. There are now at least seven different petitions filed although not all are yet open to comments. The fact that it is a petition may even give it more weight than just a comment. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
And, the FCC upheld its R&O in 98-143, denying all petitions
for reconsideration asking for reinstatement of higher speed Morse tests. Carl - wk3c Does NCI I have the latest 10 Codes out yet? |
"Keith" wrote in message nk.net... The same old Morse code is necessary for ham radio HF operation line of thinking. There is nothing that prevents anyone from learning Morse code if the FCC drops the Morse code test & requirement for General and Extra Class license holders so their petition is silly. -- Best Regards, Keith AOL IM:kilowattradio NW Oregon Radio http://kilowatt-radio.org/ Nice CB page you have there. I guess you are the future of Ham Radio? God help us all..... |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message gy.com... I suspect that this will work equally as well as a comment since the FCC will be required to weigh all the diverging and conflicting petitions that have already been submitted to come up with whatever ruling they may decide to put out. There are now at least seven different petitions filed although not all are yet open to comments. The fact that it is a petition may even give it more weight than just a comment. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Having not seen a public notice from the FCC on ANY of the petitions, it would appear that NONE of them are formally open for comment. If I missed an official FCC public notice, I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me the date it was released. (I check the "Daily Digest" and the Federal Register daily ... though it's possible I could have overlooked one ...) Carl - wk3c |
"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Carl - wk3c |
How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick?
Carl - wk3c How many Cbplussers International, I mean NCI are Members? |
"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ...
It isn't on the FCC's website yet but you can read it here.... http://www.eham.net/articles/6371 Enjoy! I thought that FISTS sold themselves as a non-political club? |
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ... Having not seen a public notice from the FCC on ANY of the petitions, it would appear that NONE of them are formally open for comment. If I missed an official FCC public notice, I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me the date it was released. (I check the "Daily Digest" and the Federal Register daily ... though it's possible I could have overlooked one ...) Carl - wk3c The ARRL website has direct links. http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/08/29/2/?nc=1 FCC Invites Comments on Six Morse Code-Related Petitions Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes: "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Lots and lots. How many *US* licensees are members of NCI, Carl? btw, the FISTS member list is online. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
N2EY wrote:
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson" writes: "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Lots and lots. How many *US* licensees are members of NCI, Carl? btw, the FISTS member list is online. I've given it a read. It sounds pretty good, I agree with it for the most part, and it is doomed. Won't happen. Not in a million years. It's not the way we are heading. How do you justify a trained group of communicators that are versed in a mode that is as useful and needed as CW is? There isn't an emergency right now. It's not the way we are heading. Perhaps some day they will see the value, just like all the people who build houses in flood plains - Hey, those areas are dry 99.5 percent of the time! - Mike KB3EIA - |
Dick Carroll; wrote:
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote: "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Many times the number of *US* NCI members, Carl. It doesn't take a majority to win an issue, Dick. All it takes is an irate minority that is prepared to be loud and active. What do they do for an encore? - Mike KB3EIA - |
"Keith" wrote in message nk.net... On 1 Sep 2003 07:25:35 GMT, Dick Carroll; in wrote: Sri...you will be referrred to this URL : http://www.qsl.net/n1ea/FIST_FCC_Petition_8-30-303.pdf "Dick Carroll;" wrote: It isn't on the FCC's website yet but you can read it here.... http://www.eham.net/articles/6371 Enjoy! The same old Morse code is necessary for ham radio HF operation line of thinking. There is nothing that prevents anyone from learning Morse code if the FCC drops the Morse code test & requirement for General and Extra Class license holders so their petition is silly. -- Best Regards, Keith AOL IM:kilowattradio NW Oregon Radio http://kilowatt-radio.org/ _Give SCO $699 for using Linux or the Penguin gets it._ Torvalds: _They are smoking crack._ No Keith, it is not silly. You are just one of those that are too lazy to learn, and want to change the whole license structure to accomidate you. Dan/W4NTI |
In article , "Dick Carroll;"
writes: And they got NO input from FISTS that round at all, either. It didn't seem likely that FCC would go so far as they did, thus there was no movement within the organization. There's also the fact that there was an ARRL proposal on the table, as well as others. And not many members commented individually. I did. This time WILL be different! Oyez! To many folks, reduction in the code tests was one thing, but total elimination is quite another. Note too that many hams are/were of the opinion "reduce the code, expand the written" but what we got was reduction across the board. As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. Over 10,000 last time I looked. And FISTS started with #1. Of course not all the numbers are active - dues are $15/year. Comments from members will be numerous, and after all, FCC officials have said they want "us" to let them know what we want in the way of restructuring rules! That's what they'll get! Maybe if FISTS had commented en masse last time it might have some effect on the outcome, given FCC comments noted above. It remains to be seen, of course. Exactly. Maybe code test retention is the majority position today, as it was in 1998-1999 (judging by comments) Or maybe the majority has shifted. Maybe FCC will go with the majority opinion this time, which it did not do in 1999. It should be noted that the FISTS petition addresses more than the issue of code testing. 73 de Jim, N2EY FISTS #4360 |
What do they do for an encore?
