On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Ben Antanaitis - WB2RHM
<wb2rhm@wb2rhm.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> If you haven't revisited the FCC lately, they continue to accept and publish
> comments on the ARRL jihad RM-11708 against narrow bandwidth signals........
>
> http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/proceeding/view;jsessionid=vWQHSHGLScXSWQn3bMTs7cXGgQGCFgG12Hz2VC0PlrF6w92nyS2K!-1864380355!1357496456?name=RM-11708
>
> The latest posting batch is interesting.... there are 4 comments (they seem
> to state identical reasoning phrased in 4 different ways) from the same
> individual (maybe representing some group, I don't know) where many of us
> are mentioned by name and callsign and we are ridiculed for our ignorance.
33 points over 10 pages. And a lawyer-like header, even. I'm sure
the commissioners will be duly impressed.
He claims on one of his 4 submissions that the other three had been
rejected. Um, no, they weren't. I'm sure the commissioners will be
impressed by his grasp of the ECFS, too. :-)
I'm going to assume that, like in Congress, these will be triaged by
staffers into groups with common themes and may even a recommendation
as to which way to go. If that's the case and if said staffers are
used to trolling through Part 97 NPRM comments, hopefully they'll be
able to separate the wheat from the chaff fairly efficiently.
And whittle it down from 900 to the 5 or 6 that are really meaningful
and well-constructed. :-)
--
Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|