Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


We're supposed to do as Len says, not as Len does.


Y'all are? Well, heck, why not...you demand Obediance to the
old standards and practices in a radio hobby...and have for years
without going along with any change.


Wrong attributes, Len.


Unless we support the
elimination of code testing, in which case we can do almost anything and

it's

OK with Len.

He probably wouldn't find it very interesting around here then!


On the contrary...:-)

If the code test were eliminated, I wouldn't bother to be here. :-)




Code test good or code test bad, elimination of it will probably not
bring anything to the ARS.


Tsk. The only thing the code test requirement did was to form
the ARS as the Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society. :-)

Plus a lot of puerile nyah-nyahs from those who could do morse
at high rate having playground glee at talking down to those who
couldn't. :-)

I haven't experienced that. If they are "talking down to you, perhaps
there is another reason?



If I were to hazard a deduction, I would have to say that from
everything I have seen, he is more interested in the destruction of
Amateur radio than anything else. I had concluded as much before, but
the diatribe of a few days ago was especially telling, in the ARS
license numbers thread, where he starts out with


Oh, my, aren't you the most Self-Righteous One! :-)

Deduction does not make a person self-righteous. and last time I
checked, there was no law against desiring the destruction of the ARS.


How does the elimination of the morse code test for a U.S. amateur
radio license, any class, suddenly "Destroy the ARS?"


It does not suddenly destroy the ARS. What it does is probably acquire
another group of people who are similar to the people that were enticed
by the no-code Technician test, who will simply drop out. One needs a
good interest level to learn Morse code. These people are likely to
stick with the program. So as attrition takes out the Olde Tymers, and
the new group simply loses interest and goes on to video games or
whatever, the ARS goes away eventually with a wimper.

Will this happen? I dunno, but there is some plausibility to it.

Tsk. You should be reporting me to the Secretary of Homeland
Security or the Attorney General for all this "destruction!"

Wanna engage in civil discussion of the Morse code issue, or do you
want to go off on wild tangents with statements like that?


Yup, lots of Morsemen would be faced with "destruction" of the
ARS AS THEY KNOW IT if the code test were eliminated.
Woe! Great weeping and gnashing of gums on that.

And not a problem at all for you.



Don't forget telling W4NTI he fills the target...

That is one I would like to forget.


Not to worry. You simply can't remember that a PCTA extra
said the same to me, years ago, and relatively recently.


So a second incident excuses the first?



Almost all radio services have gone in the direction of "no radio operator
needed", for the obvious reasons. Radio to them is a tool, not an end in
itself. If the maritime folks could replace "Sparks" with an automatic

system,

they'd do it just to save Sparks' salary and benefits.


Tsk. The "autoalarm" was already in-place on many ships prior to
1941...including the North Atlantic fabled in much earlier tales of
morsemanship.

How many NON-essential crewmen are there on ocean-going
vessels, now or in the past four decades? Hint: Not many.



It's a very basic concept, this business of the skilled radio operator.

Most if

not all of the other radio services have eliminated them, or are trying to

do

so. Yet it's precisely what we hams aspire to be!

And it's precisely what Len either doesn't understand, or understands and

wants

to destroy.

There isn't much I can add to that, Jim. Well said.


Putting aside your own personal hatred of a newsgroup opponent,
you COULD have looked at the past history of the larger world of
radio communications and - if at all possible (but unlikely in here) -
dispassionately agreed with the larger world of radio.

I there are perhaps 3 people in this world that I dislike enough that a
person might term it hatred. You are most definitely NOT one of them. I
am ready to have civil debate. Are you?


"Skilled radio operator" does NOT mean what it did in the 1920s
and 1930s when morsemanship was needed. This is 80 to 70
years later, remember?

Nope, I'm a new ham. I don't remember much on the subject more than 5
years ago.


Tsk. The elimination of the morse "skill" was already starting
in the 1940s. Those who were self-righteous about THEIR mighty
morsemanship had blinders on and couldn't see it. All those
"sparks" and their mighty macho morsemanship "skills" were
being displaced/downsized/nonessential on ocean-going vessels
by the 1960s. [today's maritime radio services use voice by VHF
of HF SSB and Data on HF...both of which require NO morsemanship
whatsoever]




If you wish to buy into mythos of morsemanship, fine. But, trying
to convince everyone in the new millennium that this is really the
1920s and 1930s in radio sounds remarkably stupid. "Dumbed-
down" to reality, in fact.

Same old argument. It is a valid mode, despite its age. So much of what
we are using is pretty old technology. SSB is old. FM is old. Even
digital modes are hardly new stuff


Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society is what you are in. Enjoy.


I hope to enjoy it as much as you do your interest in Ham radio.