Put out a list of 10 Codes |
"N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , "Carl R. Stevenson" writes: "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Lots and lots. A real specific answer ... How many *US* licensees are members of NCI, Carl? Thousands, and growing every day :-) btw, the FISTS member list is online. If you took the time to look, and it's public, why didn't you answer my question? However, we *don't* publish our membership list ... we respect the privacy of our members and keep the data they give us confidential, don't sell it to SPAMers, etc. Part of the reason is the abuse that some PCTAs dish our ... why would we subject our members to abusive e-mail? (Yes, I get the occasional rant, but that's what the DEL key is for ... but I'm inherently public because of my office in the organization.) Carl - wk3c |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... How do you justify a trained group of communicators that are versed in a mode that is as useful and needed as CW is? There isn't an emergency right now. It's especially hard when the emergency management agencies have no use for a cadre of CW ops ... it's not the type of communications that they want or need. Just as the CW NTS nets are anachronisms ... Carl - wk3c |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Dick Carroll; wrote: "Carl R. Stevenson" wrote: "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Many times the number of *US* NCI members, Carl. It doesn't take a majority to win an issue, Dick. All it takes is an irate minority that is prepared to be loud and active. No, what it takes are rational, compelling arguments that support your position ... NCI had them in the case of WT 98-143, the PCTAs couldn't come up with ANY (because there are no rational, compelling arguments for keeping Morse testing). What do they do for an encore? We present more rational, compelling arguments, of course. Carl - wk3c |
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message hlink.net... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... It isn't on the FCC's website yet but you can read it here.... http://www.eham.net/articles/6371 Enjoy! I thought that FISTS sold themselves as a non-political club? How is sending in a petition a political act? Does that mean when NCI sent in a petition it was political? Or perhaps they were simply following proceedures. Of course participating in the regulatory process is a "political" thing. And yes, FIST's position in the past (and IIRC, their charter) was that they were *not* a politically-oriented group ... just a group that was supposed to foster the *use* of Morse. And the test is *not* necessary to use Morse ... someone sending slow as they learn (voluntarily, because they *want* to) hurts nobody ... even the ARRL has stated that the best way to learn Morse is on the air. Keeping people off the air until they learn Morse to some specific level of proficiency is counter, not just to the ARS as a whole, but to the *professed* goal of those who want to keep Morse testing. If they'd welcome folks whether they could beep or not, they'd stand a better chance of gaining "recruits" than they do by acting crappy to those who aren't interested in Morse, trying to keep them off of HF, and then complaining that they don't "realize the benefits of Morse." After that sort of treatment, no wonder so many folks aren't interested in Morse (or ham radio for that matter ...) Carl - wk3c |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message gy.com... "Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ... Having not seen a public notice from the FCC on ANY of the petitions, it would appear that NONE of them are formally open for comment. If I missed an official FCC public notice, I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me the date it was released. (I check the "Daily Digest" and the Federal Register daily ... though it's possible I could have overlooked one ...) Carl - wk3c The ARRL website has direct links. http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/08/29/2/?nc=1 FCC Invites Comments on Six Morse Code-Related Petitions The ARRL has direct links to (some) of the *petitions* that the FCC has put into "docket items" on their website. There is no link to a Public Notice from the FCC, seeking comments on *any* of the petitions, nor has one been published by the FCC to the best of my knowledge, and it certainly hasn't been published in the Federal Register. I follow those sorts of things because I am involved in radio regulatory matters professionally. Technically, the FCC hasn't asked for comments yet ... Carl - wk3c |
