From: on Dec 13, 7:32 pm

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

I'm not convinced that a "starting path" is necessary.

Considering that Len hasn't even started, that's hardly a surprise...

Duhhhh...like I've never, ever operated a radio transmitter?!? :-)




37 years ago. I lost privileges. You and Len did not.

The entire USA amateur service lost in a big way,

How? Extras did not lose any privileges back then. Others could
get back the "lost" privileges by taking a test or two.

Nobody lost any bands, power or modes except Novices, who
lost 2 meter 'phone.

Was it necessary to punish amateurs?

Jimmie has a persecution complex?


but you find a way to personalize it.

The rules changes of 1968 and 1969 affected me at the time.

They affected everyone after you as well.

Nobody counts but Jimmie.


They did not affect you and they did not affect Len.

You're simply wrong on that one, Quitefine.

Lots of us radio pros without amateur licenses just didn't bother
to get an amateur license...not necessarily as a result of
"changes of 1968 or 1969." What the heck, I'd already started
15 and 14 years before in HF comms where the operating
environment was a HELLUVA LOT TOUGHER on all concerned than any
amateur activity.


Now, one license class with the equivalent of the General Class exam is
"lowering the requirements."

Yes, it would be.

Does the Advanced and Extra licenses convey the modes and power privs
that the General license conveyed?

What do you think?

I think you know what I think.

Jimmie thinks he KNOWS what everyone thinks? :-)


Why does one have to "upgrade" through license
classes?

One doesn't. Anyone can "go for the Extra right out of the box".
You haven't.

One doesn't have to upgrade at all. At one time the General conveyed
all amateur priveleges, and few amateurs tested higher.

Which is one reason the rules were changed in 1968 and 1969.

Which is another reason that those license classes were arbitrary and
redundant at the time. They remain so today.

Not "arbitrary and redundant" for Jimmie. He made it. He loves it.

Problem is, Jimmie doesn't think that others can think differently
so he doesn't think about the thousands of newcomers who MIGHT want
to get into amateur radio.


And FCC was convinced that wasn't a good thing. FCC is still convinced
of the need for at least 3 license classes.

Yeh, yeh, yeh. Using the same logic, if the FCC were conviced that a
Morse Code exam were still a good idea, they would have a specification
for Morse Code in the regulations.

Nope.

Yep.

Yes.


FCC specifically mentions the need for a 3 level license system in the
NPRM.

The FCC specifically excludes any definition or specification for Morse
Code.

NPRM 05-143 is SOLELY regarding the elimination of the code test
from the Commission's regulations for licensing in U.S. amateur
radio.

NPRM 05-143 DOES NOT CONCERN ITSELF with ANY NEW PROPOSALS for
license classes, rank, status, title, privilege, prestige, or
honor and glory in the amateur service.


Just because no one at the FCC is paying attention doesn't mean that
the present rules are worthwhile.

"No one at the FCC is paying attention"?

Just because they disagree with you?

It was just a guess. Why else would they allow such arbitrary and
redundant rules, exams, and license classes to exist?

POLITICS. The present system of U.S. amateur radio regulations, at
least up to the year 2000, was lobbied for by the ARRL. The
Reading Room at the FCC is full of documents attesting to that.

But, Jimmie is a PARTY MAN. The league can do no wrong.


You might want to read the current NPRM. Pay particular attention to
footnote 142...

Asleep at the wheel.

FCC's not asleep.

Coma?

No to all the above. FCC just doesn't think that amateur radio
deserves their maximum-mission attention in their Congress-law-
mandated task of regulating ALL United States civil radio.

When the Commission does get around to regulating amateur radio,
it does so in Memorandum Reports and Orders which are extremely
detailed and explicit (and sometimes lengthy) to their task of
regulating all U.S. civil radio.

A problem with folks like Jimmie is that they are way too focussed
on their own agendas and their own personal desires to look at it
from the perspective of an agency governing for ALL the people,
not some smaller special-interest groups favoring morse code.

