Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
AOF:
One thing for sure, this group sure has a lot which do not value having anyone respecting their credibility... after a sufficient length of time it becomes obvious, the vast amount dis-information which flows off their keyboards... I think it is deeper than just them stating falsehoods they know to be untrue, it really is a depiction of their ignorance... John On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:48:11 -0700, an_old_friend wrote: John Smith wrote: Band allocation should be allocated on long term statistics generated in regards to the modes used... (past year or two) As CW continues its' drop, it needs less and less allocations... as no-coders now enter CW will have to shrink to accommodate the new users and their modes... John And yet His comments are some of the best I have seen in defense of Code testing He addreses the reasoning to the Public Good tries to relive the FCC of the Burdens involved all in all a decent defense of the indefensable On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:09:49 -0700, an_old_friend wrote: Just why would there need to be a test in order to use this specturm set aside One can either USE Morse Code or not But still the plea that Morse Code needs welfare in order to endure David Stinson wrote: Comments submitted to the FCC, advocating ARRL administration of Morse license endorsment: ------------------- 18 Aug. 2005 WT Docket 05-235, Amateur Radio Morse Code Testing Requirement. cuting to save BW |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Seeking comments from Icom PCR1000 Users | Scanner | |||
Seeking Comments from Icom PCR1000 Users | Shortwave | |||
Citizens make inappropriate comments? | Policy | |||
NASWA Draft BPL Comments | Shortwave | |||
BPL interference - reply comments - YOUR ACTION REQUIRED | Policy |