wrote:
From: Carl R. Stevenson on Aug 30, 5:53 pm


wrote in message


It is not at all uncommon for items to take this length of time and more to
appear in the Federal Register.


Is a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking a legal document or not?

Does it not say on NPRM 05-143 that a stated Comment period
exists on both the title block on page 1 and in item 54 on
page 25? It says that the Comment period BEGINS when the
notice is published in the Federal Register. Both pages.


I know they (the FCC) are as frustrated as anyone else with the "lead time"
they sometimes face for the Fed Reg (produced by the GPO).


I don't "know" that. I'm just a citizen living roughly
3000 miles from Washington, DC, and depend on the Internet
for "quick" news out of my government. I have NO law firm
to "represent me" and can't afford a Lobbyist firm to push
for anything.

The only "problem" observed with the Federal Register TOC
page was a four-day gap two weeks ago...when they failed to
update the links to appropriate days for Volume 70 (all of
2005). Without a link to the Day TOC, NO ONE can see what
is in them unless they get the paper version.


Perhaps ARRL is waiting until the Fed Reg publication, too, so that their
comments will not "technically" be "premature."


...and perhaps the ARRL is NOT so all-fired "pure" as you say.

Then again, I am not running for any office at the ARRL.

Neither am I running for any office at NCI.



The ARRL was opposed to revision of ITU-R Recommendation S25, in
particular S25.5 making it mandatory for all administrations to
test for morse code proficiency for any license having below-30-
MHz operating privileges. The IARU was for the revision, being
its principal author of change which was voted in at WRC-03.

That is misinformation ... the ARRL "got with the program" on the revision
of S25.5 and was represented on the US Delegation. They also pushed the
improvement of S25.6 by adding a reference to a recommendation that gives
administrations guidance on the (technical) things that applicants for
amateur licenses should be tested for (which NCI also supported).


I wasn't IN Geneva, Switzerland, for WRC-03. All I read are the
U.S. Delegation's Report on WRC-03, comments from the IARU on
their web page, comments on several other web pages, and a few
items that have made it into print so far.

I read what everyone else reads...and that INCLUDES Dave
Sumnner's infrequent postings from Geneva during WRC-03.


From there on, it is speculation. The Comment period on NPRM
05-143 in WT Docket 05-235 has NOT OFFICIALLY STARTED. No notice
has yet been made in the Federal Register. There have been 1920
Comments already filed with the FCC on that Docket. Are these to
be rendered "useless" for consideration because of no Federal
Register notice given before they were filed? [see the Title
Block of NPRM 05-143 as well as page 25, item 54, for the period
of Comments and Replies to Comments]

As a practical matter, while comments file before the Fed Reg publication
are "technically" "premature," they will never the less be read and
considered by the FCC.


Hello? Who are you trying to kid here? Ever hear of "sunshine"
or see the big red type on some dockets' Comment listings?

When did you work IN the FCC Carl?



Further speculation - fueled by suspicion - is that some sort of
behind-the-scenes "stonewalling" is going on...perhaps by
lobbyists urging the FCC to delay the Federal Register notice.
Of all the possible organizations having sufficient "clout" to
lobby the FCC, the ARRL is pre-eminent, retaining the services of
both a communications-law firm and a professional lobbying firm
in the District of Columbia area.

As I said, the publication in the Fed Reg is beyond the FCC's control and I
know that they are just as frustrated as anyone else when this sort of delay
occurs.


Gratuitous corporate doublespeak phrase.

The FCC is simply NOT THAT CONCERNED about amateur radio matters.
Want evidence of that? Go to the FCC home page, click on Wireless
Communications Bureau. When you get to the Bureau, click on
"Amateur." What do you see in "news" of procedings there?

Hello, the LATEST date is 8 October 2002 on DA 02-2475, Antenna
siting and support structure revision to Part 97. Damn near
THREE YEARS OLD. Not one single thing about the 18 Petitions that
went through from 2003 to 2004. Not one notice that NPRM 05-143
was ever released. Not one notice in the separate page of "open"
procedings from all Bureaus and Offices.

