In article . net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"N2EY" wrote:

Neither have I, Dwight. As I have pointed out, the
ARRL/READEX survey is 7 years old. But it's the
most recent *scientific* survey we have. (Its 1500
respondents were chosen at random, not self-selected
as is the case in many "surveys".)

Okay, perhaps it wasn't you.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't me.

Someone posted the results of a survey done
by some club or group in Minnesota, Michigan, or somewhere like that, just a
week or so ago and I thought you were talking about that survey. I haven't
seen the survey you're talking about here so can't really comment on it.

It's now about 7 years old but is the most recent one that can be considered
"scientific" by any stretch of the imagination.

That sort of behavior is unacceptable. Not "real ham"
behavior.

Luckily, it is rare. The club in Washington was very open to all. This
club isn't.

Then it's not worth belonging to anyway. Hostility towards another ham just
because of license class - *any* license class - isn't the way 'real hams'
behave.

Sadly, the fact that a club elsewhere is different doesn't
really help those who are here. I've considered starting an alternative
club, but I'm afraid the strong position of that club will quickly turn
anything like that into a pro-testing versus anti-code testing situation
(fed by members of both groups) which will not really benefit anybody in the
long term.

dang - wish you were in this area, Dwight.

While some folks around here have strong feelings one way and the other about
code testing, it's considered very bad form to exclude or denigrate anybody
based simply on their code-test opinion. Of course, if someone starts excluding
or denigrating, they will often find themselves excluded and denigrated - even
by those who agree with their opinion.

Not that it helps things where *you* are.

How do we know that there are "far more outside that
organization..involved"?

Well, since most Amateur Radio operators don't join any type of club
(local, ARRl, or whatever), it's a fairly safe assumption.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

But it raises a good question: what are most hams actually doing? Look at the
number of Generals, Advanceds and Extras (hams with lots of HF privileges) -
the total is well over 300,000. If even 3% of them were on HF at any given
time, the bands would be packed bandedge to bandedge. (there's only 3550 kHz
from the bottom of 80 to the top of 10 - less space than 6 or 2 meters!)

Most of those opposed to code testing I have encountered
here *are* members of NCI. (snip)

Do you know that for a fact, or did you just assume they were members like
you did with me?

I have seen them sign with their NCI numbers or otherwise mention membership.
You're the exception.

No "onsession" at all. I'm just curious as to why someone who
felt strongly or even mildly that code testing should go would
*not* join that organization. (snip)

Do you feel most who support code testing are members of FISTS or other
such clubs? I don't think so.

True - but FISTS costs $15/year to belong to. NCI is free. And until recently,
FISTS did not take a position on code testing.

Based on what I've seen, there is a general
trend throughout this country not to participate in clubs or other such
groups. About the only exception to that is national political groups, which
seem to be gaining members.

Sad but true. A very big part of the reason, I think is lack of time. Not that
we have any more or less time people had in previous times, but that we use it
differently and have different expectations. In my case, for example, free time
comes in little bits and pieces in between responsibilities.

73 de Jim, N2EY