A. Because the Administrative Procedures Act required it and

B. To see how many ya-yas and yuck-yucks come out of the woodwork.

Relieves the tensions of 8 hours "in the box" sandwiched between two
hours of car-pool on either end.. Maybe that's why I never went to HQ.


I can just imagine the bureaucrat at the FCC who gets stuck
wading thru all the filed comments searching for the one
that might actually point out something of substance that was
overlooked and would matter. I made my comment short and
to the point: "I agree, do it, drop the code test". So
whoever at the FCC doesn't have to waste much time on
my comment.

robert casey wrote:




A. Because the Administrative Procedures Act required it and

B. To see how many ya-yas and yuck-yucks come out of the woodwork.

Relieves the tensions of 8 hours "in the box" sandwiched between two
hours of car-pool on either end.. Maybe that's why I never went to HQ.


I can just imagine the bureaucrat at the FCC who gets stuck
wading thru all the filed comments searching for the one
that might actually point out something of substance that was
overlooked and would matter. I made my comment short and
to the point: "I agree, do it, drop the code test". So
whoever at the FCC doesn't have to waste much time on
my comment.

I thought you had to point out how the other respondants are misguided,
or whatever..... ;^)


- Mike KB3EIA -

wrote:
Recently there have been some claims about "what the majority wants" in
regards to FCC NPRMs.

Here's what happened wrt 98-143, the last big restructuring NPRM, and
commenters' views on code testing.

The ARRL's "substantive" poll has come and gone.

WRT98-143 has come and gone.

Best of Luck making your journey to the present.

From: b.b. on Aug 7, 7:02 am

wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the majority wants" in
regards to FCC NPRMs.

Here's what happened wrt 98-143, the last big restructuring NPRM, and
commenters' views on code testing.

The ARRL's "substantive" poll has come and gone.

WRT98-143 has come and gone.

Best of Luck making your journey to the present.

Jimmie is still stuck in the PAST.

He is so tense he loses his tenses...it should be "what the
majority WANTED"...in the past tense.

As to "what happened [with regard to] NPRM 98-143," that is
all viewable on the FCC ECFS under that Docket number. In
short, there are 2,367 entries there up to and including the
FCC-official cut-off date of 15 January 1995. There are a
total of 2,671 entries under 98-143, some of which are
marked as received as late as 2005! That's indicative of
lots of folks stuck in some kind of Time Warp.

Report and Order 99-412, released in late December of 1999,
made NPRM 98-143 a thing of the past. Once an R&O is
issued, its Notice of Proposed Rule Making is NO LONGER a
notice but an ORDER.

NPRM 98-143 covered MANY different aspects of U.S. amateur
radio regulations BESIDES the morse code test. For an
excellent statistical summation on the ENTIRETY of the
Comments submitted, LeRoy Klose (KC8EPO) did an excellent
job in no less than 4 Exhibits to the FCC plus a Reply to
Comments (15 pages) which is a text tabulation of the
various Commenters, dated 25 and 26 January 1999. In those
it is quite evident that the no-code-test advocates were
the MAJORITY and NOT the minority as Miccolis alleges and
has alleged in past postings here.

FCC 99-412 was released, became LAW for U.S. radio amateurs
and that is that whether morsemen like it or not.

WT Docket 05-235 is about ONE specific change to U.S.
amateur radio regulations: Elimination of Test Element
1 concerning the morse code test required now for a new
(or "upgrade" to) General or Extra class U.S. amateur radio
license. That PAST commentary, ARRL polls, or pipe-dreaming
by morsemen are taken as "present day opinions" is invalid
for the PRESENT.

Jimmie and other rabid morsemen are in deep denial of the
growing desire of those interested in amateur radio to DO
AWAY with the morse code test. That growth has burgeoned
into a MAJORITY, not a minority any longer.

A problem with those in deep denial is that they simply
cannot recognize a public desire which is opposed to their
own self-centered personal desires on retaining some
mythical standards and practices of past times when they
"bought into" those old standards and practices. As a
result we have all that spin doctoring by the morsemen
doing a failing job of keeping archaic standards and
practices alive. They are guilty only of necro-equine
flagellation...i.e., "beating a dead horse."

bet not

wrote:
From: b.b. on Aug 7, 7:02 am

wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the majority wants" in
regards to FCC NPRMs.

