"an old friend" wrote in message
ups.com...

Bill Sohl wrote:
"an old friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

cut
but close only counts with horseshoes hand granades and nukes
what will really count is the total lack of any valid reason to keep
code testing or the failure of the Procoders to advance any new argument
(even at this late date I believe that the proCoders coming up with
something NEW...valid or not would stop the process for months)
given that I suspect the FCC will do as it is poised to do, end code
testing.

That pretty much sums things up quite well...especially since
a number of nations have already abondoned all code testing
with no ill effects after two years.

not to put you on the spott but i'll try to put you on the spot

do you agree with my statement that a for a truly new arguement that
the FCC would wait and study awhile?

IF (big IF) some new compelling reason was identified to justify
keeping code testing, then yes, I think the FCC might look deeper
or perhaps rethink their proposal...BUT, as we both appear to agree,
no such new and compelling reason(s) have been offered up by
anyone. Even after several major widespread emergencies (Katrina, etc)
no additional arguments or even anecdotal evidence has surfaced
that points to any need for code knowledge.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

FCC has seemed anxious for "concensus", so the apparent almost half who want some continued test may seem to risk that 5wpm test for Extra would remain as other countries have done for their top classes.

Scorecard in the NCTA v. PCTA Amateur Opinions on NPRM 05-143:

As of 11 Oct 05, WT Docket 05-235 Comments on Test Element 1
Elimination/Retention tabulation:

ALL to Date Since FR Notice
-------------- ---------------
Grand Total 2545 572

Indeterminate (note 1) 158 48

Value for Percentages 2387 524

Against NPRM (note 2) 719 [30.12%] 164 [31.30%]
For NPRM (note 3) 1305 [54.67%] 271 [51.72%]
Test Extra Only (note 4) 363 [15.21%] 89 [16.98%]

Notes:

Notice of NPRM 05-143 appeared in Federal Register for 31 August
and established official end of Comments as 31 October 2005 and
official end of Replies to Comments as 14 November 2005. The left
column indicates totals for ALL dates. Right column indicates
all totals beginning 31 August 2005 to day of this scorecard.
It is unknown whether or not the FCC will consider Comments entered
prior to 31 August 2005, hence the two column format used here.
Fixed-font spacing used throughout.

1. Includes duplicate postings from same individual, "joke"
or "test" entries which do not have a valid address, or
polemicizing a personal pet peeve which has nothing to
do with the NPRM, individuals not understanding the
scope and purpose of the NPRM, one foreign citizen
submission, and six who were commenting on another
matter having nothing to do with amateur radio regulations.

2. Includes only those who are whole-heartedly AGAINST
the NPRM and against dropping any code testing.

3. Includes only those who are whole-heartedly FOR the
NPRM and the abolition of the morse code test. NPRM itself
(first docket document on 15 July) is counted as a "for."

4. These are "in-betweeners" who wish to retain the code
test for the "highest" class (Extra) but will accept
eliminating the code test for other classes.

Percentages are calculated from Grand Total less Indeterminates.

Stay tuned...the future of U.S. amateur radio is being made,
like it or not.

From: "Bill Sohl" on Wed 12 Oct 2005 14:25

"an old friend" wrote in message
Bill Sohl wrote:
"an old friend" wrote in message


do you agree with my statement that a for a truly new arguement that
the FCC would wait and study awhile?

IF (big IF) some new compelling reason was identified to justify
keeping code testing, then yes, I think the FCC might look deeper
or perhaps rethink their proposal...BUT, as we both appear to agree,
no such new and compelling reason(s) have been offered up by
anyone. Even after several major widespread emergencies (Katrina, etc)
no additional arguments or even anecdotal evidence has surfaced
that points to any need for code knowledge.

I personally doubt that the FCC will do any more than review
the 2600 Comments expected to be received by the end of the
Comment period at the end of October (as of the 11th of October
the count of Comments was 2545 total). Right now there are
more Comments than the more than half-year period of WT Docket
98-143 on Restructuring. That ended in mid-January 1999 and
the final Report and Order (99-412) was released in December
1999. Since WT Docket 05-235 is less complex than 98-143, I
doubt the review-and-decision period would be greater than a
half year on NPRM 05-143.

