So Where do we Go From Here ?

[John Holotko]

Thus far  as far as proposals 11305 and 11306 go the number of cons is exceeding the number of pro's. Now it may be too early to tell but, assuming the results stay the same and at the end of the comment period if both proposals are rejected then what  happens ? Does the FRCC simply drop the proposals as "failed",  everything goes unchanged,  and we start  all over again. Or does the FCC salvage stuff from the proposals and make  new rules ?  Just  curious what  happens next in the event both proposals  end up iced.

[w3jn]

THe proposals are studied on their merits, and well-reasoned comments taken into account.  Generally it almost takes an act of God for the FCC to adopt private petitions for rule changes.

One of the problems that the FCC has is separating the wheat from the chaff in the comments.  The proposals are NOT up for a vote; IE the for/against comment ratio does not automatically pass or fail the petition.  But as you can see many hams have wasted their comments by submitting poorly-reasoned/poorly written arguments - or no argument at all.

73 John

[WA3VJB]

Ain't it the truth, John ?

From having followed recent Petitions, including the failed proposal to establish mandatory segregation on 160 meters, I've seen how the FCC measures the value of a Comment -- the agency CITES those comments as part of its Report & Order.

Sometimes the FCC will mention how many people participated in the review, and may even tally the number in favor and opposed. But rarely does such a de facto "poll" prompt the agency's decision.

For example, on raw numbers, more people were in FAVOR of the 160 meter partitioning than those opposed.  Yet, the strength of the arguments was what prompted the FCC to DENY the Petition.

It's real food for thought as you prepare to file your Comment.

[W2INR]

We are not done here. When I say "we" I mean the amateur radio community as a whole.

Some points I would like to make:

This issue at hand is 11306. This is the important issue that we must all comment on.

The proposals submitted are NOT an either/or thing. Comments on both should be made but 11306 is the dangerous path.

This is NOT a mode thing:

 It appears that some individuals( I won't mention W8JI or others) have turned this into a mode issue. Why? To cloud the real issues and to sway people to comment in a direction they might have not commented on before thru mis- information and scare tactics. This is about how the hobby does business not modes.  Yes it will effect different modes in certain ways but that is not and should not be the main focus, yet certain people have turned it into just that and the FCC will see thru all of that if even considered.

Here is the real problem - - - APATHY - - -

 At this point .0004%(averaged number) of the amateur radio community have posted comments. QTF? Over the years all you here are people sayng they are unhappy with the way things are in our hobby yet when the time comes to voice an opinion we can't get 1% to participate.Take a look at this BBS and others and many of those that seem to have all the time to type away have not taken a lousy 5 minutes for our hobby.  That tells the ARRL and FCC a much stronger message and one I do not like - - - - can you say apathy. All I hear from people is how they love the hobby but I do not see that on the comments page. Some may be holding out to the end, but I just don't see the numbers as they should be.

Yes our comments play a small part, if any, of the proposal process but a large turn out of comments in either direction would send a message to the ARRL and the FCC that this is something we are concerned about. It does not matter whether one is pro or against either proposal, it matters that we show the parties concerned that we are part of the process and expect to be part of the process. .0004% tells a completely different story.

 I don't care what history dictates, history does not say we must follow suit.  History has always shown that change is guaranteed and I say if so then why not help shape it.

So where do we go from here? Stay the course, make sure all know about this and get your freinds to comment. Why should we except less?

IMHO

GARY /W2INR

added comment:  We do not have to agree but we must be part of the process.

[WA3VJB]

Gary thank you for the rallying cry. 

I hope people take you up on it.

From having taken part in the infamous Docket 20777 in 1976-77, the one that would have banned AM below ten meters. I feel that I can point out how a strong turnout can become an investment for the future.

30 years ago, and Don K4KYV and a few others have said this many times, AM activity was pretty much at low tide. We were at our MOST VULNERABLE to being removed from the list of accepted emissions on HF.

15 years ago that started to change. Instead of being banned, we instead saw our specialty's growth and popularity of AM in all its forms coming about, but ONLY because of the earlier efforts of a dedicated bunch, maybe 100 people, who went through a laborious process of TYPING their Comment, submitting an original and ELEVEN copies by mail to the FCC in Washington.

Take a look at the directions at the top of the hand-typed ledger entry (hit the link) that I obtained from the FCC archives this past summer as the League threatened to move ahead with their scheme.

In 1976-77 there was no Electronic Comment Filing System, a Comment could NOT be sent by fax, there were no word-processing computers, there was barely a photocopy machine. All this stuff was done by hand, including the stuffing of folded, hand-stapled copies of the Docket, the typing of the envelopes, and the licking of a stamp on every damn one of them in my basement alongside Kevin WB4AIO, assembly line fashion.

The responses those good folks filed are what saved AM for you to enjoy today.

Those are just the mechanics, friends. Most of us can muster a 10 minute old buzzard transmission, and I have no doubt you can develop a thought or two as to why RM-11306 is bad for the hobby and a threat to what we now enjoy.

No, the Petition from the League does not call for a ban on AM like we faced earlier. But it would impose restrictions in such a way, without a means of measurement, that could provoke people into complaining about our activity because the technical basis for their complaint would not have to be substantiated.

Please take the time, soon, to help knock that thing dead cold.

Remember the folks who came before you :

http://www.wa3vjb.com/pics/who.bmp

[Ed KB1HVS]

APATHY lots would rather whine about a problem than try to do something. Most people would rather stay home and watch reruns of Mork and Mindy than go to the ballot box.