Here's what happened wrt 98-143, the last big restructuring NPRM, and
commenters' views on code testing.

The ARRL's "substantive" poll has come and gone.

WRT98-143 has come and gone.

Best of Luck making your journey to the present.

Jimmie is still stuck in the PAST.

He is so tense he loses his tenses...it should be "what the
majority WANTED"...in the past tense.

As to "what happened [with regard to] NPRM 98-143," that is
all viewable on the FCC ECFS under that Docket number. In
short, there are 2,367 entries there up to and including the
FCC-official cut-off date of 15 January 1995. There are a
total of 2,671 entries under 98-143, some of which are
marked as received as late as 2005! That's indicative of
lots of folks stuck in some kind of Time Warp.

Report and Order 99-412, released in late December of 1999,
made NPRM 98-143 a thing of the past. Once an R&O is
issued, its Notice of Proposed Rule Making is NO LONGER a
notice but an ORDER.

NPRM 98-143 covered MANY different aspects of U.S. amateur
radio regulations BESIDES the morse code test. For an
excellent statistical summation on the ENTIRETY of the
Comments submitted, LeRoy Klose (KC8EPO) did an excellent
job in no less than 4 Exhibits to the FCC plus a Reply to
Comments (15 pages) which is a text tabulation of the
various Commenters, dated 25 and 26 January 1999. In those
it is quite evident that the no-code-test advocates were
the MAJORITY and NOT the minority as Miccolis alleges and
has alleged in past postings here.

FCC 99-412 was released, became LAW for U.S. radio amateurs
and that is that whether morsemen like it or not.

WT Docket 05-235 is about ONE specific change to U.S.
amateur radio regulations: Elimination of Test Element
1 concerning the morse code test required now for a new
(or "upgrade" to) General or Extra class U.S. amateur radio
license. That PAST commentary, ARRL polls, or pipe-dreaming
by morsemen are taken as "present day opinions" is invalid
for the PRESENT.

Jimmie and other rabid morsemen are in deep denial of the
growing desire of those interested in amateur radio to DO
AWAY with the morse code test. That growth has burgeoned
into a MAJORITY, not a minority any longer.

A problem with those in deep denial is that they simply
cannot recognize a public desire which is opposed to their
own self-centered personal desires on retaining some
mythical standards and practices of past times when they
"bought into" those old standards and practices. As a
result we have all that spin doctoring by the morsemen
doing a failing job of keeping archaic standards and
practices alive. They are guilty only of necro-equine
flagellation...i.e., "beating a dead horse."

bet not


Jim is like an archivist that plays a role before each government
project collecting pop can pull-off rings, shards of glass, and
campfire coals.

He never affects the outcome of a project, but his presence is a
necessary nuisance.

wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the majority wants" in
regards to FCC NPRMs.


THe FCC doesn't make rules based on how polling comes out. One very
good comment can trump many "me toos". Besides, the FCC isn't
in the business of handing out gold stars. If a requirement
serves no regulatory purpose, the FCC doesn't want to bother
with it.

robert casey wrote:
wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the majority wants" in
regards to FCC NPRMs.


THe FCC doesn't make rules based on how polling comes out. One very
good comment can trump many "me toos". Besides, the FCC isn't
in the business of handing out gold stars. If a requirement
serves no regulatory purpose, the FCC doesn't want to bother
with it.

the most that the majority position will count for is about the same as
a "good comment"

but so far looks like No Code will even carry that count

robert casey wrote:
wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the
majority wants" in regards to FCC NPRMs.

THe FCC doesn't make rules based on how polling comes out.

I was speaking about comments, not polls. But you're right
either way, in that the FCC can ignore the majority
if it wants to.

One very
good comment can trump many "me toos".

Or one comment that FCC just happens to agree with.

Look at the BPL situation....

Besides, the FCC isn't
in the business of handing out gold stars. If a requirement
serves no regulatory purpose, the FCC doesn't want to bother
with it.

Or if FCC doesn't want to be bothered in the first place...

However, none of that is really what I was driving at.

My point is simply that the majority of comments on code testing
(57%) on 98-143 were in favor of at least two code test speeds,
including at least 12 wpm for Advanced and Extra. That fact is
proved by KC8EPO's published results, right here on rrap back
in March of 1999. (WA6VSE/WK3C posted them).

FCC ignored the majority opinion back then and reduced code
testing to 5 wpm. The majority opinion was *not* acted upon
by FCC.

