Lots of stuff snipped with additional comments below.
wrote in message
oups.com...
From: "Bill Sohl" on Sat,May 21 2005 3:07 am
wrote in message
roups.com...
From: "Bill Sohl" on Fri,May 20 2005 1:15 pm
wrote in message
egroups.com...
A few things are evident in this newsgroup. Firstly,
there are the cast-in-concrete conservatives who have
been brainwashed into believing that the ULTIMATE
skill in amateur radio is morsemanship. Secondly,
there is that handful of irregular regulars in here
trying to "win out" over anyone expressing any
opinion other than theirs...those stop at nothing to
attempt damaging their "opponents" credibility
through the usual attempted intimidation and personal
insults.
Personally, if someone wants to believe that morse
is THE ULTIMATE skill in amateur radio, that's
their right and opinion. Clearly neither you nor I
agree with that.
Agreed on that agreement. Others go way over the line
of the subject on their "replies." That isn't deniable.
It's archived in Google (for those that want to relive
past messaging, seeking to "avenge their wrongs").
For years and years the ARRL has emphasized morsemanship
over and above all other skills in amateur radio.
Yet ARRL has significantly altered their position...per
their filling for rules changes to the FCC that would ONLY
retain a morse test for Extra. I still disagree with ARRL
as to the need for ANY test, but ARRL certainly (IMHO)
is no longer hyping Morse to the extent you suggest.
(SNIP)
I try to avoid all personal attack commentary.
If time permits, I'll meet it head-on...and usually defeat
the insulters...whether they admit it or not (very few have
the courage to do anything but harass, heckle, and insult
in "replies").
The big difference is that I DO have documentary evidence
on what I write...and it is referenced elsewhere.
Again...I try to avoid all personal attack commentary.
(SNIP)
You have now entered the area of reducto ad absurdum.
Yes, you CAN whistle morse code characters on any voice
transmitter. Or use a little code practice oscillator set
with a speaker beeping into the microphone...if there isn't
any pucker left in your whistle. :-)
But WHY? Because you "can?" :-) How does that demonstrate
"real operating?"
If I have a two way contact using on/off tone for morse via
an FM mode, it's real operating. I suspect we will just
have to agree to disagree on that.
(SNIP)
Cellular telephony does not, nor was it ever designed, to
send textual communications. Cellular telephony was
designed and implemented to communicate by VOICE.
Agree totally...which is why I would expect morse
to win as it did.
So, you CAN agree that it was a very biased "contest?"
I agree the result was predictable.
The win did not prove nor did I see any amateur
in this newsgroup suggest that the win showed
that morse was "better than any other mode."
Bill, I will have to put you down as a LITERALIST then.
A "literalist" is one who takes all written text as it
is, unable to read in anything "between the lines" and
acting like some "language purist."
I'm sorry you've turned into that.
I will wear the badge of "literalist" with pride. Frankly
there's too much reading between the lines anyway.
If people can't be straight-up, then I'm not here to
second guess their true intentions.
Okay, so EVERYONE has to dot their "i" and cross their "t"
properly and BELIEVE what the ARRL tells them is true? :-)
How you jump from me bing a literalist to saying I think
everyone should BELIEVE what ARRL tells them is
true" is beyond my comprehension.
Very little "second guessing" is needed with this bunch.
Their agendas are clear and easy to see as a neon sign.
Assuming that is so, they ain't getting their way are they?
Morse testing WILL be ended in US ham license requirements.
It is just a matter of when?
Yes, I've been around
this newsgroup long enough to know that there is
a handful (or at least was at one time) of hams that
might have held such "morse is better than any other
mode" perspective, but I think the issue has
ckarified significantly in recent years to the point that
the issue is the TEST and only the test for most
hams.
This newsgrope group is NOT "most hams." :-)
I didn't say it was.
Ah, but the handfull of PCTA Extra Double Standard bearers
seem fond of using their royal "we" (of the "amateur
community") is "critiquing" those that don't agree with
them!
Their "we" doesn't speak for me nor do I believe they
ever meant it to.
(SNIP)
The newsgroup has "some" folks that might fit your
description...but they are fewer today than before and
they are not sole participants in the newsgroup as
others (you, me, etc) clearly have differing viewpoints.
There are NO "differing viewpoints" with that group,
Bill. They claim the only "truth" and all others are
"liars," "in error," "simply mistaken," etc. :-)
To NOT agree with these PCTA Extra Double Standard self-
imposed "judges" of all is to invite a barrage of their
anger and hatred and scathing insult commentary that is
NOT limited to radio subjects. Quod erat demonstrandum,
QED (not a Q code abbreviation).
