N2EY wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

snippage


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.

Well, if they want to, I guess Maybe Carl or Bill can give us some
numbers of joinees since the beginning of July. Seems wierd to me, but
then again so much does.


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.....

The preponderence of evidence would suggest otherwise for some.


more snippage


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.

What *looks* like happened, IMO, is that there really wasn't much
planning for a transition after the fall. I could be wrong, but the
leaders seemed rather surprised by the "looting behavior" of some
people. Any time that a vacuum is created, *something* will fill it.


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?

Many people are annoyed at the likes of myself and other "Extra Lites".
I can only imagine that novices, who have taken an extremely rudimentary
test, will likewise be thought of as not worthy of the privelige.



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).

But now imagine that. That would be tantamount to saying that "The
Morse Code makes the Ham". A tech plus is not that far from a General,
but certainly in a world that requires no code test, the Novice is
further away from a General than a Technician is. Awkward paragraph, I know.

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?

See above.


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"

Such people indeed!


- Mike KB3EIA -