"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

Yes they can be. I've known several.
They too often fall in the "know it all"
category.


That hasn't been my experience. First, I haven't seen that many rule
violations across the board. Most operators tend to stick to the rules, or
at least make a darn good effort to do so. But, second, I certainly
haven't
seen that among those who tend to be technically oriented. If anything,
they
tend to go overboard on the rules.


I've seen them have to learn the rules "the hard way" because they weren't
required to learn them for the test. Generally this has just been informal
warnings from other hams or warning notices from Official Observers. Good
intentions don't get anyone anywhere.


I think 50 to 100 questions ought to
do it. Only the pool would need to
be several hundred questions, just as
today's pools are far larger than the
number of questions actually
occurring on any one exam.


I assume you want an equal number of questions for each exam. If so, you
still haven't answered the key point of my last message. The current exam
concept is basic exams for entry into each license class. Since you're
advocating much more extensive exams, are you saying the current concept
should be thrown away?

Nope you assume wrong. I suggested simply adding a separate rules test,
perhaps taking the place of the code test by the way although I prefer a
code test stay. The remaining tests would stay the same except that the
rules questions in the current tests be replaced with other material. i.e.
The Tech test stays 35 questions but those 5 rules questions would be
replace by 5 other questions. I stated that in other posts and suggested
areas from which such material could be chosen. I was illustrating that
there is a wealth of material available.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE