Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:
Look at the old ham mags and other publications (ARRL
and non-ARRL, doesn't matter as long as it was a ham-
oriented publication) of the
so-called golden years of, say, the '50s. Back when we had
annual growth of about 8% year after year. They *weren't*
specifically aimed at "young'uns". The license requirements
*weren't* reduced (as NCVEC and others want to do) to make
the tests easier for kids to pass. The "Beginner And Novice"
columns weren't aimed at teenagers or any other age group.
And that may be a big part of what made them so attractive
to kids!
Let us assume that a company makes a video game. It's pretty
popular and sells a lot.
They would like to sell more.
Should they make their next game really easy?
Of course not.
Will millions more
teenagers buy the game because they can beat the game
the first time they play it?
If anything, that will cause the game to be unpopular
because it presents no challenge and requires no skill.
Do they want to make it so hard that it is impossible to beat?
Probably not.
BTW, the answer is no on both counts. People who would
play video games
do not buy games that are too easy to beat. Nor too hard.
Comparisons to the ease or difficulty of the ARS
licensing process are invited.
Some points:
1) Amateur radio is not a video game. It's much more complex
than that.
2) Anybody can buy a video game - all you need is cash. And if
you're satisfied to play older games, they can often be had
for very little money, or even free.
The need for skill comes only when you go to play the game.
3) The tests for an amateur radio license in the USA have varied
in the degree and types of knowledge required. (Skills are a type of
knowledge). But they have never required a very high level of
knowledge to pass. And the licenses have been earned by people of
all ages and all walks of life.
4) Reducing the license test requirements has not brought sustained
growth to US amateur radio.
73 de Jim, N2EY