Mike Coslo wrote in
:

wrote:
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

People that tell other people to shut up are acting like grand
inquisitors.

A lot of people on the no-code side don;t like Jim because he
generally
keeps his cool, and puts forth pretty good arguments.

- Mike KB3EIA -

On the contrary, I like Jim because he is rational and polite. I don't have
to agree with him, though. He did raise a valid point about citizenship,
i.e. it is irrelevant, but I raised this point myself with Len before and
didn't get an answer.

Any way you look at it though, more than half the comments are in favour of
the NPRM and less than a third against, the rest being divided into those
who want a code test retained for the Extra and those who otherwise fall in
the middle ground. The FCC will have no problem deciding that they have a
mandate to abolish Element 1 based on the comments.

So we are all just waiting for the other shoe to drop.

73 de Alun, N3KIP

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
.. .

: Any way you look at it though, more than half the comments are in favour
of
: the NPRM and less than a third against,

Not in fact is it ANY WAY (every way) you look at it. If Lenards tally is
accurate, your issue seems almost exactly an even race since the official
Federal Register publication of the NRPM with 50.41% in favor or dropping
Morse and 49.59% in sympathy to retain at least some Morse examination.
Based on your presidents election experience you should exam for perhaps
hanging chads in some preceints in Florida.

BGO


--
"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord,
make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it."
- Voltaire

"Usenet Central" wrote in
link.net:

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
.. .

: Any way you look at it though, more than half the comments are in
: favour of the NPRM and less than a third against,

Not in fact is it ANY WAY (every way) you look at it. If Lenards
tally is accurate, your issue seems almost exactly an even race since
the official Federal Register publication of the NRPM with 50.41% in
favor or dropping Morse and 49.59% in sympathy to retain at least some
Morse examination. Based on your presidents election experience you
should exam for perhaps hanging chads in some preceints in Florida.

BGO


--
"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord,
make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it."
- Voltaire





It's only an even race if you count those who want to retain a code test
for Extra only as being in the anti camp. I guarantee that the FCC will be
able to think of no reason to retain it only for Extras. In your dreams,
maybe.

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
...
"Usenet Central" wrote in
link.net:


[snip]


It's only an even race if you count those who want to retain a code test
for Extra only as being in the anti camp. I guarantee that the FCC will be
able to think of no reason to retain it only for Extras. In your dreams,
maybe.

The same thing could be said about any topic that isn't rules, good
operating practice, electrical safety or RF safety. A single license class
and single test would suffice to easily cover those three areas. Afterall,
whether or not the licensee knows how to detect or fix a problem does not
let him get out of following the rules and being responsible for his
operation.

However, the FCC continues to follow the concept that people need motivation
beyond just personal curiosity to pursue the "self training" part of the
basis and purpose. Code is as logical a choice as any other topic.

But I agree that the FCC will decide to drop code entirely if they choose to
move forward.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

On 6 Nov 2005 17:57:57 +0100, "Alun L. Palmer"
wrote:

"Usenet Central" wrote in
hlink.net:

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
.. .

: Any way you look at it though, more than half the comments are in
: favour of the NPRM and less than a third against,

Not in fact is it ANY WAY (every way) you look at it. If Lenards
tally is accurate, your issue seems almost exactly an even race since
the official Federal Register publication of the NRPM with 50.41% in
favor or dropping Morse and 49.59% in sympathy to retain at least some
Morse examination. Based on your presidents election experience you
should exam for perhaps hanging chads in some preceints in Florida.

BGO


--
"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord,
make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it."
- Voltaire





It's only an even race if you count those who want to retain a code test
for Extra only as being in the anti camp. I guarantee that the FCC will be
able to think of no reason to retain it only for Extras. In your dreams,
maybe.

the FCC has already stated same in NPRM

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

From: Alun L. Palmer on Nov 6, 8:57 am

"Usenet Central" wrote in
"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message


: Any way you look at it though, more than half the comments are in
: favour of the NPRM and less than a third against,

Not in fact is it ANY WAY (every way) you look at it. If Lenards
tally is accurate, your issue seems almost exactly an even race since
the official Federal Register publication of the NRPM with 50.41% in
favor or dropping Morse and 49.59% in sympathy to retain at least some
Morse examination. Based on your presidents election experience you
should exam for perhaps hanging chads in some preceints in Florida.

BGO [probably Barnabus Grumwich Overbite]


It's only an even race if you count those who want to retain a code test
for Extra only as being in the anti camp. I guarantee that the FCC will be
able to think of no reason to retain it only for Extras. In your dreams,
maybe.

Speaking of paradoxes, the code test for extra people allow
the "lesser classes" to be free of federal code testing for a
license. They are the classic mugwumps sitting astride the
code-test-fence, one foot on each side.

So, which way to count them? :-)

We can all go to AH0A.ORG and use Speroni's "unbiased" (Ha!)
lumping of the code-test-only-for-extras comments as being
Absolutely FOR CW! [no red strike-outs on THOSE icons!]

Of course, Joe Speroni is an unabashed morseman since way back.
He also had a couple Petitions DENIED by the FCC. shrug

Jimmie say Speroni is MORE ACCURATE. He is a morseman, ergo,
he is "accurate." shrug wink, wink... :-)

My analysis put the code-test-only-for-extras in a separate
category, neither for nor against the NPRM. Readers will
have to decide for themselves how to "rate" them.

