Dwight Stewart wrote:

"Dave Heil" wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" wrote:
(snip)

I'm sorry, I can't agree with your new age
"everyone's opinion has value" when the
topic is something in which someone has
no background. (snip)

Really?

Really.

So, if you have no background in senior levels of government or no
background in the issues at hand, you don't offer opinions when the
government decides to makes policy decisions (taxes, immigration, welfare,
social security, foreign affairs, and so on)? I find that highly unlikely,
Dave. Code testing is a government decision/policy. And the right of the
people to have a say in government decisions and policies is not "new age"
thing.

Offering an opinion and offering a sound opinion based upon experience
can be two quite different things. An opinion offered by someone who
has little or no knowledge of that being discussed isn't likely to be
worth much.

I take it that you believe that your opinions
on child birth would be meaningful or
relevant to a woman who has had several
children and that your views on space flights
would be found useful to NASA engineers.

Nice dodge, Dave.

Thanks. How did you know that I drive a Dodge?

But we're not talking about a woman with several
children or NASA engineers - this is a discussion about government policy.

Why, Dwight! It was you who brought up those very items. How can it be
a dodge when I respond to them? Let's now discuss them as government
policy. What value would your suggestions on child bearing policy or
NASA policy have to those making decisions?

And, when it come to that (even abortion and NASA financing), I do expect my views to matter.

We all have unfulfilled expectations.

After all, my tax dollars are paying for it. Code testing
is also a government policy and the radio frequencies involved belong to all
Americans.

Your tax dollars couldn't provide fuel for a rocket engine test-firing.
Have your view. Speak your mind. Don't expect others to greet your
views with reverence if you have no background in the matter under
discussion.

I didn't know a "special" knowledge or
background was required. It doesn't take
great knowledge, or an indepth background,
to see that Morse code is a declining skill
throughout the radio world.

Not in amateur radio, it isn't. Now you see that
you and Len share a common mistaken view.
Each of you might have a desire to see it as a
truth but reality doesn't seem to bear it out.

What mistaken view - that the rest of the radio world must be considered
when discussing code testing? If so, you're the one mistaken here.

The mistake is in the view that morse use is declining in amateur radio.
It matters not that the morse isn't used much by other radio services.


The FCC
itself has even taken that view in the Report & Order following the last
round of restructuring when they said;

"We are persuaded that because the
amateur service is fundamentally a
technical service, the emphasis on
Morse code proficiency as a licensing
requirement does not comport with
the basis and purpose of the service.
snip
we believe that reducing the emphasis on
telegraphy proficiency as a licensing
requirement will allow the amateur service
to, as it has in the past, attract technically
inclined persons, particularly the youth of
our country, and encourage them to learn
and to prepare themselves in the areas
where the United States needs expertise."

Morse testing is no longer emphasized as evidenced by the reduction in
speed to five wpm in testing for HF access. Now go out and prepare
yourself in areas where the U.S. needs technical expertise.

The FCC went on to later say;

"We also note that most amateur radio
operators who choose to provide
emergency communication do so,
according to the amateur radio press,
using voice or digital modes of
communication, in part, because
information can be exchanged much
faster using these other modes of
communication. Further, we note that
in traditional emergency services, such
as police, fire, and rescue, there is no
requirement that emergency service
personnel hold amateur radio licenses
or any other license that requires
telegraphy proficiency. We conclude,
therefore, that telegraphy proficiency is
not a significant factor in determining an
individual's ability to provide or be
prepared to provide emergency
communications."

Note the references throughout to other radio services and to other,
non-Amateur, radio technologies. If we're going to remain a valuable radio
service, worthy of the massive frequencies we hold and unlike personal radio
services (CB), then our ability to fit with and contribute to those outside
Amateur Radio must be a factor in this discussion.

Nothing in a five word per minute morse test prevents you from
performing public service work to your heart's content via digital or
voice modes. This public service work, according to FCC, is something
you may or may not choose to do. It is not mandatory.

Lets be honest here, Dave. I seriously doubt
his lack of a license, or comments (condescending,
outragious, or otherwise), would really bother you
that much if those comments agreed more with
your own views.

Really? Have you noticed a single occasion where
I've supported the posts of Bruce?

I also haven't noticed an ongoing effort to criticize and ridicule Bruce's
posts as you've done with Len's.

To be very honest, Dwight, Bruce is rather a dim bulb and I seldom read
his posts, much less respond to them. Is an ongoing effort necessary or
am I permitted to choose to which posts I'll respond?

Dave K8MN