RadioBanter - The Majority

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)

- Policy (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/)

- - The Majority (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/75909-majority.html)

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

From: b.b. on Aug 7, 7:02 am

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.

The ARRL's "substantive" poll has come and gone.

WRT98-143 has come and gone.

Best of Luck making your journey to the present.

Jimmie is still stuck in the PAST.

He is so tense he loses his tenses...it should be "what the
majority WANTED"...in the past tense.

As to "what happened [with regard to] NPRM 98-143," that is
all viewable on the FCC ECFS under that Docket number. In
short, there are 2,367 entries there up to and including the
FCC-official cut-off date of 15 January 1995. There are a
total of 2,671 entries under 98-143, some of which are
marked as received as late as 2005! That's indicative of
lots of folks stuck in some kind of Time Warp.

Report and Order 99-412, released in late December of 1999,
made NPRM 98-143 a thing of the past. Once an R&O is
issued, its Notice of Proposed Rule Making is NO LONGER a
notice but an ORDER.

NPRM 98-143 covered MANY different aspects of U.S. amateur
radio regulations BESIDES the morse code test. For an
excellent statistical summation on the ENTIRETY of the
Comments submitted, LeRoy Klose (KC8EPO) did an excellent
job in no less than 4 Exhibits to the FCC plus a Reply to
Comments (15 pages) which is a text tabulation of the
various Commenters, dated 25 and 26 January 1999. In those
it is quite evident that the no-code-test advocates were
the MAJORITY and NOT the minority as Miccolis alleges and
has alleged in past postings here.

FCC 99-412 was released, became LAW for U.S. radio amateurs
and that is that whether morsemen like it or not.

WT Docket 05-235 is about ONE specific change to U.S.
amateur radio regulations: Elimination of Test Element
1 concerning the morse code test required now for a new
(or "upgrade" to) General or Extra class U.S. amateur radio
license. That PAST commentary, ARRL polls, or pipe-dreaming
by morsemen are taken as "present day opinions" is invalid
for the PRESENT.

Jimmie and other rabid morsemen are in deep denial of the
growing desire of those interested in amateur radio to DO
AWAY with the morse code test. That growth has burgeoned
into a MAJORITY, not a minority any longer.

A problem with those in deep denial is that they simply
cannot recognize a public desire which is opposed to their
own self-centered personal desires on retaining some
mythical standards and practices of past times when they
"bought into" those old standards and practices. As a
result we have all that spin doctoring by the morsemen
doing a failing job of keeping archaic standards and
practices alive. They are guilty only of necro-equine
flagellation...i.e., "beating a dead horse."

bet not

On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 13:24:51 -0400, Bert Craig wrote:

wrong the FCC looked at it and did their JOB and ruled on what they
thought was in the Public Interest, they did not ignore anything

Then why ask in the first place?

A. Because the Administrative Procedures Act required it and

B. To see how many ya-yas and yuck-yucks come out of the woodwork.

Relieves the tensions of 8 hours "in the box" sandwiched between two
hours of car-pool on either end.. Maybe that's why I never went to HQ.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
ast.net...
On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 13:24:51 -0400, Bert Craig wrote:

wrong the FCC looked at it and did their JOB and ruled on what they
thought was in the Public Interest, they did not ignore anything

Then why ask in the first place?

A. Because the Administrative Procedures Act required it and

B. To see how many ya-yas and yuck-yucks come out of the woodwork.

Relieves the tensions of 8 hours "in the box" sandwiched between two
hours of car-pool on either end.. Maybe that's why I never went to HQ.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

Lol! Thanks for the honest answer, Phil. As always, it's appreciated.

--
Vy 73 de Bert
WA2SI
FISTS #9384/CC #1736
QRP ARCI #11782