N2EY wrote:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:



It's generally agreed that Access BPL will be a bad thing in any urban
radio environment.



Generally agreed by whom?

The BPL developers don't agree. And they're professionals.

Sure, they were by investors told to build something that could get
digital information over
power cables. The fact that it will radiate was not an issue for them.
But a big
issue for us.


The FCC doesn't agree. They're professionals too, and regulators of all
"civilian" radio and wire communications in the USA.

Bullshjt, they're just brearucrats who are lawyers and not engineers.
They probably
figure that they can sue whatever out of existance to solve problems....

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

It's generally agreed that Access BPL will be a bad thing in any urban
radio environment.


Generally agreed by whom?

The BPL developers don't agree. And they're professionals.

Sure, they were by investors told to build something that could get
digital information over
power cables. The fact that it will radiate was not an issue for them.
But a big
issue for us.

The FCC doesn't agree. They're professionals too, and regulators of all
"civilian" radio and wire communications in the USA.

Bullshjt, they're just brearucrats who are lawyers and not engineers.
They probably
figure that they can sue whatever out of existance to solve problems....

The FCC also created the six-tiered amateur license structure
prior to R&O 99-412 and established 13 and 20 WPM morse
code rates. :-)

ARRL didn't do a thing, did they? :-)

LHA / WMD

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , Robert Casey
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

It's generally agreed that Access BPL will be a bad thing in any urban
radio environment.


Generally agreed by whom?

The BPL developers don't agree. And they're professionals.

Sure, they were by investors told to build something that could get
digital information over
power cables. The fact that it will radiate was not an issue for them.
But a big
issue for us.

The FCC doesn't agree. They're professionals too, and regulators of all
"civilian" radio and wire communications in the USA.

Bullshjt, they're just brearucrats who are lawyers and not engineers.

They're "professionals, though. Just like Len!

They probably
figure that they can sue whatever out of existance to solve problems....

The FCC also created the six-tiered amateur license structure
prior to R&O 99-412 and established 13 and 20 WPM morse
code rates. :-)

Yep, back when the agency was run by technically knowledgeable people
who would have laughed BPL right out the door.

Six classes of license dates back to 1951.
13 wpm code test dates back to 1936
20 wpm code test dates back to the early 1920s

Tell us, Len - how do we *amateurs* fight something the
*professionals* say is a good thing? How do we convicne them it *is* a
"major calamity"?

Or don't you know how to do that?

In article , (The
Confrontational Newsgroupie Amateur
Formerly Known As Reverend Jim puts on his cammies, locks
and loads 22 shorts) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article , Robert Casey
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

It's generally agreed that Access BPL will be a bad thing in any urban
radio environment.

Generally agreed by whom?

The BPL developers don't agree. And they're professionals.

Sure, they were by investors told to build something that could get
digital information over
power cables. The fact that it will radiate was not an issue for them.
But a big
issue for us.

The FCC doesn't agree. They're professionals too, and regulators of all
"civilian" radio and wire communications in the USA.

Bullshjt, they're just brearucrats who are lawyers and not engineers.

They're "professionals, though. Just like Len!

Tsk, tsk, tsk...skipping someone in the attributions, are you?

Now you are acting like an adolescent trolling for a FIGHT!

They probably
figure that they can sue whatever out of existance to solve problems....

The FCC also created the six-tiered amateur license structure
prior to R&O 99-412 and established 13 and 20 WPM morse
code rates. :-)

Yep, back when the agency was run by technically knowledgeable people
who would have laughed BPL right out the door.

Six classes of license dates back to 1951.
13 wpm code test dates back to 1936
20 wpm code test dates back to the early 1920s

Still chanting Morse Code Uber Alles are you? :-)

Poor baby.

3 classes of new licenses dates back to 2000.

5 words per minute singular code test rate dates back to 2000.

This year is 2004.

Tell us, Len - how do we *amateurs* fight something the
*professionals* say is a good thing? How do we convicne them it *is* a
"major calamity"?

Or don't you know how to do that?

I don't know how to "convicne" them or what that word means.

As to CONVINCING any group, all I can suggest is communicating
your grievances to your government. If you are a United States
citizen, then you are given that right by the First Amendment of
the United States Constitution.

For grievances about Access BPL and NPRM 04-29 concerning
amendments to Part 15, Title 47 C.F.R., for Access BPL, you have
three very quick access routes through the FCC website at dockets
04-27, 04-29, 03-104 which can all be made through the FCC
Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). If you don't know how
to use that route, the FCC has made a good Help page available
to all. You may alternately or simultaneously choose to comment
via other media. The methods for that are also explained on an
FCC Help page available to all.