I totally disagree with the PCTA folks but I'm not
receiving any scathy insults. One or two extremeists
have resorted to name calling in the past, but so
what...such name calling pretty much shows them for
their lack of credibility on the issue anyway.
As such, I applaud the morse win over Text
messaging because it was a good opportunity to
get some publicity for ham radio.
"Publicity," yes. But at what price? By putting other
means of communications DOWN in a rigged test?
Should we have a pity party for the poor text messaging
record holder. If the text message folks feared a put
down then they had the option to not play. They decided to
play and they lost....fair, square, contrived or how ever
you feel it was inevitable that text messaging would lose.
Okay, then you agree it was a SETUP? :-)
I agree the result was predictable...if you want to call
it a set-up, then so be it.
If that's the only means of "getting publicity" nationally,
then it is of rather low taste.
Why is it of low taste? Did the losers get razzed by the morse
winners?
Not on the show. In HERE. :-)
Who really cares other than hams as to what appears
here? I suspect very few non-hams read this forum.
(SNIP)
Then argue against the test. Your post appeared to be
far more focused against morse use in general rather
than specifically the test requirement.
To use an old military term...TS. :-)
Guess you ran out of logical arguments? :-) :-)
Saying ANYTHING negative to the PCTA Extra Double Standard
bearers is to invite the usual starving-vulture feeding
frenzy of OUTRAGE that anyone would speak against morse!
:-)
Well I'm fairly safe at the moment inspite of my opposition
to all morse testing.
OUTSIDE of amateur radio, where amateur radio must coexist with
all other radio services, is another story. Even more so with
the general public who are not overly interested in the HOBBY
of some, not obligingly respectful of the claims of greatness
by those INSIDE the hobby. shrug
So, Bill, three minutes of "publicity" on national TV is "good."
It's three more minutes than NONE.
As before, I try to stay out of the personal attack
commentary that I've seen some of these discussions
reduced to.
Okay, we'll put you down as CONDONING the actions of some of
these licensed radio amateurs.
I don't condone it, I avoid it. Its not a personal
crusade of mine to point out every extremist rant, rave
or personal insult/attack.
You did say that "some publicity" is better than none, right?
I did.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau figures for 2004, there
are 100 million cell phone subscriptions in the USA. How
many morse code operators are there in radio in the USA?
Your point?
"Point?" What "point?" I asked "how many morse code operators
are there in radio in the USA." [I didn't restrict that to just
radio amateurs]
OK, for argument sake, let's say there are 1/3 million morse
code operators in the USA (hams and anyone else). Now
what's your point?
One in three Americans has a cell phone subscription. It's a
safe bet that there are at least 100 million cell phone handsets
operational now. Hams are outnumberd by cell phone users at
least 100:1.
Nothing new there.
Again, according to the U. S. Census Bureau statement (of 2004),
in 2003 at least one in five Americans had some kind of Internet
access. That's roughly 60 million Americans. The Internet
enables all instant communications with every continent except
Antarctica. Was "good publicity" responsible for that?
Good publicity, new technology and very cheap internet
access and/or cellphone ability is why 60 million folks have
internet and/or cellphones today.
Twenty years ago neither of those cell phone or Internet statistics
could have been stated. Suddenly (after 20 years) there they are.
Suddenly? 20 years isn't suddenly.
Other new technologies have seen similar relatively
short periods whereby they overcame existing
technologies:
CD over records - about 5 years
DVD vs VCR - about 5 years
Autos over horses - about 30 years
TV over Radio as prmary home entertainment - 10 years
Morse code has been around for 161 years. It was once the only
means possible for "instant" communications anywhere. No longer.
So what? It is used and liked by many hams...that
is their choice. Their use nor their being proponents
of morse use has NOT prevailed with the FCC
regarding the morse test (per the 4/2000 new rules)
except at the time retention of a 5wpm test for HF
access per then international treaty requirements.
The international treaty has changed and eliminated
any requirement for morse competency by hams
with HF access...BUT the FCC has not yet acted
upon that international change...BUT when the FCC does,
I have every belief that all code testing will be dropped...
regardless of what ARRL or any code test advocate has
or will say.
If morse code was so "good," "so triumphant" why
didn't it survive and grow?
It isn't an issue of good or not. It is now only an
issue of test or not. Those that want to use and advocate
use of morse to others are free to do so. Advocating
USE is not advocating need for a test...a point also
recognized by the FCC in the past.
Cheers,
Bill K2UNK
|