Jimmie sees only what he WANTS to see. Such as "footnotes" which
he once thought were "wrong-format" things in other arguments.



That's true, as far as it goes. But it's also true that, presently, every
mode and every power limit privilege is permitted to Technician,
Technician Plus, General, Advanced, and Extra licensees.

I understand the reason for the split in privs between the Tech/Tech+
and the G/A/E licensees. The reason for that barrier no longer exists,
but the exam and licensing schema has not kept pace. Time to perform a
top-down review, starting with basis and purpose.

The time may not be ripe just yet, Brian. Let's wait until the
FCC decides what to do about NPRM 05-143 and issue a Memorandum
Report and Order on it.

There's been two whole years of 18 Petitions commented on at length
since the end of WRC-03 and now NPRM 05-143 which can settle the
morse code testing for a license issue.


So by *your* logic (not mine), the General, Advanced
and Extra exams are arbitrary and redundant.

The Technician exam is weak on HF issues. What do you think?

The VEC QPC is responsible for generating written exam
questions and answers. VEC QPC is NOT an FCC department.



And wouldn't it also be true that the knowledge and skill required to operate
1,500 watts of CW on 14.026 MHz is EXACTLY the same knowledge and skill
required to operate 1,500 watts on 13.976 MHz?

Different service, but you're getting the point. Bravo!

Jimmie is just doing his "message-points wordplay" thing. It is
(or should be) absolutely NO difference in OPERATING any radio
transmitter physically. The only difference is in the human
regulations in regard to technical requirements.



Why can't Technicians operate on 14.026? Why can't hams operate on
13.976?

And there you go with the ultimatums and strawmen.

Jimmie with newsgroup wordplay again. About this point, Hans will
jump in saying you are "simply mistaken" and babbling about how
the "IARU and ITU" are different or other semi-sweet non-sequitur.


And while we're on the subject....

Why are hams only allowed 1500 watts output? Why not 3000, or
5000, or 10,000?

Go to Italy. They may have waivers.

The next World Radiocommunication Conference is in 2007. I don't
know if the location is fixed yet (WRC-03 changed location from
it's originally planned place). There's an FCC 8th Meeting on
WRC-07 changed to 25 Jan 2006...see the Federal Register of
today on details and contact person.

If Jimmie wants to really go high-power, it's his electric bill.
And his real estate broker's bill and re-locating his station.



Actually that's not true.
The 1998 ARRL proposal would have eliminated the 13 and 20 wpm code tests
and replaced them with a 12 wpm code test. IIRC, General code test would have
gone to 5 wpm in their proposal.

And moments prior to that proposal, the ARRL had NO proposal. But they
saw Carl and the NCI walking up the steps to the FCC office...

Actually, it was Carl Stevenson and Bill Sohl making an ex-partite
(?) presentation before the FCC. :-)

Regardless, "the 1998 ARRL proposal" is OLD HISTORY. It doesn't
apply to anything NOW. The current NPRM is 05-143 and concerning
the elimination of the code test for license testing. The ONLY
ARRL "proposal" is their Petition RM-10867 which was "granted in
part" as mentioned in NPRM 05-143.

But...Jimmie is a Believer in the league and thinks the league can
do no wrong.



I think you want the licensing standards lowered even more than
they have been already.

I want the necessary amount of regulation required, without arbitrary,
redundant, or superfluous license exams, license classes, and
privileges.

Sounds reasonable to me for what is essentially a HOBBY activity.


BTW, many of the exams are 49 or 48 or 47 questions because of the bad
questions presently in the QP.

That should be fixed.

We are self-regulating, after all.

Absolutely...by law in fact. The generation of ALL license test
questions and answers is performed by the VEC. Says so in
Part 97.


The General License used to convey ALL AMATEUR PRIVELEGES.

That ended 37 years ago. Why do you live in the past?

You're funny, Jim.

Jimmie lives in the past. Period. He has been bringing up
1998 "proposals" when he should be bringing up 2004 Petitions
on the current NPRM 05-143.

