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: email@example.com Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/