If there is any concession to the outraged ham morsemen, I would
predict that the Commission MIGHT keep the 5 WPM code test for
Amateur Extra class. I say MIGHT only in speculation. The
Commission is already on record of 15 years ago that it doesn't
think that radiotelegraphy skill is anything worthy for their
purpose in granting amateur radio licenses. However, the
Commission has conceded to the desires of the special interest
groups (such as the ARRL) in the past, so the final R&O will
say much about the influence of the ARRL on the Commission now.
If the Commission won't yield to morse testing for Extras, then
I'd say that the ARRL just doesn't have the clout it once had.

My purpose of the continually-running "scorecard" is just to get
some visibility into the "amateur community's" opinions on the
code test...unbiased by local groups' opinions on morsemanship
as either vital or neccessary in amateur radio. Think of it as
a poll of opinions by those that care to Comment, visible to ALL.

wrote:

My purpose of the continually-running "scorecard" is just to get
some visibility into the "amateur community's" opinions on the
code test...unbiased by local groups' opinions on morsemanship
as either vital or neccessary in amateur radio. Think of it as
a poll of opinions by those that care to Comment, visible to ALL.

That's nice, Len.

But with all due respect, how do we know your scorecard is accurate?

Does anyone check your work? You do make mistakes, Len. We've seen some
of them here. Like you claims about the legality of hams operating with
expired-but-in-the-grace-period licenses, where you clearly didn't
understand what Part 97 actually says.

Is there a detailed breakdown of each commenter's response, such as was
done by KC8EPO back in 1999? A listing of duplicates removed and other
anomalies, with the criteria for each? Or do you expect us to just take
your word for the accuracy of the scorecard?

I suppose someone could go through all the comments and come up with
their own scorecard. But what good would it do if that scorecard
differed from yours? We all know how you'd react here.

Also, it's clear to anyone who reads your posts here that you're hardly
unbiased on the subject of code testing.

Indeed, you used the phrase "unbiased by local groups' opinions on
morsemanship as either vital or neccessary [sic] in amateur radio" as
if *others* scorecards are somehow biased - but not yours. You've
previously accused others of 'massaged numbers' and 'fraud' when their
data did not match yours, too.

So why should anyone *assume* the accuracy of your scorecard, Len? I'm
not saying you're intentionally cooking the books, but given your long
and varied track record here and elsewhere of mistakes,
misinterpretations of dissenting opinions and extremely negative,
attacking, denigrating responses to those who support either Morse Code
or Morse Code testing, it's a bit of a stretch to imagine *you* in the
role of unbiased reporter of those comments.

Besides, FCC doesn't have to go by majority opinion anyway. Back in
1999, the majority of commenters did *not* want the elimination of all
but 5 wpm code testing, but FCC did it anyway. (See WK3C's post of
KC8EPO's tabulation here. The majority of those commenting wanted at
least two code test speeds).

wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:

My purpose of the continually-running "scorecard" is just to get
some visibility into the "amateur community's" opinions on the
code test...unbiased by local groups' opinions on morsemanship
as either vital or neccessary in amateur radio. Think of it as
a poll of opinions by those that care to Comment, visible to ALL.

That's nice, Len.

But with all due respect, how do we know your scorecard is accurate?

Because he sez it is. Jim, in all honesty, if you doubt the
accuracy of Len's reports, please go thru the 2500+
comments and give us a readout of your own analysis.

(SNIP)

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 00:14:42 GMT, "Bill Sohl"
wrote:


wrote in message
roups.com...
wrote:

My purpose of the continually-running "scorecard" is just to get
some visibility into the "amateur community's" opinions on the
code test...unbiased by local groups' opinions on morsemanship
as either vital or neccessary in amateur radio. Think of it as
a poll of opinions by those that care to Comment, visible to ALL.

That's nice, Len.

But with all due respect, how do we know your scorecard is accurate?

Because he sez it is. Jim, in all honesty, if you doubt the
accuracy of Len's reports, please go thru the 2500+
comments and give us a readout of your own analysis.

....or opine on how inaccurate it *may* be, without investing the time
and effort to substantiate your theory.......


