Iitoi wrote:
Wrote:
Scorecard in the NCTA v. PCTA Amateur Opinions on NPRM 05-143:

As of 25 Oct 05, WT Docket 05-235 Comments on Test Element 1
Elimination/Retention tabulation:

ALL to Date Since FR Notice
-------------- ---------------
Grand Total 2892 916
Indeterminate (note 1) 180 69
Value for Percentages 2708 847
Against NPRM (note 2) 846 [30.26%] 294 [34.71%]
For NPRM (note 3) 1434 [52.95%] 398 [46.99%]
Test Extra Only (note 4) 428 [15.81%] 155 [18.30%]

This tabulation in agreement with FCC ECFS as of 3 PM EDT 26 Oct 05.

Since the official publication in the Federal Register, the comments
seem to be turning "pro-code".

46.99% favor fully removing the cw test.
53.01% favor retaining some level of cw test.

Nothing like jabbing Lennie withn his own "research...

Allow me to add from Lennie's later post of the day:

QUOTE

Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
From: - Find messages by this author
Date: 26 Oct 2005 21:10:07 -0700
Local: Wed, Oct 26 2005 11:10 pm
Subject: Scorecard on WT Docket 05-235
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse

Scorecard in the NCTA v. PCTA Amateur Opinions on NPRM 05-143:

As of 26 Oct 05, WT Docket 05-235 Comments on Test Element 1
Elimination/Retention tabulation:

ALL to Date Since FR Notice
-------------- ---------------
Grand Total 3055 1079
Indeterminate (note 1) 192 81
Value for Percentages 2863 998
Against NPRM (note 2) 910 [31.78%] 355 [35.57%]
For NPRM (note 3) 1486 [51.90%] 450 [45.09%]
Test Extra Only (note 4) 467 [16.31%] 193 [19.33%]

This tabulation in agreement with FCC ECFS as of 8 PM EDT 26 Oct 05.

UNQUOTE.

With THESE numbers, "Litoi", it's even better...Notice in the "ALL
to date" column, "support" (for the NPRM) dropped a whole percentage
point in only five hours per Lennie's reporting! And the support FOR
code testing in that five hours in the "Since Notice" column jumped
almost 3 points.

It's a good day.

73

Steve, K4YZ

You just don't get it, do you Steve? This is not a poll or a vote. This is
the FCC asking for cogent, reasoned, logical discussion for doing or not
doing something. Read the responses and ask yourself who has the edge in
the discussion. From where I sit, it is about as clear cut as the Chicago
series.

Jim




With THESE numbers, "Litoi", it's even better...Notice in the "ALL
to date" column, "support" (for the NPRM) dropped a whole percentage
point in only five hours per Lennie's reporting! And the support FOR
code testing in that five hours in the "Since Notice" column jumped
almost 3 points.

It's a good day.

73

Steve, K4YZ

On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 08:45:12 -0700, "RST Engineering"
wrote:

You just don't get it, do you Steve? This is not a poll or a vote. This is
the FCC asking for cogent, reasoned, logical discussion for doing or not
doing something. Read the responses and ask yourself who has the edge in
the discussion. From where I sit, it is about as clear cut as the Chicago
series.

nope he doesn't get it indeed if it should happen that procode
coments should edge out no code coments then Stevie will be
complaining he was cheated for a few decades like some of the OT about
Incentive licenses

the "vote" count will likely count about the level as the better of
the coment but I have not seen anything new from the ProCode side in
them and those arguements are all ready shot down at the FCC

Jim




With THESE numbers, "Litoi", it's even better...Notice in the "ALL
to date" column, "support" (for the NPRM) dropped a whole percentage
point in only five hours per Lennie's reporting! And the support FOR
code testing in that five hours in the "Since Notice" column jumped
almost 3 points.

It's a good day.

73

Steve, K4YZ



_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

RST Engineering wrote:
You just don't get it, do you Steve?

Sure I do, Jim, but I think you're the one who may be a bit
confused here.

This is not a poll or a vote. This is
the FCC asking for cogent, reasoned, logical discussion for doing or not
doing something.

Here's where your confusion exists, Jim...The post responded to
was by Lennie Anderson, a non-licensed participant in an Amateur Radio
forum on USENET.

The FCC is only incidentally involved as it is their numbers he
quotes.

