| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
August 20th 05, 01:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
From: on Fri 19 Aug 2005 12:58
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. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.radio.amateur.policy/msg/bd661a50825a37f3?dmode=source&hl=en http://tinyurl.com/7t3te It was posted Mar 12 1999, by WA6VSE. Here's a relevant quote Ackshully, one ought to go to the SOURCE which is easily accessible by anyone with Internet access. Just go to the FCC ECFS and for WT Docket 98-143, look under 25 and 26 January 1999 for postings by LeRoy Klose III. Include the attachment links. That gets one into Larry Klose's remarkable summary of ALL Comments on 98-143 up to 25 January 1999 (the official cut-off date was 15 January 1999). Brian, Jimmie wants to have everyone look at "second-hand" information, an encapsulated form. It is better to look at the REAL stuff, FIRST-HAND, which is readily available. Larry eliminated dupes and responses that did not address the code test issue. It's clear that: 43% is not a majority, yet they got what they wanted. 57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 2 or 3 code test speeds. That majority did not get what they wanted. 57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12, 13 or 20 wpm for Extra. That majority did not get what they wanted. 57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12 or 13 wpm for Advanced. That majority did not get what they wanted. Lessee, 57% + 57% + 57% = 171%, a clear majority. Jimmie has a wonderful way with numbers... :-) Jimmie is also stuck firmly in the PAST. 1998 was SEVEN YEARS AGO and the Internet was in its 7th public year. FCC 99-412, ordered in December, 1999, established the "Amateur Restructuring" which took place in mid-2000. AT THE TIME (1998-1999), it was IMPOSSIBLE to eliminate the morse code test for ANY U.S. amateur radio license having privileges of operating below 30 MHz. The barrier was S25.5 of the ITU-R...colloquially known (or mis-known) as "the treaty." [there is NO specific treaty on morse code, only the honor system whereby all administrations are supposed to adhere to ITU decisions on standards and allocations] Conveniently missing is that the FCC's reasons for 90-53, of 1990, 15 years ago, was that it did not feel that any manual morse code skill test was any sort of qualifier for the Commission to grant an applicant a license. That established the reason-for-being of creation of the no-code- test Technician class license. Also conventiently omitted is EIGHTEEN Petitions, nearly all varying in general "re-re-structuring" having none-some-all code testing. Absolutely NO CONSENSUS could be gained from reviewing all 18 Pentitions...even though the Commission had stated publicly several times that it wanted a consensus. The "amateur community" is highly polarized on the subject of code testing and remains so seven years after 1998. This year, 2005, is SEVEN years from the 98-143 Docket. It is also the 14th year of public access to the Internet (it went public in 1991). Far more citizens have access to the Internet in 2005 than they did in 1998. In 2003 the Census Bureau reported that one in five Americans had some form of Internet access then. Nearly all the Comments on WT Docket 05-235 are electronic rather than written on paper. So far, in the 23rd day of Comments on WT Docket 05-235, there are 1720 documents on file, about 75 a day on the average! Compare that to the 2300+ Comments of WT Docket 98-143 whose commentary period was extended for nearly six months after release. There's far more "traffic" on 05-235 than there was on 98-143. At time NOW, in 2005, the MAJORITY are very adamantly showing they ARE a majority. Unambiguous opinions (95.3% of all filings) show a 4:2:1 ratio of For:Against:Extra-Only on elimination of the code test. There is easily a 2:1 ratio of those favoring NPRM 05-143 versus those opposing it. The IARU, helped/nudged/influenced by international membership of NCI, was the main operator in wanting S25 of the ITU Radio Regulations re-written. [it was more than just S25.5 covering code testing] It was done in mid-July, 2003, over two years ago. Since then TWENTY-THREE other countries have dropped morse code testing for their radio amateurs licenses having below-30-MHz operating privileges. Summary: The FCC wants to drop code testing, the IARU wants to drop code testing, 23 nations already have done so, and a CLEAR MAJORITY of WT Docket 05-235 Commenters want it dropped. That CLEAR MAJORUTY is 2:1 for dropping it versus those wanting it retained. That CLEAR MAJORITY is 58% of those who have unambiguously commented. Jimmie wants to crawl back seven years and live there... :-( sin die |