(SNIP)

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

73, Leo

From: Leo on Wed, Oct 12 2005 5:40 pm


wrote:
wrote in message
wrote:

My purpose of the continually-running "scorecard" is just to get
some visibility into the "amateur community's" opinions on the
code test...unbiased by local groups' opinions on morsemanship
as either vital or neccessary in amateur radio. Think of it as
a poll of opinions by those that care to Comment, visible to ALL.

That's nice, Len.

But with all due respect, how do we know your scorecard is accurate?

Because he sez it is. Jim, in all honesty, if you doubt the
accuracy of Len's reports, please go thru the 2500+
comments and give us a readout of your own analysis.

...or opine on how inaccurate it *may* be, without investing the time
and effort to substantiate your theory.......

There should be NO problem on ascertaining the accuracy of
anything where the entire contents are OUT IN THE OPEN for
ALL TO SEE. All that is left is to tally up the opinions
into the four categories I used...of all 2545 Comments filed
as of 11 October 2005, beginning with "comment" #1 on 15 July.
It's "easy." Just read every single Comment filed. :-)

"For accuracy" Jimmie MUST decide on what to do with the
duplicates (only two major offenders there, one FOR, one
Against the NPRM), what to do with the half dozen who are
Commenting on a totally different subject (not even amateur
radio), and generally try to decode what some of them are
trying to say (not always easy).

Those FOR, those Against the NPRM are fairly clear and un-
ambiguous. Should be an easy decision on just reading them.
For the "Extra Only" group it isn't that clear since those
generally add a lot of commentary that is NOT in the NPRM.

Larry Klose got a lot of static on his large, and more
complex analysis of WT Docket 98-143. That's still in the
ECFS database if anyone wants to look. I expected the same
on WT Docket 05-235 on NPRM 05-143.

Jimmie is getting draconian in his mistrust, dislike, and
general ****iness on those who won't agree with him that
morsemanship is the holy grail of amateurism. Screum.
JIMMIE CAN DO HIS OWN WORK on the stats if he is so shirty
about it...and SHOW IT. :-)

wrote:

Also, it's clear to anyone who reads your posts here that you're hardly
unbiased on the subject of code testing.

Hi! And you show no bias? Hardy, hi, hi!

Scorecard in the NCTA v. PCTA Amateur Opinions on NPRM 05-143:

As of 12 Oct 05, WT Docket 05-235 Comments on Test Element 1
Elimination/Retention tabulation:

ALL to Date Since FR Notice
-------------- ---------------
Grand Total 2556 583

Indeterminate (note 1) 161 51

Value for Percentages 2395 532

Against NPRM (note 2) 721 [30.10%] 166 [31.20%]
For NPRM (note 3) 1309 [54.66%] 275 [51.69%]
Test Extra Only (note 4) 365 [15.24%] 91 [17.11%]

Notes:

Notice of NPRM 05-143 appeared in Federal Register for 31 August
and established official end of Comments as 31 October 2005 and
official end of Replies to Comments as 14 November 2005. The left
column indicates totals for ALL dates. Right column indicates
all totals beginning 31 August 2005 to day of this scorecard.
It is unknown whether or not the FCC will consider Comments entered
prior to 31 August 2005, hence the two column format used here.
Fixed-font spacing used throughout.

1. Includes duplicate postings from same individual, "joke"
or "test" entries which do not have a valid address, or
polemicizing a personal pet peeve which has nothing to
do with the NPRM, individuals not understanding the
scope and purpose of the NPRM, one foreign citizen
submission, and six who were commenting on another
matter having nothing to do with amateur radio regulations.

2. Includes only those who are whole-heartedly AGAINST
the NPRM and against dropping any code testing.

3. Includes only those who are whole-heartedly FOR the
NPRM and the abolition of the morse code test. NPRM itself
(first docket document on 15 July) is counted as a "for."

4. These are "in-betweeners" who wish to retain the code
test for the "highest" class (Extra) but will accept
eliminating the code test for other classes.

Percentages are calculated from Grand Total less Indeterminates.

Stay tuned...the future of U.S. amateur radio is being made,
like it or not.