Regulation by Bandwidth Proposals - Decision Coming

[Pete, WA2CWA]

From the ARRL web site:

NEWINGTON, CT, Jul 7, 2005--When it meets July 15-16, the ARRL Board of Directors will consider recommendations that could result in a petition calling on the FCC to regulate the use of amateur spectrum by emission bandwidth rather than by emission mode. The ARRL Executive Committee reached consensus on a set of regulation-by-bandwidth proposals April 9, and the League has received more than 500 comments from the amateur community since the latest version of the draft recommendations went public. The ARRL will file nothing with the FCC until the Board gives its go-ahead, however. ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ, says the Board essentially has four options....

Go here to read the rest of the above details and links to additional information: http://www.remote.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/07/07/101/?nc=1

[W2VW]

Just what is this supposed to mean? A regulation without regulation? Reads just like junk science.

"Amateurs would not be required to be able to measure the bandwidth of their signals. The proposed bandwidths are more than sufficient for "clean" signals using the traditional HF modes. We have had regulation by bandwidth for certain data operations for many years without fomenting great debate over whether or not a particular signal was legal. Measurement would only arise as a potential problem for those who try to push the edge of the envelope".

[Art]

Pete,
Thanks for your support on the CTT proposal. I appreciate it. Considering what the ARRL is advocating I sense you must be feeling a certain bi-polar twinge at this point.
Art

[Ott]

Just what is this supposed to mean? A regulation without regulation? Reads just like junk science.

"Amateurs would not be required to be able to measure the bandwidth of their signals. The proposed bandwidths are more than sufficient for "clean" signals using the traditional HF modes. We have had regulation by bandwidth for certain data operations for many years without fomenting great debate over whether or not a particular signal was legal. Measurement would only arise as a potential problem for those who try to push the edge of the envelope".

Afternoon Dave...

We have a better chance of passing a test on all 59 pages of IRS Publication 505 than divining their constant prattlings...

These are the same people who have morphed Robert's Rules into a full time profession...

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Pete,
Thanks for your support on the CTT proposal. I appreciate it. Considering what the ARRL is advocating I sense you must be feeling a certain bi-polar twinge at this point.
Art

I would only consider the CTT proposal if I believed (which I don't)  that we need to turn the amateur radio service into total anarchy. The entire CTT proposal is based on delusional information and data. It's based on the grumbling of a select few who's only intent is to grab as much phone space as they muster, without any regard for the rest of current and future modes, and to the amateur radio service. It's very sad and embarrassing that most of CTT members are also AM operators.

[Art]

Ahh Petey . .  it surprises me you are so easily saddened and embarrassed by others when you have so much to be sad and embarrassed about yourself. None the less, I plugged the ARRL meeting on QRZ.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


""Personally, I think operations will proceed well without the structure of governmental band plans. Yes, there will be those who will not follow the regulations . . . however, they will not follow regulations in any case so I would not constrain all because of them.
Will there be band plans? You bet! However, I don't have a crystal ball that will tell us what tomorrow will bring in terms of technology and operating habits. I think anyone who says they do is being less than honest with themselves.
Band plans will evolve just as they have in Canada and many other less regulated areas of the world if we avoid artificial boundaries constraining the good ops who are, indeed, the majority.

I know there will be those who are uncomfortable without a  governmental blanket and their indignation when it doesn't sufficiently cover their assets . . . and then demand still more regulation . . I don't understand this view at all . .  

Creativity, thought, and human discourse fare much better when allowed to exist in an environment unrestricted by artificial and/or worse yet, ill advised, constraints.

If the de-reg is too radical for you flood the ARRL with positive suggestions now. Come up with a suggestion other than pure objection or you will be disregarded. I don't think any one else is going to get a proposal on the table fast enough to do any good at this point.
500 responses seems. . . a poor representation of amateurs at large."

"NEWINGTON, CT, Jul 7, 2005--When it meets July 15-16, the ARRL Board of Directors will consider recommendations that could result in a petition calling on the FCC to regulate the use of amateur spectrum by emission bandwidth rather than by emission mode. The ARRL Executive Committee reached consensus on a set of regulation-by-bandwidth proposals April 9, and the League has received more than 500 comments from the amateur community since the latest version of the draft recommendations went public. The ARRL will file nothing with the FCC until the Board gives its go-ahead, however. ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ, says the Board essentially has four options....

Go here to read the rest of the above details and links to additional information: http://www.remote.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/07/07/101/?nc=1"

[W3SLK]

WA2CWA said

I would only consider the CTT proposal if I believed (which I don't) that we need to turn the amateur radio service into total anarchy.

Pete you need to stop facing Newington and bowing! There was a time when I was an ARRghL cheerleader. But the enchantment was broken when I noticed how arrogant they were with regards to the membersand how they treated people like Rich Measures to name a few. T.O.M. would be running rampant through HQ with the Woulfhong and Rettysnitch over how they veered from the very principles the organization was founded on. Those clowns up there only want what THEY want. Not what the members at large want. I wish I knew who said it but they were right when they said, "Power corrupts; Absolute power, absolutlely corrupts!"

[W2VW]

Just what is this supposed to mean? A regulation without regulation? Reads just like junk science.