[John Holotko]

I have put up a page on my website containing links to the band plan proposals. The page  also contains links to the page to file comments  with the FCC as well as a  link to the page where you can review comments

The page can be reached at:

http://home.computer.net/~micros50/rulemaking.html

Now  lets get thos comments filed !!.

[John Holotko]

Gary thank you for the rallying cry. 



In 1976-77 there was no Electronic Comment Filing System, a Comment could NOT be sent by fax, there were no word-processing computers, t

Oh, there were  indeed word processors in 1976-77.  Only prtoblem was they were very far and few between and expensive.

http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa030199.htm

[W2INR]

Allow me to put the links here for veiwing and commenting on 11306

This may be of help in observing comments:

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi

In the proceeding box just type in the RM number your are interested in.

'and this link for filing your comments:

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi

When referring to 11306 you must type it in as   RM-11306

If you do not understand the system or feel uncomfortable with the filing site please fire off your comments to - - - -

 stoprm11306@amfone.net. .

Include your comments ( a paragraph or two and your legal name, address with your call as listed in the QRZ Database. I will file your comments for you.

Everyone, please, comment. Your input is critical.

G/W2INR

[WA1GFZ]

back in '83 I moved back east to find slop bucketers trying to eliminate AM. I then changed my mo from CW to AM and it has been alot of fun.

Do not forget some people would like no change. They should air that opinion.

[Ed Nesselroad]

Okay, Gary.  Your call to arms got me off my duff and into comment mode. 

After spending some time with both proposals, I'm moved to say that in their own way -- flawed as they may be by motive or specifics -- each at least seems like an attempt to manage the spectrum available to us in a manner more reflective of the way we use it.  There is less CW, more phone -- including AM, and new digital operation.  Are we ready for wide-open bands?  Based on nightly behavior on 75 meters or weekend behavior on 20 meters, I don't think so.  Are we ready for regimented bandwidths and segments with AM as an "exception", all with the implied notion that the future belongs to the digital gang?  Again, I don't think so. 

If you look at all the posts on this and other sites, there's more than enough energy and intelligence (okay, most of the posts) to harness into developing a really workable proposal.  We could do more than just rail against the league, the FCC, and the odd individuals who take a stand.  How about an AMPhone response?  A write-in substitute that the assembled multitude hereabouts might support.

[AG4YO]

I'd be careful with the "we have to accept change" argument.  Changes do come we have to accept but just because it is a change, doesn't mean it is good nor do we escape the need to fight it if it is bad.  Some people say change is enevitable, so why fight it.  My answer is, you're going to die one day, so why not just kill yourself now? Accept the coming change and get with it!

Obviously the extreme example is used to show there are many reasons why you may want to hold on to your life as long as you can.  You may want to think about accepting the fact that one day you will die, and working to that day.  But selling all your possessions, all your clothes, your home and sitting on the park bench waiting for death is not a good choice either.

In Amateur Radio today SSB and CW are the most popular modes, with a resurgence in AM use (yep I love it too).  Digital use is 99% narrowband now.  The remaining 1% of users are the ones pushing for the changes.  It makes sense to me to wait until they are 30-50% (if that day ever comes) before worrying about them needing more spectrum.  Then it's clear a change is needed.  Right now the "digital explosion" is more like a pop-n-snap. 

If we're all hell bent on changing something, why not change the ARRL?  In an era where they ask US to change, they aren't changing a thing organization-wise.  In an era where other groups are getting member participation and opening up the komono, the ARRL is as clique-ish as ever.  When we have more open polling and member participation, then we may get decent petitions filed.  Most everything the League has filed in the last 10 years has been an embarrasment.  And with the new President it will be more of the same.  He's the guy who called the debate over removing telegraphy testing "amateur radio's great religious debate" as a way to dismiss the need for dialogue.  We all know you can't argue with religious fanatics, right?

But whoever spoke about apathy hit the nail on the head.  I talk on the air today to folks who still think they're giving the Advanced test or Novice test.  These folks are the ones who wake up one day when the rules are changed and spend the next 20 years complaining.  A good many only believe what they read in QST which is always the "sweet flowers and cuddly bunnies" version of the ARRL actions.  Where do we go from here?  Without action to bring the ARRL back in line, the answer is DOWN.

[WA3VJB]

Charlie,
Nice to see you on here.
By way of introduction, Charlie is one of the active players in SPAR, the Society for the Preservation of Amateur Radio.  Good group of folks with a lot of common ground alongside the AM Community.

Regarding the prospective rise of digital activity on HF, you said:
It makes sense to me to wait until they are 30-50% (if that day ever comes) before worrying about them needing more spectrum.

This is a risky approach. I don't favor regulation as much as I favor clear expectations. Right now there's no real alarm bell going off about bringing email from the internet over ham radio. I have some real concerns about that, and yet it seems to be THE main reason people are pushing for the "development" of digital communications.

SPAR and several individuals have identified some clear problems encouraging the growth of automatic data stations interspersed with comms that are copied by ear, and I bet the next phase of that concern will center on the content of data stations and whether it is appropriate for ham radio vis a vis commercial rivals.

The content and marketing of such systems provides one of the strongest angles of attack, TODAY available against prospective problems from digital communications. Waiting until there may be a critical mass of operators would allow them to form lobbying strength they now enjoy only within the confines of the group in Newington.

Paul/VJB