Rationalize? That wasn't rationalization, CW. That was observation.
I could care less about the code requirement. I just don't want the
airwaves polluted -- I'd like to see some sort of reasonably difficult
knowledge requirement for operating ham equipment.
Oh, and THAT was an opinion, CW -- not a rationalization. (And your mileage
may vary).
Don't get so caught up in the code/anticode argument that you don't think
about the big picture, okay?
-- Stinger
"CW" wrote in message
news:ynGjb.790683$Ho3.212067@sccrnsc03...
Why waste your time trying to rationalize one side or the other. The morse
requirement will be dropped. Just the way it is.
"Stinger" wrote in message
...
Actually, John, I agree with what you're saying as far as some sort of
"entrance test" idea goes. Code has served in large part in the past,
but
if it were replaced with something that required the same committment
and
education, it could be a good thing.
HF mentioned that I was repeating the "badge of honor" argument in my
earlier post. Perhaps I did paraphrase it. But that's not a refutation
of
my point -- it's what I believe. We just disagree. Let's try a
test.....
I urge anyone leaning toward supporting a policy of "If you can afford
it,
you can operate it" to listen to CB radio in any major US city. If you
haven't done this, you cannot imagine what those frequencies are like
now.
Now, ask yourself which is better for amateur radio -- a smaller
population
of dedicated hobbyists on the air, ready to assist in emergencies, or a
much
larger population of vandalistic undisciplined, disrespectful radio
operators that could **** off ham operators around the world,
frustrating
anyone that would want to take ham up as a hobby?
-- Stinger
"John S." wrote in message
om...
Said another way, hams that are willing to learn how to send and
receive morse code should be recognized for their newly attained
skill. It is equally important to recognize that those skills can
only be put to use with a gradually shrinking group of other amateur
radio operators. Morse code is no longer used in any meaningful way
by the military, in commerce or in emergency operations. It is a
skill with only limited useful application, sort of like knowing how
to use a buggywhip.
If the gatekeepers are going to reverse the declining trends in the
amateur radio hobby they are going to have to find new ways to attract
younger members. One way would be to craft an entrance test that
corresponds to the way the world is now. To provide some level of
assurance for safety and courteous operations it is necessary to have
some sort of test to become a licensed radio operator. The applicant
should be able to demonstrate a good working knowlege of radio and
electronic principles. The applicant should also be able to
demonstrate the ability to set up and operate radio equipment and show
that they have the skills to communicate effectively using voice and
digital modes on several bands from HF on up. The semi-digital very
slow morse code should not be a part of that test.
I've heard the argument that knowlege of code is needed to support
domestic emergency operations. Well, I have yet to see a recent
example of hams providing a meaningful contribution to some emergency
project. I do remember a severe carribean hurricane that resulted in
much damage. Numerous hams were trying to contribute to an H&W net,
but the babble of simultaneous voice and morse code made it all but
impossible to understand anything. Emergency operations should be
left to the professionals with the requisite communications tools and
skills needed to communicate effectively in an emergency situation.
HFguy wrote in message
...
Stinger wrote:
Bottom line, it's too bad the trend is toward dropping the
requirement.
Until now, the morse code requirement served the dual purpose as a
de
facto
"intelligence test" to get in to ham radio, and it also required
some
committment (which in turn gets hams to respect the medium).
What I think worries everyone is that without this requirement,
the
bar will
be lowered to the extent of becoming glorified Citizens Band
radio.
And that would be a shame.
-- Stinger
You're repeating the well worn 'badge of honor' justification for
requiring morse code, otherwise known as 'I had to do it, so
everyone
should.' Contrary to what many pro-coders want to believe, the
ability
to learn morse code has very little to do with higher intelligence.
In
fact it can be argued that there may be a reverse relationship. It's
not
unusual for very intelligent people to find it harder to learn
certain
skills, which are easier for those of average intelligence. Learning
morse code may be an example of this. I've known people who were
very
good at code but were lost when it came to understanding complex
subjects requiring a higher level of reasoning. IOW- the ability to
learn morse code is not a valid IQ test.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----