Bill DeFelice Says It Straight

[Tom Wells]

Geez, I don't know.  My own station engineer who happens to have decades of experience in a variety of technical fields including radio electronics was acquainted with the now late, but formerly the best AM broadcast engineer in England.  I also have a couple other personal friends that are broadcast engineers.  I'll defer to their decades experience over someone on a message board like Fry who has an agenda against the little guy.

OK, let's leave the experience of Mr Fry out in this instance...

So tell me more about my agenda against myself.  Why wouldn't I want a much larger range?
Why can't I tickle myself or enjoy an effective game a of chess against myself?

[William C. Walker]

Geez, I don't know.  My own station engineer who happens to have decades of experience in a variety of technical fields including radio electronics was acquainted with the now late, but formerly the best AM broadcast engineer in England.  I also have a couple other personal friends that are broadcast engineers.  I'll defer to their decades experience over someone on a message board like Fry who has an agenda against the little guy.

OK, let's leave the experience of Mr Fry out in this instance...

So tell me more about my agenda against myself.  Why wouldn't I want a much larger range?
Why can't I tickle myself or enjoy an effective game a of chess against myself?

Where in any post either in this string or another have I even made mention that you had an agenda?  I doubt you will find such a statement.  That  being the case, this is a pointless topic.

[Tom Wells]

You didn't say I had any agenda, and I'm not implying such.
 
So why might my position and that of Mr Fry be in agreement over the subject at hand?

I did suggest a real and workable thousand-watt loophole....

[William C. Walker]

You didn't say I had any agenda, and I'm not implying such.
 
So why might my position and that of Mr Fry be in agreement over the subject at hand?

I did suggest a real and workable thousand-watt loophole....

Non sequitur.  You have your reasons for being a loyal follower of Mr. Fry.  That is your prerogative.  I see what he is even if you and many others don't.

I'm not interested in trying to debate your whimsical thousand watt loophole.  This debate is about Part 15 AM regulations and their misinterpretation by certain people like Mr. Fry and his followers.

[R. Fry]

You have your reasons for being a loyal follower of Mr. Fry.  That is your prerogative.  I see what he is even if you and many others don't.

You have posted that I "have an agenda against the little guy."

However I have no agenda except to post accurate technical information about the performance of transmit systems with respect to their unlicensed operation permitted by FCC Part 15.

The information I post could not accurately be described as being against anyone wanting to operate an unlicensed transmit system compliant with Part 15.

That information might not serve the interests of those wanting to exceed the limits permitted by Part 15 while claiming that they don't, but such a result does not change the reality of the way these systems operate.

There is many times more information posted on the Internet about non-compliant "Part 15" systems than about compliant ones.

Everyone is free to make a choice about which operational configuration is appropriate for them to endorse, and operate.

[William C. Walker]

You have your reasons for being a loyal follower of Mr. Fry.  That is your prerogative.  I see what he is even if you and many others don't.

You have posted that I "have an agenda against the little guy."

However I have no agenda except to post accurate technical information about the performance of transmit systems with respect to their unlicensed operation permitted by FCC Part 15.

The information I post could not accurately be described as being against anyone wanting to operate an unlicensed transmit system compliant with Part 15.

That information might not serve the interests of those wanting to exceed the limits permitted by Part 15 while claiming that they don't, but such a result does not change the reality of the way these systems operate.

There is many times more information posted on the Internet about non-compliant "Part 15" systems than about compliant ones.

Everyone is free to make a choice about which operational configuration is appropriate for them to endorse, and operate.

You overstepped your bounds when you started to harass manufacturers of these transmitters and also contacted the FCC on more than one occasion to make this your business when you have NO vested interest in it whatsoever.  Actions speak louder than words.

[Tom Wells]

Good day!

Hmmmmm. Don't feel victimized or targeted.

I don't "follow" anyone, and don't much care for hearing such a suggestion.
Why might you think I would have any interest in being  a "follower"?
I was taught to lead others and share knowledge.

Providing accurate information in an educational manner is not harrassment, either.

The rf-powered dummy load lamp system idea is not a debate, it's an idea.

Previous experience with the FCC in 1991 gives me really good reason to not try such an idea, but you're welcome to.

[William C. Walker]

Good day!

Hmmmmm. Don't feel victimized or targeted.

I don't "follow" anyone, and don't much care for hearing such a suggestion.
Why might you think I would have any interest in being  a "follower"?
I was taught to lead others and share knowledge.

Providing accurate information in an educational manner is not harrassment, either.

The rf-powered dummy load lamp system idea is not a debate, it's an idea.

Previous experience with the FCC in 1991 gives me really good reason to not try such an idea, but you're welcome to.

I'm quite content to use a Type Accepted Part 15 AM transmitter.

[R. Fry]

You overstepped your bounds when you started to harass manufacturers of these transmitters

Supplying accurate technical information to manufacturers about the operation of Part 15 systems does not constitute harassment.

and also contacted the FCC on more than one occasion to make this your business

I contacted John Reed of the FCC to get some "official" input on the way they view Part 15 systems, and posted that as a service for unlicensed operators hoping to avoid an FCC citation.  Some people didn't like the answers, but at least they were quotes from an FCC source, and not based on intuition or wishful thinking.

I have never contacted the FCC to report any unlicensed operator at any time, for any reason -- and never will.

when you have NO vested interest in it whatsoever.

Probably the comments of a person with NO vested interest in Part 15 tend to have more credibility than those of a person who is a distributor and integrator of equipment for Part 15.

[William C. Walker]

You overstepped your bounds when you started to harass manufacturers of these transmitters

Supplying accurate technical information to manufacturers about the operation of Part 15 systems does not constitute harassment.

***They see it differently.  They think you are sticking your nose into their business.  You have a lot of nerve to do that especially since you don't own a single unit from any of these manufacturers.  If you were at least a paying customer and had some valid complaints to file over your unit or its performance that is one thing.  But to simply start dictating to them without even buying the product is in bad taste to say the least.

and also contacted the FCC on more than one occasion to make this your business

I contacted John Reed of the FCC to get some "official" input on the way they view Part 15 systems, and posted that as a service for unlicensed operators hoping to avoid an FCC citation.  Some people didn't like the answers, but at least they were quotes from an FCC source, and not based on intuition or wishful thinking.

I have never contacted the FCC to report any unlicensed operator at any time, for any reason -- and never will.

***That's not the point.  You don't have any practical experience with these transmitters yet you make it your business that you are an expert in the field.

when you have NO vested interest in it whatsoever.

Probably the comments of a person with NO vested interest in Part 15 tend to have more credibility than those of a person who is a distributor and integrator of equipment for Part 15.

***When that so called expert does not have any hands on practical experience then I and others beg to differ.  My concern is maintaining the integrity of the product and seeing that my customers and those of other manufacturers of Type Accepted transmitters don't get the short end of the stick.  Whether you realize it or not I have not made ANY money doing any of the work I have done in radio for several years.  I have not sold a transmitter in around 3 years.  I don't do this for the money or even the recognition.  It's about helping people that don't have the resources to get a viable albeit small radio station on the air.