Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
"Alun" wrote in message ... Maybe we could come up with a certificate for operating from BPL test sites, with endorsements for 500W, 1kW and 1.5kW? Gentlemen (and other denizens of RRAP :-) Suggestions of deliberate interference to ANYTHING (including BPL, which under the law has no right to protection from licensed services) will NOT make any friends for us at the FCC, on Capital Hill, or in the court of public opinion ... especially when all of those venues are mostly ill-informed on the real nature of the problem ... If these suggestions, even if offered in jest, get into the hands of the BPL spin doctors, they will not hesitate to publicly tar and feather the amateur radio service, at the FCC, to Congresspersons, and as widely as possible in the press (and we know how the press likes a controversial story, don't we?) PLEASE, I implore you - drop these concepts from public venues like usenet! You will do FAR more harm than good. We MUST "take the high road" on the BPL issue ... that doesn't mean rolling over and taking it ... but it does mean not shooting ourselves in the foot with such irresponsible talk. I changed the thread to get away from that talk. Agreed! This brings up the chance to relate this thread to the recent one where a poster here made the assertion that if we know our transmissions will cause disruption to BPL access, then simply transmitting at all would constitute willful and malicious interference. Or at least willful. IOW, if I know my neighbor has BPL access, does my continued use of my HF amateur privileges when I know that tests show that the only HF signal that did not knock a BPL signal out was at the QRP level constitute that willful interference? I say no, but the other side has an interesting interpretation. Maybe Phil could weigh in on this one too? I would predict before this is all over, someone or group will call for the elimination of Amateur radio, or at least it's access to HF frequencies, in order to serve the greater good, so that we may allow millions of Americans access to the internet through BPL. Not that that is likely to happen, but I'll bet someone comes up with the suggestion. Disturbing thoughts indeed. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
NPRM and VEC | General | |||
BPL NPRM Approved | Policy | |||
BPL NPRM | Policy | |||
NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse coderequirement. | Policy | |||
NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement. | Policy |