Maybe their comment retrieval system is broken.  I manually edited the
link that I sent because when you click on their "view all" button, it
puts the number of records that it is aware of here:
"start=1&end=###records###"  That effectively limits the query to this
number of records. Since I assumed that more records would be added by
the time people clicked the link, I changed this number to 2000.
That's why all of the comments are displaying.  I assume that this is
because the method they use to calculate how many records result from
the search is broken.  It could also be a hack to only show certain
records when you click 'all records.'  Either way it's a poor design
and should be changed.

 - Tony


On 10/4/2005 1:24 PM, George created:
> Ok something wacky is going on.
> Now when I look I see 349 responses and mine is there:
> http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/websql/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.hts?ws_mode=retrieve_list&id_proceeding=04-186
> 
> 
> George
> 
> Tony Weasler wrote:
> 
>> Mine was also removed.  I think that it was because in my first filing
>> I didn't check the 'late-filed' box and I didn't change it from
>> "COMMENT" to "STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD."
>>
>> The moral of the story is: keep a copy of anything that you send to
>> the government.  Fortunately, I did and re-submitted it with the
>> correct information.
>>
>> Thanks for the heads-up, George!  Everyone who thought they filed
>> should check to see if your filing is still there:
>> http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/websql/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.hts?ws_mode=retrieve_list&id_proceeding=04-186&start=1&end=2000&first_time=N
>>
>>
>>  - Tony
>>
>> P.S.  I just noticed that most of the other filings after 1/1/05 are
>> marked as "Document Type: NOTICE" and not "STATEMENT" or "STATEMENT
>> FOR THE RECORD"  Is it possible that statements are being erased as
>> well?  I filed one copy as a "STATEMENT" and another as a "STATEMENT
>> FOR THE RECORD" and both have identical information in the search
>> results.  Should we be filing "notices" instead?
>>
>>
>> On 10/4/2005 10:29 AM, George created:
>>
>>> Funny thing is I filled this one out.
>>> I could have sworn there was like 295 responses the next day after we
>>> sent this to the various lists and now there is only 242 responses and
>>> my response can not be found.
>>> Anyone else notice this and does anyone else see their response missing?
>>>
>>> George
>>>
>>>
>>> John Scrivner wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I just wanted to say thank you to all who are sending a clear message
>>>> to the new FCC about the stalled ruling for access to unused
>>>> television channel space. Your messages are going to be heard.  04-186
>>>> is key to the future growth of our industry. We face huge opposition
>>>> from the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) who do not want
>>>> anyone else playing in their sandbox. If you have not already told the
>>>> FCC that you need those unused television channels to help grow your
>>>> business and serve those hard to reach customers then please do so
>>>> now. Here are the instructions once again:
>>>>
>>>> GO RIGHT NOW TO:
>>>> http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi
>>>>
>>>> A from will appear magically in your web browser. Fill in the blanks
>>>> with your contact information. Use the guide below for specific lines
>>>> to help you with items you may not know how to fill in correctly.
>>>>
>>>> 1) Where it says "Proceeding" type in 04-186
>>>> 2) For the "Mail Correspondence to" line click on "Name".
>>>> 4) and 5) Leave Blank
>>>> 11) Check "Late Filed" check box.
>>>> 12) Select the drop down for "Statement for the Record"
>>>>
>>>> The other lines not listed above are things like your name which I
>>>> will assume you guys have covered. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Then type your comments about why you need those TV channels for
>>>> broadband. Give good reasons and do not argue with the FCC. Just tell
>>>> them why you need the channels. Use good grammar, use correct
>>>> spelling, be as good a writer as you can even if it is only one
>>>> sentence. I want to see 500 comments from the WISP industry on this
>>>> NPRM over the next 5 days. Let's bury them in so many comments in
>>>> support of this NPRM that the FCC cannot deny us this ruling.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks guys,
>>>> Scriv
>>>>
>>>> PS. I am not on any other list servers so feel free to pass this on if
>>>> you are.
>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to