And beer. Reminds me of a Zappa tune.

Leo wrote in message . ..
Nice one, Alun - tit for tat! :)

73, Leo

(Seated in the same fan section as Alun - oh, yeah!)

On 16 Jan 2004 05:23:15 GMT, Alun wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in :

But what does all this have to do with Kim's callsign?

- Mike KB3EIA -



Not much. There again, there does seem to be a correlation between pro-code
testing and anti-t*ts! Put me down as anti-code testing and pro-t*ts!!!

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Mike Coslo wrote:
D. Stussy wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Carl Zager wrote:

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com...

"Alun" wrote in message
...

I'm guessing that code CSCEs issued now will turn out to be good until
element 1 is abolished.

73 de Alun, N3KIP

Only if the code requirement is abolished in less than 365 days. Keep in
mind that some of the petitions filed do call for keeping code for General
or Extra while letting the Techs have some limited HF privileges. With the
speed with the FCC is not moving, less than a year from now seems rather
iffy.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

And ... a code CSCE is only "good" as follows:
1. For upgrade to General, one year. However, once a General, then the

^^^^^^^^
NO! It's good for 365 days, which is NOT always equal to one year, especially
when a leap year is involved.


Are leap seconds taken into account?

Since the TIME of the examination is not recorded on the CSCE, it is not
possible nor relevent to determine the expiration of a CSCE to the nearest
second.

http://www.remote.arrl.org/news/stor.../01/19/1/?nc=1


On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 21:24:44 GMT, "Bert Craig"
wrote:

"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...




Many novices may not even have their original CSCE. The FCC would
also recognize a copy of your former Novice license as proof you passed
5 wpm.




Yes that is true but I was addressing the case of someone who's first
license was a Technician.

If it was a tech plus, that means that they passed a 5wpm code test.
Which should also
be good. What strangely enough happened is say someone who never passed
a 5wpm
test but passed 13 or 20, doesn't get the lifetime credit. Some FCC
brearucrat writing
the rules didn't realize that he should have written "5 WPM or faster".
He might have
thught 5 was harder than 13 or something like that...

Kinda scary, eh? Should serve as a reminder to all who repeat the "but the
FCC says..., but the FCC says..., but the FCC says..." mantra solely because
it serves their current agenda.

73 de Bert
WA2SI