Whether FCC did the best thing or not is a matter of opinion.
But the plain simple fact is that the majority was *not*
anti-code-test.

Now of course if the majority of comments on 05-235 are in
favor of no more code testing, FCC will most certainly say
they are simply doing what the majority wants.


73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
robert casey wrote:
wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the
majority wants" in regards to FCC NPRMs.

THe FCC doesn't make rules based on how polling comes out.


I was speaking about comments, not polls. But you're right
either way, in that the FCC can ignore the majority
if it wants to.

The FCC is legaly bound to ignore the majority in what it sees as the
public interest

One very
good comment can trump many "me toos".

Or one comment that FCC just happens to agree with.

Look at the BPL situation....

Besides, the FCC isn't
in the business of handing out gold stars. If a requirement
serves no regulatory purpose, the FCC doesn't want to bother
with it.

Or if FCC doesn't want to be bothered in the first place...

Indeed the FCC doesn't want to be bothered with much from the ARS, we
should count ourselves lucky to get any enforcement action

However, none of that is really what I was driving at.

My point is simply that the majority of comments on code testing
(57%) on 98-143 were in favor of at least two code test speeds,
including at least 12 wpm for Advanced and Extra. That fact is
proved by KC8EPO's published results, right here on rrap back
in March of 1999. (WA6VSE/WK3C posted them).

so?


FCC ignored the majority opinion back then and reduced code
testing to 5 wpm. The majority opinion was *not* acted upon
by FCC.

and No one ever promised or sugessted it would be

the FCC has a DUTY to the PUBLIC interest first and only then to the
interests of the ARS and finaly to the WISHES of the ARS


Whether FCC did the best thing or not is a matter of opinion.
But the plain simple fact is that the majority was *not*
anti-code-test.

so


Now of course if the majority of comments on 05-235 are in
favor of no more code testing, FCC will most certainly say
they are simply doing what the majority wants.

Not likely

The FCC will simply issue it's report and order



73 de Jim, N2EY

an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
robert casey wrote:
wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the
majority wants" in regards to FCC NPRMs.

THe FCC doesn't make rules based on how polling comes out.


I was speaking about comments, not polls. But you're right
either way, in that the FCC can ignore the majority
if it wants to.

The FCC is legaly bound to ignore the majority in what it sees as the
public interest

"...legaly (legally) bound to ignore..."

I don't think so.

One very
good comment can trump many "me toos".

Or one comment that FCC just happens to agree with.

Look at the BPL situation....

Besides, the FCC isn't
in the business of handing out gold stars. If a requirement
serves no regulatory purpose, the FCC doesn't want to bother
with it.

Or if FCC doesn't want to be bothered in the first place...

Indeed the FCC doesn't want to be bothered with much from the ARS, we
should count ourselves lucky to get any enforcement action

Us or anyone else. However the FCC has demonstrated significant
enforcement actions over All services in recent years. Refer to the
FCC's NOV/NOUO archives.

However, none of that is really what I was driving at.

My point is simply that the majority of comments on code testing
(57%) on 98-143 were in favor of at least two code test speeds,
including at least 12 wpm for Advanced and Extra. That fact is
proved by KC8EPO's published results, right here on rrap back
in March of 1999. (WA6VSE/WK3C posted them).

so?

FCC ignored the majority opinion back then and reduced code
testing to 5 wpm. The majority opinion was *not* acted upon
by FCC.

and No one ever promised or sugessted it would be

Sure it was.

It was called the Constitution of the Untied States.

That concept has been lost in the caucophony of
least-common-denominatior bar-lowerings.

the FCC has a DUTY to the PUBLIC interest first and only then to the
interests of the ARS and finaly to the WISHES of the ARS

"The "wishes" you refer to are by citizens of the United States
who told the government what they wanted.

The government ignored them.

Whether FCC did the best thing or not is a matter of opinion.
But the plain simple fact is that the majority was *not*
anti-code-test.

so

So the wishes of the citizens were ignored.

The Consitution was violated.

Now of course if the majority of comments on 05-235 are in
favor of no more code testing, FCC will most certainly say
they are simply doing what the majority wants.

Not likely

Absolutely. Watch.

The FCC will simply issue it's report and order

And in that R&O they will say "...the majority of respondents..."

Steve, K4YZ