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


As of 26 Oct 05, WT Docket 05-235 Comments on Test Element 1
Elimination/Retention tabulation:


ALL to Date Since FR Notice
-------------- ---------------
Grand Total 3096 1120


Indeterminate (note 1) 194 83


Value for Percentages 2902 1037


Against NPRM (note 2) 910 [31.36%] 355 [34.23%]
For NPRM (note 3) 1510 [52.03%] 474 [45.71%]
Test Extra Only (note 4) 482 [16.61%] 208 [20.06%]


Tabulation in agreement with FCC ECFS as of 11 AM EDT 27 Oct 05.


Notes:

the figure of 600-700 thousand UShams is bandied about

the number of coments file is roughly one half of one percent of all
Hams (assuing that only Hams have filed comments)

a figure of 100 or so thousand is thrown around for the ARRL (i'll
100k to make my math easier

if one assumed all the coments were filed by arrl members (clearly
false but but assume it for sec) less than one in 10 ARRL members has
seen fit to coment (roughly 3 %)

if one asumes instead that the proportions of ARRL vs non memebers is
rough of that ham population as a whole then of course only a very
smal proportion of the arrl memebership cared enoughto even coment and
they should know it is going on

instad let us assume that all Procode commenet are ARRL members then
1.5% of the arrl is procode enough to even bother filing coments

I am truely glad this is no vote
the turn out would be seen as pathetic
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

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


As of 26 Oct 05, WT Docket 05-235 Comments on Test Element 1
Elimination/Retention tabulation:


ALL to Date Since FR Notice
-------------- ---------------
Grand Total 3096 1120


Indeterminate (note 1) 194 83


Value for Percentages 2902 1037


Against NPRM (note 2) 910 [31.36%] 355 [34.23%]
For NPRM (note 3) 1510 [52.03%] 474 [45.71%]
Test Extra Only (note 4) 482 [16.61%] 208 [20.06%]


Tabulation in agreement with FCC ECFS as of 11 AM EDT 27 Oct 05.


Notes:

the figure of 600-700 thousand UShams is bandied about

the number of coments file is roughly one half of one percent of all
Hams (assuing that only Hams have filed comments)

"comments" "assuming"

a figure of 100 or so thousand is thrown around for the ARRL (i'll
100k to make my math easier

Actually it's over half-again that number, but why let 75,000 slow
you down?

if one assumed all the coments were filed by arrl members (clearly
false but but assume it for sec) less than one in 10 ARRL members has
seen fit to coment (roughly 3 %)

"comments"

I'll bet the percentage of ARRL-members as respondents was far
greater than the non-members as respondents.

if one asumes instead that the proportions of ARRL vs non memebers is
rough of that ham population as a whole then of course only a very
smal proportion of the arrl memebership cared enoughto even coment and
they should know it is going on

"assumes" "small" "ARRL" "membership" "comment"

OK...So WHY "should" they know?

Yes, they get QST. Are they OBLIGATED to read all the "releases"?
Is there some part of ARRL membership I missed that says "If you join
ARRL you MUST respond to all NPRM's?"

What about the percentage of "Worldradio" readers? "CQ" magazine?
The same information and the same references to the NPRM and EFCS were
in those publications and were more-widely distributed. Why not base
your numbers on "Amateurs Who Care Enough To Read ANY Amateur Related
Journal"...???

instad let us assume that all Procode commenet are ARRL members then
1.5% of the arrl is procode enough to even bother filing coments

"instead" "comments" "ARRL"

What were you trying to say, Mark?

I am truely glad this is no vote
the turn out would be seen as pathetic

"truly"

OK...So how is this different from most general
elections...HOW...???

A great many elections are determined with less than 50% of the
electorate showing up. Many policies on taxation, zoning, law
enforcement, fire suppression, etc, are enacted in our communities
based upon 26% or less of the electorate's say-so.

(Don't choke...) I agree with you that it's pathetic that we
can't "get out the vote" more effectively on such a hotly contested
issue.

What bothers me even more is that we've been trying to get a
spectrum protection act (in one form or another) passed for the last
TWELVE years, and it continually dies in committee or lack of
representitive support.