"Delay" is like a few days, maybe two weeks. The NOTICE for 05-143
hasn't been there for SIX WEEKS.


Trying to "nail" the ARRL on some sort of half-baked "conspiracy theory" is
simply bogus.


Bullsnit. Hello? I'm SPECULATING. Understand the word?

Don't get your legal briefs in a knot. A legal beagle you ain't
and this is NOT "moot court."


If the FCC doesn't have control over when the item gets
published, which they don't, how can you rationally assert that the ARRL is
"behind the delay???"


RATIONALLY, one only has to look over the past half-century or so
and see that, in the beginning, the ARRL used to get all that it
asked for, lobbied for, etc. All the way up to creation of the
much-beloved (by some) "incentive plan."

Since I don't work for the ARRL and am NOT running for office, I
simply observe what everyone else can observe and RATIONALLY put
together all the available information...and "connect the dots."
It's not difficult for anyone with a RATIONAL mind. Note I
emphasize RATIONAL. Those whose minds are "conditioned" or easily
swayed by nice-nice words that cater to what they want to believe
won't connect all the "dots"...those minds are NOT rational, just
conditioned (or "brainwashed" in the indelicate common phrase).

I'm just a citizen of the USA without a fancy title, can't put
words down on nice letterhead paper sounding like they are oh, so
important(!). Not being an "insider" or having opportunity to
hobnob with the rich and famous, all I or any other citizen can
so is SPECULATE...based on what has happened in years past.


BTW, I *do* appreciate all the effort you've been putting into reading all
of the comments filed and giving us the stats ...


Here's some "charm school" advice, Carl. If you want to SOUND
appreciative, put such phrases FIRST in the body of text. Putting
them at the last makes them look like the phony-baloney they
probably are.

I don't work for NCI. In fact, NCI REFUSED my no-dues membership
for over a year. I don't work for ANY big money or big
organizations and am NOT running to do so. Got that so far?
I've been doing small-scale arguing on this code-test issue since
three decades ago. And received the usual boilerplated form-
letter "replies" in surface mail, like a truly wonderful "answer"
from the late Vic Clark (?) once the elected president of the
older ARRL...which said if I "wanted to know more about radio,
buy the new book out "Now You're Talking!" Judas H. Cottonpicker,
after my beginning in HF radio communications, I was supposed to
read a "radio for dummies" book? Yeah, like thanks a lot, big
League. And the same to you.

I do some bookkeeping on numbers and percentages which are a bit
of extra effort. I read EVERY SINGLE COMMENT...for ME, not for
anyone else. I post the stats in here because I CAN...for
ANYONE's information-input. If those stats show code-test
retention, then that is what I would show. But, the stats
favor code-test elimination. Push aside the gratuitous corporate-
speak phrases and understand that. NPRM 05-143 is going to have
as large, possibly larger, effect on U.S. amateur radio in the
near future than the "restructuring" of R&O 99-412 did. Had you
read all of those Comments on WT Docket 05-235 and done an honest
synopsis of them, you would see the same. But, you are running
for office now, and that may not be in the center of your vision.

Oh, did you want nice-nice phrases down here? :-) Sorry, I don't
HAVE to work for anybody or run for office, I can speak my mind.
I've done the "charm school" thing (manager's classes) and passed
just fine. :-) Don't have to use those "lessons learned" now.
Difficult to take a RATIONAL, independent mind, ain't it? :-)

"...and INSULTING each and every person who contradicts him or just
expresses an opposing viewpoint. NOT a good image."

--Len Anderson

Sometimes you even snap and snarl at those who share your goals, Len.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Carl R. Stevenson on Aug 30, 5:53 pm
cut


"...and INSULTING each and every person who contradicts him or just
expresses an opposing viewpoint. NOT a good image."

--Len Anderson

Sometimes you even snap and snarl at those who share your goals, Len.

sometimes he does as is his right. I am sure he will even agree you
have the right to snap and snarl at everyone who disgrees with you

but you missed the point(s) as usaul

Amoug them being

Your snap at everyone, your right but not a good image.

