Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
K2EY:
I think the majoritys' will is what is occurring, and no, I don't think a minority is going to be able to stop the majority here, perhaps if you got a group together called "Gay Hams for Morse!" it might float, for some reason the homosexuals are able to enforce their will on others effectively, perhaps a study of their methods and their adoption could lead to success. John On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 20:21:19 -0700, Phil Kane wrote: On 4 Aug 2005 15:22:35 -0700, wrote: If nothing else, all of us can at least say that we let FCC know where we stood. And the FCC let us all know where it stood when the NPRM was released. Does anyone deny that the horserace is fixed and that the majority wishes have nothing to do with the outcome? |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Phil Kane wrote: On 4 Aug 2005 15:22:35 -0700, wrote: If nothing else, all of us can at least say that we let FCC know where we stood. And the FCC let us all know where it stood when the NPRM was released. Does anyone deny that the horserace is fixed and that the majority wishes have nothing to do with the outcome? Writeth this OF on 21 July: "This "NPRM" is not "an opportunity to comment", it's an announcement about the way it's absolutely gonna be. Period. They'll go thru the NPRM motions only because the law sez they have to and they'll patiently tap their fingers on the table until the deluge of desparate commnents is over then declare the POS they published today a done deal." Ignore the speling and thankew. Anyone who thinks that flooding the FCC with "comments" will make a whit of difference on this one doesn't understand how/why democracy beltway-style actually works. Diddy dah dit dah. Dit-DIT. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane w3rv |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ups.com... Phil Kane wrote: On 4 Aug 2005 15:22:35 -0700, wrote: If nothing else, all of us can at least say that we let FCC know where we stood. And the FCC let us all know where it stood when the NPRM was released. Does anyone deny that the horserace is fixed and that the majority wishes have nothing to do with the outcome? Writeth this OF on 21 July: "This "NPRM" is not "an opportunity to comment", it's an announcement about the way it's absolutely gonna be. Period. They'll go thru the NPRM motions only because the law sez they have to and they'll patiently tap their fingers on the table until the deluge of desparate commnents is over then declare the POS they published today a done deal." Ignore the speling and thankew. Anyone who thinks that flooding the FCC with "comments" will make a whit of difference on this one doesn't understand how/why democracy beltway-style actually works. Diddy dah dit dah. Dit-DIT. w3rv Bottom line here... 1. The discussion as to value or need to have any code test was completely discussed prior to 2000 when the FCC specifically called for such discussion (NPRM 98-143). 2. Thousands of comments were filed with various rationals in support of code testing....the FCC in their R&O reviewed and dismissed every pro-code test argument.... 3. The ONLY reason the FCC kept even a 5wpm test was because of the international treaty requiring a code test. 4. The WRC-2003 review resulted in elimination of any code test requirement in the international treaty with almost unanomous agreement by the countries to do so. 5. The current NPRM, in short, deletes code testing for USA amateurs as allowed now by the international treaty. The FCC, now has an open comment period for discussion of the proposed change. 6. Unless some great new and profound reason to retain code testing surfaces via the 05-235 comment process, any prospect of keeping any code test is just not going to happen. The old arguments (and that's all that any PCTAs have been rehashing) have no chance of winning out since they failed in 98-143, WRC-2003, etc. 7. Any argument or claim that the code test should be retained if a majority of hams want it so isn't going to happen either. For two reasons: (a) The FCC doesn't make the rules that way and (b) The majority of current comments are actually running better than 2 to 1 in favor of total elimination of code testing. Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Phil Kane wrote:
On 4 Aug 2005 15:22:35 -0700, wrote: If nothing else, all of us can at least say that we let FCC know where we stood. And the FCC let us all know where it stood when the NPRM was released. Yep. In fact they let us know that back in '99. Does anyone deny that the horserace is fixed and that the majority wishes have nothing to do with the outcome? The majority didn't get what they wanted back then. More than half of those who commented wanted at least 2 code test speeds but we got 5 wpm across the board. Still, it will be worth commenting just for the principle of the thing. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Bert Craig wrote: Isn't democracy grand? ;-) That it tis, my friend...that it tis! 73 Steve, K4YZ |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "K4YZ" wrote Well, well, well.................... Well, well, well, indeed! For the first time in my memory Steve makes a comment to FCC on a new NPRM, then pounds his chest in pride and prematurely chides others for not following his lead. Well, well, well! beep beep de Hans, K0HB |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() K=D8HB wrote: "K4YZ" wrote Well, well, well.................... Well, well, well, indeed! For the first time in my memory Steve makes a comment to FCC on a new NPR= M, then pounds his chest in pride and prematurely chides others for not following= his lead. check your memory again, didn't he do that is the last time too? I think so but well that was a few years ago =20 Well, well, well! =20 beep beep de Hans, K0HB |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() K=D8HB wrote: "K4YZ" wrote Well, well, well.................... Well, well, well, indeed! For the first time in my memory Steve makes a comment to FCC on a new NPR= M, then pounds his chest in pride and prematurely chides others for not following= his lead. Well, well, well! =20 beep beep de Hans, K0HB He's an idiot. |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() b=2Eb. wrote: K=D8HB wrote: "K4YZ" wrote Well, well, well.................... Well, well, well, indeed! For the first time in my memory Steve makes a comment to FCC on a new N= PRM, then pounds his chest in pride and prematurely chides others for not followi= ng his lead. Well, well, well! Hans hasn't been paying attention. He's an idiot. Oh, gee, Brain, after all we've meant to each other, you want to go and be "that way"... Of course pathological liars such as yourself have a need to hide behind others...And you DO have a lot to hide... As for the comments...It's not as if there hasn't been a seven year plus history of this NG IRT the Code test, Hans...One might draw the conclusion that this group had a predetermined interest in the subject and had make decisions on what to say. Steve, K4YZ |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Latest Online Oldies shows on Rock-it Radio | Broadcasting | |||
New York Art Show Shuttered After Bush Monkey Portrait | Shortwave | |||
Latest 50's Rock and Roll Shows Online | Broadcasting | |||
6th Annual East Coast vs. West Coast Oldies Show online at Rock-it Radio | Broadcasting |