Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

It's been
nearly two years since the first of those 18 petitions arrived
at
the
FCC and the conservative-traditionalists mounted much cross-fire
to those nasty radicals wanting dirty, rotten change (hack,
ptui)
from divine, blessed, noble olde-tyme regulations. Code MUST
stay! It is "right!" :-)

You've really worked yourself into a froth today, old timer. Too
much
caffeine?

More probably a lack of Geritol, Dave...Ot too much? Does it
matter? He's a putz either way.

73

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

It's been
nearly two years since the first of those 18 petitions arrived
at
the
FCC and the conservative-traditionalists mounted much cross-fire
to those nasty radicals wanting dirty, rotten change (hack,
ptui)
from divine, blessed, noble olde-tyme regulations. Code MUST
stay! It is "right!" :-)

You've really worked yourself into a froth today, old timer. Too
much
caffeine?

More probably a lack of Geritol, Dave...Ot too much? Does it
matter? He's a putz either way.

These demented rants of his grow more strange by the week. His factual
errors are numerous. The legion of lurkers which he claimed would rise
to the defense of his ideas never materialized and he's irrelevant to
amateur radio in this country.

Leonard really needs a new cause.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote in news:4229580A.BDD9A351
@earthlink.net:

K4YZ wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

It's been
nearly two years since the first of those 18 petitions arrived
at the FCC and the conservative-traditionalists mounted much
cross-fire to those nasty radicals wanting dirty, rotten change
(hack, ptui) from divine, blessed, noble olde-tyme regulations.
Code MUST stay! It is "right!" :-)

You've really worked yourself into a froth today, old timer. Too
much caffeine?

More probably a lack of Geritol, Dave...Ot too much? Does it
matter? He's a putz either way.

These demented rants of his grow more strange by the week. His factual
errors are numerous. The legion of lurkers which he claimed would rise
to the defense of his ideas never materialized and he's irrelevant to
amateur radio in this country.

Leonard really needs a new cause.

Dave K8MN


I'm not a lurker, but I will say that Lennie is right. Granted I'm not sure
why he's still here, since he could obviously pick up a no-code licence any
time he feels like it and doesn't seem to want to get on HF anyway?
However, his satirical comments, whilst over the top, seem to be right on
the money.

73 de Alun, N3KIP

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
.. .
"Dee Flint" wrote in
:


"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
.. .
Michael Coslo wrote in
:


[snip]

It's not particurly difficult, but I can see no need to continue the
closed classes. All those who would get a 'free upgrade' have held
their licences for some time, so I foresee no impact whatsoever from
eliminating those licences and upgrading them.

Alun N3KIP

Why not simply cancel their licenses unless they take the upgrade exam
by a certain date? It gets rid of the closed classes yet gives no one
a freebie. Those who are active or care about their license but are
inactive due to circumstances in their lives currently will upgrade.
Those who don't care won't be any great loss. Let's shake the dead
wood out of the tree and find out how many hams we really do have.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE




Cancelling is a bit harsh. Maybe they could be downgraded at the next
renewal after say three years notice up front. Of course, for Novices that
would mean cancellation, but I seriously doubt whether there are any
active
Novices?

73 de Alun, N3KIP

There are a few though they are very few. I was looking at vanity call
signs recently issued on some site or another and there was even a Novice
who had received a vanity call. Since he/she was restricted to a 2x3 call
there must have been some other reason that they wished a new call.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
.. .
Michael Coslo wrote in
:

[snip]

It's not particurly difficult, but I can see no need to continue
the
closed
classes. All those who would get a 'free upgrade' have held their
licences
for some time, so I foresee no impact whatsoever from eliminating
those
licences and upgrading them.

Alun N3KIP

Why not simply cancel their licenses unless they take the upgrade
exam by a
certain date?

Like the old Novice..

It gets rid of the closed classes yet gives no one a freebie.
Those who are active or care about their license but are inactive due
to
circumstances in their lives currently will upgrade.

I still remember the screaming from 1968 when "incentive licensing"
went back into effect. What you propose would be worse.

They wouldn't be screaming any louder than those opposed to automatic
upgrades would be. Any change from the current will cause major screaming
other something like closing the classes to new licenses as was done in
2000. Personally I happen to think leaving the classes alone is the best
thing.


Those who don't care
won't be any great loss.

There's also the group who don't know. It's almost 5 years since
restructuring and I still read/hear questions from hams about what the
license structure and test requirements are, particularly from inactive
or narrow-focused hams.


Well the FCC expects hams to keep up with the rules or they send them
greeting cards if the violate the new ones. This wouldn't be any worse. It
could be handled by specifying that they must upgrade by their next renewal.
If they forget to renew, they loose their license anyway. Those who do
attempt to renew could get a form stating that they must upgrade instead.
Afterall, they will have the remainder of their term plus the grace period
(which I would keep) to use their existing license for the appropriate
elements.

Let's shake the dead wood out of the tree and find
out how many hams we really do have.

What good would that really do, Dee? If nothing else, it would give
folks like the BPL companies ammunition against us.

73 de Jim, N2EY


It makes no less and no more sense than "auto upgrades." I don't
particularly put it forth as a serious suggestion. Too many people are
simply yakking on about the "burden" and "confusion" engendered by
retaining these close classes so chose to describe an alternative. I just
threw in the "deadwood" part since some people are so worried about the
number of hams and the accuracy of the numbers.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in news:4229580A.BDD9A351
@earthlink.net:

K4YZ wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

It's been
nearly two years since the first of those 18 petitions arrived
at the FCC and the conservative-traditionalists mounted much
cross-fire to those nasty radicals wanting dirty, rotten change
(hack, ptui) from divine, blessed, noble olde-tyme regulations.
Code MUST stay! It is "right!" :-)

You've really worked yourself into a froth today, old timer. Too
much caffeine?

