Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235
 

Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235
 

On 21 Oct 2005 20:05:26 -0700, wrote:

wrote:

grow up

What does that mean in this context?

in this context it means either do your own countor shut up

Are you saying that I
should just shut up and not ask questions?


it is his count so he makes the rules he will use

I'm just asking for explanations of those rules.

again and again and again

Len is under no obligation to answer your questions of anyone else if
he chooses not

Is that not allowed?

apeartly len chooses to exercise his right to state by his refusal to
answer to make exactly that determination

It is his count, his rules, and he is NOT accountable to you, or me or
even the FCC or Father Chrismass for that matter

Is it somehow not "grown up" to
ask questions about what those rules are?

what you are doing, by going on and one about is interfere with others
find the results of his work
cut out of mercy to us all

now grow up and take a hint he isn't going to answer you
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235
 

wrote:
On 21 Oct 2005 20:05:26 -0700, wrote:

wrote:

grow up

What does that mean in this context?

in this context it means either do your own countor shut up

Why? Is Len's count somehow sacred, and not open to any
questions?

Are you saying that I
should just shut up and not ask questions?

Sure looks like it.

it is his count so he makes the rules he will use

I'm just asking for explanations of those rules.

again and again and again

Is there a limit? I've only asked most of the questions once.

Len is under no obligation to answer your questions of anyone
else if he chooses not

That's right. But if he ignores questions on how his numbers
were derived, why should we accept those numbers as valid?

Len isn't the only one counting the comments, btw.

Is that not allowed?

apeartly len chooses to exercise his right to state by his
refusal to answer to make exactly that determination

??

Are you saying that if Len doesn't answer questions,
then I don't have the right to ask questions?

That's totally bogus.

It is his count, his rules, and he is NOT accountable
to you, or me or
even the FCC or Father Chrismass for that matter

I'm just asking for an explanation of some of his "rules".
Like whether a comment by a group or club is counted as
one or more than one comment.

Is it somehow not "grown up" to
ask questions about what those rules are?

what you are doing, by going on and one about is interfere with others
find the results of his work

How am I interfering in any way?

cut out of mercy to us all

You don't have to read my posts, Mark. Nor respond to them.

now grow up and take a hint he isn't going to answer you

He answers all right - with his typical jackass behavior.
At great length, too, all the while avoiding the real issues.
Do you consider that behavior to be "grown up"?

But all that's OK with you, yet my questions aren't.

You're saying that Len has freedom of speech here, but
I don't.

Think about it.

Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235
 

On 22 Oct 2005 05:51:41 -0700, wrote:


wrote:
On 21 Oct 2005 20:05:26 -0700, wrote:

wrote:

grow up

What does that mean in this context?

in this context it means either do your own countor shut up

Why? Is Len's count somehow sacred, and not open to any
questions?

no

but he does npt have to answer any questions

cut
Len is under no obligation to answer your questions of anyone
else if he chooses not

That's right. But if he ignores questions on how his numbers
were derived, why should we accept those numbers as valid?

then don't accept them as valid

Len isn't the only one counting the comments, btw.

Is that not allowed?

apeartly len chooses to exercise his right to state by his
refusal to answer to make exactly that determination

??

Are you saying that if Len doesn't answer questions,
then I don't have the right to ask questions?

never siad you lacked the right


That's totally bogus.

your effort to imply someone is doing something imporper is totalay
bogus

you distortion of a plea to stop asking question that is is clear are
not going to be answered as someone tryin gto intfer with your ight is
totaly bogus

cut

You're saying that Len has freedom of speech here, but
I don't.

liar

I am excercising My rights to tell I think you are trying to infringe
on Lens right (and now mine as well) to engage in legal actvities by
harrasment

you are not in any way a victum of censorhsip

Think about it.

_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235
 

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

As of 21 Oct 05, WT Docket 05-235 Comments on Test Element 1
Elimination/Retention tabulation:

ALL to Date Since FR Notice
-------------- ---------------
Grand Total 2641 665

Indeterminate (note 1) 171 60

Value for Percentages 2470 605

Against NPRM (note 2) 748 [30.28%] 193 [31.90%]
For NPRM (note 3) 1341 [54.29%] 305 [50.41%]
Test Extra Only (note 4) 381 [15.43%] 107 [17.69%]

This tabulation in agreement with FCC ECFS as of 1 PM EDT 22 Oct 05.

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.

Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235
 

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 14:23:24 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

wrote:
wrote:

On 21 Oct 2005 20:05:26 -0700, wrote:


wrote:


grow up

What does that mean in this context?

in this context it means either do your own countor shut up


Why? Is Len's count somehow sacred, and not open to any
questions?

Strange. I read about the PCTA's being ill mannered and rude. I do find
in practice however, that the NCTA's and interested others are the ones
telling people to keep their mouth shut.

yea we advocate against harrassment one of the worst forms of rudeness

Procders complain that other excercising there free speech is somehow
infringing on their own

Ya notice that too, Jim?

- Mike KB3EIA -

_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235
 

Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235
 

Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235
 

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 16:41:58 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 14:23:24 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:


wrote:

wrote:


cutns?

Strange. I read about the PCTA's being ill mannered and rude. I do find
in practice however, that the NCTA's and interested others are the ones
telling people to keep their mouth shut.


yea we advocate against harrassment one of the worst forms of rudeness

Procders complain that other excercising there free speech is somehow
infringing on their own

So I guess what you are saying is that your cause is so righteous that
you are justified in squelching the other side?

no effort to squech it has been made. he has the right to ignore me if
he likes, as do you of course, and I have the right to tell to shut
up and stoping acting like High Inqusitor or impling that Len is doing
something imporper in reading and counting as he sees fit

How many hunderd question does Jim need to ask before he reconizes
that Len is not required to answer him

or when wil Jim realize there has not been a grand inquistitor
apponointed eith for Ham radio or RRAP


- Mike KB3EIA -

_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235