N2EY:

That is ok, I'll just hang around looking for new and exciting
discoveries and ideas to start being discussed.

I know it is going to start any minute now... we have pretty well beaten
to death old the old stuff which has been beat for decades... that can't
go on forever...

John

wrote in message
ups.com...


John Smith wrote:
N2EY:

I mean you have convinced me you are hopeless...

Actually I'm *hopeful*, John. I simply don't agree with you
about some things that you take for granted as facts.

You really don't seem to be open to change...

you don't see a problem... you are fine with the numbers...

Those claims are incorrect. I do see a problem with declining
numbers of US hams. I just don't blindly accept your one-step
solution, that's all.

I don't think you give a
damn if we ever get enough young hams in here to make it
interesting...

That claim is incorrect in at least two ways.

First off, I would like to see more hams - of all ages, and from all
walks of life. But not at the cost of trashing the amateur radio
service in the blind pursuit of numbers.

Second, I think hams of all ages can be "interesting". I don't have an
age bias against young or old, male or female.

frankly I just don't think you give a damn about anything but status
quo...

That claim is incorrect also.

you have convinced me you are stone set in your ways and think
everything is fine... go for it... we will see as time passes...

We have seen that reducing the license test requirements in 2000
led to a short-term peak in the number of US hams, followed by a
decline
to levels lower than before the restructuring.

But we're only talking a few percent.

the bands are boring

To you. Not to everyone. Perhaps you could tell us how to
make them more interesting?

and that is the way you like 'em--

That claim is incorrect.

I have interesting QSOs every time I'm on the ham bands. Of course
I'm rarely using 'phone - I'm usually on Morse Code (CW). Last night
40
meters was full of Morse Code signals from 7000 to 7060 or so. Some
interesting conversations. I fired up my Elecraft K2 at the 5 watt
level
and had a nice chat with a ham in Indiana.

have at it... I got
the internet to chat on while I wait...

To each his own.


wrote in message
ups.com...
John Smith wrote:
N2EY:

One point you got right, ham radio HAS TO compete with a
superior form of communication--the internet!

For some uses the internet is better than ham radio. For other
uses ham radio is better. The competition is for time only.

And, the only way it can is drop the code...

Do you mean hams should stop using Morse Code, or that there
should not be a Morse Code *test*?

In either case, how will that help ham radio compete for
time?

wrote in message
ups.com...
Charles Brabham wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
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...


This does NOT make sense when our numbers are near their all
time
high.

Yes - both in total numbers of US hams, and the ratio of hams to
the
total US population.

In recent years the totals have begun to go down, and the
percentage
of
the
population as well. Reducing the license test requirements in
2000
has
not brought growth, yet some folks insist that more and more
reductions
in test requirements are the only solution.

It's just another one of those guys who thinks that Ham Radio
is
only
relevant in as much as it resembles the Internet. - In other
words,
the guy
has no clue about the hobby but wants to run it down because it
is
not the
Internet.

BINGO!

Yet it is exactly the fact that amateur radio *is not* the
internet
that is
the draw!

I use this attitude as a handy intelligence test for
amateurs...
If
they
cannot differentiate between Amateur Radio and the Internet, or
if
they
cannot see why there should and would be differences between
the
two - then
I know that they are brain-damaged ( or even worse ) -
associated
with TAPR
or the ARRL's HSMM group.

In any case the attitude indicates a clueless state in relation
to
the
amateur radio hobby.

Makes sense to me!

73 de Jim, N2EY

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org
Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com
Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php