In article et, "KØHB"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote


Which I sense is a process that Hans wants to avoid,
because there are bound to be both
supporting and opposing comments.

Avoid?????

Why, yes.

What a strange thought process, coming from someone who seems to
be familiar with my participation here on rrap. Do I appear bashful about
stating my ideas, and avoiding reactions to them?

Not here. But I don't know about in the much wider arena of petitions to the
FCC.

The field is currently crowded with at least 14 petitions, and ARRL will
likely make it 15.

The comment and reply comment periods to all of those 14 petitions are long
past. ARRL hasn't started yet.

Would you like a petition of yours to be buried in that
noise level?

What noise level? Right now there are no petitions/RMs/NPRMs on amateur license
requirement changes out there. Yours would have the comment stage to itself
right now.

Soon ARRL will have its board meeting, and then there will probably be a
proposal that will gather all kinds of comments. Obviously you don't want to
compete with that!

Timing, Jim, is EVERYTHING, and introducing another petition
at this time would NOT be a way of gaining any significant mindshare from
the rulemakers.

Of course! But if you wait too long, the opportunity may be lost. Considering
the way FCC tossed out 14 RM numbers in two batches of seven, if you wait you
may find your proposal batched with ARRL's. If you wait too long, FCC could
move on to the NPRM process before you ever get the petition sent in.

Happy Y3K,

And looking forward to Y4K

73 de Jim, N2EY