Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 05, 03:09 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235

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


"Amateur Opinions"?

Does that mean only the opinions of licensed radio amateurs are
considered in the totals?

As of 20 Oct 05, WT Docket 05-235 Comments on Test Element 1
Elimination/Retention tabulation:

ALL to Date Since FR Notice
-------------- ---------------
Grand Total 2634 658

Indeterminate (note 1) 171 60

Value for Percentages 2463 598

Against NPRM (note 2) 746 [30.29%] 191 [31.94%]
For NPRM (note 3) 1339 [54.36%] 303 [51.67%]
Test Extra Only (note 4) 378 [15.35%] 104 [17.39%]

This tabulation in agreement with FCC ECFS as of 3 PM EDT 21 Oct 05.

Notes:

It is unknown whether or not the FCC will consider
Comments entered
prior to 31 August 2005,


Why isn't that known? Does anyone think FCC would
put comments in their database, yet not consider them?

1. Includes duplicate postings


"Postings"? Aren't they called "comments"?

from same individual,


If an individual submits multiple but different comments, are they all
counted, or just one?

Are Reply Comments counted? If an individual submits both Comments and
Reply Comments, are they all counted, or just one?

"joke"
or "test" entries which do not have a valid address,


How is an address determined to be valid?

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,


Citizenship is not a requirement for an FCC amateur radio license.
Neither is resident status. Yet all licensees are
subject to FCC regulations. Why shouldn't the comments of
prospective licensees be counted just because they're not
citizens?

and six who were commenting on another
matter having nothing to do with amateur radio
regulations.


Such as?

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.


Well, that's pretty clear.

NPRM itself
(first docket document on 15 July) is counted as a "for."


Why? It's not a comment.

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.


There's only one other class that requires a code test.

Percentages are calculated from Grand Total less Indeterminates.

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


The future of amateur radio is always being made - by those who are
part of it.

  #2   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 05, 03:45 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235

On 21 Oct 2005 19:09:53 -0700, wrote:

grow up

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

you don't like make your own count and post the results

I doubt it will make much difference

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


"Amateur Opinions"?

Does that mean only the opinions of licensed radio amateurs are
considered in the totals?

As of 20 Oct 05, WT Docket 05-235 Comments on Test Element 1
Elimination/Retention tabulation:

ALL to Date Since FR Notice
-------------- ---------------
Grand Total 2634 658

Indeterminate (note 1) 171 60

Value for Percentages 2463 598

Against NPRM (note 2) 746 [30.29%] 191 [31.94%]
For NPRM (note 3) 1339 [54.36%] 303 [51.67%]
Test Extra Only (note 4) 378 [15.35%] 104 [17.39%]

This tabulation in agreement with FCC ECFS as of 3 PM EDT 21 Oct 05.

Notes:

It is unknown whether or not the FCC will consider
Comments entered
prior to 31 August 2005,


Why isn't that known? Does anyone think FCC would
put comments in their database, yet not consider them?

1. Includes duplicate postings


"Postings"? Aren't they called "comments"?

from same individual,


If an individual submits multiple but different comments, are they all
counted, or just one?

Are Reply Comments counted? If an individual submits both Comments and
Reply Comments, are they all counted, or just one?

"joke"
or "test" entries which do not have a valid address,


How is an address determined to be valid?

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,


Citizenship is not a requirement for an FCC amateur radio license.
Neither is resident status. Yet all licensees are
subject to FCC regulations. Why shouldn't the comments of
prospective licensees be counted just because they're not
citizens?

and six who were commenting on another
matter having nothing to do with amateur radio
regulations.


Such as?

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.


Well, that's pretty clear.

NPRM itself
(first docket document on 15 July) is counted as a "for."


Why? It's not a comment.

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.


There's only one other class that requires a code test.

Percentages are calculated from Grand Total less Indeterminates.

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


The future of amateur radio is always being made - by those who are
part of it.


_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
  #5   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 05, 01:51 PM
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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.



  #6   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 05, 03:10 PM
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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
  #7   Report Post  
Old October 27th 05, 02:03 AM
K4YZ
 
Posts: n/a
Default Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235


wrote:
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


"not"

Then to NOT clarify his work is to admit that it's not prepared in
any remotely scientific manner, which is to say that it's just a lot of
bufoonery.

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


But why?

Lennie went to a lot of effort to make these posts in order to
validate his points.

Why then would he NOT want anyone to understand his "work"...?!?!

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


"said"

No...You didn't "say" it...You just told Jim to shut up.

That's totally bogus.


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


"improper" "totally"

But it's NOT "bogus".

He's been after Lennie to clarify his data collection methods, and
YOU are telling Jim to just "accept" it or shut up.

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


"Your" "trying" "to" "interfere" "right"

No, it's NOT bogus.

You've clearly attempted to coerce Jim into NOT asking Lennie
VALID data collection questions on his "scorecard".

YOU are the one doing the interfering.

cut

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


liar


No, he's not.

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 "exercising" your right to be a foul-mouthed, ill-informed
and arrogant idiot who is making false accusations.

you are not in any way a victum of censorhsip


"victim"

Sure he is. YOU have point-blank told him to shut up.

THAT is censorship.

Steve, K4YZ

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Docket Scorecard [email protected] Policy 108 October 29th 05 12:02 AM
Docket 05-235 Scorecard [email protected] Policy 83 September 7th 05 05:32 PM
Stonewalling on WT Docket 05-235? [email protected] Policy 13 September 6th 05 01:13 AM
Stonewalling WT Docket 05-235? [email protected] Policy 2 August 31st 05 09:10 PM
Status of WT Docket 05-235 [email protected] Policy 7 August 2nd 05 11:37 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017