In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

For what it's worth, as of 6 April 2004, there were 282,948

That number includes expired licenses which are in the grace period. As of
April 11 2004, the number of current (non-expired) Technicians is 262,804.

Ho ho ho...you HAVE to start this all over again, don't you?

I just look at www.hamdata.com and accept that.

If you a terrible need to point fingers and cry "shame, wrong!" then
go argue with the hamdata folks.

Tell you what, Rev. Jim, YOU download the ENTIRE FCC database
and pass out copies on CDs. That way anyone can be very
busy little bees and MASSAGE data any way that suits them.

no-code-test Technicians in the FCC ham database. That's a
whopping 38.9 percent of all licensees who cannot, legally,
operate on ham bands below 6 meters.

Incorrect!

Since April 15, 2004 (4 years ago as of this coming Thursday), FCC has been
renewing all Technician Plus licenses as Technician. In addition, any
Technician who has passed Element 1 gets Novice/Technician Plus HF privileges
even though the license and database still say "Technician".

Jimmie, Jimmie, Jimmie. Try to stay in focus without your fuse
getting lit. :-)

On 6 Apr 04 the number of all US amateur licensees, less club
calls, was 727,145. Divide that into 282,948 and you get 38.9%.

That's OVER one-third of all licensees...even if you insist on your
VERSION of numbers.

If you can't show the EXACT numbers of ALL those T+ conversions
to T or all those that "passed Element 1" then you be wrong,
wrong, wrong, wrong, clong. :-)

Why did I pick 6 April 2004? [funny you should ask] It's copied
into several of my Comments on the 4 Petitions for 2004. If you
want to pick at flyspecks, go to the ECFS and let the FCC know.

I could pick 11 April and get those numbers. But, tomorrow, when
you finally see this, it will be 12 April and there are new numbers.
Good...then you could shout all over "He's wrong! He's wrong!"
:-)

All you are doing is poor MANUFACTURING of a dispute. As you've
done many times before. [shoddy manufacture, poor QC]

So, do you WANT all HF hams to sit forever in little tiny bandspaces?

LHA / WMD

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

For what it's worth, as of 6 April 2004, there were 282,948

That number includes expired licenses which are in the grace period. As of
April 11 2004, the number of current (non-expired) Technicians is 262,804.

Ho ho ho...you HAVE to start this all over again, don't you?

You "started" it, Len. You posted some interesting numbers. I'm simply
clarifying what they mean.

I just look at www.hamdata.com and accept that.

OK, fine. Those numbers include expired licenses that are in the grace period.
The number I posted do not. No problem.

YOU download the ENTIRE FCC database
and pass out copies on CDs. That way anyone can be very
busy little bees and MASSAGE data any way that suits them.

You're getting all upset over nothing, Len. Try to stay focused.

no-code-test Technicians in the FCC ham database. That's a
whopping 38.9 percent of all licensees who cannot, legally,
operate on ham bands below 6 meters.

Incorrect!

Since April 15, 2004 (4 years ago as of this coming Thursday), FCC has been
renewing all Technician Plus licenses as Technician. In addition, any
Technician who has passed Element 1 gets Novice/Technician Plus HF
privileges
even though the license and database still say "Technician".

In addition, anyone whose license has expired but is still in the database due
to being in the grace period cannot, legally, operate on any ham bands at all
until their license is renewed.

On 6 Apr 04 the number of all US amateur licensees, less club
calls, was 727,145. Divide that into 282,948 and you get 38.9%.

That's true. However, a significant number of those *do* have access to some HF
amateur frequencies. Your statement

"no-code-test Technicians in the FCC ham database. That's a
whopping 38.9 percent of all licensees who cannot, legally,
operate on ham bands below 6 meters."

Is simply not correct because it ignores Technician Pluses renewed as
Technician, as well as "Techs-with-HF"

That's OVER one-third of all licensees...even if you insist on your
VERSION of numbers.

Your version is still incorrect.

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

For what it's worth, as of 6 April 2004, there were 282,948

That number includes expired licenses which are in the grace period. As of
April 11 2004, the number of current (non-expired) Technicians is 262,804.

