Thanks Bob:
Other than ARRL, are there any other sources of news like this before it
becomes law? Or is this the starting point of our knowledge
of it.
73 fer nw es gud DX,
QSL VIA: BUR, LotW, e-QSL
Bob AD5VJ(AAR6VM)
Old calls: WY5L/KH3-KE5CTY-N5IET
http://www.ad5vj.com/
Member: CTDXCC, NTCC, STXDXCC
FISTS: # 12637, SKCC# 2369
10X# 37210, FP#-1141
SMIRK#-5177, RARS #-149
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bob Cunnings
> Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2006 12:49 AM
> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] [Fwd: FCC ELIMINATES CW EXAM]
>
> It's all right here:
>
> http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-143A1.pdf
>
> Bob NW8L
>
> On 12/16/06, AD5VJ Bob <rtnmi@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > That brings up a good point. Some entity somewhere had to "push"
> > through the no code. I don't think this was just an idea
> someone at the FCC office had in a dream one night and spent
> the governments money to fulfill it.
> >
> > So that being said, I for one would sincerely like to know,
> what was
> > the argument that won and what was the strength of the argument?
> >
> > 73 fer nw es gud DX,
> > QSL VIA: BUR, LotW, e-QSL
> > Bob AD5VJ(AAR6VM)
> > Old calls: WY5L/KH3-KE5CTY-N5IET
> > http://www.ad5vj.com/
> >
> > Member: CTDXCC, NTCC, STXDXCC
> > FISTS: # 12637, SKCC# 2369
> > 10X# 37210, FP#-1141
> > SMIRK#-5177, RARS #-149
> >
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|