What the Commission will actually DO in the future is up to
them. Some poor guy/gal or small group there has got a
whale of an analysis task to wade through nearly 3700 filings
after 14 November 2005 and try to get a feeling of what the
"public" wants. That's going to take quite a while, I'd say
more than the 10+ months between 15 Jan 99 and late December
1999 on WT Docket 98-143 for Restructuring. 98-143 had no
more than about 2200 filings between official start and end
times of Comments/Replies.

FCC once said it wanted a "consensus" on opinions in amateur
radio. It should be blatantly obvious that there is NO such
"consensus" with regard to WT Docket 05-235 and NPRM 05-143.

Nitpickers can make all the "finger-pointing" they want about
"illusionary four decimal place percentages" but the opinions
filed so far have a damn close near-even split betweeen For
and Against.

Whichever way the final R&O goes, we've all seen a part of
history in the making in regards to U.S. amateur radio.
Democracy in action, visible on the FCC ECFS! Good thing!

wrote:
From: Alun L. Palmer on Nov 6, 8:57 am

"Usenet Central" wrote in
"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message

: Any way you look at it though, more than half the comments are in
: favour of the NPRM and less than a third against,

Not in fact is it ANY WAY (every way) you look at it. If Lenards
tally is accurate,

But it isn't.

your issue seems almost exactly an even race since
the official Federal Register publication of the NRPM with 50.41% in
favor or dropping Morse and 49.59% in sympathy to retain at least some
Morse examination.

A more accurate analysis puts the numbers at 45% in favor and 55%
against.

Based on your presidents election experience you
should exam for perhaps hanging chads in some preceints in Florida.

It's only an even race if you count those who want to retain a code test
for Extra only as being in the anti camp. I guarantee that the FCC will be
able to think of no reason to retain it only for Extras. In your dreams,
maybe.

Let's look at the facts:

1) The NPRM proposes complete elimination of
all Morse Code testing for an FCC-issued amateur radio license.

2) Only 45% of those submitting comments support complete elimination
of
all Morse Code testing for an FCC-issued amateur radio license. That's
a
clear *minority*.

3) A clear majority (well over 60%) of those submitting comments
support elimination of
Morse Code testing for a General-class FCC-issued amateur radio
license.

4) A clear minority (well under 40%) of those submitting comments
support no change in Morse Code testing for an FCC-issued amateur radio
license.

5) The comments are not a vote. FCC accepts comments from all
interested parties, including multiple comments from the same person.
But one person's opionion isn't
worth more because of multiple filings.

Speaking of paradoxes, the code test for extra people allow
the "lesser classes" to be free of federal code testing for a
license.

What's wrong with that?

They are the classic mugwumps sitting astride the
code-test-fence, one foot on each side.

It's not an either-or issue

So, which way to count them? :-)

Because they submitted comments.

We can all go to AH0A.ORG and use Speroni's "unbiased" (Ha!)

His tabulation is unbiased compared to yours.

lumping of the code-test-only-for-extras comments as being
Absolutely FOR CW! [no red strike-outs on THOSE icons!]

They are against the NPRM, which calls for complete elimination
of all code testing.

Of course, Joe Speroni is an unabashed morseman since way back.

Ad hominem attack noted.

He also had a couple Petitions DENIED by the FCC. shrug

In order to have a petition denied, a petition must be filed.

Has Leonard Anderson filed any petitions with FCC?

Jimmie

Who?

say Speroni is MORE ACCURATE.

Let's put that to a "vote"...

Should multiple comments and reply comments
which express the same opinion from the same
person be counted separately?

Or should they be counted as one opinion?

My analysis put the code-test-only-for-extras in a separate
category, neither for nor against the NPRM. Readers will
have to decide for themselves how to "rate" them.

That can easily be done with the AH0A analysis.

You also counted multiple filings by the same person as
separate opinions even if they say essentially the same thing.

If a person writes a lot of reply comments, does that mean
their opinion is worth more than the person who simply
wrote a comment? Your tally says it does.

What the Commission will actually DO in the future is up to
them.

And it's *not* a vote.

Some poor guy/gal or small group there has got a
whale of an analysis task to wade through nearly 3700 filings
after 14 November 2005 and try to get a feeling of what the
"public" wants.

What the public wants is only one factor in the decision. FCC
rules are not democratic nor a referendum. They're more like
a benevolent dictatorship - the governed can ask but there's no
absolute mandate. Those who make the rules are appointed,
not elected, too.

That's going to take quite a while, I'd say
more than the 10+ months between 15 Jan 99 and late December
1999 on WT Docket 98-143 for Restructuring.

Is that an entry for The Pool?

98-143 had no
more than about 2200 filings between official start and end
times of Comments/Replies.

The FCC is mandated to do what they think is best. Doesn't mean
they always live up to the mandate.

FCC once said it wanted a "consensus" on opinions in amateur
radio. It should be blatantly obvious that there is NO such
"consensus" with regard to WT Docket 05-235 and NPRM 05-143.

Nor was there a consensus on 98-143 but FCC acted anyway.

Nitpickers can make all the "finger-pointing" they want about
"illusionary four decimal place percentages" but the opinions
filed so far have a damn close near-even split betweeen For
and Against.

Not true, unless you consider multiple filings of the same opinion
by the same person as being worth more.

If A files a comment supporting one position, and B files a comment
and 9 reply comments supporting a different position, should B's
opinion be worth 10 times what A's opinion is worth, simply because
B is more adept at spamming ECFS?
is B's opinion

Whichever way the final R&O goes, we've all seen a part of
history in the making in regards to U.S. amateur radio.

The history of amateur radio is made every day.

Democracy in action, visible on the FCC ECFS! Good thing!