Ho ho ho...you HAVE to start this all over again, don't you?

You "started" it, Len. You posted some interesting numbers. I'm simply
clarifying what they mean.

I just look at www.hamdata.com and accept that.

OK, fine. Those numbers include expired licenses that are in the grace period.
The number I posted do not. No problem.

YOU download the ENTIRE FCC database
and pass out copies on CDs. That way anyone can be very
busy little bees and MASSAGE data any way that suits them.

You're getting all upset over nothing, Len. Try to stay focused.

no-code-test Technicians in the FCC ham database. That's a
whopping 38.9 percent of all licensees who cannot, legally,
operate on ham bands below 6 meters.

Incorrect!

Since April 15, 2004 (4 years ago as of this coming Thursday), FCC has been
renewing all Technician Plus licenses as Technician. In addition, any
Technician who has passed Element 1 gets Novice/Technician Plus HF
privileges
even though the license and database still say "Technician".

In addition, anyone whose license has expired but is still in the database due
to being in the grace period cannot, legally, operate on any ham bands at all
until their license is renewed.

On 6 Apr 04 the number of all US amateur licensees, less club
calls, was 727,145. Divide that into 282,948 and you get 38.9%.

That's true. However, a significant number of those *do* have access to some HF
amateur frequencies. Your statement

"no-code-test Technicians in the FCC ham database. That's a
whopping 38.9 percent of all licensees who cannot, legally,
operate on ham bands below 6 meters."

Is simply not correct because it ignores Technician Pluses renewed as
Technician, as well as "Techs-with-HF"

That's OVER one-third of all licensees...even if you insist on your
VERSION of numbers.

Your version is still incorrect.

If even one amateur in your omitted "2 year grace period" renews, your
numbers will be incorrect also.

I think its safe to say at this point that your numbers will be
incorrect by the end of the day, if not sooner.

Best of Luck.

Billy

In article ,
(William) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:

For what it's worth, as of 6 April 2004, there were 282,948

That number includes expired licenses which are in the grace period. As of
April 11 2004, the number of current (non-expired) Technicians is 262,804.

Ho ho ho...you HAVE to start this all over again, don't you?

You "started" it, Len. You posted some interesting numbers. I'm simply
clarifying what they mean.

I just look at www.hamdata.com and accept that.

OK, fine. Those numbers include expired licenses that are in the grace
period.
The number I posted do not. No problem.

YOU download the ENTIRE FCC database
and pass out copies on CDs. That way anyone can be very
busy little bees and MASSAGE data any way that suits them.

You're getting all upset over nothing, Len. Try to stay focused.

no-code-test Technicians in the FCC ham database. That's a
whopping 38.9 percent of all licensees who cannot, legally,
operate on ham bands below 6 meters.

Incorrect!

Since April 15, 2004 (4 years ago as of this coming Thursday), FCC has
been
renewing all Technician Plus licenses as Technician. In addition, any
Technician who has passed Element 1 gets Novice/Technician Plus HF
privileges even though the license and database still say "Technician".

In addition, anyone whose license has expired but is still in the database
due
to being in the grace period cannot, legally, operate on any ham bands at
all
until their license is renewed.

On 6 Apr 04 the number of all US amateur licensees, less club
calls, was 727,145. Divide that into 282,948 and you get 38.9%.

That's true. However, a significant number of those *do* have access to some
HF
amateur frequencies. Your statement

"no-code-test Technicians in the FCC ham database. That's a
whopping 38.9 percent of all licensees who cannot, legally,
operate on ham bands below 6 meters."

Is simply not correct because it ignores Technician Pluses renewed as
Technician, as well as "Techs-with-HF"

That's OVER one-third of all licensees...even if you insist on your
VERSION of numbers.

Your version is still incorrect.

If even one amateur in your omitted "2 year grace period" renews, your
numbers will be incorrect also.

Brian, Rev. Jim can't admit any wrongdoing if there is the slightest
negativism implied against his beloved telegrapy.

His newsgrope tactic is to bring out as much misdirection as
possible of anyone speaking in the slightest against morse code
or the highly-conservative, rigid thinking that U.S. amateur radio
is all about telegraphy skills.