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: N2EY wrote: In article , "Carl R. Stevenson" writes: "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Lots and lots. How many *US* licensees are members of NCI, Carl? btw, the FISTS member list is online. I've given it a read. It sounds pretty good, I agree with it for the most part, and it is doomed. Won't happen. Not in a million years. It's not the way we are heading. Maybe it will make a difference, maybe it won't. But no matter what happens, there will have been a proposal and a lot of commentary opposing the dropping of all code tests. How do you justify a trained group of communicators that are versed in a mode that is as useful and needed as CW is? There isn't an emergency right now. It's not the way we are heading. True - the "fashion" for the past 25+ years has been to reduce the license test requirements - code *and* written. Perhaps some day they will see the value, just like all the people who build houses in flood plains - Hey, those areas are dry 99.5 percent of the time! Let it never be said that there was no opposition. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... How do you justify a trained group of communicators that are versed in a mode that is as useful and needed as CW is? There isn't an emergency right now. It's especially hard when the emergency management agencies have no use for a cadre of CW ops ... it's not the type of communications that they want or need. KT4ST has shown that to be untrue. However, with all due respect, Carl, I don't think you'd be the most effective salesman for the mode... Just as the CW NTS nets are anachronisms ... What about SSB NTS nets? Are they anachronisms? A CW NTS net can handle more traffic in less time using less spectrum than an SSB NTS net. Been there, done that. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ...
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message hlink.net... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... It isn't on the FCC's website yet but you can read it here.... http://www.eham.net/articles/6371 Enjoy! I thought that FISTS sold themselves as a non-political club? How is sending in a petition a political act? Does that mean when NCI sent in a petition it was political? Or perhaps they were simply following proceedures. Of course participating in the regulatory process is a "political" thing. And yes, FIST's position in the past (and IIRC, their charter) was that they were *not* a politically-oriented group ... just a group that was supposed to foster the *use* of Morse. Right. So where NCI is purposely a politically-oriented group, and behaves accordingly, FISTS is specifically a non-political group who is now behaving politically. Why don't we hear any whining about how FISTS has broken with their charter from the people that are always whining about NCI? Usual PCTA double-standard? |
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Dick Carroll; wrote: "Carl R. Stevenson" wrote: "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Many times the number of *US* NCI members, Carl. It doesn't take a majority to win an issue, Dick. All it takes is an irate minority that is prepared to be loud and active. No, what it takes are rational, compelling arguments that support your position ... NCI had them in the case of WT 98-143, the PCTAs couldn't come up with ANY (because there are no rational, compelling arguments for keeping Morse testing). What do they do for an encore? We present more rational, compelling arguments, of course. Carl, with all due respect, "rational and compelling arguments" are in the head of the beholder. Why do you do people a disservice by suggesting otherwise? I have read both documents, and find the NCI and FISTS proposals equally rational and compelling. In the end, it all comes down to what a person **believes**. And that is not rational. Not in your case, not in mine. And too much of the "belief" business and it turns into religion, which some PCTA'ers have been accused of. It all works both ways. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Dick Carroll; wrote: "Carl R. Stevenson" wrote: "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Many times the number of *US* NCI members, Carl. It doesn't take a majority to win an issue, Dick. All it takes is an irate minority that is prepared to be loud and active. No, what it takes are rational, compelling arguments that support your position ... NCI had them in the case of WT 98-143, the PCTAs couldn't come up with ANY (because there are no rational, compelling arguments for keeping Morse testing). What do they do for an encore? We present more rational, compelling arguments, of course. Carl, with all due respect, "rational and compelling arguments" are in the head of the beholder. Then the words "rational" and "irrational" have no meaning. |
Dick Carroll; wrote:
It isn't on the FCC's website yet but you can read it here.... http://www.eham.net/articles/6371 If CW does enjoy a 13 dB advantage over SSB, avid DX hounds will choose to learn it and use it on their own. No need for a license test. CW makes for small bandwidth combined with simple equipment. NASA doesn't use CW with its deep space probes, but they have fancy equipment on both ends. I mention this in that NASA does the ultimate in weak signal work, something CW is usually good for on ham bands with simple equipment and trained operators. But there's no CW op on the space probe. Or we could do an "either or": For the extra, pass element 1 or a new element 5 (a tougher written) with your general license. And for the general, either element 1 and the general written, or the general and extra writtens with your tech license. |