|
#3
August 21st 05, 09:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote: From: on Fri 19 Aug 2005 12:58 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. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.radio.amateur.policy/msg/bd661a50825a37f3?dmode=source&hl=en http://tinyurl.com/7t3te It was posted Mar 12 1999, by WA6VSE. Here's a relevant quote Ackshully, one ought to go to the SOURCE which is easily accessible by anyone with Internet access. Just go to the FCC ECFS and for WT Docket 98-143, look under 25 and 26 January 1999 for postings by LeRoy Klose III. Include the attachment links. That gets one into Larry Klose's remarkable summary of ALL Comments on 98-143 up to 25 January 1999 (the official cut-off date was 15 January 1999). Brian, Jimmie wants to have everyone look at "second-hand" information, an encapsulated form. It is better to look at the REAL stuff, FIRST-HAND, which is readily available. Jimmie No-Serve has always wanted the truth filtered. When wasn't it so? Larry eliminated dupes and responses that did not address the code test issue. It's clear that: 43% is not a majority, yet they got what they wanted. 57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 2 or 3 code test speeds. That majority did not get what they wanted. 57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12, 13 or 20 wpm for Extra. That majority did not get what they wanted. 57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12 or 13 wpm for Advanced. That majority did not get what they wanted. Lessee, 57% + 57% + 57% = 171%, a clear majority. Jimmie has a wonderful way with numbers... :-) Jimmie is also stuck firmly in the PAST. 1998 was SEVEN YEARS AGO and the Internet was in its 7th public year. FCC 99-412, ordered in December, 1999, established the "Amateur Restructuring" which took place in mid-2000. AT THE TIME (1998-1999), it was IMPOSSIBLE to eliminate the morse code test for ANY U.S. amateur radio license having privileges of operating below 30 MHz. The barrier was S25.5 of the ITU-R...colloquially known (or mis-known) as "the treaty." [there is NO specific treaty on morse code, only the honor system whereby all administrations are supposed to adhere to ITU decisions on standards and allocations] Nebbermind that the US of A has broken lots of treaties that Jimmy No-Serve has never protested. Conveniently missing is that the FCC's reasons for 90-53, of 1990, 15 years ago, was that it did not feel that any manual morse code skill test was any sort of qualifier for the Commission to grant an applicant a license. That established the reason-for-being of creation of the no-code- test Technician class license. But, but, but, that was because of some King that nobody cares about anymore. CAn't we just ignore him? Also conventiently omitted is EIGHTEEN Petitions, nearly all varying in general "re-re-structuring" having none-some-all code testing. Absolutely NO CONSENSUS could be gained from reviewing all 18 Pentitions...even though the Commission had stated publicly several times that it wanted a consensus. The "amateur community" is highly polarized on the subject of code testing and remains so seven years after 1998. Highly polarized. But as long as the good EXTRAS are being satisfied... This year, 2005, is SEVEN years from the 98-143 Docket. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven... It is also the 14th year of public access to the Internet (it went public in 1991). Far more citizens have access to the Internet in 2005 than they did in 1998. In 2003 the Census Bureau reported that one in five Americans had some form of Internet access then. Nearly all the Comments on WT Docket 05-235 are electronic rather than written on paper. So far, in the 23rd day of Comments on WT Docket 05-235, there are 1720 documents on file, about 75 a day on the average! Compare that to the 2300+ Comments of WT Docket 98-143 whose commentary period was extended for nearly six months after release. There's far more "traffic" on 05-235 than there was on 98-143. And there should be. At time NOW, in 2005, the MAJORITY are very adamantly showing they ARE a majority. They are merely delusional. Unambiguous opinions (95.3% of all filings) show a 4:2:1 ratio of For:Against:Extra-Only on elimination of the code test. There is easily a 2:1 ratio of those favoring NPRM 05-143 versus those opposing it. You'll always have your EXTRA Jims in the ARS. The IARU, helped/nudged/influenced by international membership of NCI, was the main