Len does reserve to right to snapp at folks too, event hose he shares
goals with

Indeed you miss out on the fact the Nocoders do disagree amoug
ourselfs, and we are free to to do so, a sign of the greater freedom
espoused by the NoCoders

but then you never seem to get the point, and indeed seem to prefer
volumes on evasion rather than answer a few simple questions

Dave K8MN

In . com "an old friend" writes:


Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Carl R. Stevenson on Aug 30, 5:53 pm
cut


"...and INSULTING each and every person who contradicts him or just
expresses an opposing viewpoint. NOT a good image."

--Len Anderson

Sometimes you even snap and snarl at those who share your goals, Len.

sometimes he does as is his right. I am sure he will even agree you
have the right to snap and snarl at everyone who disgrees with you

but you missed the point(s) as usaul

Amoug them being

Your snap at everyone, your right but not a good image.

Len does reserve to right to snapp at folks too, event hose he shares
goals with

Len may have the "right" to do a lot of things, but if he truly wants to
"win friends and influence people" in this debate, and leave a personal
legacy other than that of a Usenet "kook," he might want to take stock
of who are his allies and who are his enemies. And even enemies can
become allies on some issues. Recently, Len insisted that he only posts
facts and truth, and challenged me to find examples otherwise. When I
did, finding several recent errors and subjective interpretations,
rather than acknowledge or rebut them, he chose to change the subject
and accuse me of being a hanging "judge" for daring to criticize. Len
also seems to feel he is entitled to unlimited public revenge against
those who have slighted him, and will lash out reflexively, and Serdar
Argic style, whenever anyone posts with certain "hot-button" keywords
like Morse Code. Serdar accused anyone who disagreed with him as
"criminal Armenian," even those who were ethnic Japanese. Similarly, I
wonder if invectives like "Macho Morsemen" are aimed at Kim and Dee Dee,
also.

When I pointed out areas of agreement, including one example where I was
the only one to side with him in this forum, he replied with, "I don't
give a flying fig about your 'position.'"

I also wonder why most of those that try to defend Len choose to post
anonymously. I have agreed with Len on some issues, and have posted
with my real name. One red flag that someone is being tuned out is the
number of likely sock puppets that start to orbit around him.

Indeed you miss out on the fact the Nocoders do disagree amoug
ourselfs, and we are free to to do so, a sign of the greater freedom
espoused by the NoCoders

I'm happy to debate with anyone on any subject, and though I may
disagree, I will treat that person respectfully, even going so far as to
separate behavior from personality. There's a difference between honest
debate and sniping, insults, and ad-hominem attacks. It's also useful
to clarify and make understandable your position by indicating whom you
may agree with, rather than solipsistically dismissing any worldview
other than your own with, "I don't give a flying fig about your
'position.'"

but then you never seem to get the point, and indeed seem to prefer
volumes on evasion rather than answer a few simple questions

Dave K8MN

My comments on this docket are forthcoming. No evasion or avoidance of
simple questions are planned.

--
73, Paul W. Schleck, K3FU

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger for PGP Public Key

"Paul W. Schleck" wrote in message
...
In . com "an old friend"
writes:


[snip]

Similarly, I
wonder if invectives like "Macho Morsemen" are aimed at Kim and Dee Dee,
also.


Of course they are. Especially if one has not only passed the code but also
had the audacity to get their Extra class ticket. And heaven help you if you
actually USE Morse code.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Paul W. Schleck wrote:
In . com "an old friend" writes:


Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Carl R. Stevenson on Aug 30, 5:53 pm
cut


"...and INSULTING each and every person who contradicts him or just
expresses an opposing viewpoint. NOT a good image."

--Len Anderson

Sometimes you even snap and snarl at those who share your goals, Len.

sometimes he does as is his right. I am sure he will even agree you
have the right to snap and snarl at everyone who disgrees with you

but you missed the point(s) as usaul

Amoug them being

Your snap at everyone, your right but not a good image.

