RadioBanter - View Single Post - ARRL to propose subband-by-bandwidth regulation

August 30th 04, 09:09 PM

In article , PAMNO
(Quitfine) writes:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

Things are changing with more and more citizens able to lobby the
FCC without having to join special interest groups. Changes are
coming....

You've lobbied. I don't see any changes in your status vis a vis amateur
radio.

Don't hold yer breath, Dave!

Oh, I won't. I don't expect Leonard (despite often writing of "getting
into" amateur radio) to actually obtain a license during his present
incarnation.

The license is the least of it. Setting up a station and actually operating
it,
without government or corporate backing is the bigger challenge these days.

Lots of "challenge" walking into an HRO, presenting a plastic
card, taking home everything ready-built, following hook-up
instructions... :-)

About as "challenging" as setting up a CB base station.

About as "challenging" as setting up a new personal computer.

About as "challenging" as installing a home music system
stereo receiver.

Ho hum.

You're still not a participant after decades of self-declared
interest. You're still not involved despite a boast of getting an
"Extra right out of the box" years back.

January 19, 2000, to be exact. Right in this-here newsgroup. Of course he
was "Lenof21" then.

I remember that one and Cutey Boy's memorable statement. They are,
you'll have to admit, quite similar in outcome.

You mean neither has yet made good on what they said they'd do.

Ah, so one "takes vows" in newsgroups?!? :-)

Tsk. Allow a response used frequently by nursie:

"BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Some changes must come very slowly.

Fun facts:

- Despite his claims of being online since dirt was new, Len could not get
ECFS
to work for him back in early 1999. Couldn't keep up with the times, I
suspect.
Most of us poor old backward hams got ECFS to work for us, though. He
wound up
submitting his 98-143 comments by US mail, on disk and paper. He's been a
busy
wordsmith since then, though, deluging the FCC with commentary. Most of it
is obvious cut-and-paste. Poor Bill Cross.

It'd be interesting to see if our resident r.r.a.p. g.o.m. (grumpy old
man) is the most prolific of commenters.

In sheer volume, he's probably pretty close to the top for an induhvidual
commenter.

But James P. Miccolis, with or without the "Quitefine" anonymouse
pseudonum is up to the task of DOING MORE! He is Extra. He is
PCTA! Hear him roar! :-)

Poor Bill Cross.

FCC salaries are low?

- FCC got about 2500 comments on 98-143, the last big restructuring. Back
in
the mid-1960s, FCC got over 6000 comments on "incentive licensing", most
of
them from individuals, even though there was no ECFS back then and all
commentary was plain old words-on-paper.

Did Leonard comment on incentive licensing?

I don't know. His recall of that regulatory proceeding is quite innaccurate.

Tsk. Quitefine not know! Terrible. Quitefine, er, Jimmie know
EVERYTHING! He never "innaccurate!" :-)

His declared interest in
amateur radio would have taken him back to that era.

I "have an interest" in learning Japanese. I know about a half-dozen words in
that language.

Jimmie want jo-san? :-)

- ARRL lobbied to increase the code test speed from 10 to 12.5 wpm in
1936.
That was the last time ARRL lobbied for an increase in code test speeds.
Indeed, the 1963 ARRL incentive licensing proposal called for no increase
in
code test speeds (full privileges would have been allowed to Advanceds
under
that plan) and ARRL *opposed* the FCC idea of a new 16 wpm test for
"Amateur First Class" which FCC wanted in 1965.

So the mythical "Church of St. Hiram" isn't at all as Len has attempted
to portray it?

If you mean the ARRL, its policy and operations are quite different than what
Len portrays.

The League is your shepherd, you shall not want...

- No class of US amateur radio license has required more than 5 wpm code
test
since 2000. No class of US amateur radio license has required more than 5
wpm
code test since 1990 (with an easily-obtained medical waiver, and a long
list of possible accomodations).

Yet Len's sole involvement is the harangue of an outsider. Kibitzer.
Sidewalk superintendent.

I've pointed that out to him on numerous occasions. Len could have
easily passed a no code exam. I feel sure that, despite the enormous
obstacle of a 5 wpm code test, he could have met the qualifications of
at least one of the HF license classes. He hasn't. If his intention is
to wait until there is no code test for an HF amateur radio license,
fine. He's really showing us.

Tsk. More imaginative rambling. :-)

My "case" in here was simply to argue against a morse code test.

Since so many PCTA extras inhabited this din of inequity, that was
all but impossible in the torrent of personal abuse rendered against
all NCTA.

The PCTA extras could never, ever make their case for maintenance
of the morse code test...but they cannot ever lose any argument so
the personal abuse levelled against NCTA continues...and continues.