.... interesting, now county courts are going to start ruling of federal
regulations?

John

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 01:49:08 +0000, KØHB wrote:


"K4YZ" wrote


So the wishes of the citizens were ignored.

The Consitution(sic) was violated.


OK folks, you read it right here!

FCC Docket 98-143 is unconstitutional!

The FCC proceeding has been struck down by the County Court of Franklin County
Tennessee, the Honorable Judge Steven J Robeson presiding. Hope the VEC's
didn't throw away their 13 and 20WPM testing materials.

Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep
de Hans, K0HB

After years and years and years of tolerance, Jim/N2EY was finally
cornered and he rendered the opinion that Bruce was an embarassment to
the ARS.

You go Jim!

John Smith wrote:
Uncle Ted:

Your point is well taken, and I do believe a variety of "tools" have been
used to discourage new membership, and in subversive ways. Strange it has
worked so well for so long. But in the end, when the pathetic end of all
this is examined, it is hard not to see what has been occurring.

John

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 11:53:31 -0400, Uncle Ted wrote:

On 9 Aug 2005 20:35:08 -0700, "b.b." wrote:


John, Extra Bruce/WA8ULX is somehow simultaneously a brilliant test
taker and a functional illiterate. The comments posted here earlier
look like a page out of his playbook. I'm sure he's not alone in his
Extraness and stupidity, and willingness to sabotage the U.S. amateur
radio service. $0.02. bb

At my company, there was a maintenance supervisor who was as stubborn
and illiterate as Bruce. You either did things his way, or he would
write you up for insubordination. Often times, his way would involve
unsafe acts that violated safety practices and OSHA regulations. For
whatever reason, he didn't think such rules applied to the people
working under him. (Fortunately, he was put in his place for this
before someone got hurt, and started abiding by safety procedures.)

The best part about this guy was the shift reports that he'd write.
These were e-mailed to an intranet list server, and many people,
including company executives, received them. The reports were full of
spelling errors, terrible grammar, and looked like they were written
by a second grader. Yet, no one cared or did anything about this
because the man had been with the company for so long. It was more of
a joke than anything else.

Even though the shift reports were internal, I had often wondered what
would have happened if a customer would have seen some of these
reports. Would they still shrug it off easily if they knew such an
ignoramus was costing them money? Would they think it was such a big
joke when they started losing orders? It's the same with Bruce. Do the
newcomers to amateur radio see Bruce's rants, and think, "If this is
what amateur radio has among its ranks, I want no part of it." Most of
us ignore Bruce, or see him as a joke. However, his incomprehensible
ramblings and insults against "CB Plussers" brand him as a hypocrite
and a disgrace far beyond the people he derides, and that certainly is
no joke.

"John Smith" wrote


... interesting, now county courts are going to start ruling of federal
regulations?


Seems that way. Judge Steven J. Robeson (aka "K4YZ/K4CAP") has ruled FCC Docket
98-143 was crafted in violation of the Consitution (sic). You could look it up
on Google!

Beep Beep
de Hans, K0HB

.... obviously a joke I am barely aware of ...

John

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 03:07:15 +0000, KØHB wrote:


"John Smith" wrote


... interesting, now county courts are going to start ruling of federal
regulations?


Seems that way. Judge Steven J. Robeson (aka "K4YZ/K4CAP") has ruled FCC Docket
98-143 was crafted in violation of the Consitution (sic). You could look it up
on Google!

Beep Beep
de Hans, K0HB

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:

43% is not a majority, yet they got what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 2 or 3 code test speeds.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12, 13 or 20 wpm for Extra.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12 or 13 wpm for Advanced.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

80% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 5 wpm for General
That majority did get what they wanted.

But only 43% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 5 wpm or less code
testing. That's a minorty, but that's what FCC did.

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

If someone thinks 43% is a majority, they're either lying or they
don't understand what the words mean.

73 de Jim, N2EY

more abusing of poor dead equines Jim
wrote:
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:

43% is not a majority, yet they got what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 2 or 3 code test speeds.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12, 13 or 20 wpm for Extra.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12 or 13 wpm for Advanced.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

80% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 5 wpm for General
That majority did get what they wanted.

But only 43% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 5 wpm or less code
testing. That's a minorty, but that's what FCC did.

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

If someone thinks 43% is a majority, they're either lying or they
don't understand what the words mean.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
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:

43% is not a majority, yet they got what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 2 or 3 code test speeds.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12, 13 or 20 wpm for Extra.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12 or 13 wpm for Advanced.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

Lessee, 57% + 57% + 57% = 171%, a clear majority.