More probably a lack of Geritol, Dave...Ot too much? Does it
matter? He's a putz either way.

These demented rants of his grow more strange by the week. His factual
errors are numerous. The legion of lurkers which he claimed would rise
to the defense of his ideas never materialized and he's irrelevant to
amateur radio in this country.

Leonard really needs a new cause.

Dave K8MN


I'm not a lurker, but I will say that Lennie is right. Granted I'm not sure
why he's still here, since he could obviously pick up a no-code licence any
time he feels like it and doesn't seem to want to get on HF anyway?
However, his satirical comments, whilst over the top, seem to be right on
the money.

Noted. You're not a lurker. You support Len's idea for having a
minimum age for entrance into U.S. amateur radio. You join "bb" in the
Len Anderson Fan Club.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
"Alun L. Palmer" wrote:

I'm not a lurker, but I will say that Lennie is right. Granted I'm
not sure
why he's still here, since he could obviously pick up a no-code
licence any
time he feels like it and doesn't seem to want to get on HF anyway?
However, his satirical comments, whilst over the top, seem to be
right on
the money.

"Satirical comments"...?!?!

BBBWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
! ! ! ! !

Lennie left "over the top" years ago and went straight to "over
the edge".

Lennie Anderson has been REPEATEDLY proven to be a L I A R, Alun.
Not "wrong"..."Wrong" is when you make a mistake, and when it's pointed
out to you why it's wrong, you acknowldege it and move on.

Leonard H. Anderson of Sun Valley Californis is a liar. Period.

He's NOT a satirist, and there's nothing comical about his insults
and deceptions.

Noted. You're not a lurker. You support Len's idea for having a
minimum age for entrance into U.S. amateur radio. You join "bb" in
the
Len Anderson Fan Club.

Geeze...I hope not. Alun's previously impressed me as being pretty
balanced.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Alun L. Palmer wrote:

"Dee Flint" wrote in
:


"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message
...

Michael Coslo wrote in
:



[snip]


It's not particurly difficult, but I can see no need to continue the
closed classes. All those who would get a 'free upgrade' have held
their licences for some time, so I foresee no impact whatsoever from
eliminating those licences and upgrading them.

Alun N3KIP

Why not simply cancel their licenses unless they take the upgrade exam
by a certain date? It gets rid of the closed classes yet gives no one
a freebie. Those who are active or care about their license but are
inactive due to circumstances in their lives currently will upgrade.
Those who don't care won't be any great loss. Let's shake the dead
wood out of the tree and find out how many hams we really do have.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE





Cancelling is a bit harsh. Maybe they could be downgraded at the next
renewal after say three years notice up front. Of course, for Novices that
would mean cancellation, but I seriously doubt whether there are any active
Novices?

73 de Alun, N3KIP

I know of three local novices that are on ten meters every night. That's
all they want. They have no need for VHF and are just happy with what
privileges they have now.

Dave Heil wrote in
:

"Alun L. Palmer" wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in news:4229580A.BDD9A351
@earthlink.net:

K4YZ wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:

It's been
nearly two years since the first of those 18 petitions
arrived at the FCC and the conservative-traditionalists
mounted much cross-fire to those nasty radicals wanting
dirty, rotten change (hack, ptui) from divine, blessed,
noble olde-tyme regulations. Code MUST stay! It is "right!"
:-)

You've really worked yourself into a froth today, old timer. Too
much caffeine?

More probably a lack of Geritol, Dave...Ot too much? Does it
matter? He's a putz either way.

These demented rants of his grow more strange by the week. His
factual errors are numerous. The legion of lurkers which he claimed
would rise to the defense of his ideas never materialized and he's
irrelevant to amateur radio in this country.

Leonard really needs a new cause.

Dave K8MN


I'm not a lurker, but I will say that Lennie is right. Granted I'm not
sure why he's still here, since he could obviously pick up a no-code
licence any time he feels like it and doesn't seem to want to get on
HF anyway? However, his satirical comments, whilst over the top, seem
to be right on the money.

Noted. You're not a lurker. You support Len's idea for having a
minimum age for entrance into U.S. amateur radio. You join "bb" in the
Len Anderson Fan Club.

Dave K8MN


Where did you get that I support a minimum age? I don't.

"K4YZ" wrote in
oups.com:


Dave Heil wrote:
"Alun L. Palmer" wrote:

I'm not a lurker, but I will say that Lennie is right. Granted I'm
not sure why he's still here, since he could obviously pick up a
no-code licence any time he feels like it and doesn't seem to want
to get on HF anyway? However, his satirical comments, whilst over
the top, seem to be right on the money.

"Satirical comments"...?!?!

BBBWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! ! ! ! ! !

Lennie left "over the top" years ago and went straight to "over
the edge".

Lennie Anderson has been REPEATEDLY proven to be a L I A R, Alun.
Not "wrong"..."Wrong" is when you make a mistake, and when it's pointed
out to you why it's wrong, you acknowldege it and move on.

Leonard H. Anderson of Sun Valley Californis is a liar. Period.

He's NOT a satirist, and there's nothing comical about his insults
and deceptions.

Noted. You're not a lurker. You support Len's idea for having a
minimum age for entrance into U.S. amateur radio. You join "bb" in
the Len Anderson Fan Club.

Geeze...I hope not. Alun's previously impressed me as being pretty
balanced.

73

Steve, K4YZ



Thankyou. I think the point of Len's little tirade was that some here seem
to be opposed to change at any cost, and that certainly has a ring of truth
to it. Of course, he may have expressed that in a very sarcastic way, but
that doesn't mean he's necessarily wrong.