"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote: Sorry, the "Morse is necessary for emergency communications" argument doesn't hold water, and the FCC has already realized that. Carl - wk3c Let's face it- Carl just hates Morse code, despite his many protests to the contrary. It's really not that difficult to understand - after all, he hears all that digital data flying past his ears and the old nternal modem just won't work on it! Ah, the pain! The Frustration! The Agony! You just can't help sympathyzing with his plight. The ONLY way for him to find relief is to slay that dreaded dragon under the bed..... Regardless of what Carl wants or likes or dislikes, you are free to use Morse at any time (cept on CB and 5MHz). |
Dick Carroll; wrote:
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote: "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Many times the number of *US* NCI members, Carl. Now Dick, how do you know that? No one knows except a person that isn't telling. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Carl R. Stevenson wrote: I've explained out committment to our members' privacy. If FISTS doesn't have the same policy, that's their choice, and thus, you could have answered my question without breaching any confidence. I can't do the same because of the committment we have made to our members. Can't you think of a better reason? Let's say there are 5000 members of NCI. Explain how saying There are 5000 members of NCI is violating anyones privacy. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Brian wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ... Carl R. Stevenson wrote: some snippage We present more rational, compelling arguments, of course. Carl, with all due respect, "rational and compelling arguments" are in the head of the beholder. Then the words "rational" and "irrational" have no meaning. 1. Everyone here thinks they are being rational, unless they are being purposefully non-rational. (say Bruce for example, who is having fun baiting people - and even in his case, take note that when he is starting to be serious his spelling and grammar become correct) 2. You really aren't that far from the truth. 3. Insane people are exempt from all this. But there really aren't that many insane people. My rationale is that what is or isn't rational is based on the starting assumption or world view. If your basic assumption is that things should be simplified or to be made easier, then you would agree with a proposal such as the NCI proposal before the FCC. It is rational and compelling from that viewpoint. If you believe that simplification is not necessary or desirable, you are more likely to find the FISTS proposal rational and compelling. - Mike KB3EIA - |
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message hlink.net... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... It isn't on the FCC's website yet but you can read it here.... http://www.eham.net/articles/6371 Enjoy! I thought that FISTS sold themselves as a non-political club? How is sending in a petition a political act? Does that mean when NCI sent in a petition it was political? Or perhaps they were simply following proceedures. Of course participating in the regulatory process is a "political" thing. And yes, FIST's position in the past (and IIRC, their charter) was that they were *not* a politically-oriented group ... just a group that was supposed to foster the *use* of Morse. And the test is *not* necessary to use Morse ... someone sending slow as they learn (voluntarily, because they *want* to) hurts nobody ... even the ARRL has stated that the best way to learn Morse is on the air. Keeping people off the air until they learn Morse to some specific level of proficiency is counter, not just to the ARS as a whole, but to the *professed* goal of those who want to keep Morse testing. If they'd welcome folks whether they could beep or not, they'd stand a better chance of gaining "recruits" than they do by acting crappy to those who aren't interested in Morse, trying to keep them off of HF, and then complaining that they don't "realize the benefits of Morse." After that sort of treatment, no wonder so many folks aren't interested in Morse (or ham radio for that matter ...) Carl - wk3c Please explain to the audience then, how, one can have basically no knowledge of Morse, then get on the air and try to improve it? You MUST have a rudimentary knowledge, in otherwords something to work with, before one can proceed. I think 5 WPM is a fair requirement. I think total ellimination is equivilant to negotiations with a terrorist organization (NCI). Dan/W4NTI |