It's a good thing but it's not "democracy". ECFS is not a vote, and
there is no requirement for FCC to follow the commentary, with or
without percentages.

For example, after comments closed back in 1999, the majority
thought that FCC should retain at least two code test speeds. This
was clearly documented by KC8EPO and reported by WK3C (as
WA6VSE). "Democracy in action" would require that FCC follow
that majority opinion.

But FCC reduced code testing to one speed, the absolute minimum they
considered adequate for treaty compliance.

Now the majority that think FCC should retain a
code test for Extra. "Democracy in action" would require that
FCC follow that majority opinion.

We'll see if they do...

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in
:

wrote:
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

People that tell other people to shut up are acting like grand
inquisitors.

A lot of people on the no-code side don;t like Jim because he
generally
keeps his cool, and puts forth pretty good arguments.

- Mike KB3EIA -

On the contrary, I like Jim because he is rational and polite.

Thanks, Alun!

I don't have to agree with him, though.

Of course not.

He did raise a valid point about citizenship,
i.e. it is irrelevant, but I raised this point myself with Len before and didn't get an answer.

FCC doesn't exclude noncitizens, so why should a count of the
comments exclude them? A noncitizen can get an FCC license, but
has to take the same tests as a citizen, so why shouldn't their
comments be counted?

Len has a proven track record of mistakes here, particularly in
the area of FCC regulations, so it's not unreasonable to ask
about how his numbers are compiled and how they are checked.

Any way you look at it though, more than half the comments are in favour of
the NPRM and less than a third against, the rest being divided into those
who want a code test retained for the Extra and those who
otherwise fall in the middle ground.

I disagree!

The NPRM proposes to eliminate *all* Morse Code
testing for an amateur license. Someone who supports
the NPRM must, by definition, support the removal
of *all* code testing, not just some of it. Otherwise
they are opposed to the NPRM.

The detail of whether they support the current level
of Morse Code testing, or whether they support a
reduction but not complete elimination, does not
change the fact that they are opposed to the NPRM as
it stands.

The FCC will have no problem deciding that they have a
mandate to abolish Element 1 based on the comments.

Perhaps - but recall that FCC is not required to follow
the majority opinion. They did not follow majority
opinion in 1999 either...

More important to the discussion of 'scorecards' is the
accuracy of the count. At present, Len's 'scorecard' is
made up of about 2500 comments that pass some vaguely
defined tests of validity.

With a base of 2500 comments, a single comment represents .04% of the
total, and 25 comments represent 1% of the total. With the totals being
so close, it would not take a lot of mistakes to change the apparent
majority.

Showing the apparent results to four significant figures may
give the illusion of accuracy to some, but in fact there's a
pretty big range of interpretation to those numbers.

For example, if one person submits multiple comments that are somewhat
different from each other (but all from the same
person), are they all counted, or just one?

If one person submits comments and reply comments (but all from the
same person), are they all counted, or just one?

If a club or organization comments, does that count as one comment or
multiple comments?

If a single comment has multiple signatures, does it count as one
comment or does the number of signatures come into play?

You can see that depending on how the above questions are
answered, and rules are applied, the results can be far different.

So we are all just waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Probably. FCC may simply be responding to the fact that if they
don't drop Element 1, the petitions and proposals will continue,
making more work for them, but no more resources.

73 de Jim, N2EY

From: on Oct 24, 3:39 am

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in
wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 16:41:58 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 14:23:24 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:
wrote:



no effort to squech it has been made.

Tsk, tsk...LOTS of "squelching" has been ATTEMPTED. :-)

Case in point: All these allegations of "honesty" and FALSE
charges of an inordinate number of "mistakes." Nice
MISDIRECTION away from the NPRM. :-)

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

Mark, simply Being Here and Being NOT for morse code is "improper"
and "incorrect!" :-)

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

Doesn't matter. Jimmie Noserve is a Radio god in here and can
act/do/write whatever he wants to and that WILL be "correct"
(because that is his opinion and anything against it is "wrong").

Disagreement with him is "wrong," thus "validating" his false
charges of "mistakes." :-)

A lot of people on the no-code side don;t like Jim because he
generally keeps his cool, and puts forth pretty good arguments.

Tsk, tsk, writing nastygrams about the "docket scorecard" a half
hour after midnight (local) means something has been "eating him"
and causing loss of sleep. :-)


On the contrary, I like Jim because he is rational and polite.

Thanks, Alun!

Jim is always right. He must be because he says so...those
against his opinions are "wrong." :-)

When it comes to one-sided opinions in favor of code testing,
he gets upset and irrational. shrug


He did raise a valid point about citizenship,
i.e. it is irrelevant, but I raised this point myself with Len
before and didn't get an answer.

I thought I answered that. :-)

I'll have to get busy and find out every other government
administrations' Elections so that I can go vote on those
issues...if I don't need to be a citizen there. :-)

Last I saw, United States citizens voted on, expressed
opinions on United States laws, regulations, rules. As far as
I've seen so far, Title 47 C.F.R. applies ONLY to United States
citizens on United States soil.

FCC doesn't exclude noncitizens, so why should a count of the
comments exclude them? A noncitizen can get an FCC license, but
has to take the same tests as a citizen, so why shouldn't their
comments be counted?

By INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT, the United States allows non-
citizens to be granted United States radio operator licenses.
Do NON-citizens vote on United States laws, regulations, rules?

Doing a voluntary examination of an on-going WT Docket and
reporting what I found is hardly "telling the FCC or anyone
in here" "what to do." Tsk, tsk. Since this is a private
all-voluntary "score card," the one doing the READING of ALL
filings is allowed to set the conditions. :-) Those
conditions have been FULLY EXPLAINED in each "score card" I've
posted...since the end of July, 2005. Why is there some kind
of "dispute" NOW rather than in the past two months?