As of the close of FCC office hours on 25 March 2004, there were
108 documents filed under docket 04-37, 6 documents under
docket 04-29, 5813 documents under docket 03-104. I have made
my comments to the FCC on all three dockets plus I am finishing
surface mail correspondence with my federal Senator and federal
Representative in reference to NPRM 04-29 and Access BPL.

You are welcome to do nothing but sit in here and pick verbal bar
fights with others if you wish. That is a free option but it doesn't
make any sort of communications to federal regulators about
Access BPL one way or the other. Your choice.

Plonk

LHA / WMD

Subject: BPL NPRM v. NOI
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 3/26/2004 12:28 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(The
Confrontational Newsgroupie Amateur
Formerly Known As Reverend Jim puts on his cammies, locks
and loads 22 shorts) writes: (SNIP)

"I am only here to civilly debate the Morse Code test issue"

Leonard H. Anderson, alleged retired professional engineer.

Subject: BPL NPRM v. NOI
From: (N2EY)
Date: 3/26/2004 11:44 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article , Robert Casey
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

Bullshjt, they're just brearucrats who are lawyers and not engineers.

They're "professionals, though. Just like Len!

I consider myself a "professional" too, but I don't remember ahving been
taught that profanity is an effective means of communication.

Must be a night-school engineer's course.

They probably
figure that they can sue whatever out of existance to solve problems....

The FCC also created the six-tiered amateur license structure
prior to R&O 99-412 and established 13 and 20 WPM morse
code rates. :-)

Yep, back when the agency was run by technically knowledgeable people
who would have laughed BPL right out the door.

Those days left with Jimmy Carter's administration.

Six classes of license dates back to 1951.
13 wpm code test dates back to 1936
20 wpm code test dates back to the early 1920s

Tell us, Len - how do we *amateurs* fight something the
*professionals* say is a good thing? How do we convicne them it *is* a
"major calamity"?

Or don't you know how to do that?

Sure...you bombard newsgroups for which you have no vested interest with
years of aggitation, argument and profanity.

Steve, K4YZ

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: BPL NPRM v. NOI
From: (N2EY)
Date: 3/26/2004 11:44 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

I consider myself a "professional" too, but I don't remember ahving been
taught that profanity is an effective means of communication.

How did you make it through the U.S. Marine Corp without ever meeting a sailor?

ect: BPL NPRM v. NOI
From: (William)
Date: 3/27/2004 8:46 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: BPL NPRM v. NOI
From: (N2EY)
Date: 3/26/2004 11:44 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

I consider myself a "professional" too, but I don't remember ahving
been
taught that profanity is an effective means of communication.

How did you make it through the U.S. Marine Corp without ever meeting a
sailor?

What does having served in the U. S. Marine Corps or meeting sailors have
to do with my training and education as a Nurse, Brain?

Steve, K4YZ

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
ect: BPL NPRM v. NOI
From: (William)
Date: 3/27/2004 8:46 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: BPL NPRM v. NOI
From: (N2EY)
Date: 3/26/2004 11:44 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

I consider myself a "professional" too, but I don't remember ahving
been
taught that profanity is an effective means of communication.

How did you make it through the U.S. Marine Corp without ever meeting a
sailor?

What does having served in the U. S. Marine Corps or meeting sailors have
to do with my training and education as a Nurse, Brain?

Steve, K4YZ

I've never met a sailor who could communicate w/o profanity.

Unless you consider "sailoring" to not be a profession.

On 27 Mar 2004 08:05:03 GMT, Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:

Yep, back when the agency was run by technically knowledgeable people
who would have laughed BPL right out the door.

Those days left with Jimmy Carter's administration.

Y'know, you're right.

Until Carter got in, the Chairman was Dick Wiley, an extremely
knowledgeable comm lawyer who could understand things technical
without any problem and knew what the Commission was supposed to do.
Very impressive.

Carter replaced him with Charlie Ferris, Tip O'Neill's bag-carrier,
in a patently political payback. Ferris brought in the economists
and the consumer-ists for top management and policy-setting positions
and the slippery slope started.

In the Reagan-Bush_I years that followed Carter, there were a
succession of lightweight Chairmen epitomized by "Madman Mark"
Fowler, a comm lawyer who couldn't get a significant law partnership
after he was replaced by Reed Hundt - the guy who took the field
apart because he didn't understand what enforcement was all about
and why the agency had to do it - when Clinton got in. Hundt was
followed by Bill Kenard, whose greatest achievement was to make the
spectrum auction system work. Bush_II brought us Michael Powell, the
cheerleader of BPL.

And Jim wonders why I'm embarrassed ??

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane