Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (William)
Date: 8/20/2004 2:47 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...
"William" wrote in message
om...
(Jim Hampton) wrote in message
. com...

Jim, for a whole class of licensees, there absolutely were CW Only
subbands. And if my memory serves, higher class licensees had to
abide by the mode and power restrictions.

Where's Miccolis with his ham history cliff notes?

Look at your FCC rule book.

I don't have one from 15 years ago. I thought they had to abide by
the Novice restrictions.

Who needs one from 15 years ago, Brain?

Band assignments still exist fo Novice class licensees in present Part 97.

They had to abide by the power restrictions on
15m, 40m, and 80m in the novice subbands but not in the 10m novice subband.
In the 10m novice subband, Generals and higher could use full legal limit.
In all of those novice subbands, they were NOT restricted to the mode
requirements of the novices. READ YOUR RULEBOOK!!! These rules have been
in effect for longer than I have been licensed (1992) and I have copies of
the rule books for this time period.

Thanks Dee. Looks like I was wrong, and I stand corrected.

Apologies to Jim and Kelly.

SOMEONE DIAL 9-1-1 IN PICKERINGTON OHIO AND FIND OUT WHO KIDNAPPED BRIAN
BURKE! ! ! ! ! ! !

Bravo, Brian. Bravo.

Now, let's work on the truth about the authorization for your alleged
Somalia operation and try and get some validation for that assertion about
"unlicensed devices playing a major role in emergency communications" thing
working while you're on a roll!

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (William)
Date: 8/20/2004 5:50 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: "Dee D. Flint"
Date: 8/20/2004 7:54 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"William" wrote in message

Jim, for a whole class of licensees, there absolutely were CW Only
subbands. And if my memory serves, higher class licensees had to
abide by the mode and power restrictions.

Where's Miccolis with his ham history cliff notes?

Look at your FCC rule book. They had to abide by the power restrictions
on
15m, 40m, and 80m in the novice subbands but not in the 10m novice
subband.
In the 10m novice subband, Generals and higher could use full legal limit.
In all of those novice subbands, they were NOT restricted to the mode
requirements of the novices. READ YOUR RULEBOOK!!! These rules have been
in effect for longer than I have been licensed (1992) and I have copies of
the rule books for this time period.

Dee, your operating on the presumption that Brain can read, let alone
comprehend what he reads. Big stretch there!

73

Steve, K4YZ

Wrong again, diminuitive man. Read my next reply to Dee.

I did Brian! I did!

And it only took YOU a week of hammering the same thing through to
you for you to FINALLY get it!

Kudos again on sucking-it-up and apologizing to Jim Miccolis and Brian
Kelly. You forgot to add Dee in the mix, but hey, it was a first for you so we
can let you make it up later.

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

"William" wrote in message
. com...
(Jim Hampton) wrote in message
.com...
(William) wrote in message
.com...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...
"William" wrote in message
om...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

"KØHB" wrote in message
thlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote

- No CW-only subbands

There never have been any "CW-only" subbands on HF.

That's true - but there should be!

Odd, when I was first licensed I could only use CW on 80, 40, 15,
and 10M.

Wonder what kind of subbands those were?


General class and higher licensees can also use the FSK data modes
here.
Thus they are not "CW only."

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Now tell me about the Novices.

I don't believe the question was about license class; it was about the
HF amateur spectrum. In that case, there is no exclusive CW anywhere
on HF. On VHF, of course, there is.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim - AA2QA

Jim, for a whole class of licensees, there absolutely were CW Only
subbands. And if my memory serves, higher class licensees had to
abide by the mode and power restrictions.

Where's Miccolis with his ham history cliff notes?

Look at your FCC rule book. They had to abide by the power restrictions on
15m, 40m, and 80m in the novice subbands but not in the 10m novice subband.
In the 10m novice subband, Generals and higher could use full legal limit.
In all of those novice subbands, they were NOT restricted to the mode
requirements of the novices. READ YOUR RULEBOOK!!! These rules have been
in effect for longer than I have been licensed (1992) and I have copies of
the rule books for this time period.

Dee, the FCC dates back to 1934 and ARRL dates back to 1914.

FCC os 70 this year and ARRL is 90.

Many, many rules have CHANGED in that time.

FCC doesn't use OLD rules for new regulations.

Were there "CW-only subbands" in 1976?

My old 1976 ARRL Handbook says there were.

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Jim Hampton) wrote in message
.com...
(William) wrote in message
.com...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...
"William" wrote in message
om...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Brian Kelly) writes:

"KØHB" wrote in message
thlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote

- No CW-only subbands

There never have been any "CW-only" subbands on HF.

That's true - but there should be!

Odd, when I was first licensed I could only use CW on 80, 40, 15, and
10M.

Wonder what kind of subbands those were?


General class and higher licensees can also use the FSK data modes
here.
Thus they are not "CW only."

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Now tell me about the Novices.

I don't believe the question was about license class; it was about the
HF amateur spectrum. In that case, there is no exclusive CW anywhere
on HF. On VHF, of course, there is.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim - AA2QA

Jim, for a whole class of licensees, there absolutely were CW Only
subbands. And if my memory serves, higher class licensees had to
abide by the mode and power restrictions.

Where's Miccolis with his ham history cliff notes?

I could post exerpts of ARRL-reprinted FCC rules from their 1976
Handbook...showing that there were (!) "CW-only subbands on HF."

Problem is, Rev. Jim would immediately misdirect, point out flaws
in my character and repeatedly chant "Incorrect! Incorrect!"

In article ,
(Jim Hampton) writes:

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



I could post exerpts of ARRL-reprinted FCC rules from their 1976
Handbook...showing that there were (!) "CW-only subbands on HF."

Problem is, Rev. Jim would immediately misdirect, point out flaws
in my character and repeatedly chant "Incorrect! Incorrect!"




Nope, I wouldn't do that. I re-read the thread. Nothing said about
CW only *now*, the question is "never was". In that case, there
certainly was CW only sub-bands (at least I'm pretty sure). The
novice portions of the bands when I was a novice in 1962 were portions
of 80, 40, and 15 meters (there was 2 meter phone available back then
for novices). Novices were crystal contol only and all amateurs were
limited to 75 watts *input* in the novice bands (but higher class
licensees could use VFOs). I don't recall at all where rtty was
permitted, but not in the novice bands. The only 'digital' modes
would have been cw and rtty. I do wish I had the old handbook from
1960 however. Lost that once I went into the service in January of
1967. Gawd, I wanna cry when I think of the *tons* of QSTs and 73s
that I got rid of at that time .....

Back in '76 the ITU and FCC were still using "A1, A2, F1, F2..."
designations for emissions. [was 28 years ago]

Bringing back the old, obsolete technical terms isn't too hard
(but why innaheck do that) and a simple one-page scan of one
page of band designations with modulations would prove it all.

But, lotsa folk in here wanna argue the Whichness of the What
in a flame fest of minutae. Nonsense activity.

No huhu on getting old copies of QST. ARRL sells them on CD.
ARRL also resells CQ's 3-CD set of all 22 years of articles of
Ham Radio magazine. Lots more solid radio information in HR
than them old QST hi-jinky reportings of past contests and glories
in (hah!) "radiosport." :-)

"Radiosport!" Like NBC would broadcast ANY of that! :-)

Beep, beep...

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...


SOMEONE DIAL 9-1-1 IN PICKERINGTON OHIO AND FIND OUT WHO KIDNAPPED
BRIAN
BURKE! ! ! ! ! ! !

Len, that would be just like crazy Steve to try to get someone else to
make a false distress call. Maybe that's how they train them in the
CAP?

Gunnery nurse Yellyell wants to "make calls." He threatened!

Obey him or get committed! He has the Power!

Must be the corps trains them that way.

Ptui.

LHA / WMD

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...

"Radiosport!" Like NBC would broadcast ANY of that! :-)

Beep, beep...



Missed it at the Olympics. Maybe itsa "winter" sport.

I think it must be a Twilight Zone sport...something engaged in
by invididual minds, a fantasy of sight and sound.

Read the signpost up ahead, look for a guy that resembles a
lightweight Scicilian boxer doing a voice-over...

fade to dark, take station ID, roll promo clips

In article ,
(William) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...

Dee, the FCC dates back to 1934 and ARRL dates back to 1914.

