RadioBanter - View Single Post - Element 1, Code vs. No-code, and Dad

October 31st 03, 11:32 AM

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,
(N2EY)
writes:

Try not to strain yourself putting words into others' messages.

What "words have I put in others messages", Len?

Those following -

It's clear from your many, many posts here that you want amateur radio to
become a multiband version of cb.

That's just your DELUSION and fantasy.

Not at all. It's the sum total of what you've been preaching here for
years and years. It explains the motive behind every single post
you've made here.

Wrong.

No, it's quite right. It's what you want for amateur radio, Len. You've been
saying it for years now, and it goes far beyond code test elimination.

You are still in the delusion of living in PAST standards
and practices of amateur radio.

Be specific. What are YOUR standards and practices? What would YOUR standards
and practices for the amateur radio service be?

Anything against your fraternal-
order idea of amateur radio is labeled by you as "wrong" or some
evil personified by Citizens Band Radio Service.

Not at all. And the question is about YOUR proposed standards and practices.
It's clear you will not stand for anyone to say anything that doesn't admire
the way cb has evolved.

The FCC is not required to sanctify or regulate a fraternal order
as ordained by the ARRL. That is your fantasy and delusion.

So what do you suggest?

Citizens Band Radio Service has been in existance for longer
than 45 years and several private land mobile radio services (now
collected under PLMRS) have been in existance longer than that.
Times have changed.

What, exactly, does that mean? 27 MHz CB started out on 23 channels and got 17
more back in the '70s. Started out with AM and got SSB - both modes are still
in use. Started out with licenses but dropped them in the 70s.

In fact, cb hasn't changed much since the '70s, has it?

The amateur radio of today is quite different from the amateur radio of 30
years ago, but the cb of today isn't much different from the cb of 30 years
ago. Yet you would have the amateur radio service emulate the cb radio service.
Why?

ARRL can no longer assume guardianship
over US amateur radio service as it did before Internet and improved
citizen ability to communicate directly with the FCC.

We've alwyas had direct access to FCC. Didn't you know about typewriters and
the post office?

The OTHER
U.S. radio services have changed and adapted to modern times.

You mean like cb has adapted?

Let's see, we hams have a wider variety of modes, equipment, and operating
activities than ever before.

Why do you NEED all thsoe "classes" in an a voluntary, avocational
recreational radio activity?

License classes allow beginners to get started with an easy-to-get license and
work their way up to full privileges over time. Of course if someone wants to
get a full-privileges license "right out of the box", they can choose to do
that, too. Right now, FCC thinks 3 classes is the right number.

Why does all this bother you? You don't have an amateur license and you don't
seem to want one. In fact, you want to prevent people under the age of 14 from
getting amateur licenses.

Is it just to give yourself an elitist "title
of nobility" to "sign" behind your name (or in lieu of it)?

It's an identifier. There may be other folks out there with a name similar to
mine, but nobody else has my amateur radio callsign.

I *earned* the callsign N2EY by passing the required tests. I've held it and
used it for 26 years and I'm proud of it. Is that wrong, Len? You seem to think
it's wrong for me to be proud of my accomplisments in amateur radio.

You've never had any amateur radio callsign and never operated any amateur
radio station (as the control operator, anyway) yet you preach to us endlessly
about amateur radio.

Do you
NEED the artificiality of class-distinction to "prove" yourself to the
world...or to prove you are "better" than others...so that you can
feel justified in putting down others?

Not at all.

Does my use of my callsign in postings cause you to feel "put down", Len? Poor
baby!!!!!!

It would seem that you DO have such a NEED.

Just your "delusion and fantasy", Len. Perhaps you're jealous.

All you're really saying is that you favor just one class of amateur license.
Why not just come right out and say that? You're not being paid by the word.

I find all of radio and electronics in general to be a fascinating area
of technology, so much so that I became a hobbyist in that a long
time ago and made it my life's work...even though experienced and
with an aptitude for a totally different kind of work.