That's an issue that hits ALL of us, regardless of class of
license...But we STILL can't get folks to write a "Dear Senator"
letter, even if it's just enough to say "Please support this bill".
But everyone will wail and whine when it's gone, crying "WHY DIDN'T
SOMEONE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS...?!?!?"

Steve, K4YZ

On 28 Oct 2005 02:28:32 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote:


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


As of 26 Oct 05, WT Docket 05-235 Comments on Test Element 1
Elimination/Retention tabulation:


ALL to Date Since FR Notice
-------------- ---------------
Grand Total 3096 1120


Indeterminate (note 1) 194 83


Value for Percentages 2902 1037


Against NPRM (note 2) 910 [31.36%] 355 [34.23%]
For NPRM (note 3) 1510 [52.03%] 474 [45.71%]
Test Extra Only (note 4) 482 [16.61%] 208 [20.06%]


Tabulation in agreement with FCC ECFS as of 11 AM EDT 27 Oct 05.


Notes:

the figure of 600-700 thousand UShams is bandied about

the number of coments file is roughly one half of one percent of all
Hams (assuing that only Hams have filed comments)
cut spelling cop
a figure of 100 or so thousand is thrown around for the ARRL (i'll
100k to make my math easier

Actually it's over half-again that number, but why let 75,000 slow
you down?

i used the figures thrwon around but the larger the mmebership of the
ARRL the worse the numbesr look

if one assumed all the coments were filed by arrl members (clearly
false but but assume it for sec) less than one in 10 ARRL members has
seen fit to coment (roughly 3 %)

cut spelling cop

I'll bet the percentage of ARRL-members as respondents was far
greater than the non-members as respondents.

very like just establishing parameters

if one asumes instead that the proportions of ARRL vs non memebers is
rough of that ham population as a whole then of course only a very
smal proportion of the arrl memebership cared enoughto even coment and
they should know it is going on

cut spelling cop

OK...So WHY "should" they know?

civic duty something BTW most ProCoders claim makes them better than
NoCoders

Yes, they get QST. Are they OBLIGATED to read all the "releases"?
Is there some part of ARRL membership I missed that says "If you join
ARRL you MUST respond to all NPRM's?"

What about the percentage of "Worldradio" readers? "CQ" magazine?
The same information and the same references to the NPRM and EFCS were
in those publications and were more-widely distributed. Why not base
your numbers on "Amateurs Who Care Enough To Read ANY Amateur Related
Journal"...???

instad let us assume that all Procode commenet are ARRL members then
1.5% of the arrl is procode enough to even bother filing coments

"instead" "comments" "ARRL"

What were you trying to say, Mark?

I am truely glad this is no vote
the turn out would be seen as pathetic

"truly"

OK...So how is this different from most general
elections...HOW...???

I have never seen an election with less than 20% turn out

never as low as .5%




A great many elections are determined with less than 50% of the
electorate showing up. Many policies on taxation, zoning, law
enforcement, fire suppression, etc, are enacted in our communities
based upon 26% or less of the electorate's say-so.

i have never seen less than 20% perhaps you have if so PLEASE do me
the favor of not telling me Id like to think well of the US

(Don't choke...) I agree with you that it's pathetic that we
can't "get out the vote" more effectively on such a hotly contested
issue.

What bothers me even more is that we've been trying to get a
spectrum protection act (in one form or another) passed for the last
TWELVE years, and it continually dies in committee or lack of
representitive support.

one reason might well be they are all based on pretty rigid standards
that I am not sure I support I do reconize that we the ARS likely will
and looking from the standard of General interest should lose some to
other uses

That's an issue that hits ALL of us, regardless of class of
license...But we STILL can't get folks to write a "Dear Senator"
letter, even if it's just enough to say "Please support this bill".
But everyone will wail and whine when it's gone, crying "WHY DIDN'T
SOMEONE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS...?!?!?"

a civil post I honetsly did not think you had it in you, I adkowledge
the "disappointment"

Steve, K4YZ

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