Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
some snippage

And of course there is the big question of.....WHY!

(snip)

I understand all that, but it seems a little strange to join a group
that is facing extinction soon.

Not if you want to help that cause along.

All these people
yakking here are US citizens with (I think) one exception. What is the
purpose of joining an organization that has accomplished it's apparent
sole purpose in this country?

That goal has not yet been accomplished! Element 1 or equivalent credit is
still required for all classes of US ham license with HF privileges. FCC
hasn't
changed those rules yet. Heck, FCC hasn't even gotten a proposal to do so
yet.

TRue, but even if it takes that two years I speak of, it doesn't seem
worth joining. Plus it seems their only goal is to eliminnate the code
test, not the transition from one state to the other.

All in the mind of the joiner, doncha think? For some, two years is
not a long time, for others it's a very long time.

NCI's Board of Directors is working the strategy for how to
best approach the FCC on this matter and we will keep the
membership informed when we have finalized those discussions.

In other words, "join our organization and trust us to do what's best,
don't go running off half-cocked and make all of us look bad". That's
what the ARRL has been saying for decades...

NCI knows better than the rest of us.

While I don't agree with that, their BoD certainly knows more about dealing
with the FCC than those who advocate breaking the rules.

Heheh, that's true

Would that some folks would at least listen to reason on what the
rules actually mean.....

Join No Code International! Hams for the 21st Century.

Will these "hams for the 21st Century" listen to you and toe the party
line?

They don't seem to be so far do they?

We're only talking about a vociferous few, Mike. So far. It will be
interesting to see what happens on Aug 1.

Help assure the survival and prosperity of ham radio.

I think we can agree that annoying the Commissioners, breaking the
rules, and acting like we don't know how the system works isn't going
to help the survival and prosperity of ham radio.

But that doesn't mean it isn't going to happen.

Hopefully saner heads will prevail.

There's one thing about all this that puzzles me, though. The FCC made
their opinions clear back in 1999 and again in 2000. The agenda for
WRC 2003 was known more than a year in advance and the outcome for
S25.5 correctly predicted by you (Carl) as a "slam dunk". Yet your
organization is still figuring out what to do next wrt FCC?

I myself have no idea why there isn't a whole sequence of events
marked out for an orderly transition.

You mean by FCC? They don't work that way. Look how long the last
restructuring took.

Nope, I mean the NCI. Why they don't have things mapped out and know
exactly the steps that must be taken to achieve their stated purpose on
this earth. Surely THEY knew that it takes more than just changing the
treaty?

Of course they do. But there's a number of issues. For example:

Does FCC need to wait until the treaty is ratified or not?

Might FCC just dump Element 1 by MO&O, or is a complete NOI/NPRM cycle
needed?

Will submitting a proposal now cause FCC to act faster or slower? (If
FCC thinks they need to wait till ratification, and they plan to just
dump Element 1 by MO&O, submitting a proposal could upset the apple
cart and cause an NPRM cycle that delays things years!)

What about proposals that are already on the docket?

Might FCC tack code test elimination onto an existing proposal such as
the one "refarming the Novice bands"?

Should the anticodetest folks go for a single issue (dump Element 1)
or something more comprehensive?

Of course all of this may already have been worked out. Or maybe not.

Like who becomes what in the hierarchy of licenses.

Do Novices lose their licenses? Aside from CW, their test is so
rudimentary?

Tech pluses?

Lots of stuff that will become apparent as time goes on.

Nobody should lose their license. Nobody should lose operating privileges
UNLESS they are compensated for by new privileges.

Right. But I think there should be some sort of remedial program for the
novices.

Why?

After all, I would expect their final priveliges to be
equivalent to a tech plus, which of course doesn't exist anymore, at
least for testing.

That was suggested back in '98 and shot down by FCC. (ARRL wanted
instant grandfathering of Novices and Tech Pluses to General).

Consider this: There's a whole bunch of stuff that my 1967-70 era tests didn't
cover (like PSK-31). But FCC trusts that since I have a clean record I have
kept up with the rules and regs. So why should a Novice or Tech be any
different?

Well?

And yes, I worry about those people. I have great concern for the
people who think that a Technician can now pick and choose where to
transmit, who think that all ya gotta do to change the rules is have
everyone email the head people at the FCC, and whatever these good folk
dream up next.


The oddest thing is that even when someone as knowledgeable as Carl, Bill or
Phil, who are "on their side" tells them they're wrong, they argue.

Right. I could be of help, but when I point out to them what to me is
obvious, and turning out to be true, I get that. And it isn't even a
personal condemnation.

"Brave new world, that has such people in it"

N0BK would call it surreal. He's gone, so I'll have to do the honors.

It's surreal......

"If it happens, it must be possible".

73 de Jim, N2EY