[PVRCNC] Re: [PVRC] please!

Sat, 16 Aug 2003 08:48:26 -0400 (EDT)

Thanks also from me...I'll send it comments on Monday.

73, Will, wj9b, dit dit

On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 08:13:56 -0400 Jim Jordan K4QPL 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks, Merrie,
> 
> However, today I received the following while attempting to comment:
> "Proceeding 03-104 is not available for comment" I then noted the header:
> 
> "The ECFS system will be unavailable for scheduled maintenance from Saturday
> Agugust 16th, 2003 until Monsday August 18th, 2003." (Definitely an
> engineer, not an English major!) I didn't really want to give the system
> scheduled maintenance, I just wanted to submit a comment.   :^)  I will try
> to get on again on "Monsday" in "Agugust"!
> 
> I believe we also need to find an "angle" which is not seen as simply a
> selfish claim from amateurs. The following is a paste from my attempted
> submission for anyone else to use in their own submissions.
> 
> "Radio amateurs, and many other users of two way radio communication, are
> involved in various forms of weak-signal reception and transmission.
> The potential for interference to the amateur service and other
> communications services by BPL is enormous. To allow very substantial
> interference, with unacceptable background spectrum pollution is not
> reasonable for existing services, nor is it necessary in the public
> interest. Other methods including cable and telephone DSL are
> adequate for broadband in all but the most remote areas. As seen from
> the recent blackout, the energy providers need to concentrate on
> their own service reliability, and vital communications should never
> be vulnerable to such events. Making BPL available will encourage
> users to "put all their eggs in one basket" with serious risks to
> the national interest."
> 
> Jim, K4QPL
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Merrimon Crawford Pladsen" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 9:49 PM
> Subject: [PVRC] please!
> 
> 
> >
> > If you have not filed your comments with the FCC about BPL, please do it
> now!
> >
> > As of tonight, only 103 hams in NC have bothered to file comments.  NC has
> > many more hams than Colorado and I am shocked that they have the same
> > number of comments in these states.  Both are pathetic.  I cannot imagine
> > how any contester could not care about trying to listen through that kind
> > of interference.  If you have not heard the interference that is typical
> > please go to the website
> > http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/08/08/2/?nc=1   and listen to the
> > download of interference in test communities.  Once listening, I think we
> > can see that implementation of BPL will de the nail in HFamateur radio's
> > coffin.
> >
> > Individuals and clubs can post comments.  It's easy and all you have to do
> > is fill in "03-104" under proceeding number and file your comment at:
> > http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi
> >
> > Legislators will look at the number of filings and if there are so few,
> > they will think we just don't care.
> >
> > I am very disappointed to see the lack of PVRC members filing comments.
> >
> > 73
> > Merri AB0MV
> >
> >
> > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> > multipart/mixed
> >   text/plain (text body -- kept)
> > The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
> > or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
> > to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---
> > _______________________________________________
> > PVRC mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PVRC mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc

----------------------
Willie L. Baber
[email protected]