"The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones." That's from memory and may not be verbatim, but it applies in this case. Even after BPL is dead and buried, if we let it stand, the fact that the FCC decided that all a Part 15 device operator has to do to resolve a harmful interference complaint is to reduce the emission by an arbitrary amount, even if interference is still present, will haunt us. The good news is that it gives other services a reason to intervene on our behalf, even if their ox isn't gored by BPL. Dave K1ZZ ________________________________ From: Shelley, Barry, N1VXY [mailto:bshelley@arrl.org] Sent: Mon 9/11/2006 3:52 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:14477] Re: DIRECTORS - YOUR ATTENTION REQUIRED 107771 - [arrl-odv:14463] Re: DIRECTORS - YOUR ATTENTION REQUIRED Point 3 of the memo to the EC discusses adding "yet another year of uncertainty" for the BPL promoters. My biggest hesitation in voting to spend the appeal money is: Will the flaws inherent in making BPL a viable marketplace broadband alternative FINALLY bring it down WITHOUT adding the time uncertainty of the appeal? Sure it would be great to duke this out in court (esp. if we win) but I suggest we not spend the money IF we have reasonable assurance BPL will fade in a somewhat timely fashion. Of course I realize reading the tea leaves accurately on that question are about as problematic as "will the FCC finally act on Morse and give our 2006 budget plan a chance of coming true" has been...... Nonetheless, I'd like to hear some as-of-today discussion of the chances BPL will wither and die on its own, within the framework of the above. Bruce