Your argument is concise and to the point. Agreed. ARRL (or insert any organization's name here) bigotry, bad spelling, and poor grammar aside, the issue seems like a good one to tackle and I support the proposed RM. But I am just a nobody to anyone here... Who cares? At least this web site highlights improperly spelled words as you type - can't understand why spelling errors persist. But, who cares? I don't. Moving on...
This proposal does two good things. It brings regulation of amateur digital modes into the latter half of the 20th century (still a ways to go to get into this century) and it establishes a bandwidth limit for data modes, which does not exist now. It's too bad that it doesn't go the full way to regulation by bandwidth rather than transmission content. It will be interesting to see what hams can come up with if the symbol rate limit goes away.
I anticipate more QRM-flavored temper tantrums if something interesting is developed and shows up on the bands.
The way I understand it the proposal would allow semi automated and automated PACTOR stations to transmit with a bandwidth of 2800 hz anywhere in the CW/digital mode areas totally and permanently wipe out CW and digital modes such as MFSK16, PSK31, RTTY, etc. There are already problems with PACTOR stations wiping out ongoing digital mode QSO's. I've been operating the digital modes since 2003 and in the intervening 13 years I've had 1000's of digital mode QSO's wiped out by PACTOR stations both automated and semi automated. Why? Because the PACTOR stations violate the most basic of operating tenets, listen before transmitting.
There is already a rule that states you cannot start a transmission on an occupied freq. This RM does not change that. And, we restrict the symbol rate today. Obviously, that doesn't solve poor operator practice.
Richard, your QRZ 'bio' page>> "Not much to say I here for the log book." And you are throwing stones? I give everyone the benefit of doubt at least once. Others are not as nice.
The Digital Stone Age stifled USA's ham operators for too many years. Sadly, the rest of the world passed us by We welcome the day when FCC's antiquated HF symbol rate rule goes extinct!
We welcome the bell ringer herself! Post the one about digital prison and/or chains. I always liked that one.
No but it has became a pet peeve about ham radio. There an unwillingness to advance technology because that not the way we do it 1970. If you want talk about thrown stones, how about theses who call me stupid because I can program in C++ and lean to build a VFO but do not know to change a crystal in 1960's era radio or those who think because I do not care to do CW at this time I am not a real ham. As such these this and other reasons I do not use QRZ. Also I do not care for the 4chan attitude of these forum. Also I do not like to keep my data on another person server. I prefer my own cloud server or on my PC or net drive at home.
But just because it's a pet peeve, it doesn't mean you need to come out of the corner swinging! I for one am OK with you being part of the 0.1% group. What is a 4chan attitude? It's a new one on me. Is that l33t for a naughty word? Ahhh, but you DO "use QRZ!" You're here, aren't you? If you don't like the 4chan attitude, why do you log in? To quote someone, "Spin the dial!" Calm down, you'll live longer. To quote someone, "Lead with friendly"
True but since have the part 97 rules been followed by troublesome hams? It's akin to saying that there are laws that are on the books that say that you can't own a gun if you are a convicted felon, especially if a firearm was used during commission of the felony crime like armed robbery. It never seems to stop those bad guys from getting and using a firearm in yet another armed robbery.
