July 2005 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:12783] GMail
by Andy Oppel 22 Jul '05

22 Jul '05

If any of you want a free and very reliable e-mail account with practically unlimited storage space, I'd be happy to send you an invitation for Gmail (run by Google). I don't use mine much, but Director Vallio uses his account a lot and is very satisfied. You have to get an invitation to open an account, which always seemed odd to me, but it might be a ploy to slow down spammers. At any rate, ask for it if you want it - it might save a couple of you who are use AOL (pronounced "A-O-Hell") -- Gmail doesn't block good guys like the ARRL -- ever. 73, Andy Oppel, N6AJO Vice Director, Pacific Division, ARRL n6ajo(a)arrl.org home: (510) 864-2299 cell: (510) 910-1508

1 0

[arrl-odv:12782] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News
by Greg Milnes 22 Jul '05

22 Jul '05

Chris I don't read that the FCC "rejected" our proposals. They did say they were not considering it in "this proceeding." They also said in footnote 7 that they had taken comment already in another NPRM. They haven't issued any orders based on that NPRM as far as I know. That all says to me they have taken a basic issue, CW, and separated it from other considerations. It seems that logically they would rule on this first (I know assigning logic to the FCC is dangerous, speculative and probably wrong). With that said, I would expect the FCC to rule on the CW issue and delete the testing requirement. Then they would eventually rule on our Restructuring II petition. This extends out the time for them to act which is a desirable FCC goal. Maybe by then the WTB will have been broken into a number of pieces and the current folks won't have to come to any conclusions. Maybe by then the current workers will have retired and they would never have to address it.just pass it off to new guys. Am I wrong in this view? 73/Greg W7OZ _____ From: W3KD(a)aol.com [mailto:W3KD@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 2:13 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12734] FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News Greetings. The FCC today released its NPRM in Docket 05-235. They did not propose to adopt our restructuring II proposal. They instead proposed only to eliminate telegraphy examination requirements completely from Amateur licensing. We are attempting to find out what the actual rationale is for this proposal, and their rejection of our carefully crafted proposal, which had substantial support. The comment date is long, and we will have plenty of opportunity to see about bringing this back on track. Here is the NPRM text in word format. 73, Chris W3KD

1 0

[arrl-odv:12781] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good Newser.
by Greg Milnes 22 Jul '05

22 Jul '05

Mike I'm using my laptop (desktop mother board was fried.a new Dell is on its way). Also I'm using a new email program. I was merely observing that many out here seem to want regulation. Personally I'm in favor of dropping most of our regulations. CW sub bands to protect CW were ill conceived as an example. Phone is what if anything, ought to be protected. I can always hear CW through a phone QSO. CW can readily screw up a phone QSO however. I'm for the European way.except for one small modification.East coast guys can only use wires, no beams. You guys already have too much advantage with geography. 73/Greg W7OZ _____ From: Mike Raisbeck [mailto:k1twf@arrl.net] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 5:09 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12780] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News Hi Greg, Of course some (perhaps many??) of your members want the FCC to babysit them. It's the same in New England. The issue is bigger than that. Were we elected: A. to vote the way our members want? OR B. to spend the time and energy that individual members cannot, in order to steer a clear and well considered course into the future? This is a fundamental problem in representative democracy. It isn't easy to resolve, and it calls for compromise. The best practical course probably lies somewhere in between. Personally, I lean toward "B". I'm honored to be on the board, even as a lowly vice director, but I firmly believe that if I worry too much about being reelected, I'm actually short changing my constituents. My life would not end if I were voted off, though I would be saddened. What is your feeling on this? Is there a majority of your constituents that feel they want a babysitter, or is it just a vocal minority? 73, Mike K1TWF ----------------------------------- Law Office of Michael N. Raisbeck Phone: (978) 250-1236 Fax: (978) 250-0432 Web: www.mraisbeck.com Email: k1twf(a)arrl.net CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain privileged and confidential information intended only for the above-named recipient. If you have received this in error, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited. In such case, please notify us by reply email and delete this message _____ From: Greg Milnes [mailto:w7oz@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 4:18 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12777] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News OK with me to deregulate but Many of my members want to FCC babysit them. 73/Greg W7OZ _____ From: Mike Raisbeck [mailto:k1twf@arrl.net] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 4:26 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12765] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News Hi Joel, No, I'm not totally asleep :-) . . . .