As far as the "Indeterminate" column of my scoring, the notes
explain what was done. At issue in WT Docket 05-235 is just
whether or not NPRM 05-143 should be made into an R&O or not.
NPRM 05-143 is NOT some comprehensive all-inclusive Remake
of Part 97 as in the "Restructuring" of '98-'99. It is just
about morse code testing, whether it should stay or go...in
USA amateur radio regulations.

Other than the non-specific "Indeterminate" opinions, there
are only three others: FOR the NPRM, AGAINST the removal of
code testing, and retention of code testing ONLY for the
Amateur Extra class. Perhaps that is just too difficult to
grasp?

What IS difficult to grasp - by the PCTA - is that the NCTA
are no longer a minority. In fact, many PCTA just cannot
believe that radio hobbyists cannot love, honor, and obey
the cherished Belief that morse code testing is "necessary."


Len has a proven track record of mistakes here, particularly in
the area of FCC regulations, so it's not unreasonable to ask
about how his numbers are compiled and how they are checked.

"Proven track record?!?" :-)

Is that what is called "politeness" and "civility?" In here
I guess so... :-)

The way to "check" my numbers is to GO AND READ ALL THE
COMMENTS-FILINGS ON WT DOCKET 05-235 AND DO YOUR OWN
TALLIES OF OPINIONS.

Jimmie has NOT even made ONE filing on WT Docket 05-235.

Jimmie has NOT stated he has READ a single filing on 05-235.

Jimmie has spent a LOT of time and effort trying his best
to obscure and misdirect the NPRM "scorecard" results by
all these "challenges" and FALSE statements about my previous
alleged "inaccuracies."

Hey, it's a neat trick to try and sway public opinion in this
computer-modem kind of communications. Done well enough,
constant repetition of FALSE charges will make some folks
believe that a person is "highly inaccurate." :-)


The NPRM proposes to eliminate *all* Morse Code
testing for an amateur license. Someone who supports
the NPRM must, by definition, support the removal
of *all* code testing, not just some of it. Otherwise
they are opposed to the NPRM.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Nothing in ANY NPRM is so sacrosanct as
to demand absolute obediance to the NOTICE of PROPOSED
RULE MAKING. Had Jimmie seen other NPRMs and the
resulting R&Os, he would understand that. Obviously,
he has NOT.

The detail of whether they support the current level
of Morse Code testing, or whether they support a
reduction but not complete elimination, does not
change the fact that they are opposed to the NPRM as
it stands.

SPIN, SPIN, SPIN. :-)

Tsk, the purpose of a COMMENT period is to allow
CITIZENS to make their desires known to their
government on a PROPOSED ruling. Those desires ARE
now PUBLIC. 2,641 filings' worth. Miccolis has NOT
read ALL of them, hasn't even made his own filing.
I have read ALL of them...including the 19 more for
24 October 2005 (making 2,660 filings) which will be
posted on 25 October (plus any additional the FCC
wishes to add).

So...where is the "score card" by James Miccolis?

And...WHO will "check his work?" :-)

Who checks Miccolis' "work" on his bi-monthly "license
number" postings? [he won't say from where he cribs
his numbers]


The FCC will have no problem deciding that they have a
mandate to abolish Element 1 based on the comments.

Perhaps - but recall that FCC is not required to follow
the majority opinion. They did not follow majority
opinion in 1999 either...

Tsk. Morse lovers are seeing the handwriting on the
wall. Finally. Wow, news flash, morse code testing
is NOT favored by a majority! [sunnuvagun!]

The ARRL represents a distinct MINORITY of all USA
amateur radio licensees. A mere 20%. Yet, on any
other issue, What The ARRL Says is some kind of "truth"
about amateur radio...anyone against that will get all
sorts of nastygram grief from ARRL Believers!!!

More important to the discussion of 'scorecards' is the
accuracy of the count. At present, Len's 'scorecard' is
made up of about 2500 comments that pass some vaguely
defined tests of validity.

"Vaguely defined tests of validity?!?"

2,645 filings for the period 15 July 2005 to 22 October 2005.

Miccolis is IN ERROR...it was NOT "2500." Tsk, tsk.

With such ERRORS, Miccolis is establishing a "PROVEN TRACK
RECORD OF MISTAKES!!!" :-)

"Vaguely defined?" The Notes in my "score card" postings
explain it, well past "vague" judgements by PCTA Miccolis.

With a base of 2500 comments, a single comment represents .04% of the
total, and 25 comments represent 1% of the total. With the totals being
so close, it would not take a lot of mistakes to change the apparent
majority.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...PCTA Miccolis has NOT CHECKED THE WORK!

Showing the apparent results to four significant figures may
give the illusion of accuracy to some, but in fact there's a
pretty big range of interpretation to those numbers.

Only in the "Indeterminates." Many of THOSE are so vaguely
comprehensible that it would take an extreme favoritsm to
one side or the other to put them in an "un-ambiguous"
category. READ THEM AND SEE.

"Illusion of accuracy?" :-) With over a thousand filings
judged into four categories, four-place accuracy was thought
needed to trends, changes, closeness-of-differing-opinions
and so forth. That is insufficient for the highly judgemental
(and rather disturbed by revelations) James Miccolis. He
wants "the work checked" by another PCTA...possibly to show
the "true light of the efficacy and necessity of morse code
testing?"

