| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
August 7th 05, 11:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
John Smith wrote: Len: I await the day when the arrl (ancient retarded religious league) goes the way of the dodo, or else, is taken over by under 40 year olds! gee you are leting Me out of that hrrrrmph We need someone to crack a window and let some fresh air in! John On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 19:39:27 -0700, LenAnderson wrote: From: Mike Coslo on Aug 6, 7:23 am wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message Phil Kane wrote: On 4 Aug 2005 15:22:35 -0700, wrote: 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). I thought so to. But why didn't FCC simply dump Element 1 two years ago, after WRC 2003 ended the treaty requirement? Institutional inertia. INCORRECT. 1. The LAW (try the Communications Act of 1934 for starters) doesn't work that way. 2. The FCC could legally do it just the same but would face later LAW in the Courts from all the outraged membership organizations, enough to delay everything for years more. 3. The ARRL lobbyists (both the law firm and the lobbying firm) were dead set against the FCC doing anything without "the League's Permission." Is there any chance that *any* pro-code-test discussion will have *any* effect on the outcome? Negative. ANY negative with another negative added to it will still be NEGATIVE. Suppose - just suppose - that after all the comments are in, the majority of commenters support at least some code testing. Will FCC change their position? I believe that the way the argument is framed is critical. It seems that the argument has been put forth about getting rid of a regulation. And we all "know" that regulation is a bad thing. Element 1 goes away. I consider the odds of it staying are about the same as a singularity popping up. WOW! Those SOUR GRAPES ripened FAST...you've already made gallons of WHINE out of it! Prosit. Um, Bill. Do you *really* believe that because the majority of current comments are in favor of elimination of the test, that the majority of Hams are of the same opinion? *Is* it a representative sample? Does that matter? No it doesn't' matter. I simply want to point out to people such as Bill and Jhxn that the comments are not even close to a statistically proper poll. I expect better out of Bill. Wow! You WHINE-tipplers better not drive anywhere...you are DUI. Tsk, is your definition of "representative sample" equivalent to WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN? Silly question, of course it is! Now, if the ARRL had conducted a "poll," it would be absolutely, positively, peachy-keen ACCURATE...even if the poll respondents were League members and good, God-fearing Morsemen of high rate! BWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! hee haw |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| 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 | |||
Threaded Mode