And you remind us that you're a "PROFESSIONAL IN RADIO!!!!!!!!!!!" in almost
every posting here. Then you get mad because we don't bow down to you.

But, you and
other "titled," self-important radio amateurs want to put that down,
stoutly maintaining an absolute rigidity to the artificiality of rank,
status, privilege AS IF amateur radio were the SAME as a guild or
union.

Is there something wrong with guilds or unions - particularly ones that anyone
can join?

Everyone (according to yourself) MUST follow the "rules,"
not the regulations, but the "rules" as laid down by one membership
organization which still is just a minority "representative" political
action entity.

What *are* you talking about, Len? Give us an example of these "rules".

And what would YOUR "rules" be? Should we hams follow the example set by cb?
You'd like that....

Do not deny that ARRL is a political-interest group.

Where have I done that? It's a good thing ARRL is a political-interest group.
Do you think anyone else could lead the fight against BPL? I sent them a check
to do just that.

Oh wait - no strong national organization ever emerged for cb....

Their federal
tax returns are evidence that they retain a lobbying service in DC
as well as a law firm.

So? Those are good things. (where's that checkbook?)

They are NOT a government entity, just a
large fraternal order that survives on publication and product
resale and advertising profits.

And membership dues. Only $39/yr.

ARRL deludes you and others into
thinking they are always "representative" of radio amateurs...but
over the years of successful brainwashing through self-promotion,
they remain a minority political entity on "representation."

That's just your delusion and fantasy, Len. All anyone needs to do is to find
out what ARRL policies are, and decide whether they agree or not. I don't agree
with all ARRL policies, and I let the directors know that.

You will not accept such a minority status yet it is obvious reality.

You're a minority of one, Len.

The FCC has recognized this some time ago but you still support
defend and sometimes "fight" for the ARRL on matters and blame
the FCC for your perceived "evils" while turning hypocritical and
extoling the ARRL as "doing the right thing" when decisions align
themselves with your ARRL-influenced personal opinions.

You're just ARRL bashing again. Typical.

Case in point: As of the close of 28 October 2003, the FCC ECFS
had a total of 3,877 comments on 14 petitions for regulation
changes on retention (7) or elimination (7) of the morse code test
for U.S. amateur radio. Comments were from all over the nation,
individuals to groups, licensed and unlicensed in amateur radio.

So? FCC has *always* accepted comments from all interested parties. Back in the
'60s, when their were far fewer hams and commenting to FCC meant making an
original and a pile of paper copies, FCC got over 6000 comments to their
restructuring proposals.

There is far more access and FREEDOM for all citizens to make
our grievances known to our government...directly if we desire,
not having to use a "middleman" group to do our collective
communications...a "middleman" that pretends to be "representative
for all" yet is not, by all evidence, representative to any but a small
coterie within that organization.

The freedom has always been there, Len. We had typewriters and postal service
back then. Anyone could comment. ARRL encouraged it then and they encourage it
now. So do I. You don't.

You desire to have such commentary CLOSED to any but the elite
already-licensed.

That's not correct. You are mistaken. In error. Flat out wrong.

I'm for anyone interested being able to comment.

I challenge you to show where I have been against *ANYONE* commenting to FCC.
Even you.

Of course, if someone expresses an opinion or comment, they have to be able to
"take the heat" of having others disagree with, and debate, their opinions and
commentary. You can't tolerate being disagreed with.

Such is against the very basic First Amendement
to the United States Constitution.

I'm for anyone interested being able to comment.

I challenge you to show where I have been against *ANYONE* commenting to FCC.
Even you.

Didn't you write:

"Shut the hell up, you little USMC feldwebel."

right here in rrap a day or so ago, Len? Is that in the spirit of the very
basic First Amendment to the United States Constitution?

If that's how "PROFESSIONALS IN RADIO!!!!" behave, I'll stick with amateurs,
thank you very much.

The FCC is not obligated in any
way to sanctify its regulations in the maintenance of an essentially
private fraternal order. Yet you insist that this "fraternal order" MUST
be maintained. Others insist more fervently, ready to fight at
all costs. Such a "must" is delusional, fantasyland imagining.