"Brian" wrote in message om... "Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message hlink.net... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... It isn't on the FCC's website yet but you can read it here.... http://www.eham.net/articles/6371 Enjoy! I thought that FISTS sold themselves as a non-political club? How is sending in a petition a political act? Does that mean when NCI sent in a petition it was political? Or perhaps they were simply following proceedures. Of course participating in the regulatory process is a "political" thing. And yes, FIST's position in the past (and IIRC, their charter) was that they were *not* a politically-oriented group ... just a group that was supposed to foster the *use* of Morse. Right. So where NCI is purposely a politically-oriented group, and behaves accordingly, FISTS is specifically a non-political group who is now behaving politically. Why don't we hear any whining about how FISTS has broken with their charter from the people that are always whining about NCI? Usual PCTA double-standard? Not only a dumb ass, but a knee jerk bleeding heart liberal to boot. Dan/W4NTI |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
gy.com... "N2EY" wrote in message ... 73 de Jim, N2EY FISTS #4360 Well just received my FISTS number and it is 10270. My OMs number is 10271. So you don't need to count them. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Hmmmm, the ASCII format document with just the list copied and pasted into a MS Word document shows to be 5,193 paragraphs, which would be members--presuming there is one line/paragraph per member. That list is labeled as "Active Members." Kim W5TIT |
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Brian wrote: Mike Coslo wrote in message ... Carl R. Stevenson wrote: some snippage We present more rational, compelling arguments, of course. Carl, with all due respect, "rational and compelling arguments" are in the head of the beholder. Then the words "rational" and "irrational" have no meaning. 1. Everyone here thinks they are being rational, unless they are being purposefully non-rational. (say Bruce for example, who is having fun baiting people - and even in his case, take note that when he is starting to be serious his spelling and grammar become correct) Bruce is an stupendous and amazing man. 2. You really aren't that far from the truth. Oh, geez. 3. Insane people are exempt from all this. But there really aren't that many insane people. Not even Hinkley? My rationale is that what is or isn't rational is based on the starting assumption or world view. Always is. If your basic assumption is that things should be simplified or to be made easier, then you would agree with a proposal such as the NCI proposal before the FCC. It is rational and compelling from that viewpoint. My basic assumption is there are some things the government should be doing and there are some things that the government shouldn't be doing. We could start with the Constitution of the United States and its Articles, and try to find the rationale for a welfare state. Brian |
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message thlink.net...
I think total ellimination is equivilant to negotiations with a terrorist organization (NCI). Dan/W4NTI Talk about a dumb ass. He combines Bruce's stupidity with reckless statements. |
Talk about a dumb ass. He combines Bruce's stupidity with reckless
statements. Dumb Ass is someone who lets NCI dictate to them what they can and cant say |
|
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 19:57:23 GMT, "Carl R. Stevenson"
wrote: "Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ... As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI. How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick? Carl - wk3c Nearly 10,000. Not all of them are users of code either. FISTS welcomes anybody, unlike the NCI where you join "the cause to remove code requirements". If you prefer to remove the code requirement, no one is forcing you do unplug your keyer from your radio. Stacey, AA7YA FISTS #3857 |
On Tue, 2 Sep 2003 19:43:55 -0500, "Kim W5TIT"
wrote: "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... "N2EY" wrote in message ... 73 de Jim, N2EY FISTS #4360 Well just received my FISTS number and it is 10270. My OMs number is 10271. So you don't need to count them. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Hmmmm, the ASCII format document with just the list copied and pasted into a MS Word document shows to be 5,193 paragraphs, which would be members--presuming there is one line/paragraph per member. That list is labeled as "Active Members." Kim W5TIT It works like 10-X International. I've had a 10-X number for 12 years and have remained "inactive" (non-paid member) for 11 years, but I can exchange 10-X numbers on the air if I so choose. So reading from the active list is very misleading. I am however an active member of the FISTS, as you probably already gathered from perusing the "Active Members" list. Stacey, AA7YA |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:50 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com