No subject

[Beryl D. Simonson K3AR]

Enough already.  I received my fourth choice after Fedexing my
application to Pittsburgh.  I was almost the last call issued on the
list.  Something must have been random.  Although the whole process
could have been handled in a better fashion (it's always easier to
second guess), I'm happy I got a 1x2 call and certainly wouldn't want
to take a chance a second time around, nor would I want to wait
another month, six months, or a year until the FCC tries again, and
maybe still doesn't' produce to everyone's satisfaction.  I, along
with many others have ordered new QSLs, updated email addresses,
packet cluster signon's, etc.  I'm satisfied with what I received,
and tired of the bickering.  Barring somebody proving outright fraud
during the process, or with respect to specific call signs (and then
I guess those call signs should be revoked and thrown back in to the
pot), who knows where you would end up if you threw your call sign
back in to the pot and tried again.  

This is not meant to flame anyone, but the few individuals who had to
have X1XX, or X1XY, and want to litigate to get it, can sure mess the
process up for the vast majority of us who are more than satisfied
that we got one of our choices.

Beryl


Beryl D. Simonson  K3AR  (formerly KE3GA) Frankford Radio Club
(H) k3ar at contesting.com or bsimonson at comcastpc.com
(W) bsimonson at slfcpa.com


>From jbmitch at vt.edu (John Mitchell)  Thu Nov 14 01:37:53 1996
From: jbmitch at vt.edu (John Mitchell) (John Mitchell)
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 20:37:53 -0500
Subject: (Vanity uproar)
Message-ID: <199611140138.UAA04091 at sable.cc.vt.edu>

At 08:03 PM 11/13/96 -0500, Beryl D. Simonson K3AR wrote:
>Enough already.  I received my fourth choice after Fedexing my
>application to Pittsburgh.  I was almost the last call issued on the
>list.  Something must have been random.  Although the whole process
>could have been handled in a better fashion (it's always easier to
>second guess), I'm happy I got a 1x2 call and certainly wouldn't want
>to take a chance a second time around, nor would I want to wait
>another month, six months, or a year until the FCC tries again, and
>maybe still doesn't' produce to everyone's satisfaction.  I, along
>with many others have ordered new QSLs, updated email addresses,
>packet cluster signon's, etc.  I'm satisfied with what I received,
>and tired of the bickering.  Barring somebody proving outright fraud
>during the process, or with respect to specific call signs (and then
>I guess those call signs should be revoked and thrown back in to the
>pot), who knows where you would end up if you threw your call sign
>back in to the pot and tried again.  
>
>This is not meant to flame anyone, but the few individuals who had to
>have X1XX, or X1XY, and want to litigate to get it, can sure mess the
>process up for the vast majority of us who are more than satisfied
>that we got one of our choices.
>
>Beryl


Dittos.

Here's my take on all this.  We all had about the same chance to get a good
call.  The FCC home page still had no info about actually filing
electronically on the date I needed to mail my application (2 day air,
mailed on Saturday), so I had a choice:  either mail the app or wait to see
how the e system would work, or not work, on Monday.  A few adventurers
gambled on the E system.  Unless they had previous knowledge that their
calls would receive priority, how can they be said to have done other than
gambled and won?  I chose not to gamble, and took my chances with the rest
using snail mail.  BTW I got my ninth choice, and am delighted.  

Now some would have the whole game torn down and started over, just to maybe
increase their chances?  Come on.  Probably illegal, too, as we've all been
lawfully using our new calls for a week or so now.  How to undo all those
"illegal" qsos, once all the vanity calls are recalled.  Come on, folks,
let's get real.  Let's get over it.  

73,

John K4IQ


>From w0mu at sprynet.com (Mike Fatchett)  Thu Nov 14 01:49:58 1996
From: w0mu at sprynet.com (Mike Fatchett) (Mike Fatchett)
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 18:49:58 -0700
Subject: 
Message-ID: <01BBD193.81F47560 at hd14-174.compuserve.com>

I think you missed the point.  I am tired of being lied to and misled by =
the Govenment.  As long as the majority of people think as you do they =
will continue to do it.  I don't expect anything to happen, but I do =
think the FCC owes the Amateur community the real answer

Mike

----------
From: 	Beryl D. Simonson K3AR[SMTP:bsimonson at comcastpc.com]
Sent: 	Wednesday, November 13, 1996 6:03 PM
To: 	CQ Contest Mailing List

Enough already.  I received my fourth choice after Fedexing my
application to Pittsburgh.  I was almost the last call issued on the
list.  Something must have been random.  Although the whole process
could have been handled in a better fashion (it's always easier to
second guess), I'm happy I got a 1x2 call and certainly wouldn't want
to take a chance a second time around, nor would I want to wait
another month, six months, or a year until the FCC tries again, and
maybe still doesn't' produce to everyone's satisfaction.  I, along
with many others have ordered new QSLs, updated email addresses,
packet cluster signon's, etc.  I'm satisfied with what I received,
and tired of the bickering.  Barring somebody proving outright fraud
during the process, or with respect to specific call signs (and then
I guess those call signs should be revoked and thrown back in to the
pot), who knows where you would end up if you threw your call sign
back in to the pot and tried again. =20

This is not meant to flame anyone, but the few individuals who had to
have X1XX, or X1XY, and want to litigate to get it, can sure mess the
process up for the vast majority of us who are more than satisfied
that we got one of our choices.

Beryl

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Beryl D. Simonson  K3AR  (formerly KE3GA) Frankford Radio Club
(H) k3ar at contesting.com or bsimonson at comcastpc.com
(W) bsimonson at slfcpa.com



>From w0mu at sprynet.com (Mike Fatchett)  Thu Nov 14 01:52:20 1996
From: w0mu at sprynet.com (Mike Fatchett) (Mike Fatchett)
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 18:52:20 -0700
Subject: Does anyone really know what time it is?
Message-ID: <01BBD193.CD6A15E0 at hd14-174.compuserve.com>



There is also a program called TARDIS that will keep your =
computers,servers etc... on the correct time.  I think you have to have =
a connection to the Internet though.

Mike