So are you telling me to "shut the hell up"?

Amateur radio is a voluntary, avocational, recreational activity done
for no pecuniary reason. A hobby. Fun.

How would you know, Len? You aren't a ham and never have been.

But some want to rule,
to regulate the "fun" solely for their self-interests.

That would be you, Len.

Not technical
regulations but the activity itself and this strange absolute NEED to
be just like a professional service group with rigid adherence to
activity rules, jargon, even paper forms ("official" radiogram blanks).
This strange NEED for rigid adherence extends to absolute honoring
of tradition AND an intolerance to anything new that threatens the
perceived glory and honor of any tradition or its history. All who
have any interest whatsoever MUST be licensed to the imaginary
"dedication and committment to the ARS community."

So what are YOUR standards and practices for the amateur radio service, Len?
How would you set things up?

You tell us endlessly what you don't like, but except for a constant insistence
on dropping the one remaining Morse code test and bashing ARRL and traditions
you don't tell us how *you* would order things. Oh wait, you wanted an age
requirement of 14 years for any amateur license. CB used to have an age
requirement, back when they had licenses....

All who refuse to Believe in such a fantasy are heretics, lesser
humans, worthy of contempt by the self-perceived nobility...as
evidenced by all the archives in the Google.

Give us an example.

The first message of this particular thread started off with an
emotion-loaded play to readers of a father (authority figure) that
was supposed to uphold tradition, honor, glory, etc. as a "positive
attribute" or "family value" to pass along to generations.

I'm not him, Len.

How many children have you raised?

Over
morse code proficiency that has been dropped or never considered
by every other radio service? That's fantasy, delusional thinking,
suitable only for fraternal orders looking for status quo stability.

No, it was an observation of the value of standards. Maybe you don;t like those
standards - fine. Tell us, specifically, what *your* standards would be.

How many classes of license? Requirements for same? Callsigns? Operating
procedures? Subbands by mode and license class? Power limits? Authorized modes?

Get specific. This isn't a Zen experience where we describe things by saying
what they aren't.

My father and father-in-law would no doubt have great fun at such
"important family values" to pass on had they been alive today.

Were they radio amateurs? Did they even know what amateur radio is?

Are you going to tell us how they could cuss us out in foreign languages for
daring to disagree with them?

If my ancestors could outcuss your ancestors, would it make them right?

Would your ancestors be proud of you telling a complete stranger to:

"Shut the hell up, you little USMC feldwebel." ???

Those are *your* words, Len. No smiley, either.

Hey - I've got an idea! Let's start a thread that's a collection of quotes from
"Len The Zen", where he shows us how "PROFESSIONALS IN RADIO" behave in "civil
debate"! We can start out with that "USMC feldwebel" one, and add more as they
are found.

They were both born a year before the first radio signals crossed
the Atlantic and three years before the Wright brothers successfully
flew a heavier-than-air vehicle...and both saw the first humans set
foot on the moon by live television from a quarter million miles away.

How does that make them somehow qualified to judge amateur radio policy today?

btw, it's been 31 years since any humans got to the moon. Commercial supersonic
air travel has recently ended. If someone still as a working TV from 1969, they
can still use it to watch today's programs...

And cb is still a mess.

Change happened in their lifetimes. Great, profound changes.
Change will continue to happen in many things and in many lives.
We can all adapt and meld with the future, become part of it, or
remain in the past in a fantasyland of old things, old ideas, old
standards, old skills that no longer apply to the majority living in
reality.

Give us some specifics besides dropping the Morse code test, Len.

I am for the now, the future, reality and freedom.

Yeah, me too, Mom's apple pie, truth, justice and the American way...

I will not live in
your delusional fantasyland.

You often sound like you just visited the Magic Kingdom, Len....;-)

Neither will millions of others.

Who are these "millions"? Do you claim to represent them? Talk about delusions
and fantasies....

All that over a 5 wpm code test for a license in a radio service you have no
interest in joining. Fascinating.

And what the heck is a "feldwebel"?