FCC os 70 this year and ARRL is 90.

Many, many rules have CHANGED in that time.

FCC doesn't use OLD rules for new regulations.

Were there "CW-only subbands" in 1976?

My old 1976 ARRL Handbook says there were.



Jimmy Who's got all the old books. Constantly quoting out of them.

But now he is silent! Silent!! SILENT!!!

Hi, hi!

So easy to be Two-Faced when you're PCTA.

Like Quitefine/Jimmy Who. Like ONE Pea in a Pod.

He don't pea no more.

Maybe he have pod infection?

Tsk.

In article ,
(Jim Hampton) writes:

Nothing said about
CW only *now*, the question is "never was". In that case, there
certainly was CW only sub-bands (at least I'm pretty sure). The
novice portions of the bands when I was a novice in 1962 were portions
of 80, 40, and 15 meters (there was 2 meter phone available back then
for novices). Novices were crystal contol only and all amateurs were
limited to 75 watts *input* in the novice bands (but higher class
licensees could use VFOs). I don't recall at all where rtty was
permitted, but not in the novice bands.

Sorry, Jim, that's not the case.

When you were a Novice in 1962, RTTY was permitted in the Novice bands. Just
not to Novices! On 80 it was allowed from 3500 to 3800 kHz, on 40 from 7000 to
7200, etc. (remember that the voice/image subbands were different then). So a
Novice could have had to deal with RTTY QRM.

Of course in those days there weren't many hams (percentagewise) with RTTY, and
they tended to operate away from the Novice segments anyway. But it was legal
then for Generals, Advanceds, Extras and Conditionals to run FSK in the Novice
subbands. And it's been legal ever since (including 1976) - just not for
Novices, and, later, Techs-with-HF and Tech Pluses.

The reason you didn't hear amateur RTTY in the 1962 Novice bands was
gentleman's agreements and good operating practice.

The only 'digital' modes
would have been cw and rtty. I do wish I had the old handbook from
1960 however.

I've got a '54, '57, '64, and many more.

Lost that once I went into the service in January of
1967. Gawd, I wanna cry when I think of the *tons* of QSTs and 73s
that I got rid of at that time .....

I may have some of them!

All QSTs are available on CD. But for post WW2 issues it may be cheaper to buy
the actual mags used. I've got a few from that era if you're interested..

Some time back I saw a website where every issue of 73 was planned to be
available. I think they'd show you a few pages, then you'd need a membership
for a nominal fee to download the rest.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ,
(Jim Hampton) writes:


Hello, Jim

Greetings from a former denizen of Palmyra and Newark...

Well, I truly was *not* sure. Thanks for the information, however.

You're welcome!

Amazing how long these threads get over something which is not
particularly earthshaking these days ;)

Sure.

But for me the important question is: Should there be CW-only subbands? I say
yes - about the lowest 15-20% of each HF/MF hamband. Including 160.

Why not? Would it really bother anyone if 3500-3575 and 7000-7050 were CW only?

I do remember a time in the late 70s when 73 magazine was *huge*.
That magazine had to be 3/8 of an inch thick back then. I've seen
some nice articles in some of those (but they, too, are a long time
gone).

Yep. I never subscribed but I sure read 'em.

I went looking for that website where the guy was scanning old 73s but couldn't
find it. Maybe there were copyright issues or something.

I keep thinking about getting back on HF.

DO IT.

I'll likely go web surfing
for construction ideas on some loop antennas (I'd still like to get
back on 160 and that would be the only way I could possibly do it).

Do you mean horizontal loop (as in a wavelength long) or a small vertical loop?

Meanwhile, it's the old dipole in the attic currently (on 10) plus 440
:( It is, of course, at right angles to the cables to the satellite
tv dish :)

(sigh)

In Palmyra I had a lovely inverted L. Out the basement window and up the side
of the house to a bracket, then out to a convenient tree in the yard. Just
about 140 feet, worked really well 80-20. Overlooked the old Erie Canal (not
the modern barge canal).

As the sunspots fade the bands below 20 will just get better and better. Enjoy
them while we can.

You ever get to Rick's or to Dinosaur BBQ?

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

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

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...


SOMEONE DIAL 9-1-1 IN PICKERINGTON OHIO AND FIND OUT WHO KIDNAPPED
BRIAN
BURKE! ! ! ! ! ! !

