Recently there have been some claims about "what the majority wants" in
regards to FCC NPRMs.

Here's what happened wrt 98-143, the last big restructuring NPRM, and
commenters' views on code testing.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...e=source&hl=en

http://tinyurl.com/7t3te

It was posted Mar 12 1999, by WA6VSE. Here's a relevant quote


BEGIN QUOTE:


Here's a summary of how the numbers came out ... more detail will be
available from the NCI website soon ... special thanks to Larry Close

[Larry Klose, KC8EPO]

who put in a herculean effort to read EVERY record in the ECFS database
and do a very comprehensive statistical analysis of the body of
comment.


Code Exam Proposal Summary

Position Supported # %
No Code Comments 711 43% (favoring 5 wpm MAX or NO code test)
Pro-Code Comments 607 37% (status quo, including rants for faster
code tests)
ARRL Comments 331 20% ("I support the ARRL proposal" or
supporting 5/12/12)
-----------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL COMMENTS 1649 100%

END QUOTE

(the bit about "rants" is from the poster of the results, not KC8EPO)

Larry eliminated dupes and responses that did not address the
code test issue.

It's clear that:

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 2 or 3 code test speeds.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12, 13 or 20 wpm for Extra.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12 or 13 wpm for Advanced.

80% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 5 wpm for General

But only 43% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 5 wpm or less code
testing.

57% is a clear majority, but FCC ignored it and went to 5 wpm for all
license classes requiring a code test.

For the record, I supported 5 wpm for General, 12 or 13 wpm for
Advanced, and 20 wpm for Extra.


73 de Jim, N2EY