PCTA James Miccolis has NOT made any filing whatsoever as of
midnight, 22 October 2005. He has NO indication of READING
ANY of the 2,641 filings (except the first one, maybe) on
WT Docket 05-235. Then he "challenges" me to "show the work"
as if he is some kind of "authority" on what should be posted
in here! Magnificent performance! [of petulant spite]

For example, if one person submits multiple comments that are somewhat
different from each other (but all from the same
person), are they all counted, or just one?

That has been EXPLAINED. Duplicates are put into the Indeterminate
category. There are TWO flagrant violators of that, one for, one
against the NPRM. Can Miccolis NAME those two? I can.

But, I've READ all 2,641 filings made up to midnight, 22 October
2005.

If one person submits comments and reply comments (but all from the
same person), are they all counted, or just one?

More necro-equine flagellation. :-)

If a club or organization comments, does that count as one comment or
multiple comments?

Sigh...:-) So far, ONE club has filed (but not given any list of
members). Editor Moseson of CQ has filed...does PCTA Miccolis
demand that ALL SUBSCRIBERS TO CQ be counted also? :-)

If a single comment has multiple signatures, does it count as one
comment or does the number of signatures come into play?

Which filing by whom and on what date has "multiple signatures?"

Does Miccolis get multiple ligatures squirming around, trying
to find a fresh spot on the dead horse?

So far, Miccolis has NOT CHECKED MY WORK, probably has NOT READ
ALL of the 2,641 filings to midnight, 22 October, 2005. He has
NOT made his OWN filing by that date.

You can see that depending on how the above questions are
answered, and rules are applied, the results can be far different.

What "rules" were "necessary" to be followed, Miccolis?

Were they "published" prior to 15 July 2005?

Did you "define what should be done" by the end of August, 2005?
[no, you did NOT]

Did you "define what should be done" by the end of September,
2005? [no, you did NOT]

Tsk, Miccolis must have become suddenly aware that there is NO
majority favoring the retention of the morse code test in
the United States' regulations for civil radio, Title 47 C.F.R.,
Part 97! [sunnuvagun!]

Miccolis is seeing the "end of ham radio" (as HE knows it) when
things are progressing ever onwards towards elimination the morse
code test! Poor thing...he stays up late on Sunday night, even
into Monday morning to vent his Grief and Upset at that!


So we are all just waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Probably.

"Probably?" :-) It's UNAVOIDABLE. It WILL come about.

The only question is when.

The official end of Comments on WT Docket 05-235 is 31 October,
2005, a week from now. The official end of Replies to Comments
is 14 November 2005.

On WT Docket 98-143 the official end of the last extension of
Comments was 15 January 1999. The final R&O on "Restructuring"
wasn't released until the last week in December, 1999. That is
roughly 10 months of decision-making...but on a LOT more issues
than just morse code testing.

James Miccolis wasn't IN the FCC in 1998, 1999, and he isn't
IN the FCC in 2005. However, he KNOWS things and anyone who
doesn't agree with this innate knowledge "makes mistakes!"

FCC may simply be responding to the fact that if they
don't drop Element 1, the petitions and proposals will continue,
making more work for them, but no more resources.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. If the decisions don't go YOUR way, then you
can renounce the FCC as some sort of meaningless beaurocracy
that doesn't serve the "public need," right? You ARE U.S.
amateur radio, aren't you? [you sure sound like it]

The FCC will take its time, make its decisions, the issue an
R&O. They will do so WITHOUT having James Miccolis "check
their work!" However, any decision arrived at WILL be fully
explained in THEIR Report and Order and appropriate Commentors
noted in references. So far, as of midnight, 22 October 2005
the FCC CANNOT cite any James Miccolis as a referencible
Commentor...he has NOT even submitted any Comments on 05-235
as of that date!

Jimmie, you can make all the FALSE and misdirected "questions"
you wish about me. All I do is READ ALL the Comments and
Replies to Comments on 05-235. The OPINIONS on what the FCC
should do in its final R&O come from United States citizens.
The FCC is bound by law and reputation to "serve the public
interest." They seem to do a good job of that, despite what
the losers on past decisions snarl about.

Okay, you can try more misdirection and multiple postings
and you are going to get the same replies from me. That
doesn't affect the final R&O one iota. You've had all
your amateur life to crow about the efficacy of morse code
as a "necessary" part of licensing...and now you are seeing
that all of that will soon be gone. You won't be able to
crow much in the future...but you may have to EAT some...

wrote:
From: on Oct 24, 3:39 am
Alun L. Palmer wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in
wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 16:41:58 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 14:23:24 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:
wrote:

no effort to squech it has been made.

Tsk, tsk...LOTS of "squelching" has been ATTEMPTED. :-)

By you and Mark..

Case in point: All these allegations of "honesty" and FALSE
charges of an inordinate number of "mistakes."

By whom?

Nice MISDIRECTION away from the NPRM. :-)

The thread is about your "scorecard", Len. Asking how the
numbers are derived, what rules are used in the derivation,
and who checks your work are right on-subject.

For example, if someone filed 1 comment and 3 reply comments
on the NPRM, did you count them as 1 or 4 or something else?

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

Mark, simply Being Here and Being NOT for morse code
is "improper" and "incorrect!" :-)

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

Doesn't matter. Jimmie Noserve is a Radio god

"Radio god"?

Looks like an extreme exaggeration. How do we know you
don't exaggerate other things?

in here and can
act/do/write whatever he wants to and that WILL be "correct"
(because that is his opinion and anything against it
is "wrong").

