JJ wrote in message ...
Brian wrote:



The key word is "implemented" - not increased.


You just play word games. You should have corrected that in your last
post, but no, you thought you could just play it off and keep it a big
secret.

Lets see now, the amateurs were on the air communicating with code long
before it was required they be licensed. Likely, most amateurs could
easily do 10 wpm or more. Now along comes licensing *implementing* a 10
wpm code speed (may have orginally been 5 wpm but I can't document that)
test along with a technical test. So with amateurs already being able to
copy code, just how was this 10 wpm test going to reduce the number of
amateurs? It is not a word play, the key word is *implemented*. The code
was not *implemented* to reduce the number of amateurs, it was part of
the standard to be met to be licensed. If anything the technical part
was more likely to reduce the number of amateurs from being licensed
than the code. The code may have been *increased* later to in an attempt
to limit the numbers of licensees, but it was not *implemented*
orginally for that purpose.

He could have said as much in his earlier post. Instead he played it
off as if he had -never- heard of such a thing. That is dishonest.

I cannot trust what he says anymore.