In article , "Bert Craig"
writes:

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"JEP" wrote in message
om...
SNIP
YES! No code is killing
ham radio. See you on channel 22 good buddy.

And just what "facts" do you preent to back-up your claim
that: "No Code is killing ham radio?"

Odds are you haven't a single rational example.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

May I, Bill?

While I do not think No-Code Int'l. is "killing" ham radio, I do believe it
is fostering a bad mindset.

Of course...it was STARTED by a 20 WPM code-tested Extra.

If there were truly no no-code AR license available, I'd agree that the
Morse code exam is a barrier to those who neither possess the "Morse
aptitude" (For lack of a better term.) nor wish to utilize it OTA. However,
there's been a no-code ticket available for over a decade now...with some
pretty generous RF real estate and power limitations I might add.

Yes, make those heathen no-coders sit in the back of the EM
bus! Banish them to VHF and above!

No-coders "don't belong" on HF!

IMHO, No-Code Int'l. has:

1. Encouraged the idea that it is preferable to lower the requirements
through mass petition rather than encourage individuals to strive toward
higher achievement. Some refer to it as "lowering the bar."

And some olde tyme hammes have been hoisting too many at a bar.

Ah! "Mass petition!" How dare no-coders do that!

Ahem...take a look at the carbon-copy Comments on the FISTS
petition. Would you like to halt "mass petitioning" against CW
testing?

2. Made the notion of more privileges via higher achievement appear as if
it's fundamentally wrong. If one wishes to upgrade, then meet the
requirements necessary to achieve that upgrade. (Not just the requirements
we *want* to meet.)

Of course. US ham radio is all about "working DX on HF with CW."

Emphasis on CW. Morsemanship. Just like it was in the 1930s.

I've read enough posts here and on the countless code vs. no-code articles
on the various ham radio web forums (As well as the actual RM petitions and
their respective comments.) to confidently say that neither side can claim
an overwhelming numerical advantage over the other. So I think it's safe to
say that not all ascribe to the "barrier" notion.

Not all ascribe to the "morse is best" notion, either.

What will happen? Well, the squeaky wheel gets the oil so I think we can be
reasonably assured of the elimination of Element 1...at least for Technician
"+" privies. Personally, I'm prouder to have achieved rather than squeaked.

Well then, it's all about pride in being better than most, isn't it?

In 2003 morsemanship for licensing is an Artificial Standard.

If you want to retitle Part 97 the "Aritificial Radiotelegraphy Servce,"
be my guest.

LHA