Disagreement with him is "wrong," thus "validating" his false
charges of "mistakes." :-)

Good description of your behavior here, Len.

Your mistakes are well documented. Such as the legality of
amateur operation by hams with expired-but-in-the-grace-period
licenses.

On the contrary, I like Jim because he is rational
and polite.

Thanks, Alun!

Jim is always right.

Gosh, Len, so you *can* call me by my name!

He must be because he says so...those
against his opinions are "wrong." :-)

When it comes to one-sided opinions in favor of code testing,
he gets upset and irrational. shrug

He did raise a valid point about citizenship,
i.e. it is irrelevant, but I raised this point
myself with Len
before and didn't get an answer.

I thought I answered that. :-)

I'll have to get busy and find out every other government
administrations' Elections so that I can go vote on those
issues...if I don't need to be a citizen there. :-)

Last I saw, United States citizens voted on, expressed
opinions on United States laws, regulations, rules.
As far as
I've seen so far, Title 47 C.F.R. applies ONLY to United
States
citizens on United States soil.

US citizenship is not a requirement for getting an FCC
amateur radio license. Passing the required tests *is* a
requirement.

A comment to FCC is not a vote. Citizenship is not required
to comment. Neither is there an age requirement to comment.

Of course Len has admitted that he has had problems integrating young
people into what he considers 'adult' activities....

FCC doesn't exclude noncitizens, so why should a count of the
comments exclude them? A noncitizen can get an FCC license, but
has to take the same tests as a citizen, so why shouldn't their
comments be counted?

By INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT, the United States allows non-
citizens to be granted United States radio operator licenses.

That's right.

Do NON-citizens vote on United States laws, regulations,
rules?

A comment is not a vote. An NPRM is not an election. FCC doesn't have
to act on what the majority of comments want.

Doing a voluntary examination of an on-going WT Docket and
reporting what I found is hardly "telling the FCC or anyone
in here" "what to do."

Who said it was?

The issue is the accuracy of your 'scorecard'.

Tsk, tsk. Since this is a private

It's not private at all. You blab it all over a public forum,
so it's fair game for comment and question by others.

That's what free speech in a public forum is all about, Len.
If you make statements here, others have the right to comment
on them and question their validity.

Is your 'scorecard' a collection of alleged facts, or is it
just your opinion?

all-voluntary "score card," the one doing the READING of ALL
filings is allowed to set the conditions. :-)

Of course.

Those
conditions have been FULLY EXPLAINED in each "score card"
I've posted...since the end of July, 2005.

No, they haven't. For example:

If someone posts multiple comments that are not identical,
are they counted as one comment or more than one?

If a group or club posts a comment with multiple signatures,
does that count as one comment or more than one?

How is it decided what constitutes a "valid address"?

Why is there some kind
of "dispute" NOW rather than in the past two months?

Is there a time limit on questions?

As far as the "Indeterminate" column of my scoring, the notes
explain what was done.

Not completely.

At issue in WT Docket 05-235 is just
whether or not NPRM 05-143 should be made into an R&O or not.
NPRM 05-143 is NOT some comprehensive all-inclusive Remake
of Part 97 as in the "Restructuring" of '98-'99. It is just
about morse code testing, whether it should stay or go...in
USA amateur radio regulations.

The NPRM does not state that comments must be about Morse Code testing
and nothing else.

Back in 1999 you posted reply comments recommending an age requirement
for all classes of amateur license, even though
that NPRM never mentioned anything about an age requirement.

Should your reply comments be called "indeterminate" because
of that?

Other than the non-specific "Indeterminate" opinions, there
are only three others: FOR the NPRM, AGAINST the removal of
code testing, and retention of code testing ONLY for the
Amateur Extra class. Perhaps that is just too difficult to
grasp?

Perhaps your explanation is incomplete?

What IS difficult to grasp - by the PCTA - is that the NCTA
are no longer a minority.

That has not been shown to be true.

In fact, many PCTA just cannot
believe that radio hobbyists cannot love, honor, and obey
the cherished Belief that morse code testing is "necessary."

Len has a proven track record of mistakes here, particularly in
the area of FCC regulations, so it's not unreasonable to ask
about how his numbers are compiled and how they are checked.

"Proven track record?!?" :-)

Yes. You've made serious mistakes in your statements about
Part 97. And you've refused to correct or even acknowledge them.

Is that what is called "politeness" and "civility?" In here
I guess so... :-)

It's called stating a fact.

The way to "check" my numbers is to GO AND READ ALL THE
COMMENTS-FILINGS ON WT DOCKET 05-235 AND DO YOUR OWN
TALLIES OF OPINIONS.

You're not the only one reading the comments, Len. And your
numbers don't agree with others' results.

Jimmie has NOT even made ONE filing on WT Docket 05-235.

If someone makes multiple filings on that docket, and they
are not identical, will you count them as one comment or more than
one?

Do "filings" include only comments, or are reply comments and
other materials included in the count?

Is your 'scorecard' only a count of comments, or are reply
comments included too?

Jimmie has NOT stated he has READ a single filing on 05-235.

Who is "Jimmie", Len? Can't be me, because I've read several of
the comments. Reply comments too. And the whole NPRM.

Jimmie has spent a LOT of time and effort trying his best
to obscure and misdirect the NPRM "scorecard" results by
all these "challenges" and FALSE statements about my previous
alleged "inaccuracies."

I've simply asked questions and stated facts. It's a fact that
you have a proven track record of mistakes here. Here's another:
you once stated you had *never* used a certain screen name to post
here, and then it was shown that you had. I think you called
yourself 'Averyfine'...