operator in wanting S25 of the ITU Radio Regulations re-written. [it was more than just S25.5 covering code testing] It was done in mid-July, 2003, over two years ago. Since then TWENTY-THREE other countries have dropped morse code testing for their radio amateurs licenses having below-30-MHz operating privileges. We need people like Carl Anderson pushing the buttons at the ARRL. Summary: The FCC wants to drop code testing, the IARU wants to drop code testing, 23 nations already have done so, and a CLEAR MAJORITY of WT Docket 05-235 Commenters want it dropped. That CLEAR MAJORUTY is 2:1 for dropping it versus those wanting it retained. That CLEAR MAJORITY is 58% of those who have unambiguously commented. Jimmie wants to crawl back seven years and live there... :-( sin die Much much further. |
|
#4
August 22nd 05, 03:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote: wrote: From: on Fri 19 Aug 2005 12:58 cut AT THE TIME (1998-1999), it was IMPOSSIBLE to eliminate the morse code test for ANY U.S. amateur radio license having privileges of operating below 30 MHz. The barrier was S25.5 of the ITU-R...colloquially known (or mis-known) as "the treaty." [there is NO specific treaty on morse code, only the honor system whereby all administrations are supposed to adhere to ITU decisions on standards and allocations] Nebbermind that the US of A has broken lots of treaties that Jimmy No-Serve has never protested. and not to mention that the Treaty never said what a code test was, by plain reading one could argue that sending a did and requiring the teste to Id it it as E would be a test cut |
|
#5
August 22nd 05, 03:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Len:
I was just here "Twiddling With Amateur Things" and attempting to come up with an acronym for what I was doing, when I seen your post, pleasant diversion--your post... .... well, back to figuring out the acronym--you have any ideas? grin John On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 18:17:37 -0700, an_old_friend wrote: wrote: wrote: From: on Fri 19 Aug 2005 12:58 cut AT THE TIME (1998-1999), it was IMPOSSIBLE to eliminate the morse code test for ANY U.S. amateur radio license having privileges of operating below 30 MHz. The barrier was S25.5 of the ITU-R...colloquially known (or mis-known) as "the treaty." [there is NO specific treaty on morse code, only the honor system whereby all administrations are supposed to adhere to ITU decisions on standards and allocations] Nebbermind that the US of A has broken lots of treaties that Jimmy No-Serve has never protested. and not to mention that the Treaty never said what a code test was, by plain reading one could argue that sending a did and requiring the teste to Id it it as E would be a test cut |
|
#6
August 22nd 05, 04:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#7
August 22nd 05, 05:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Len:
LOL!!! Yes, you are right, hit the wrong mouse button and attached my response to the wrong post... just lucky you found it and probably figured out it was a goof on my end--had not noticed until just now... Traveling Wave Amplifier Tubes sounds like an interesting subject, one which could really catch a guys interest! Especially after a drink or two and some soft music... more than likely, takes a lifetime to explore fully... grin John On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 19:49:08 -0700, LenAnderson wrote: That was mainly Brian Burke's and Mark Morgan's post, John. I spent a whole summer testing Travelling Wave Amplifier Tubes... know what you mean...:-) you men |
|
#8
August 22nd 05, 04:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: on Aug 21, 12:10 pm
wrote: From: on Fri 19 Aug 2005 12:58 wrote: Brian, Jimmie wants to have everyone look at "second-hand" information, an encapsulated form. It is better to look at the REAL stuff, FIRST-HAND, which is readily available. Jimmie No-Serve has always wanted the truth filtered. When wasn't it so? Possibly before he left the Seminary? shrug AT THE TIME (1998-1999), it was IMPOSSIBLE to eliminate the morse code test for ANY U.S. amateur radio license having privileges of operating below 30 MHz. The barrier was S25.5 of the ITU-R...colloquially known (or mis-known) as "the treaty." [there is NO specific treaty on morse code, only the honor system whereby all administrations are supposed to adhere to ITU decisions on standards and allocations] Nebbermind that the US of A has broken lots of treaties that Jimmy No-Serve has never protested. ...nor protected. Conveniently missing is that the FCC's reasons for 90-53, of 1990, 15 