N2EY:
I have asked the young men why they have no interest in getting a ham
license, it is because of the limitations placed on the no code
license--and the fact they are not interested in learning code to chat
with someone DX--a task which can be accomplished much easier and
reliably over the net with instant messaging, IRC chat, etc... that is
REAL. THAT is dropping the numbers of hams and putting bands in danger
of being lost... that is holding our numbers at such low levels the FCC
begins to find us more a bother than anything else...
Now we are just debating if and how we are going to save amateur radio
from the men who would require a code requirement onto the hobbies
death...
You are right, I repeat the mantra like a prayer...
John
wrote in message
oups.com...
John Smith wrote:
N2EY:
Well, if you are going to use cw, a code test should be administered,
if
not, none need be given...
Apply that same argument to ssb...and AM...and FSK...and VHF/UHF.
Apply it to the VE rules, band edges, and almost any other
regulations.
If your argument is valid for the use of code, then it's valid for the
use of almost everything else in amateur radio.
I certainly do not use cw...
So? I certainly do not use much of what I had to learn to get
my license. But I learned it just the same. Was that wrong?
and no young
guys I have helped into the hobby are going to be using it...
What if they do? What if they discover, on their own, how much
fun it is, despite your efforts otherwise?
in the future cw will go silent... that is inevitable...
In the future all modes will go silent.
It seems to me, John, that you do not answer questions nor
engage in dialogue, but simply repeat the same basic
mantras. Some could call that "cult-like behaviour".
Is there a reason for your top-posting and non-answers?
Just curious
wrote in message
oups.com...
John Smith wrote:
I think most of those groups progressive and open to change--this
alone
would make classification as a cult difficult...
Try selling the NRA on the idea that the Second Amendment should be
repealed.
Try selling NCI on the idea that *some* code testing is OK.
However, the ARRL with un-moving devotion to its "principles" and
the
staunch "unwillingness" to change is what makes it more
appropriate
to
such classification...
The ARRL is as "open to change" (if not more so) as any of the
organizations named.
Is devotion to principles a bad thing? Or are principles,
traditions,
and
standards to be tossed aside merely because they're old?
rather bizarre really--when at its core is
technology--and a technology which is RAPIDLY changing and
adapting
to
new discoveries, methods, devices, etc...
Such as?
The ARRL has been pushing for a revision of the rules to classify
signals by bandwidth rather than content, and to free up old
technical limitations. What other group has put forth such a
proposal?
While I don't agree with all the proposed revisions, the general
concept is a valid one. Why should an FSK signal of 900 Hz
bandwidth
be
permitted on a frequency because it's RTTY, but an FSK signal of
500 Hz bandwidth be prohibited from the same frequency because it's
digitized voice?
US amateur radio is and has long been wide open for new
discoveries,
methods, devices, etc.. Particularly on VHF/UHF, where there's lots
of
bandwidth. You cannot blame the license requirements for lack of
innovation, because the requirements for full VHF/UHF privileges
have
included no code test and only a minimal written test for 14+
years.
The real "cult" or "religion" to watch for is the mindset that all
change is good, new is better than old, ending is better than
mending, and similar marketing buzzphrases.
That mindset is geared to three goals:
- selling more product, regardless of whether it's really better
- attracting investment capital
- destroying the existing structure without an adequate replacement
The boom-dot-bust mess of 2000 proves the game doesn't last
forever.
"new" and "remarkable" become "old" and "common" in only a matter
of
months in this field...
Which field?
Radio broadcasting in the USA uses AM (developed more than a
century
ago)
and FM stereo multiplex (developed a half century ago). Satellite
radio
may
cut into their market but it's a long way from replacing standard
broadcasting.
TV broadcasting is only now beginning the widespread change to
HDTV,
after a half-century of NTSC.
In any technology, there is usually rapid progress when the
technology
is
new, then as the technology matures, the changes become more
evolutionary
than revolutionary.
Suppose FCC just dumps Element 1 tomorrow. Will we see a techno-
revolution in ham radio? Not likely - it didn't happen after the
Tech
lost its code test.
wrote in message
oups.com...
John Smith wrote:
N2Ey:
I stand corrected, ARRL is NOT a valid religion...
Nope, more of a cult actually--"Cult of the ARRL." grin
Then the following are all cults, too:
- Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts and similar organizations
- US Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard
- AMA, ANA, and similar organizations
- IEEE and similar organizations
- No-Code International and similar organizations
And many others.
|