Hey, it's a neat trick to try and sway public opinion in this
computer-modem kind of communications. Done well enough,
constant repetition of FALSE charges will make some folks
believe that a person is "highly inaccurate." :-)

Is that your methodology here, Len? Perhaps you're counting on nobody
checking your work.

The NPRM proposes to eliminate *all* Morse Code
testing for an amateur license. Someone who supports
the NPRM must, by definition, support the removal
of *all* code testing, not just some of it. Otherwise
they are opposed to the NPRM.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Nothing in ANY NPRM is so sacrosanct as
to demand absolute obediance to the NOTICE of PROPOSED
RULE MAKING.

There's no A in "obedience", Len. Are you getting worked up over this?


Had Jimmie seen other NPRMs and the
resulting R&Os, he would understand that. Obviously,
he has NOT.

I don't know what "Jimmie" has read, but I've read plenty of
NPRMs and the resultinf R&Os.

The detail of whether they support the current level
of Morse Code testing, or whether they support a
reduction but not complete elimination, does not
change the fact that they are opposed to the NPRM as
it stands.

SPIN, SPIN, SPIN. :-)

Tsk, the purpose of a COMMENT period is to allow
CITIZENS to make their desires known to their
government on a PROPOSED ruling.

Not just CITZENS, Len - all interested parties. FCC has
not rejected the comments of noncitizens - why chould you?

In fact, one doesn't even have to be a human being to
comment. FCC accepts comments from corporate organizations
as well. They cited the comments of Kenwood back in the R&O
about the 2000 restructuring.

If Kenwood files comments, will you count them or reject them?

Those desires ARE
now PUBLIC. 2,641 filings' worth.

Do they include reply comments or just comments in your totals?

Miccolis has NOT
read ALL of them,

Are you sure?

hasn't even made his own filing.
I have read ALL of them...including the 19 more for
24 October 2005 (making 2,660 filings) which will be
posted on 25 October (plus any additional the FCC
wishes to add).

Does that mean no one can question your scorecard? Why?
Is it somehow sacred and not open to any questions or
comments?

Seems that way.

So...where is the "score card" by James Miccolis?

And...WHO will "check his work?" :-)

It's not about me, Len. It's about *your* 'scorecard'.

Who checks Miccolis' "work" on his bi-monthly "license
number" postings? [he won't say from where he cribs
his numbers]

Anyone can check my posted numbers very simply by doing the
math. I've stated the source of those numbers here.

If there's a math mistake I'll correct it. But I don't recall
anyone pointing out such a mistake.

The FCC will have no problem deciding that they have a
mandate to abolish Element 1 based on the comments.

Perhaps - but recall that FCC is not required to follow
the majority opinion. They did not follow majority
opinion in 1999 either...

Tsk. Morse lovers are seeing the handwriting on the
wall. Finally. Wow, news flash, morse code testing
is NOT favored by a majority! [sunnuvagun!]

How do you know it's not favored by a majority?

The ARRL represents a distinct MINORITY of all USA
amateur radio licensees. A mere 20%.

How is that number derived?

Yet, on any
other issue, What The ARRL Says is some kind of "truth"
about amateur radio...anyone against that will get all
sorts of nastygram grief from ARRL Believers!!!

More important to the discussion of 'scorecards' is the
accuracy of the count. At present, Len's 'scorecard' is
made up of about 2500 comments that pass some vaguely
defined tests of validity.

"Vaguely defined tests of validity?!?"

Yes.

2,645 filings for the period 15 July 2005 to 22 October 2005.

Miccolis is IN ERROR...it was NOT "2500." Tsk, tsk.

I wrote "about 2500" - which was accurate when it was written.

With such ERRORS, Miccolis is establishing a "PROVEN TRACK
RECORD OF MISTAKES!!!" :-)

Really?

"Vaguely defined?"

Yes.

The Notes in my "score card" postings
explain it, well past "vague" judgements by PCTA Miccolis.

If someone posts multiple comments that are not identical,
are they counted as one comment or more than one?

If a group or club posts a comment with multiple signatures,
does that count as one comment or more than one?

How is it decided what constitutes a "valid address"?

Are reply comments included or just comments?

With a base of 2500 comments, a single comment
represents .04% of the
total, and 25 comments represent 1% of the total.
With the totals being
so close, it would not take a lot of mistakes to
change the apparent majority.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...PCTA Miccolis has NOT CHECKED THE WORK!

How could anyone check your work, Len? You haven't shown it.

Showing the apparent results to four significant figures may
give the illusion of accuracy to some, but in fact there's a
pretty big range of interpretation to those numbers.

Only in the "Indeterminates." Many of THOSE are so vaguely
comprehensible that it would take an extreme favoritsm to
one side or the other to put them in an "un-ambiguous"
category. READ THEM AND SEE.

"Illusion of accuracy?" :-) With over a thousand filings
judged into four categories, four-place accuracy was thought

Thought by whom?

needed to trends, changes, closeness-of-differing-opinions
and so forth. That is insufficient for the highly
judgemental
(and rather disturbed by revelations) James Miccolis. He
wants "the work checked" by another PCTA...possibly to show
the "true light of the efficacy and necessity of morse code
testing?"

Are you afraid of having your work checked, Len?

PCTA James Miccolis has NOT made any filing whatsoever as of
midnight, 22 October 2005.

So?

If I make 10 nonidentical comments, will they count as 1 comment or
more than 1?

He has NO indication of READING
ANY of the 2,641 filings (except the first one, maybe) on
WT Docket 05-235. Then he "challenges" me to "show the work"
as if he is some kind of "authority" on what should be posted
in here!

