[DCboatanchors] Re: [FLBOATANCHORS] RM-11306 COMMENTS!

[Brian Carling]

This is truly truly laughable! Most of us just want to use our 
AM or CW Boatanchor Radios without some here-today-gone-tomorrow 
digital noise maker commandeering the frequency where our 
QSO is in progress. When I tune up the old DX100 and SX101
I don't want to hear a buzz saw from K4CJX and his 5 pals.
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/hteller/pactor3.jpg

I am sure CJX worked harder than anyone to get positive 
comments. So why are they lacking? Anyone can comment.

The information age has caught up with such sinister plots.
They were found out is what it boils down to!

As to the stats - IS the coffee cup 99.9% full of 0.1% empty, OM?
Let's just FACE IT - most hams HATE the ARRL proposal. 
Even those who support ARRL on most other matters. 

Think of an odd integer between 3,000 and 4,000.
If those 550,000 hams were SOOOOO supportive of this
ARRL attempted perpetration of a crime against amateur 
radio then they should have spoken up while they had a chance!

For now we can still peak the grid and happily dip the plate and 
continue. This has been brewing for years as they trie dto lay the 
groundwork by getting hundreds of thousands of dollars in
Homeland Security money for free modems, trucks etc.
from government.

Let's examine why they didn't comment...

Remember, some of the supporters and flag wavers were
talking only recently about what a "great" job ARRL did of 
surveying the membership.

You CAN'T have it both ways!

2/3 of the ham population isn't active, and they don't give a rat's 
hind end about this, so that leaves about 220,000. 
Of those 220,000 (SOME of them) active hams,  approximately
150,000 are VHF-only hams licensed within the past 10 years
That leaves 70,000 hams, of which 45,000 are contesters
who will barrel through anything with 3 KW p.e.p. to a Rhombic
or stacked KLM Skywalker 411-BA stacked 11 element beams
at 200 feet above average terrain...

Out of the remaining 25,000 hams about 15,000 of those only
talk for a ragchew with their friends once a week on 20 - 
or 75m SSB and would just as soon be left alone and they have 
never HEARD of RM-11306 and quite honestly "Couldn't care 
less about it or any other hair-brained proposal from ARRL or 
any other whacko amateur radio group."

Now, THAT leaves us with the other 10,000 hams who have 
carefully considered this proposal, and thought about voting on 
it.  Most of US are interested because we either enjoy AM, 
CW or the Digital Modes.

Now, the CW-only ops mostly don't use the internet because 
they don't have a computer. So let's say there are 5,000 radio
amateurs who KNOW about his AND care about it. Good 
intentions sometimes get put-off, and since the FCC magically only 
allowed comments for 30 days, let's say that 1,000 of the guys who 
INTENDED To comment didn't get it done in time. Another
1,000 tried to get it done but couldn't navigate through the complex 
process, or their comments were disallowed by the FCC (for hanging 
chads or whatever!)

Now ADD to the number those hardcore WINLINK/Pactor 
robot enthusiasts that comprise about 0.0007% of the U.S. amateur 
population, including ALL of the ARRL Board and most of their 
Directors and Digital etc. committees. That adds another 143 hams.
(No surprise at THAT number - LOL!) Subtract the first number you 
thought of!

You come up with a number of approximately 838 amateurs filing,
which makes sense, since 695 filed comments opposing the proposal.
The 143 in favor of it are NO surprise and we KNOW who you ARE,
fellers!

Keep smiling - life is being taken way too seriously anyway!

I will live with whatever the powers that be come up with!

73 de AF4K, Brian

On 19 Feb 2006 at 13:21, Peter A Markavage wrote:

> I wonder what the other 550,000 U. S. amateurs, who didn't respond, 
> think about it. As of 2/12/06, 658,883 U. S. amateurs. Using Paul's
> numbers (695 against) indicates approx. .1% of the entire amateur
> population.
> 
> Pete, wa2cwa
> 
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 07:54:22 -0500 Brian Carling <bcarling at CFL.RR.COM>
> writes:
> > It does mean that we are winning on popular opinion!
> > 
> > So far... like BPL, I am sure this thing will rear its ugly head 
> > soon in another form even if the FCC do4es the right thing 
> > and shoots it down.
> > 
> > On 19 Feb 2006 at 6:20, charles hawes wrote:
> > 
> > > So does that mean we are winning?
> > 
> > >   ----- Original Message ----- 
> > >   From: Brian Carling 
> > >   Subject: [FLBOATANCHORS] RM-11306 COMMENTS TALLY!
> > > 
> > >   Looks like this ARRL Absurdity may be dead in the water if the 
> > >   FCC has an ounce of integrity left in them!
> > > 
> > >   K2ORC Reports:
> > > 
> > >   As of 1530 ET February 7, 2006 
> > > 
> > >   No doubt due to a backlog since there was quite a flurry of 
> > filing 
> > >   activity in the final 24 hours, comments dated Feb. 6 have 
> > >   appeared today on the FCC's ECFS site.  Our count will stop when 
> > 
> > >   the last 2/6/06 comment is filed.   
> > > 
> > >                                                FOR     AGAINST
> > >   RM-11305 (CTT petition)        44              244
> > > 
> > >   RM-11306 (ARRL petition)      143             695

COPIES TO AMRADIO-QTY and to GLOWBUGS DELETED so as 
to avoid irritating the sensitive - if you forward this please do so with 
tongue firmly in cheek!

73 de AF4K, Brian