1 0

[arrl-odv:12780] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News
by Mike Raisbeck 22 Jul '05

22 Jul '05

Hi Greg, Of course some (perhaps many??) of your members want the FCC to babysit them. It's the same in New England. The issue is bigger than that. Were we elected: A. to vote the way our members want? OR B. to spend the time and energy that individual members cannot, in order to steer a clear and well considered course into the future? This is a fundamental problem in representative democracy. It isn't easy to resolve, and it calls for compromise. The best practical course probably lies somewhere in between. Personally, I lean toward "B". I'm honored to be on the board, even as a lowly vice director, but I firmly believe that if I worry too much about being reelected, I'm actually short changing my constituents. My life would not end if I were voted off, though I would be saddened. What is your feeling on this? Is there a majority of your constituents that feel they want a babysitter, or is it just a vocal minority? 73, Mike K1TWF ----------------------------------- Law Office of Michael N. Raisbeck Phone: (978) 250-1236 Fax: (978) 250-0432 Web: www.mraisbeck.com Email: k1twf(a)arrl.net CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain privileged and confidential information intended only for the above-named recipient. If you have received this in error, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited. In such case, please notify us by reply email and delete this message _____ From: Greg Milnes [mailto:w7oz@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 4:18 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12777] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News OK with me to deregulate but Many of my members want to FCC babysit them. 73/Greg W7OZ _____ From: Mike Raisbeck [mailto:k1twf@arrl.net] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 4:26 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12765] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News Hi Joel, No, I'm not totally asleep :-) . . . .

1 0

[arrl-odv:12779] FW: UTC Industry Intelligence - July 21, 2005
by Tom Frenaye 21 Jul '05

21 Jul '05

From the United Telecom Council Industry Intelligence e-newsletter - July 21, 2005 >Martin Reportedly Eying Breakup of Wireless Bureau > >Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin is considering breaking up the functions of the current Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and spreading them to other parts of the agency, according to several industry trade reports this week. The Chairman reportedly also is considering creating a Homeland Security Bureau within the FCC. > >Since the departure of John Muleta in March, few names have surfaced as likely successors as WTB Chief. Now, Martin reportedly is considering moving Public Safety and Critical Infrastructure Division activities _ which include most issues impacting UTC members _ to a new Homeland Security Bureau. At the same time, however, it_s unclear how the Bureau_s licensing functions would be allocated. Industry sources say one aspect of the changes would be to consolidate spectrum issues now handled by WTB, the International Bureau (which handles satellite issues) and the Office of Engineering and Technology, another section of the agency without an announced new Chief since the departure of Edmond Thomas in May. Commercial spectrum policy issues reportedly could be moved to the Wireline Competition Bureau. > >UTC_s initial reaction to the proposed changes is mixed. While moving PSCID functions to a Homeland Security Bureau could be an improvement, providing more focus on unique, non-commercial wireless concerns, UTC is concerned that policy and licensing functions for member wireless systems remain closely tied. The changes as announced seemingly would require close cooperation among multiple Bureaus to enable spectrum allocations and service rules. UTC will provide more information on this issue as it becomes available. ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