"Amateurs would not be required to be able to measure the bandwidth of their signals. The proposed bandwidths are more than sufficient for "clean" signals using the traditional HF modes. We have had regulation by bandwidth for certain data operations for many years without fomenting great debate over whether or not a particular signal was legal. Measurement would only arise as a potential problem for those who try to push the edge of the envelope".

Afternoon Dave...

We have a better chance of passing a test on all 59 pages of IRS Publication 505 than divining their constant prattlings...

These are the same people who have morphed Robert's Rules into a full time profession...

Maybe you are right but a lot of people read what goes on here and elsewhere in order to get a pulse.

[Jack-KA3ZLR-]

Morning Folks,

 I just don't understand why it's So hard to get a little more Room.

 Static operations today demand it, i don't get the unseeing obvious.

[Tom WA3KLR]

Mike mentioned Richard Measures AG6K.  Richard published an article in January 1994 QST on modifications for linear amplifiers.  I remember reading the article at the time.  I completely missed the rebuttal article however!  His name happened to pop into my head about a year ago and I entered his name in Google.  I found his website and read his account of the aftermath of his technical article being published in QST.  Quite disappointing.

His website is:

http://www.somis.org/

Scroll down and read the section titled - League Fatigue.

Read his account, his original article, the rebuttal article, etc.  It gives a good glimpse in to League politics.

[Art]

I had a little time to kill so, what the heck, I didn't give Peteys post the response it deserved. . . .

"I would only consider the CTT proposal if I believed (which I don't) that we need to turn the amateur radio service into total anarchy."

 This is a most pessimistic perspective meant to 'scare' folks into believing the rest of your tripe. It is 'sad' at best.

"The entire CTT proposal is based on delusional information and data."

Yep, a proposal that supports freedom and the right to choose is bound to be a delusion to people who cannot function without a boot on their back.

"It's based on the grumbling of a select few"

Thank you, I do feel special . . . and I only grumble about incompetence. Read on to see what I am grumbling about now . . .

" who's only intent is to grab as much phone space as they muster, without any regard for the rest of current and future modes, and to the amateur radio service."

Absolute bull bagels. Anyone who reads the proposal can see all modes and all people are treated as equal. The only limiting factor is you.
 
"It's very sad and embarrassing that most of CTT members are also AM operators."

I already responded to this but didn't elaborate why I think you are probably representing the saddest and most embarrassing element in amateur radio today. Consider the "press release" . . .
You criticise the CTT for being but seven representatives of many. Well Petey, I have responded to over 500 'inputs' myself. Many have just  sent a brief email with a 'right on'. . . . admittedly, some less than 'aligned' responses as well. How many responses did you quote as providing input to the ARRL 'proposal(s)' . . . oh yeah, more than 500. Can we say the ARRL did about as well as 7 disparate crusaders? Nope, we can't. We did better. The ARRL clearly demonstrated their procedural, marketing, and technical incompetence with their effort. That's why I posted the press release on QRZ . . . they need all the input they can get and if I can help . . . well, I am still a life member . . .

BTW Petey . . . would you sign my application to run for Atlantic director?

-ap

[W3SLK]

Art said:

Absolute bull bagels.

I like that Art May I use that as part of my negotiating repertoire?

[Art]

Well Mikey ..  please feel free to use it as you wish. I stole it from Col. Potter,    MASH 4077 . . . as for a negotiating tool . . . what it lacks in eloquence it makes up in emphasis . . . sometimes it is appropriate to express  disagreement .. . colorfully . . yet tastefully . . . pass the cream cheese please . . .

-ap

[AMroo]

And I was thinking of joining the ARRL, not now.

[Jack-KA3ZLR-]

Good Day Everyone,

 Joining the League is an individual decision and i think in the begining aspiring Amateurs should take a look see and become aware as much as possible and gain as much insight as can be had about it obviously there are some utilities that are handy, of course now with the internet accessability and the imediate information exchange having an impact it has put a different light on the service so, it's there for one and all to use, and I am a Member and I have at times vocalized my problems with the Admin and that's a good thing and I vote when needed so, information and education is power, and I'm always for continuing learning as time passes and experience is gained the skys the limit in the service.

 Obviously there are some problems and i've always felt that the only way to change the system is work within it, that's my take.

Good day.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Art said - How many responses did you quote as providing input to the ARRL 'proposal(s)' . . . oh yeah, more than 500. Can we say the ARRL did about as well as 7 disparate crusaders? Nope, we can't. We did better. The ARRL clearly demonstrated their procedural, marketing, and technical incompetence with their effort. That's why I posted the press release on QRZ . . . they need all the input they can get and if I can help . . . well, I am still a life member . . .

Actually Art, I probably would be more concerned with the ones that didn't respond.  Initial inputs, pros and cons, are easy to count. Responders out beating the bushes for support, either way,  might be difficult to gauge.

Art said - BTW Petey . . . would you sign my application to run for Atlantic director?

Don't think I can do it since I'm in the Hudson Division, but it's great news, if you're serious about it. Your progressive thinking, in a Director position, could help shape amateur radio's future direction. Who would you want for Vice-Director?