Len, that would be just like crazy Steve to try to get someone else to
make a false distress call. Maybe that's how they train them in the
CAP?

Gunnery nurse Yellyell wants to "make calls." He threatened!

Obey him or get committed! He has the Power!

Must be the corps trains them that way.

Ptui.

LHA / WMD

Since we know he not brave enough to do hisself, he want other to do
what he chiken to do. He like Lex Luther on Superman cartoon,
"Greatest Criminal Mastermind!" Hi, hi!

Ho ho! ...still waiting for those "authorities" to come pick me
up on the basis of a single telephone call from a NURSE!

Now I'm waiting for the same thing from ANYONE's phone call.

I have a Lonnnnnnnnnnng time to wait...won't bother.

Nobody wants to talk about ARRL sub-band proposals. Ever-
body jes wanna fight, fight, fight personalities in here...

Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (Brian)
Date: 8/25/2004 3:10 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

But for me the important question is: Should there be CW-only subbands? I
say
yes - about the lowest 15-20% of each HF/MF hamband. Including 160.

Why not? Would it really bother anyone if 3500-3575 and 7000-7050 were CW
only?

Only if it were to include all other "digital" (hi,hi) modes...

As it is, CW is allowed in ALL MF/HF -amateur- spectrum.

As it is, Brian, do you understand WHY it's allowed?

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (Brian)
Date: 8/25/2004 3:15 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

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

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...


SOMEONE DIAL 9-1-1 IN PICKERINGTON OHIO AND FIND OUT WHO KIDNAPPED
BRIAN
BURKE! ! ! ! ! ! !

Len, that would be just like crazy Steve to try to get someone else to
make a false distress call. Maybe that's how they train them in the
CAP?

Gunnery nurse Yellyell wants to "make calls." He threatened!

Obey him or get committed! He has the Power!

Must be the corps trains them that way.

Ptui.

LHA / WMD

Since we know he not brave enough to do hisself, he want other to do
what he chiken to do. He like Lex Luther on Superman cartoon,
"Greatest Criminal Mastermind!"

Baby banter, Brian...

Are you really not better than that?

I think you are.

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article ,
(gunnery nurse Yell-yell, shouting from an emotional high) writes:

Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (Brian)
Date: 8/25/2004 3:10 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

But for me the important question is: Should there be CW-only subbands? I
say
yes - about the lowest 15-20% of each HF/MF hamband. Including 160.

Why not? Would it really bother anyone if 3500-3575 and 7000-7050 were CW
only?

Only if it were to include all other "digital" (hi,hi) modes...

As it is, CW is allowed in ALL MF/HF -amateur- spectrum.

As it is, Brian, do you understand WHY it's allowed?

NURSIE ask a no-brainer question.

Easy answer: Olde-Tyme Hammes at ARRL lobby for morsemanship,
get it. FCC not care much, takes easy way out and gives in to ARRL.

That was in the past (where "Quitefine" hangs out...).

Things are changing with more and more citizens able to lobby the
FCC without having to join special interest groups. Changes are
coming....

Will NURSIE be able to change with the times?

Will NURSIE be able to change anything...including uniforms? :-)

Will NURSIE ever get proper credentials as a homo sapiens?

In article , (Simple
Steve at da gunnery nurse barracks) writes:

Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (Brian)
Date: 8/25/2004 3:15 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

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

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...


SOMEONE DIAL 9-1-1 IN PICKERINGTON OHIO AND FIND OUT WHO KIDNAPPED
BRIAN
BURKE! ! ! ! ! ! !

Len, that would be just like crazy Steve to try to get someone else to
make a false distress call. Maybe that's how they train them in the
CAP?

Gunnery nurse Yellyell wants to "make calls." He threatened!

Obey him or get committed! He has the Power!

Must be the corps trains them that way.

Ptui.

LHA / WMD

Since we know he not brave enough to do hisself, he want other to do
what he chiken to do. He like Lex Luther on Superman cartoon,
"Greatest Criminal Mastermind!"

Baby banter, Brian...

Are you really not better than that?

I think you are.

Good thinking. Of course we are.