Re: Couldn't Resist
by w6rod＠comcast.net 21 Jul '05

21 Jul '05

I like jokes that allow all sorts of people to be plugged into the punch line. For example, people who work with particular government agencies could be inserted into the punch line for the joke Joel sent and it might fit very well.....;) 73, Rod -------------- Original message -------------- > > I usually dislike forwarded jokes and email and try to avoid it. > > HOWEVER, given the events of yesterday, this seemed appropriate. > > 73 Joel W5ZN > > > > > > Five Surgeons > > > > Five surgeons are discussing who has the best > > patients to operate on. > > > > The first surgeon says, "I like to see accountants on > > my operating table because when you open them up, > > everything inside is numbered." > > > > The second responds, "Yeah, but you should try > > electricians! Everything inside them is color coded." > > > > The third surgeon says, "No, I really think > > librarians are the best; everything inside them is in alphabetical > > order." > > > > The fourth surgeon chimes in: "You know, I like > > engineers. Those guys always understand when you have > > a few parts left over at the end, and when the job > > takes longer than you said it would." > > > > But the fifth surgeon shut them all up when he > > observed: "You're all wrong. Politicians are the > > easiest to operate on. There's no guts, no heart, no > > balls, no brains and no spine, and the head and the > > ass are interchangeable! > > > > > > >

1 0

[arrl-odv:12777] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News
by Greg Milnes 21 Jul '05

21 Jul '05

OK with me to deregulate but Many of my members want to FCC babysit them. 73/Greg W7OZ _____ From: Mike Raisbeck [mailto:k1twf@arrl.net] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 4:26 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12765] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News Hi Joel, No, I'm not totally asleep :-) Of course the CW issue is only one piece of the story. But it is an interesting and important one, and judging from the amount of discussion it generated at the time we deliberated on restructuring, it hardly seems an insignificant matter. My question to you is "why didn't OUR proposal do away with CW?" I do think that there is another important message here. You say that the FCC ignored an opportunity to move forward. To some degree you are right. But with this decision the FCC has given a strong indication of what they see as "forward." Clearly, the FCC wants to take a laissez faire approach to Amateur Radio. They don't want to spend a lot of energy on us. I'll bet they think that we've well exceeded our ear time quota with them just on the BPL issue. And perhaps this is something of a spite move on their part, punishing us for fighting so vigorously on BPL. Who knows? But consider what the FCC is going to do with our current big item, the bandwidth regulation proposal. Despite some whisperings in the corridors, we didn't seriously consider the option of doing away entirely with mode AND bandwidth regulation. My bet now is that the FCC will ignore our latest proposal as well, and put us on a scheme like that of Canada and most of the rest of the world. Two things to take away from this experience: 1 - while we think we are "listening to our constituents", we may in fact be avoiding our duty to really think and prepare for the longer term. We're not elected to "do what our members say" If that were true, we could just as well run the organization by monthly ballot of the members. We're elected to consider the issues affecting the Service more deeply than most individual members can, and to reach sound decisions. 2 - we have some influence with the FCC. That influence is strongest when we and they have similar objectives, and we use our strength to nudge things in one direction or the other, putting spin on the ball, so to speak. When our objectives and their objectives differ markedly, our influence declines. We've been 180 degrees out of phase with them on CW for a long time. Look who won the battle. Now ask yourself - Where do they stand on bandwidth? (I've received some hints indirectly from FCC sources that they would be just as happy to deregulate completely) Where do they stand on license classes? (we might have just gotten an answer to that one ...) Where do they stand on other matters important to us? We had better figure this out. 73, Mike K1TWF ----------------------------------- Law Office of Michael N. Raisbeck Phone: (978) 250-1236 Fax: (978) 250-0432 Web: www.mraisbeck.com Email: k1twf(a)arrl.net CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain privileged and confidential information intended only for the above-named recipient. If you have received this in error, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited. In such case, please notify us by reply email and delete this message. _____ From: Joel Harrison [mailto:w5zn@arrl.org] Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 9:49 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12752] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News Mike, Have you been asleep? Our petition and position really had nothing to do with CW, but had everything to do with modernizing our license structure with privileges to match. And at least one other important group, the VEC's thought so as well. I'm not upset about the CW ruling, I'm upset that FCC chose to ignore an opportunity to move forward. I for one, however, am not finished with this pursuit ! 73 Joel W5ZN -----Original Message----- From: Mike Raisbeck [mailto:k1twf@arrl.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 7:48 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News Hello Folks, I see this development quite differently than most of you (at least, those of you who have expresses opinions so far.) The FCC is delivering a message here that this Board has been struggling to ignore for my entire tenure as a vice director!!! CW is an antiquated, technologically uninteresting mode that is completely irrelevant to the goals and purposes of Amateur Radio I am myself a great fan of CW, and one who would probably come out on the top quartile of any CW test given to the members of this Board. But CW is like sailing - a wonderful, wonderful hobby, and a skill that no rational person would argue should be required knowlege to drive a power boat. Over the last decade we have seduced ourselves with arguments about how wonderful CW is in a low power, high noise pinch. How many examples can we really find of CW "saving the day"? We have invoked the high ground of "democracy" and of "doing the will of our members", ignoring the broader responsibility that we have to them to see and plan for a real future for the hobby. We have allowed our ears to be captured by a small number of vociferous crackpots (often, very intelligent and articulate crackpots, and just possibly including a few members of our own revered group!) Is the real sting in this that the FCC might be thinking that we are becoming a bit irrelevant? Frankly, if this decision of the FCC is a surprise to you, you need to take a long, hard look at yourself, your hobby, and your relation to it. 73, Mike K1TWF PS - do any of you see it interesting that the notice came out a few days AFTER the board meeting? ----------------------------------- Law Office of Michael N. Raisbeck Phone: (978) 250-1236 Fax: (978) 250-0432 Web: www.mraisbeck.com Email: k1twf(a)arrl.net CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain privileged and confidential information intended only for the above-named recipient. If you have received this in error, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited. In such case, please notify us by reply email and delete this message.