From: on Fri 19 Aug 2005 12:58


wrote:
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/rec.radio.amateur.policy/msg/bd661a50825a37f3?dmode=source&hl=en

http://tinyurl.com/7t3te

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

Ackshully, one ought to go to the SOURCE which is easily
accessible by anyone with Internet access. Just go to the
FCC ECFS and for WT Docket 98-143, look under 25 and 26
January 1999 for postings by LeRoy Klose III. Include the
attachment links.

That gets one into Larry Klose's remarkable summary of ALL
Comments on 98-143 up to 25 January 1999 (the official
cut-off date was 15 January 1999).

Brian, Jimmie wants to have everyone look at "second-hand"
information, an encapsulated form. It is better to look at
the REAL stuff, FIRST-HAND, which is readily available.



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

It's clear that:

43% is not a majority, yet they got what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 2 or 3 code test speeds.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12, 13 or 20 wpm for Extra.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

57% of those who commented on 98-143 wanted 12 or 13 wpm for Advanced.
That majority did not get what they wanted.

Lessee, 57% + 57% + 57% = 171%, a clear majority.

Jimmie has a wonderful way with numbers... :-)

Jimmie is also stuck firmly in the PAST. 1998 was SEVEN
YEARS AGO and the Internet was in its 7th public year.

FCC 99-412, ordered in December, 1999, established the
"Amateur Restructuring" which took place in mid-2000.

AT THE TIME (1998-1999), it was IMPOSSIBLE to eliminate
the morse code test for ANY U.S. amateur radio license
having privileges of operating below 30 MHz. The barrier
was S25.5 of the ITU-R...colloquially known (or mis-known)
as "the treaty." [there is NO specific treaty on morse
code, only the honor system whereby all administrations are
supposed to adhere to ITU decisions on standards and
allocations]

Conveniently missing is that the FCC's reasons for 90-53,
of 1990, 15 years ago, was that it did not feel that any
manual morse code skill test was any sort of qualifier for
the Commission to grant an applicant a license. That
established the reason-for-being of creation of the no-code-
test Technician class license.

Also conventiently omitted is EIGHTEEN Petitions, nearly all
varying in general "re-re-structuring" having none-some-all
code testing. Absolutely NO CONSENSUS could be gained from
reviewing all 18 Pentitions...even though the Commission had
stated publicly several times that it wanted a consensus.
The "amateur community" is highly polarized on the subject of
code testing and remains so seven years after 1998.

This year, 2005, is SEVEN years from the 98-143 Docket. It is
also the 14th year of public access to the Internet (it went
public in 1991). Far more citizens have access to the Internet
in 2005 than they did in 1998. In 2003 the Census Bureau
reported that one in five Americans had some form of Internet
access then. Nearly all the Comments on WT Docket 05-235 are
electronic rather than written on paper. So far, in the 23rd
day of Comments on WT Docket 05-235, there are 1720 documents
on file, about 75 a day on the average! Compare that to the
2300+ Comments of WT Docket 98-143 whose commentary period
was extended for nearly six months after release. There's
far more "traffic" on 05-235 than there was on 98-143.

At time NOW, in 2005, the MAJORITY are very adamantly showing
they ARE a majority. Unambiguous opinions (95.3% of all filings)
show a 4:2:1 ratio of For:Against:Extra-Only on elimination of
the code test. There is easily a 2:1 ratio of those favoring
NPRM 05-143 versus those opposing it.

The IARU, helped/nudged/influenced by international membership
of NCI, was the main operator in wanting S25 of the ITU Radio
Regulations re-written. [it was more than just S25.5 covering
code testing] It was done in mid-July, 2003, over two years
ago. Since then TWENTY-THREE other countries have dropped
morse code testing for their radio amateurs licenses having
below-30-MHz operating privileges.

Summary: The FCC wants to drop code testing, the IARU wants
to drop code testing, 23 nations already have done so, and
a CLEAR MAJORITY of WT Docket 05-235 Commenters want it
dropped. That CLEAR MAJORUTY is 2:1 for dropping it versus
those wanting it retained. That CLEAR MAJORITY is 58% of
those who have unambiguously commented.

Jimmie wants to crawl back seven years and live there... :-(

sin die

"There is little in the world
more stupid than a majority."

Alexander Hamilton

Funny, Saddam Husein might have said those very words...

John

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 04:28:59 +0000, David Stinson wrote:

"There is little in the world
more stupid than a majority."

Alexander Hamilton