"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:

. . .

On the other hand, I believe that we should have a good
mix of ages.

Sure - but how much is enough? If, say, 10% of the US amateur
population were under the age of 21, would that be enough?

What "dire fate" would befall ham radio if there wasn't a single
licensee under 21? What do they actaully bring to hobby which is so
important?? Sorry, makes no sense, I just don't get it.

If it's a numbers game why not shift gears and recruit retirees instead
of chasing kids? The retirees are far more independent than kids,
they're more mature, on average they don't care about nonsense like
instant gratification and peer pressure and they have the time the kids
don't have. And in most cases they also have the money the kids don't
have.

w3rv


I've often suggested recruiting people in the 40 to 50 year old range.
Their kids are grown or nearly so. They have a better income than when
they
were younger and a little more free time than when they were younger. And
they are still young enough to have energy and enthusiasm for new
activities.

Personally I try to encourage everyone of all ages who shows even a hint
of
interest.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



Hello, Dee

You are one who is an asset to amateur radio. One who doesn't quibble over
someone's age, gender, or background (heaven help us if it is a cber wanting
to get in LOL).

Go tell 'em, gal!


The best of 73s from Rochester, NY (someone will gripe about a plural here
LOL)
Jim

ps - I consider the best of 73s to be a singular collective and think Dee
deserves a big *thanks* for encouraging anyone and everyone!


pps - anyone who thinks not, just be my guest and ZBM-2

)