1 0

[arrl-odv:12776] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News
by Greg Milnes 21 Jul '05

21 Jul '05

But Kay, squashing him like a bug, is the right thing. 73/Greg W7OZ _____ From: Kay Craigie [mailto:n3kn@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 5:23 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12767] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News Surprise, disappointment, whatever. The semantics are beside the point. We're all unhappy with Bill Cross and would like to squash him like a bug. Since that, alas, is not an option, our job is to get over the initial emotional reaction to his knuckleheadedness and keep our focus on doing the right thing. 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0

Couldn't Resist
by Joel Harrison 21 Jul '05

21 Jul '05

I usually dislike forwarded jokes and email and try to avoid it. HOWEVER, given the events of yesterday, this seemed appropriate. 73 Joel W5ZN > > Five Surgeons > > Five surgeons are discussing who has the best > patients to operate on. > > The first surgeon says, "I like to see accountants on > my operating table because when you open them up, > everything inside is numbered." > > The second responds, "Yeah, but you should try > electricians! Everything inside them is color coded." > > The third surgeon says, "No, I really think > librarians are the best; everything inside them is in alphabetical > order." > > The fourth surgeon chimes in: "You know, I like > engineers. Those guys always understand when you have > a few parts left over at the end, and when the job > takes longer than you said it would." > > But the fifth surgeon shut them all up when he > observed: "You're all wrong. Politicians are the > easiest to operate on. There's no guts, no heart, no > balls, no brains and no spine, and the head and the > ass are interchangeable! > >

1 0

[arrl-odv:12774] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 21 Jul '05

21 Jul '05

I doubt that any Commissioner or any of the Commissioners' own staffs even read the NPRM. It was done in the Wireless Bureau. Dave -----Original Message----- From: dick(a)pobox.com [mailto:dick@pobox.com] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 2:45 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12772] Re: FCC Releases Restructuring NPRM - Not Good News 21 JUL, 2005 - 1340 CDT Considering that none of the Commissioners are technical people (all patronage-appointed attorneys?), I have to assume that staff input was paramount in the FCC's Restructuring NPRM. And who's input was paramount? Was it not a certain CS licensed amateur whose first name happens to be Bill. This person told me years ago his first priority was secure his longevity at the FCC by not going out on a limb on issues... CHA. I doubt if there is a conspiracy to teach ARRL a lesson for opposing BPL. But if there is one, remember we have a very vindictive White House these days. - Dick, W9GIG

1 0