Len does reserve to right to snapp at folks too, event hose he shares
goals with

Len may have the "right" to do a lot of things, but if he truly wants to
"win friends and influence people" in this debate, and leave a personal
legacy other than that of a Usenet "kook," he might want to take stock

again missing the point

an Old friend wrote:
Paul W. Schleck wrote:

In . com "an old friend" writes:



Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

From: Carl R. Stevenson on Aug 30, 5:53 pm

cut


"...and INSULTING each and every person who contradicts him or just
expresses an opposing viewpoint. NOT a good image."

--Len Anderson

Sometimes you even snap and snarl at those who share your goals, Len.

sometimes he does as is his right. I am sure he will even agree you
have the right to snap and snarl at everyone who disgrees with you

but you missed the point(s) as usaul

Amoug them being

Your snap at everyone, your right but not a good image.

Len does reserve to right to snapp at folks too, event hose he shares
goals with

Len may have the "right" to do a lot of things, but if he truly wants to
"win friends and influence people" in this debate, and leave a personal
legacy other than that of a Usenet "kook," he might want to take stock


again missing the point

I'm sorry that you missed the point. Perhaps it'll come to you after a
re-reading.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
an Old friend wrote:
Paul W. Schleck wrote:
cut
again missing the point

I'm sorry that you missed the point. Perhaps it'll come to you after a
re-reading.

not me that needs to reread it

Dave K8MN

an Old friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an Old friend wrote:

Paul W. Schleck wrote:

cut

again missing the point

I'm sorry that you missed the point. Perhaps it'll come to you after a
re-reading.


not me that needs to reread it

You seem to be the one missing the point.

Dave K8MN

From: Paul W. Schleck on Sep 5, 6:43 am

In . com "an old friend"

writes:
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Carl R. Stevenson on Aug 30, 5:53 pm


Sometimes you even snap and snarl at those who share your goals, Len.

sometimes he does as is his right. I am sure he will even agree you
have the right to snap and snarl at everyone who disgrees with you
but you missed the point(s) as usaul
Amoug them being
Your snap at everyone, your right but not a good image.
Len does reserve to right to snapp at folks too, event hose he shares
goals with

Len may have the "right" to do a lot of things, but if he truly wants to
"win friends and influence people" in this debate, and leave a personal
legacy other than that of a Usenet "kook," he might want to take stock
of who are his allies and who are his enemies.

Feel free to list them by category... :-)

And even enemies can become allies on some issues.

Old Sicilian saying: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." :-)

Not really. That's just one of those sayings that is supposed
to show the sayer in some kind of Light of Wisdom. :-)

Recently, Len insisted that he only posts
facts and truth, and challenged me to find examples otherwise.

"Recently?!?" :-)

When I
did, finding several recent errors and subjective interpretations,
rather than acknowledge or rebut them, he chose to change the subject
and accuse me of being a hanging "judge" for daring to criticize.

Tsk. I must have hit a nerve or three. Awful sawwy, Judge.

Len
also seems to feel he is entitled to unlimited public revenge against
those who have slighted him, and will lash out reflexively, and Serdar
Argic style, whenever anyone posts with certain "hot-button" keywords
like Morse Code. Serdar accused anyone who disagreed with him as
"criminal Armenian," even those who were ethnic Japanese. Similarly, I
wonder if invectives like "Macho Morsemen" are aimed at Kim and Dee Dee,
also.

"Serdar Argic?!?" Is that person on the BoD of ARRL? IARU?

I used to know of an Arpad Somlyody, applications engineer at
Burroughs Corporation on Nixie display tubes. Any relation?

When I pointed out areas of agreement, including one example where I was
the only one to side with him in this forum, he replied with, "I don't
give a flying fig about your 'position.'"

That's still true.

I also wonder why most of those that try to defend Len choose to post
anonymously.

You mean like "Commander Buzz Corey of the Space Patrol?" :-)

I have agreed with Len on some issues, and have posted
with my real name.