Does that mean no one can question your scorecard? Why?
Is it somehow sacred and not open to any questions or
comments?

Seems that way.

Magnificent performance! [of petulant spite]

By you....;-)

For example, if one person submits multiple comments that are omewhat
different from each other (but all from the same
person), are they all counted, or just one?

That has been EXPLAINED.

No, it hasn't.

Duplicates are put into the Indeterminate
category. There are TWO flagrant violators of that, one
for, one
against the NPRM. Can Miccolis NAME those two? I can.

How can we be sure you caught every single person that filed more than
one comment?

But, I've READ all 2,641 filings made up to midnight, 22
October 2005.

Really? That's nice.

If one person submits comments and reply comments
(but all from the
same person), are they all counted, or just one?

More necro-equine flagellation. :-)

Leads me to believe you're counting reply comments too.
And not checking for dupes.

If a club or organization comments, does that count
as one comment or
multiple comments?

Sigh...:-) So far, ONE club has filed (but not
given any list of
members).

Only one?
Editor Moseson of CQ has filed...does PCTA Miccolis
demand that ALL SUBSCRIBERS TO CQ be counted also? :-)

Only if ALL SUBSCRIBERS to QST are also counted...

If a single comment has multiple signatures, does it count as one
comment or does the number of signatures come into play?

Which filing by whom and on what date has "multiple
signatures?"

You tell me.

Does Miccolis get multiple ligatures squirming around, trying
to find a fresh spot on the dead horse?

So far, Miccolis has NOT CHECKED MY WORK,

Nobody can. You haven't shown it.

probably has NOT READ
ALL of the 2,641 filings to midnight, 22 October, 2005.

"probably"? Aren't you sure? Previously you were sure, now
you're not.

He has
NOT made his OWN filing by that date.

Is a comment a requirement? The deadline isn't till next week.

You can see that depending on how the above questions are
answered, and rules are applied, the results can be far
different.

What "rules" were "necessary" to be followed, Miccolis?

Were they "published" prior to 15 July 2005?

Did you "define what should be done" by the end of August,
2005?
[no, you did NOT]

Did you "define what should be done" by the end of September,
2005? [no, you did NOT]

Does that mean no one can question your scorecard? Why?
Is it somehow sacred and not open to any questions or
comments?

Tsk, Miccolis must have become suddenly aware that there is NO
majority favoring the retention of the morse code test in
the United States' regulations for civil radio, Title 47
C.F.R.,
Part 97! [sunnuvagun!]

I'm just asking some questions, Len.

Miccolis is seeing the "end of ham radio" (as HE knows it) when
things are progressing ever onwards towards elimination the morse
code test! Poor thing...he stays up late on Sunday night, even
into Monday morning to vent his Grief and Upset at that!

I'm just asking some questions, Len. You seem to be very
upset over them.

So we are all just waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Probably.

"Probably?" :-) It's UNAVOIDABLE. It WILL come about.

Crystal ball?

The only question is when.

The official end of Comments on WT Docket 05-235 is 31
October,
2005, a week from now. The official end of Replies to
Comments
is 14 November 2005.

On WT Docket 98-143 the official end of the last extension of
Comments was 15 January 1999. The final R&O
on "Restructuring"
wasn't released until the last week in December, 1999.
That is
roughly 10 months of decision-making...but on a LOT
more issues
than just morse code testing.

So?

James Miccolis wasn't IN the FCC in 1998, 1999, and he isn't
IN the FCC in 2005.

Neither are you, Len - ever.

However, he KNOWS things and anyone who
doesn't agree with this innate knowledge "makes mistakes!"

I'm just asking some questions, Len. You seem to be very
upset over them.

FCC may simply be responding to the fact that if they
don't drop Element 1, the petitions and proposals will
continue,
making more work for them, but no more resources.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. If the decisions don't go YOUR way, then you
can renounce the FCC as some sort of meaningless beaurocracy
that doesn't serve the "public need," right? You ARE U.S.
amateur radio, aren't you? [you sure sound like it]

I'm just asking some questions, Len. You seem to be very
upset over them.

The FCC will take its time, make its decisions, the issue an
R&O. They will do so WITHOUT having James Miccolis "check
their work!" However, any decision arrived at WILL be fully
explained in THEIR Report and Order and appropriate
Commentors
noted in references. So far, as of midnight, 22 October 2005
the FCC CANNOT cite any James Miccolis as a referencible
Commentor...he has NOT even submitted any Comments on 05-235
as of that date!

So?

Jimmie, you can make all the FALSE and
misdirected "questions"
you wish about me. All I do is READ ALL the Comments and
Replies to Comments on 05-235. The OPINIONS on what the FCC
should do in its final R&O come from United States citizens.

Not just citizens.

The FCC is bound by law and reputation to "serve the public
interest." They seem to do a good job of that, despite what
the losers on past decisions snarl about.

You're the one 'snarling'. Len.

I'm just asking some questions. You seem to be very
upset over them.

Okay, you can try more misdirection and multiple postings
and you are going to get the same replies from me.

IOW, nothing of any substance.

That
doesn't affect the final R&O one iota. You've had all
your amateur life to crow about the efficacy of morse code
as a "necessary" part of licensing...and now you are seeing
that all of that will soon be gone.

The test may be gone, but Morse Code use by hams will go on.
For a long time.

You won't be able to
crow much in the future...but you may have to EAT some...

I'm just asking some questions, Len. You seem to be very
upset over them.

Besides - what does all this matter to you? You're not going to
get a license anyway, test or no test.