Until evidence is presented otherwise, I don't think we can assume the ARRL is
'all over this' FCC RFI inquiry.
I contacted the gentleman who was listed at the end of the document. First,
his ARRL email address did not work. After I dug around and found an IEEE
address I was able to make contact. But I didn't get much assistance in how to
best address the FCC in this action.
I requested other filing documents we could review so we didn't have to
reinvent the wheel. The feds are pretty specific about format, so it would be a
shame to have a well-conceived reply be rejected because it failed the
formatting test.
No help.
The army of volunteers the ARRL could bring to bear is left unfocused and
unmanaged. Each to his own.
A very inefficient way to approach this battle.
Yes, I've discussed this with ARRL leadership, all the way to the top of the
ladder.
Scott
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® II, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
<div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Dave Cole
<dave@nk7z.net> </div><div>Date:06/22/2016 7:16 AM (GMT-05:00) </div><div>To:
rfi@contesting.com </div><div>Subject: Re: [RFI] More information regarding the
FCC's TAC inquiry on the
RF spectrum noise floor </div><div>
</div>On Wed, 2016-06-22 at 05:09 -0500, Rob Atkinson wrote:
> This story in Radio World does a good job of spelling out what it is
> all about:
>
> http://www.radioworld.com/article/fcc-adviors-tackle-noise-floor-issue
> s/279077
>
> 73
>
> Rob
> K5UJ
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
My assumption is the ARRL is all over this... Ed? If so, how can we
help?
--
73's, and thanks,
Dave (NK7Z)
For software/hardware reviews see:
http://www.nk7z.net
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|