NURSIE not realize we use "simple spoken English" so that NURSIE
can understand words, not have to look up so many in dictionary...or
in federal regulations such as Department of Defense directives. :-)

We have to try to fit in to flow of conversation of some in here...
baby talk for baby minds.

Was that a good pacifier for you, NURSIE?

William wrote:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...

Baby banter, Brian...

Are you really not better than that?

I think you are.

73

Steve, K4YZ


You rasis!

I just hafta ask, Brian. What on earth is a rasis?




You stop make fun my Hop Sing mask. Go pik on Qitefeind
if you got big enoff chopstik.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Len Over 21 wrote:

Things are changing with more and more citizens able to lobby the
FCC without having to join special interest groups. Changes are
coming....

You've lobbied. I don't see any changes in your status vis a vis amateur
radio. You're still not a participant after decades of self-declared
interest. You're still not involved despite a boast of getting an
"Extra right out of the box" years back. Some changes must come very
slowly.

Dave K8MN

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:54:19 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

I just hafta ask, Brian. What on earth is a rasis?

It's the female sibling of a raisin.

John Kasupski, Tonawanda, New York
Amateur Radio (KC2HMZ), SWL/Scanner Monitoring (KNY2VS)
Member of ARES/RACES, ARATS, WUN, ARRL
http://www.qsl.net/kc2fng
E-Mails Ignored, Please Post Replies In This Newsgroup

In article , John Kasupski
writes:

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:54:19 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

I just hafta ask, Brian. What on earth is a rasis?

It's the female sibling of a raisin.

No, John, it is the slurred pronunciation of RACIST. [we have to
talk like that so that NURSIE understands everything, otherwise
he gets very confused]

Like ham radio, there is very little gender among raisins.

Raisins are "grapes with experience." :-)

John Kasupski wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:54:19 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

I just hafta ask, Brian. What on earth is a rasis?

It's the female sibling of a raisin.


No, it was meant to be "racist," but my knowledge of pidgeon english
is about as extensive as Yell DMC's knowledge of the Air Force.

Sorry.

bb

Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (William)
Date: 8/27/2004 9:02 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

John Kasupski wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:54:19 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

I just hafta ask, Brian. What on earth is a rasis?

It's the female sibling of a raisin.


No, it was meant to be "racist," but my knowledge of pidgeon english
is about as extensive as Yell DMC's knowledge of the Air Force.

I dare say I know more about the USAF, past and present, than you ever did
while in it, Brain.

Sorry.

Yes, you are VERY sorry.

Sucks to be you, Brain.

Wanna try for another 12 hours of being a man again, or did the other day
scare you off?

Steve, K4YZ

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Baby banter, Brian...

Are you really not better than that?

I think you are.

Why do you think
that?

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

NURSIE ask a no-brainer question.

Who is "NURSIE", Len?

Easy answer: Olde-Tyme Hammes at ARRL lobby for morsemanship,
get it. FCC not care much, takes easy way out and gives in to ARRL.

When and how did this
happen, Len?

That was in the past (where "Quitefine" hangs out...).

Quitefine are here, now, in
the present time. It is you
who lives in the past, Len.

Things are changing with more and more citizens able to lobby the
FCC without having to join special interest groups.

FCC has always accepted input
from all interested groups. Your
knowledge of the past seems to
have missed that. Your recall of
amateur radio regulatory history
is incomplete and defective.

ECFS has existed for at least six
years, but it simply represents a
convenience compared to paper-
and-mail comment filing.


Changes are coming....

Changes are always coming.
However, not all of us are
neophiliacs like you.

Will NURSIE be able to change with the times?

Will you?

Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (Quitefine)
Date: 8/28/2004 9:37 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Baby banter, Brian...

Are you really not better than that?

I think you are.

Why do you think that?

I am a Nurse.

I am eternally hopeful for the well-being and the healing of those who
suffer from illness, injury or mental defect. Brain seems to be batting about
..666 in that regard. (Ironic, the average, eh...?!?!?) He's obvioulsy hurting
from some untold trauma and he needs some encouragement to overcome it.

I know that short of having a steel rod driven through his head, Brian
Burke can do better. He HAS done better. He was off to a really good start
the other day. But just as soon as I started returning his civility in kind,
he turned around again.

