Dave Heil wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

Follows, for anyone who's interested, my response to the insulting,
inaccurate press release (and comments to the FCC) from the UPLC:

I'd almost think you were angry with them or something..........

Seriously, it's a great letter. Good work, Carl.


To quote Carl's letter: "With all due respect - Hogwash".
I don't think it is a good letter at all. It would have been better if
Carl had delayed in sending it for several days, cooled his jets and had
written a toned-down response.

Well Dave, we could say "With all due respect, sirs, we don't want to
insinuate that you might not be accurate, but we don't really think that
your assessment is possibly not totally of the same opinion that we
have. All apologies if we might be wrong, but we really think that, well
we were kind of hoping that maybe you would.........."



Yeah, Carl used Hogwash in his letter. I personally think he pulled his
punch there anyhow. Hogwash is putting it quite politely.

The UPLC doc uses exaggeration, innuendo, gratuitous insults, and
monumental inaccuracies. And while we are on the gratuitous line, it
makes an equally monumental stretch in connecting BPL with Home security.

The version he sent is inflammatory and
combative. Then again, Carl is generally inflammatory and combative.
At least he left out the "electronic paintball wars" stuff in his
description of amateur radio.

I disagree with Carl on a number of issues, but on this one I believe
he is spot on. We didn't start the volley of insults, UPLC did. The
question of whether we want to be in this position is moot. We can
either stand by and let them stomp on us, or we can take a more active
stand.

YMMV

- Mike KB3EIA -