Bill Sohl wrote:
"an old friend" wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Nov 26, 4:11 pm
(SNIP)
Having seen some of the handwritten "comments" sent in on
the 2,272 filings in WT Docket 98-143 and ALL of the 3,795
filings in WT Docket 05-235, some are a hilarious barrel
of laffs! :-)
[ chuckle, chuckle ]
So you really don't know what you're talking about when
you talk about FCC "chuckling" over some comments.
he can make the same assumetion you can
By the way, Docket 98-143 had 303 ADDITIONAL filings after the
twice-revised final end date of 15 Jan 05, the latest being
made on 5 August 2005! :-)
Why does that matter?
becuase it isn't suposed to happen at least if it does they are all
suposed to have been mailed before the deadline
why does it seem you don't care about the
rule of of law when it suits you
There's no violation of law if someone sends in a late comment.
Missing the deadline simply means FCC isn't required to consider
the comment.
Analogy: When a government agency puts out a project proposal
and requests bids, there's always a deadline. Submitting a bid
after the deadline isn't a violation of any law, but the bid will
rarely
if ever be considered. (An exception might be made if there were
no bids or no responsive bids before the deadline).
Ham Radio analogy: Contests usually have deadlines for log
submissions. Sending in a late submission doesn't break the
contest rules, but a late log submission probably won't make
the writeup or qualify for any awards.
(SNIP)
FCC received over 6000 comments on the "incentive licensing" proposals,
Len. Without the internet. That's a fact.
indeed shwoing what a disaster the idea was
Not at all. The comments were split about even, for and against.
how the ARRL tired to kill the ars
Shows how little you know of the subject.
The original 1963 ARRL proposal to FCC was simple: Return to the
pre-1953
rule that required a ham to have an Advanced or Extra to work 'phone on
the
ham bands between 2 and 25 MHz. Reopen the Advanced to new issues. No
other changes.
Existing Advanceds and Extras would have lost nothing. Existing
Generals and
Conditionals needed only to pass a written test to get the Advanced and
they'd
have full privileges again. Simple and effective.
That proposal generated other proposals - at least 10 of them got RM
numbers.
The complexity of incentive licensing comes from those other proposals.
THE only reason comment volume ( 6000 ) on incentive
licensing was so high is because every General and every
Advanced was going to LOSE privileges.
That's not exactly the case, Bill, as seen above, but it's of
little consequence to your point. Regardless of which version
or proposal we look at, large numbers of hams stood to either
lose privileges or have the upgrade requirements for them raised.
Human nature
is such that when threatened with a lose, people speak up...
but if the changes don't truly alter their current status then
most don't care and say nothing.
Agreed - particularly when so many considered their license
privileges to be theirs for life.
But that was all beside my point.
What I was and am pointing out is that even back in 1964,
when there was no internet, no email, no ECFS and the
US ham population was less than 40% of what it is now,
FCC received 6000+ comments on a major ham radio
rules change proposal. Alternative proposals, too - without
word processors, websites, newsgroups or online organizations.
IOW, Len's contention that the internet has somehow changed
the ability of amateurs to contact FCC is not true. All ECFS
has really done is make it faster and more convenient. But
even in the bad old days thousands of hams were commenting
directly to FCC.
(SNIP)
Based on my "first job in radio" I already knew that morse
code was a dead end in radio in 1964, 41 years ago.
Well, you were wrong, Len.
Because Morse Code is still alive and
well in radio today.
For the price of a little study and a few tests, Len could have gotten
his ham license 41 years ago. But he wasn't willing to expend the
time or effort, and so he's missed out on 41 years of fun in amateur
radio. No wonder he's so bitter....
It has a following in amateur radio, but that's
like saying that archery is not dead as a weapon
of choice because a group of people like and do it.
Yep - the archery analogy is a good one. Archery isn't
"dying" or a "dead end" just because guns exist. In fact,
IIRC, here in PA the use of archery for deer hunting is
on the rise.
Why bother pursuing a dying technique back then?
Morse Code wasn't "dying" back then and it isn't "dying" now - in
amateur radio, anyway.
not what I hear
Gee, Mark, do you ever actually listen to the HF amateur bands?
Particularly the parts where amateurs commonly use Morse Code?
Maybe not dying, but taking a smaller role as each year moves
forward.
As there are more modes added, all of the existing ones are
used a little less on a percentage basis.
Back in 1964, a ham on HF had the following mode choices:
Morse Code/CW
SSB voice
AM voice
NFM voice (very rare)
60 wpm Baudot-encoded RTTY (no other variety allowed)
Fax (very rare)
SSTV (very rare)
And that was about it.
All those still exist today, plus a long list of newer modes
like PSK31, PACTOR, etc.
Are there absolute proofs that is so? No, but reality
on the ham bands seems to me to indicate so. Your mileage
may vary :-)
which is a very different thing from a "dying technique".
73 de Jim, N2EY