Good job on the League web report! It certainly is “interesting” to see how some
folks are able to finagle facts to reinterpret them to suit their
need and, in this case, to take a swipe at us.
Facts must create wounds in some people.
Anyone have a large salt shaker?
Director, Great Lakes
Division ARRL; http://www.arrl.org/
5065 Bethany Rd., Mason,
OH 45040
Tel.: 513-459-0142;
E-mail: k8je@arrl.org
ARRL:
The reason Amateur Radio Is!
MEMBERS:
The reason ARRL Is!
-----Original Message-----
From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ
[mailto:dsumner@arrl.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004
10:54 PM
To: arrl-odv
Subject: [ARRL-ODV:11642] Our
Earthlink story struck a nerve
The ARRL Web story http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/12/16/3/?nc=1 about
Earthlink telling the FCC that BPL was not a "commerciallly viable
alternative" to cable and DSL appears to have struck a nerve.
Ambient is putting out a rebuttal. Of course, they are ignoring the
fact that the conclusions we reported are Earthlink's, not ours.
I have written to Marketwatch in reply:
-----Original Message-----
From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ
Sent: Fri 12/17/2004 2:56 AM
To: newsroom@marketwatch.com
Cc:
Subject: Ambient's response to
ARRL
Rather than simply reproduce Ambient's comments, why not refer
your readers to the actual Earthlink document as submitted to the FCC? It is
available to the public at http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6516883843.
Note especially the second paragraph on page 1 and the chart on page 18.
ARRL's report on the document was accurate in every
way and we stand by our report. The conclusions given are not ours, but
Earthlink's.
David Sumner
Chief Executive Officer, ARRL