By WRC-07 Jimmie might STILL be babbling about "the ARRL
1998 proposal!" :-)


I'm simply pointing out where your line of reasoning leads.

You saw where it leads. It leads to the elimination of arbitrary,
redundant, and superfluous licensing exams, classes, and privileges.

Jimmie doesn't WANT to see where anything leads. shrug




Apparently my knowledge and skills intimidate you, so that you
have to attack me personally rather than argue facts and opinions.

Apparently they do not. The mode chosen to provide the example of
arbitrary privs was done for your ease of understanding, not mine. And
you quickly grasped the concept and took it to its logical extension,
which would mean a freefall of your prestige and stature in the amateur
community. That scared you.

Holy Judas H. Cottonpicker, but lil Jimmie done made hisself
more pompously arrogant (and egotistical) than anyone else!

The elimination of the code test for any U.S. amateur radio
license WILL REDUCE BRAGGING RIGHTS OF MORSEMANSHIP BY THE
PCTA MORSEMEN. Logical extension.

NO PRIVILEGES ARE REMOVED by the adoption of NPRM 05-143 as an
R&O intact.

ALL that is left is the bragging rights to those who ONCE
passed a high-rate code test for their license.


No one proclaimed you king either.

Remember, I am not the one seeking power and prestige through amateur
radio. I've been a proponent of the one license (classless) service
for a long, long time.

Ah, but Jimmie NEEDS the nobility of title and status and
prestige.


Is someone who expresses an opinion here somehow claiming a
royal role?

Only those who still believe in a feudalistic system of
rank-status-title-privilege in what is essentially a HOBBY.

If I want better peerage, I go to my opthalmologist for an
eyeglass exam...so that I can "peer" at things better. :-)


I'm glad that you easily grasp the concept that these are, after all,
only our opinions. Not "Statements of Fact," nor "Assertions of Fact."
Expressing an opinion does not make one a liar.

...unless you are in a "discussion" with Dudly the Imposter.

However, you need to realize that I advocate a review of ALL government
that presently exists, not just amateur radio. The review should start
with, "What is the purpose of government?" Refer to the U.S.
Constitution and the Bill of Rights often.

I'm with you on that, Brian.

Unfortunately, some in here wish to abrogate those Rights in
favor of what They want... :-(



You could probably drop the rhetoric about code tests.

WHAT?!? Jimmie drop rhetoric about code testing?!? NO WAY! :-)


- All existing Generals, Advanceds, and Extras get full
privileges. Some Technicians and Technician Pluses
who passed the Tech written when it was same as
General get full privileges too.

Two questions:

What happens to existing Novices and Technicians who
haven't passed the General written?


What happens to them now???

I'm asking what your one-class-of-license plan would do
for them. It's your plan, not mine.

Why? The FCC is presently dealing with it fairly.

Jimmie trying to paint you in a corner there. His brush is dry.


FCC has repeatedly refused free (no-test) upgrades.

So?

So you have to convince FCC to reverse that policy if you
want your plan put into effect.

Why? Why must I do what you say???

You are acting very king-like.

I know...some extras get like that...




Then please don't expect FCC to give free upgrades.

Did't state that, didn't suggest that. Why do you keep putting your
scarecrow out there?

His scarecrow must be there. His corn is green.


Don't expect FCC
to implement less than 3 classes of licenses. And don't expect
FCC to lower the testing standards any more than is already proposed.

What is proposed is the elimination of the code exam. You're welcome
to confine your discussions on rrap to that.

Jimmie was trying to read the secret writing between the lines.


IOW, you expect the FCC to agree with you on everything without
you having to convince them.

You expect the FCC to agree with me even if I should put forth a
convincing proposal?

Hi! You angry white males are all the same.

:-)

Sigh...Jimmie is finally seeing the dawning of a new age and he
is vainly trying to shut everyone out of (his) sight. Now, if
everyone could just accept Jimmie as the God-granted Ruler of
Ham Opinion, he wouldn't get so upset. Alas, others aren't so
inclined. The hissy fits continue...