N2EY wrote:
"KØHB" wrote in message hlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote
However, no matter how interested someone is in politics, that person can
*only* vote where he/she resides. IOW the price of voting is having to
join a community by living there.
Your analogy remains flaccid.
Your description of my analogy remains inaccurate.
ahhh, flaccidity!
Amateur radio exists in the community in
which we all live. It has an effect on all of us, whether we are licensed
or not, and the regulations concerning qualification to participate in it
even more so.
The regulations affect those who are hams the most.
I always thought that self determination was a good thing.
My friend, W4OYI, ex-President of ARRL, compares the ARS to a public park; a
place in the spectrum set aside for citizens to pursue the avocation of
radio.
That's a passable analogy.
In most of the public parks I know, what you can do is limited. And
you need a permit/license to do certain things in the park.
What you are proposing is that persons already in this 'park' by
virtue of having paid some entry price be the only ones allowed to vote on
the conditions under which other citizens can fully participate in every
area of park activities. IOW, "I got mine, now you get yours, and then you
can vote."
No, that's not it at all. You misunderstand what Bert and I are
saying.
Not to mention, a drastic oversimplification of the whole subject.
Comparison of a technical avocation such as the ARS to something like
buying a pavilion permit so you can have a picnic in one, falls apart
pretty quickly.
What we're saying is that on the single issue of continued Morse code
testing, it would be interesting to know what the opinions of *all*
licensed US hams, (not just a vocal minority) really are. That
includes amateurs of *all* license classes, not just those who have
passed a code test.
But they might not like what they hear.
To use your park analogy, it's like polling those who actually use a
park whether a specific change should be made.
DOH!
Nowhere is it proposed that the ability of others to comment would be
changed.
Of course this is simply a discussion point because there's no one who
would actually pay the expenses to conduct such a poll.
Or consider the recent election of a movie actor with no experience as a
government official to the governorship of California.
Are you suggesting that "experience as a government official" should be a
qualification for election to office in the USA?
Nope.
I'm saying that I find it incredible that the allegedly most qualified
candidate for the highest office in the most populous and most in debt
state in
the Union is a movie actor with no real experience as a government
official.
I think it fits like a glove! Loonyland is a unique place, and needs to
be governed by unique people.
The Constitution contains
no such language.
I know. And nowhere do I say it should be a requirement. But do you
*really* think the new governor is going to better than the old one?
He has more experience wit' the ladies!
Am I the only one that sees the amazing hypocrisy in that little gem?
a whole bunch of snippage
You're avoiding the central issue. I think you know that if such a
poll were actually taken, you might not like the results.
Bingo! This issue seems to run along "party lines". I'm just about
certain that the more non-amateurs included in any poll, the lower the
support for Morse code, and vice versa.
Let's have NASCAR fans determine ARS policy. And we can determine
NASCAR's rules. 8^)
More of your "I've got mine, now you get yours" mindset showing.
Perhaps "I've got mine, here is yours, have fun!" would be more
appropriate?
Not me. I EARNED mine. I encourage others to EARN theirs. Is that bad?
Shall I apologize for my accomplishments and sit idly by while others
try to trash a community I belong to?
Not gonna happen, Hans. No matter how much you try to twist what I
wrote.
- Mike KB3EIA -
|