RadioBanter - View Single Post

July 16th 04, 10:57 AM

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,

(N2EY) writes:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

Hams - old and new - didn't change the exam procedures. Neither did
ARRL, NCI, NCVEC or any other ham group. FCC did, because it saved
them resources.

We aren't going to a system other than multiple-choice
published-Q&A-pool exams in the foreseeable future. Just not gonna
happen.

ANd then there's the question of what knowledge should be expected from
applicants anyway. Does it really require more knowledge and skill to
operate on 14.167 vs 14.344?

More spectrum is simply the reward system in use. It was chosen in large
part
because it's easy to enforce.

Nonsense for the new millennium.

That's what you're giving us, Len!

Now, now Rev. Jim. You're off on an evangelical Sermon on the
Antenna Mount again!

Who is this "Rev. Jim" person you keep mentioing, Len?

You just didn't answer the question I posed about "enforcement
ease." Tsk. tsk. tsk.

Yes, I did, Len.

Tell us how morse signals are "easier to enforce" than voice
signals. Try a few details of how that is done.

Why?

The separate, elite morsemen-only portions of the ham bands were
put there by old morsemen who were able to influence League
lobbying.

Len, what are "morsemen"?

An elite band of beepers stuck in a time warp of yesteryear.

Amateurs, of course.

So all radio amateurs are morsemen?

The rest of the radio world has given up morse code modes for any
primary communications. Most other radio services never even
considered it!

So you think radio amateurs should stop using Morse code?

And if you're talking about how the bands got carved up into Extra-only,
Advanced-and-Extra-only, and General-and-above subbands, that wasn't an
ARRL idea at all. It came from elsewhere.

What is this "easy to enforce" nonsense?

It's not nonsense at all, Len.

So...answer how it is "easy."

I'll explain it again.

If a ham tries to exceed license privileges by operating on frequencies not
licensed to that ham, all that has to be done is measure the operating
frequency and identify the source.

The FCC reads morse
easier than it can voice? [I don't think so] Can the FCC DF on
OOK-CW signals "easier" than voice signals? [I don't think so]

The easy to enforce *fact* is that it's simple to check the frequency of a
signal against the license class. It's not nearly so easy to verify things
like power level.

Oh, yeah, the Magick of Morse!

Applies to all modes.

All morsemen are superbly honest and without fault...would not
dream of falsifying anything, would they?

How could they?

When was the last time FCC had to do some enforcement on a ham using Morse
code?

Hello? Ever hear of audio recorders? Those have been around
since WW2. Really. More modern stuff than wire recorders
nowadays, old timer. Combine that with modern DF techniques
(no rotating loop antennas required) and modern data recorders
and ANY signal can be found out.

An audio recorder doesn't tell what radio frequency is being used.

All of the morsemen's propaganda is just spin to keep their little
morse playground. No more, no less.

What are you talking about, Len?

YOUR spin on morse code. And the Belief System of the Church
of St. Hiram.

What *are* you talking about, Len?

The only Morse-code-only segments of US amateur radio are the lowest 100 kHz
of 6 and 2 meters. Open to all hams except Novices.

WE weren't talking about "morse code only" stuff, Rev. Jim.

Who is "we", Len?

[got some bad peyote again? tsk]

Never touched the stuff. You sound like ol' Carlos, though.

You will be angry and disturbed at such direct language, but, like
Ernestine's creator put it..."plbthththt...and that's the absolute
truth." :-)

And it's as true as what Ernestine says. IOW, what you wrote is absolute
nonsense, Len, and the historical records prove it.

Yah, yu be all hot and bothered! :-)

Not me.

SPIN doctoring you do, Rev. Jim, and you don't have the license
to practice doctoring. Tsk, tsk.

What spin, Len?

Besides, why do you want to live in the past so much?

Moi? HAH!

Yes, you.

Who was talking up "T.O.M." olde tymer? YOU were.

EIGHTY YEARS AGO.

Tsk, tsk, tsk.

Still accurate.

Since 1990 it has been
possible to get any class of US ham license with just a 5 wpm code test and
a
medical waiver. Since 2000, the only Morse code test left has been the 5 wpm
test.

So?

The morse code test is STILL THERE, isn't it?

Sure. Even though the treaty changed over a year ago, and there have been a
half-dozen or more petitions asking to drop the code test, FCC hasn't changed
anything about it.

Why don't you confront Chairman Powell on his blog and ask him why not? Maybe
you could call him "Mikey" and tell him how unqualified he is. You could use
the same sort of style there as you use here, Len.

All U.S. amateur radio licenses with below-30-MHz privileges
require passing that morse code test. NOW. Not 14 years ago,
not 80 years ago. NOW.

We all know that, Len. Why do you repeat the obvious?

WHY?

Because the FCC says so.

Here's a challenge for ya, Len:

Lissen up, peyote breath.

I guess you can't rise to the challenge, then. You're just here to spout
nonsense and abuse.

Here's YOUR challenge:

Try to go a whole 48 hours of NOT accessing the newsgroup and
telling everyone a sermon or preaching that Code Is Good, the Best.

Why?

Bet you can't do it. :-)

Sure I can. In fact I was gone for a lot longer than 48 hours back in April.

You can't.

Sure I can. But why should I? Just to make you happy?

What you want is for opposing opinions to simply shut up. You can't tolerate
anyone who disagrees with your cherished beliefs. Even worse for you is when
someone proves you are simply wrong about something.

You are fixated on Being Here, the Voice of "Truth"
about olde-tyme hamme raddio, telling all heretics to your
Belief System that they are "wrong," "incorrect," and other
indelicate nasties when they don't like Mighty Macho Morse.

"Same old, same old crap on the newsgroups
when some schmuck can't reply on a subject - just heap
abuse on the person doing the replying."

"The only variety is the KIND of abuse they use."

- From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 13 Jul 2004 23:35:34 GMT