I think the idea of having to live up to his OWN rhetoric about the tone
and temperment of the exchanges was more than he could handle. Lennie's hand
must have slipped out of the pocket long enough to let Brian act independently,
but he obviously got it back in before Brian could really get a good running
start.

Too bad. Now he's babbling again. And he accuses ME of being "off your
meds".

Sheeeesh.

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Things are changing with more and more citizens able to lobby the
FCC without having to join special interest groups. Changes are
coming....

You've lobbied. I don't see any changes in your status vis a vis amateur
radio.

Don't hold yer breath, Dave!

You're still not a participant after decades of self-declared
interest. You're still not involved despite a boast of getting an
"Extra right out of the box" years back.

January 19, 2000, to be exact. Right in this-here newsgroup. Of course he was
"Lenof21" then.

Some changes must come very slowly.

Fun facts:

- Despite his claims of being online since dirt was new, Len could not get ECFS
to work for him back in early 1999. Couldn't keep up with the times, I suspect.
Most of us poor old backward hams got ECFS to work for us, though. He wound up
submitting his 98-143 comments by US mail, on disk and paper. He's been a busy
wordsmith since then, though, deluging the FCC with commentary. Most of it is
obvious cut-and-paste. Poor Bill Cross.

- FCC got about 2500 comments on 98-143, the last big restructuring. Back in
the mid-1960s, FCC got over 6000 comments on "incentive licensing", most of
them from individuals, even though there was no ECFS back then and all
commentary was plain old words-on-paper.

- ARRL lobbied to increase the code test speed from 10 to 12.5 wpm in 1936.
That was the last time ARRL lobbied for an increase in code test speeds.
Indeed, the 1963 ARRL incentive licensing proposal called for no increase in
code test speeds (full privileges would have been allowed to Advanceds under
that plan) and ARRL *opposed* the FCC idea of a new 16 wpm test for "Amateur
First Class" which FCC wanted in 1965.

- No class of US amateur radio license has required more than 5 wpm code test
since 2000. No class of US amateur radio license has required more than 5 wpm
code test since 1990 (with an easily-obtained medical waiver, and a long list
of possible accomodations).


Yet Len's sole involvement is the harangue of an outsider. Kibitzer. Sidewalk
superintendent.

Gladys Kravitz effect.

"Not that there's anything wrong with that!"

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Subject: ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation
From: (Quitefine)
Date: 8/28/2004 9:37 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4CAP) writes:

Baby banter, Brian...

Are you really not better than that?

I think you are.

Why do you think that?

I am a Nurse.

NURSIE is the nurse's nurse, fabled in song and story, known
throughout the land as the Florence Dayingwind of amateur radio?

I am eternally hopeful for the well-being and the healing of those who
suffer from illness, injury or mental defect. Brain seems to be batting about
.666 in that regard. (Ironic, the average, eh...?!?!?) He's obvioulsy
hurting
from some untold trauma and he needs some encouragement to overcome it.

[ forgot that spell-checker button again, "obvioulsy"... ]

"Hurting from some untold trauma?"

Only thing we readers all know is the UNTOLD details of NURSIE's
"seven hostile actions." Or any "hostile actions" other than in here.


I know that short of having a steel rod driven through his head, Brian
Burke can do better. He HAS done better. He was off to a really good start
the other day. But just as soon as I started returning his civility in kind,
he turned around again.

NURSIE went "civil?!?!?"

Quick, call the national press! Call "60 Minutes!" Call CNN and
the New York Times and the Washington Post!

Breaking news!!!

[ phlegm at 11... ]


I think the idea of having to live up to his OWN rhetoric about the tone
and temperment of the exchanges was more than he could handle. Lennie's hand
must have slipped out of the pocket long enough to let Brian act
independently,
but he obviously got it back in before Brian could really get a good running
start.

Tsk. More charges of homosexual acts and scatological intentions.

THAT wasn't on the ARRL website about "proposed subband-by-
bandwidth regulations..."

NURSIE's idea of "civil discourse?"


Too bad. Now he's babbling again. And he accuses ME of being "off your
meds".

Tsk. All that irrationality. Once more from NURSIE.

Toss it in the Sharps on your way out...

William wrote:

Yet, I am not Brain.

Amen.

Dave K8MN