K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Well, after (ugh) reading through 3,599
filings on the FCC ECFS
under WT Docket 05-235 (up to 31 October 2005),
I'm convinced
that way too many radio amateurs are still
stuck to the glorious
past of a half century ago in radio communications.
Why, Len? Because the *majority* disagree with you?
Steve agreed with removing the Morse Code Exam. I guess that makes him
"progressive."
That's not what I said.
It's what CQ magazine said that you said.
I said I am in favor of allowing some access to HF without the
Morse exam.
You did use a couple of double negatives to disallow non code-tested
hams access to narrowband operations.
I also said I favor retaining the Morse exam for the Extra Class
license and for limiting access to those frequencies where Morse is
most used where the licensee has not demonstrated at least some
proficiency in Morse Code.
CQ didn't indicate that.
Their bliss
over the efficacy of morsemanship shines
on under skies unclouded
by progress in technology...
which had already begun before they
got their first amateur license.
You haven't got *your* first amateur radio license, Len.
That would make Len "unbiased."
No, it would not.
It VERY heavily predisposes Lennie to a specific view.
He has no vested interest in Amateur Radio.
They BELIEVE deep in their
little hearts that morsemanship is THE essential
ingredient in
becoming an extra-super-special radio "expert,"
"well-rounded"
and a "leader" in amateurism.
And what do *you* believe deep in your little heart, Len?
That there is a God
Is there? Really?
Is there?
It's a Belief so deep, so basic,
that they are convinced that ALL morsemen
are "experts" on
everything and those who don't Believe
as they do are heretics
who know nothing about everything.
Sounds like sour grapes on your part.
Sounds like several of the amateurs that remain on this news group.
Such as?
Seems everyone here, myself included, have expressed many different
ideas on a great many issues.
Your ideas are usually summed up with, "putz, liar, deceit, coward,
dialing..."
The actual count of individuals commenting showed that
once duplicates and nonresponsive filings were removed,
55% of those commenting support at least a Morse Code
test for Extra. Only 45% support the NPRM, with its
complete removal of Morse Code testing.
Where did your numbers come from?
The FCC via Lennie's previous posts.
Why?
Did Jim check Len's work?
A few days ago, you wrote:
"3. The attitude towards morse code testing in the U.S.
amateur community has been CHANGING all along...AWAY from
the old, Old, OLD standards and practices." - Len Anderson
But the filings on WT 05-235 show that the majority (55%!) of
those who commented want at least some code testing. That
majority is almost identical to those supporting more than
one code test speed back in 1998.
Show your work.
It's LENNIE'S Work, Brain...The number are fluid, of course, but
as of his last compilation, those numbers still come pretty close.
So Jim just takes Len's work and posts it as his own, without even
checking the validity of it?
Another quote from what you wrote a few days ago:
"That seems to **** you off greatly and makes you petulant, whiny, and
accusatory. Tsk." - Len Anderson
A perfect lead-in to the following:
Must be wonderful to exist in such deep
delusions of grandeur,
very satisfying, off in a wonderland of
their own fantasies
of self-importance and Greatness. shrug
It's interesting that you will go on and on and on
about the motivations of people you've never met,
but you won't tell us *your* motivations for
changing the regulations of the Amateur Radio Service.
Which is a radio service you are not involved in.
Lots of people deciding the outcome of the NPRM are not involved "in"
amateur radio.
No...A FEW people are.
Steve, K4YZ
No license required to have an opinion wrt amateur radio. No license
required to enforce amateur radio rules. No license required to
restructure the ARS. No license required to drop the morse code exam.
And that's the way it is.