Example: Each and every no-code-test Technician class licensee
that obtained their first amateur license obtained their Technician
license WITHOUT taking any telegraphy test. Those former
Technician Plus licensees whose renewal put them into the
Technician class category after 2000 seem to have disappeared
from the misdirected meanderings of Rev. Jim. He only wishes to
mention those [no numbers supplied] Technician class licenses
who SUPPOSEDLY took and passed an element 1 code test as
"destroying" my comment as "incorrect."

Note that I used a specific data compilation date. For those that
bother to look, such is quoted on previous Comments to the four
Petitions for Rule Making filed in 2004. Rev. Jim uses a NEW
date, a later one, as if to say that His data is somehow "more
correct" even though it does not present any definitive numbers
on all those Technicians who supposedly passed a separate
code test, nor any of those Technician Plus classes whose
renewal automatically placed them in a different class category.

No data = vaporware. But, he MUST be correct because he says
others with data are "incorrect." Remarkable!

Rev. Jim argues on some vaporous claims which he cannot
support with real numbers. I merely quote some accessible-by-all
statistics from www.hamdata.com which massages the publicly
available [but huge] amateur database file from the FCC in order
to provide some specific information as to license class totals
and other periodic information.

I think its safe to say at this point that your numbers will be
incorrect by the end of the day, if not sooner.

It is safe to say that ANYTHING I say will be refuted by Rev. Jim
using his common vaporware misdirection tactics displayed
on this subject thread and many others in the past.

The end result is a lot of electrons wasted in discussing
something not on the original subject, a common tactic by
newsgroupies. Such misdirection concentrates on a
communicator's alleged personal faults instead of the
message subject.

And, when misdirection has been explained and refuted, Rev.
Jim gets all upset and huffy about "not being respected for his
accuracy" in using vaporware opinion concepts. :-)

LHA / WMD

Subject: Fun with numbers
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 4/12/2004 12:58 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(William) writes:

If even one amateur in your omitted "2 year grace period" renews, your
numbers will be incorrect also.

Brian, Rev. Jim can't admit any wrongdoing if there is the slightest
negativism implied against his beloved telegrapy.

Lennie...You've been proven wrong so many times that if your lies were a
revolving door, it would have reached orbit by now...

His newsgrope tactic is to bring out as much misdirection as
possible of anyone speaking in the slightest against morse code
or the highly-conservative, rigid thinking that U.S. amateur radio
is all about telegraphy skills.

Pot/Kettle/Black.

Why do you insist on making such ludicrous statements proven false by a
simple review of Jim's posts?

I think its safe to say at this point that your numbers will be
incorrect by the end of the day, if not sooner.

It is safe to say that ANYTHING I say will be refuted by Rev. Jim
using his common vaporware misdirection tactics displayed
on this subject thread and many others in the past.

Your posts are EASILY "refuted" by anyone who takes the time to wade
through the posts. Your "facts" are anything BUJT facts, Lennie.

The end result is a lot of electrons wasted in discussing
something not on the original subject, a common tactic by
newsgroupies. Such misdirection concentrates on a
communicator's alleged personal faults instead of the
message subject.

In order to "communicate", there needs to be a "sender" and "receiver".
Both must be willing to truly participate in the conversation.

This leaves you out, Lennie. All Things Amateur MUST be wrong...So Sayeth
You.

And, when misdirection has been explained and refuted, Rev.
Jim gets all upset and huffy about "not being respected for his
accuracy" in using vaporware opinion concepts.

Jim may or may not be a lot of things, but "huffy" is not one of them.

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Fun with numbers
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 4/11/2004 10:26 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Tell you what, Rev. Jim...(SNIP)

Jimmie, Jimmie, Jimmie. Try to stay in focus without your fuse
getting lit....(SNIP)

All you are doing is poor MANUFACTURING of a dispute. As you've
done many times before....(SNIP)

So, do you WANT all HF hams to sit forever in little tiny bandspaces?

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

Leonard H. Anderson

From the "Lennie Anderson" anthology.

Steve, K4YZ