| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote in message ups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: "K4YZ" wrote in message oups.com... If the FCC were mandated to accept the simple majority of comments, either way you look at it, Morse Code testing (in the United Staes) in one form or another would be staying for some time to come. Steve, K4YZ IF the FCC were so mandated, but we all know they are not bound by any "voting" analogy. Exactly! FCC need only consider the comments, not act on them. What also is obvious to those that have been around long enough is that the current "score" is a dramatic shift from opinions within the amateur community as compared to prior efforts to "score" support (98-143) or back when the first efforts to bring a nocode license began. I disagree, Bill. Or rather, I'd say it's not that clear. Back in 1998, NCI supported the concept of "5 wpm now, complete elimination when the treaty changes". That position got about 45% support (check Carl's post of around that time when he reported KC8EPO's tally of comments). Now the NPRM proposes "complete elimination now that the treaty has changed" but the support is still about 45% of commenters. So the support for total code test elimination isn't much different than it was 7 years ago. The trend is and has been towards ending code. Nothing has changed to alter that general opinion. Playing your number realignment, you must admit then that 68% of commentors DO support ending code for General. Yep. Exactly as proposed by ARRL. THAT is dramatic in comparison to past opinion analysis. We don't really know that, do we? There was never a serious proposal before that suggested "code test for Extra only" that I know of. Fair enough. Consider too that IF the FCC retained any level of code testing for Extra then the FCC would/will have to reintroduce waivers as the international treaty no longer provides absolute minimal code requirements for any level. Why would FCC "have to" do waivers? IIRC there's no mention of waivers in the NPRM. The treaty's been changed for almost 2-1/2 years but no waivers. IF the code test isn't dropped totally, the president for waivers in the absence of any treaty requirement will rule. Inactivity in response to the treatty change by the FCC can certainly be chalked up to digestion of the host of petitions filed after WRC and the ultimate issuance of NPRM 98-235 which is now pending. IF (let's be hypothetical) the FCC did retain code for Extra, then the American Disabilities Act (ADA) will surely be raised by someone who need only point to the use of waivers previously and no court in this country would rule against such a clain. That's a path that FCC just won't go down. Probably not. PLEASE explain on what legal or rational basis the FCC could argue to avoid a waiver policy if code was only retained for Extra. One simple solution is the "Canadian compromise": Keep code testing but change how it is scored. One method is to change the requirement for Element 3 (General written) to the following: Element 3 can be passed by getting an ~85% grade on the 35 written questions *or* a ~75% grade and a passing mark on the code test. That way there's no "lowering of standards" yet the Morse Code test is not a mandatory pass-fail standalone test any more. I personally don't believe the Canadian compromise would pass ADA requirements. Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Docket Scorecard | Policy | |||
| Docket 05-235 Scorecard | Policy | |||
| Stonewalling on WT Docket 05-235? | Policy | |||
| Stonewalling WT Docket 05-235? | Policy | |||
| Status of WT Docket 05-235 | Policy | |||