years ago, was that it did not feel that any manual morse code skill test was any sort of qualifier for the Commission to grant an applicant a license. That established the reason-for-being of creation of the no-code- test Technician class license. But, but, but, that was because of some King that nobody cares about anymore. CAn't we just ignore him? I don't believe that "King of Jordan request of Papa Bush". Yurp had the "T-hams" well before 1990. The movement to eliminate the code test has beginning to gather momentum in 1980, a decade before. Also conventiently omitted is EIGHTEEN Petitions, nearly all varying in general "re-re-structuring" having none-some-all code testing. Absolutely NO CONSENSUS could be gained from reviewing all 18 Pentitions...even though the Commission had stated publicly several times that it wanted a consensus. The "amateur community" is highly polarized on the subject of code testing and remains so seven years after 1998. Highly polarized. But as long as the good EXTRAS are being satisfied... Yes, they have "lesser classes" to look down upon. also the 14th year of public access to the Internet (it went public in 1991). Far more citizens have access to the Internet in 2005 than they did in 1998. In 2003 the Census Bureau reported that one in five Americans had some form of Internet access then. Nearly all the Comments on WT Docket 05-235 are electronic rather than written on paper. So far, in the 23rd day of Comments on WT Docket 05-235, there are 1720 documents on file, about 75 a day on the average! Compare that to the 2300+ Comments of WT Docket 98-143 whose commentary period was extended for nearly six months after release. There's far more "traffic" on 05-235 than there was on 98-143. And there should be. Once NPRM 05-143 is included in the Federal Register (it wasn't up to last Friday), the floodgates may be opened. Mondays always have the most documents received; so far nothing has appeared on Saturdays or Sundays. The 458 Comments of 8 August 2005 was a veritable deluge. At time NOW, in 2005, the MAJORITY are very adamantly showing they ARE a majority. They are merely delusional. Unambiguous opinions (95.3% of all filings) Somehow that just isn't getting through to the coders. They just can't understand that the NCTA are sick and tired of that code test as some kind of "maintainer of a living museum of morsemanship." The NCTA are in the MAJORITY, no ifs, ands, buts, or conditionals. You'll always have your EXTRA Jims in the ARS. I'm sure. They see themselves as "an elite force" or whatever. The IARU, helped/nudged/influenced by international membership of NCI, was the main operator in wanting S25 of the ITU Radio Regulations re-written. [it was more than just S25.5 covering code testing] It was done in mid-July, 2003, over two years ago. Since then TWENTY-THREE other countries have dropped morse code testing for their radio amateurs licenses having below-30-MHz operating privileges. We need people like Carl Anderson pushing the buttons at the ARRL. I wish CARL STEVENSON all good fortune on getting elected. By all accounts, Carl GETS THINGS DONE. He was IN Geneva for WRC-03...while the League was still objecting to changing S25, back two years ago...they may not have fully recovered from that. The League needs some new blood...not reprocessed plasma. Kellie can vote NO on Carl Anderson if he wants to... :-) Summary: The FCC wants to drop code testing, the IARU wants to drop code testing, 23 nations already have done so, and a CLEAR MAJORITY of WT Docket 05-235 Commenters want it dropped. That CLEAR MAJORUTY is 2:1 for dropping it versus those wanting it retained. That CLEAR MAJORITY is 58% of those who have unambiguously commented. Jimmie wants to crawl back seven years and live there... :-( Much much further. His choice. The rest of the world continues on...to the future. the now |
|
#9
August 22nd 05, 04:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message oups.com... [snip] We need people like Carl Anderson pushing the buttons at the ARRL. Who's Carl Anderson??? (I didn't see that name in the e-mail I got from Dave Sumner listing those who had been nominated for ARRL offices ...) 73, Carl - wk3c http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c |
|
#10
August 22nd 05, 05:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Taliban are among us-Immediate threat | Shortwave | |||
| RAC Bulletin - Industry Canada Posts Responses to RAC Recommendations on Morse Code | Policy | |||
| Who are the FISTS members on RRAP? | Policy | |||
| Do yourself a favor. Cancel your League membership now! | Policy | |||
Hybrid Mode