Read the responses and ask yourself who has the edge in
the discussion. From where I sit, it is about as clear cut as the Chicago
series.

Everyone sees things as they will, Jim. I am sure you "vision" is
as clear as anyone else's from THEIR perspective at any given moment.

Thanks for stopping by.

73

Steve, K4YZ

wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 08:45:12 -0700, "RST Engineering"
wrote:

You just don't get it, do you Steve? This is not a poll or a vote. This is
the FCC asking for cogent, reasoned, logical discussion for doing or not
doing something. Read the responses and ask yourself who has the edge in
the discussion. From where I sit, it is about as clear cut as the Chicago
series.

nope he doesn't get it indeed if it should happen that procode
coments should edge out no code coments then Stevie will be
complaining he was cheated for a few decades like some of the OT about
Incentive licenses

Now you're even more confused than Jim is, Markie.

the "vote" count will likely count about the level as the better of
the coment but I have not seen anything new from the ProCode side in
them and those arguements are all ready shot down at the FCC

You need to take those words and re-arrange them, Markie.

But as for any "vote", there is no "vote". Only percentages based
on very broad categories.

Steve, K4YZ

On 27 Oct 2005 10:02:32 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote:


wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 08:45:12 -0700, "RST Engineering"
wrote:

You just don't get it, do you Steve? This is not a poll or a vote. This is
the FCC asking for cogent, reasoned, logical discussion for doing or not
doing something. Read the responses and ask yourself who has the edge in
the discussion. From where I sit, it is about as clear cut as the Chicago
series.

nope he doesn't get it indeed if it should happen that procode
coments should edge out no code coments then Stevie will be
complaining he was cheated for a few decades like some of the OT about
Incentive licenses

Now you're even more confused than Jim is, Markie.

another flasehood on your part

I say a lie but it mught just be within the realm of opinion

the "vote" count will likely count about the level as the better of
the coment but I have not seen anything new from the ProCode side in
them and those arguements are all ready shot down at the FCC

You need to take those words and re-arrange them, Markie.

now you are lying

But as for any "vote", there is no "vote". Only percentages based
on very broad categories.

Steve, K4YZ

_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

On 27 Oct 2005 09:59:40 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote:


RST Engineering wrote:
You just don't get it, do you Steve?

Sure I do, Jim, but I think you're the one who may be a bit
confused here.

a Lie you don't get and your poroof it everytime you post

so the rest of your ****.....

_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

Here's where your confusion exists, Jim...The post responded to
was by Lennie Anderson, a non-licensed participant in an Amateur Radio
forum on USENET.

I don't give a royal flying freak if it was posted by a little green
Martian. Last I looked it was data posted to a usenet group by an
individual. You don't need any credentials or licenses to post to any given
group, last I looked. And, I consider Len to be just a little more
competent to post than you.



Everyone sees things as they will, Jim. I am sure you "vision" is
as clear as anyone else's from THEIR perspective at any given moment.

Visions and opinions are much like assholes -- everybody has one, and most
of them stink. Mine included.




Thanks for stopping by.


Don't mention it.

Jim

On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 11:24:00 -0700, "RST Engineering"
wrote:


"K4YZ" wrote in message
roups.com...

Here's where your confusion exists, Jim...The post responded to
was by Lennie Anderson, a non-licensed participant in an Amateur Radio
forum on USENET.

I don't give a royal flying freak if it was posted by a little green
Martian. Last I looked it was data posted to a usenet group by an
individual. You don't need any credentials or licenses to post to any given
group, last I looked. And, I consider Len to be just a little more
competent to post than you.

Stevie seems to think so

He certainly states it should be required to licenses for all sorts of
things, Posting, having kids or even opinion



Everyone sees things as they will, Jim. I am sure you "vision" is
as clear as anyone else's from THEIR perspective at any given moment.

Visions and opinions are much like assholes -- everybody has one, and most
of them stink. Mine included.

I take issue with comparing vision to assholes in this manner many
visions a re at least quite pleasent (even the flawed visions can be
quite attractive till closely examained




Thanks for stopping by.


Don't mention it.

Jim


_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

The name is Iitoi, not Litoi.

I wonder if James will continue to challenge the tally now that it appears to support his view of the topic, or if the challenge is based on "you can't trust someone who has no license".

The Man in the Maze
QRV at Baboquivari Peak, AZ