Well, that's better than "Quitefine" or "Darkguard."

One red flag that someone is being tuned out is the
number of likely sock puppets that start to orbit around him.

Are they all "Lamb Chops?" :-)

"Orbit?" :-) "Puppets?!?" :-)

Indeed you miss out on the fact the Nocoders do disagree amoug
ourselfs, and we are free to to do so, a sign of the greater freedom
espoused by the NoCoders

I'm happy to debate with anyone on any subject, and though I may
disagree, I will treat that person respectfully, even going so far as to
separate behavior from personality.

Then you be the RARE BIRD of this Galaxy, Paul.

This newsgroup is best described as a Din of Inequity.

ANY unmoderated newsgroup is so described... :-)

There's a difference between honest
debate and sniping, insults, and ad-hominem attacks.

And there is a HUGE GAP in the levels of sensitivity among
the Easily Offended in here. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

It's also useful
to clarify and make understandable your position by indicating whom you
may agree with, rather than solipsistically dismissing any worldview
other than your own with, "I don't give a flying fig about your
'position.'"

Careful, Paul, one of "my sock puppets" may attack you... :-)

They might send figs flying your way. Enjoy.

but then you never seem to get the point, and indeed seem to prefer
volumes on evasion rather than answer a few simple questions

Dave K8MN

[I beat my wife in bed the other night, by about five minutes...]

:-)

My comments on this docket are forthcoming. No evasion or avoidance of
simple questions are planned.

Well, Paul, I don't give a Flying Fig about "Serdar Argic" either.

NBC West Coast Hq is just a couple miles away from me. Shall I
call them up on Tuesday and ask if they have any leftover "Flying
Fickle Finger of Fate" statuettes that you could award to someone?
Just asking for Laugh-Ins. :-)

Sock puppet to me? :-)

===

On WT Docket 05-235, the ECFS opened it up on 15 July 2005 and
the first individual Comments arrived on 20 July 2005. Actually,
NPRM 05-143 was released on 15 July but was not put into the
ECFS by the FCC until 21 July. See the date stamp on the viewed
NPRM document on the ECFS for proof. There was NO NOTICE of
NPRM 05-143 given in the Federal Register until 31 August 2005.
Do you wish to count the elapsed days between 15 July and 31
August? By "business days" or calendar days, I don't care.
A rather long time between release and official notice, it seems
to me. shrug

Guess who started THIS thread on 30 August 2005? :-)

ABOUT the Federal Register Notice on that NPRM. Now how much
discussion on that subject has gone on? Not a great deal. Most
of this thread's content is a lot of in-fighting between the
"regulars" of this newsgroup...fighting among themselves. :-)

I already commented several times on the FAILURE of timely
notice in the Federal Register as can be seen on the "scorecard"
postings I made on WT Docket 05-235. I even thanked Carl
Stevenson publicly in here for pointing it out first in here.

If you bother to look in Google archives you will see that I've
complained years ago about NCI membership "requirements" in
regards to who can "join." That was all public. Most of the
exchange on that took place in here between myself and Carl.
I don't harbor any "bad feelings" for Carl and support him in
TWO forthcoming elections; I'd vote for him at the IEEE except
my IEEE ballot doesn't allow non-Standards-Committee members
to vote on Members At Large in the Standards Committee. I
can't vote for him on the ARRL because I'm not a member of the
ARRL. I have NO disputes on those. NCI did change their
"membership requirements" to what is currently shown at
www.nocode.org and I thought that was a Good Thing.

Now, as long as we are being up-front on THIS thread, is WT
Docket 05-235 and NPRM 05-143 about the U.S. amateur radio
telegraphy test element? Is it on anything else in amateur
radio regulations? No? Well, I guess it is what you call a
"hot button topic" ey? Would this "Serdar Argic" approve or
disapprove? And why should we care? :-)

Say hello to Abulard Harkonnen and Vorian Atriedes when you
get off-line. Figs are in the approved food groups...