[AMRadio] ARRL changes: League dumps threat to AM


EP Swynar gswynar at durham.net
Sun Mar 25 08:10:46 EST 2007


What the heck is going on with our neighbours south of the 49th
Parallel...?!

You've seemingly got a licensing body populated by little-more than
did-interested, beaurocratic, career-oriented mandarins, headed-up by
politically correct toadies of big money & big bu$ine$$...your largest lobby
group seems to be grossly ineffective of late in its ability to grab the ear
of the FCC to make it listen, because it's apparently too distracted by its
own agenda & internal empire building...

I am NOT attempting to condemn you good folks, or put you down, or set up
our system here in Canada by comparison as some sort of a ",,,beacon of
enlightenment" --- nothing like that at all! But man-o-man, I do feel for
you guys.

It's like you're all alone in a cruel world that simply continues to change
for the worst. Obviously politics & Ham radio do NOT mix...on ANY level. I
only hope things might change for you guys soon, because you certainly do
deserve better than what you've been getting for the past several years,
IMHO...

~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bry Carling" <bcarling at cfl.rr.com>
To: "Discussion of AM Radio in the Amateur Service"
<amradio at mailman.qth.net>
Cc: <BOATANCHORS at LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV>; <FLBOATANCHORS at yahoogroups.com>;
<heathkit at yahoogroups.com>; <MOPAGROUP at yahoogroups.com>;
<AmRadGear at yahoogroups.com>; <dcboatanchors at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 6:51 AM
Subject: [AMRadio] ARRL changes: League dumps threat to AM


> Thanks, Paul - excellent commentary from WA3VJB...
>
> The threat to operators of old tube AM and CW rigs is
> somewhat diminished.
>
> To expand and explain slightly - the part they DO want to keep...
> They now propose to destroy only ten meters, perhaps figuring
> that since there has been a long sunspot minimum, no one
> will be paying attention...
>
> http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2007/03/23/101/?nc=1
>
> Wa3VJB wrote
>
> > The ARRL, a small, non-profit publishing company in
> > Newington Connecticut, has abandoned a threat to
> > impose a system of bandwidth segregation on the
> > various modes and activities on HF below 10 meters.
> >
> > In an email to the club's volunteer administrators,
> > Dave Sumner, the company's highest-paid, unelected
> > staffer, seems to have acknowledged the overwhelming
> > opposition arrayed against his group's plan the past
> > several years.
> >
> > The threat to AM was specific and unquestionable -- it
> > would have imposed the first-ever, numerical
> > constraints on bandwidth without providing a means for
> > licensees to ensure compliance and ward off
> > unwarranted complaints from those who do not
> > participate in this mode and activity.
> >
> > The scheme would also have characterized AM as a
> > "footnote" that otherwise would not be in compliance
> > with their misguided system of bandwidth segregation.
> >
> > Sumner wrote, in part,
> >
> > Quote
> > Regulation by bandwidth rather than by mode of
> > emission remains controversial below 28 MHz because of
> > perceived potential impact on established operating
> > patterns, so these proposals were removed from the
> > list with one narrow exception.
> >
> > Those who subscribe to the ARRL can pursue the full
> > text, which contains several insults and additional
> > patronizing language to those of us who dared to
> > question the scheme their group tried to slip through.
> >
> > Keywords:
> > --And for the truly paranoid
> > --don't know all the facts
> > --making their complaints and threats
> > --have other motives
> >
> > It is important to note that the club continues to try
> > to sneak through the small, remaining portion of their
> > scheme that opponents had not, until now, chosen to
> > challenge.
> >
> > Fresh opposition remarks about the fraction the League
> > continues to push are now being filed and accepted on
> > the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System.
> >
> > The latest challenges join the carefully considered,
> > well-reasoned arguments that gave the ARRL a severe
> > spanking and refuted that group's earlier threat to AM
> > that they now have abandoned.
> >
> > This appears to be the system of feedback the group in
> > Newington prefers.
> >
> > Paul/VJB
> >
> >
> >
> >
____________________________________________________________________________
________
> > Never miss an email again!
> > Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives.
> > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > AMRadio mailing list
> > List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
> > List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
> > Partner Website: http://www.amfone.net
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> > Post: mailto:AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
> > To unsubscribe, send an email to amradio-request at mailman.qth.net with
> > the word unsubscribe in the message body.
> >
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> AMRadio mailing list
> List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
> List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
> Partner Website: http://www.amfone.net
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
> To unsubscribe, send an email to amradio-request at mailman.qth.net with
> the word unsubscribe in the message body.




More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 22 Oct 2017.