RadioBanter - View Single Post

November 21st 05, 12:15 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Nov 19, 6:34 pm
wrote:
From: on Thurs 17 Nov 2005 02:45
wrote:
From: on Nov 16, 2:20 am
Dave Heil wrote:

In other words, if it didn't make money for you, it wasn't going to
get your time and effort.

You really can't understand anyone who doesn't have YOUR
immaculate set of "standards" can you?

I've met people like you, Len.

No you haven't, Heil. People like me would AVOID your kind.

Then why do you not avoid his "kind" here, Len?

Such avoidance allows you to continue living.

How?

Is that a threat? You seem to be saying that Dave would be
in some sort of danger if he were to meet you.

What danger would that be, Len?

Be greatful for that.

I'm *grateful* I don't have neighbors like you, Len.

Am I some kind of "beginner" in radio after a half century
of experience in more parts of the EM spectrum than any
amateur is allowed?

In some kinds of radio, you are a beginner, Len.

Am I some kind of "beginner" because I've
operated transmitters with far higher power outputs than
amateurs are allowed to have?

Yes - because you didn't "operate" those transmitters in the legal
sense of the word.

Am I some kind of "beginner"
because long ago I learned how to design radio circuits from
a blank pad with pen on to the finished hardware and gotten
them to perform as originally specifed?

Yet when a simple design problem was posed to you here,
you could not solve it.

You seem to think so. What it really boils down to is
manual telegraphy.

That's one thing you're a beginner at, Len. There's lots more.

I would be an absolute beginner at telegraphy, no dispute,
if I were to take that up again. All I know is the pattern
of dots and dashes and their corresponding English language
characters. That's suffed into a good memory with lots and
lots and lots of other data, some useful, some not.

"suffed"?

Seems to me that beginner status is what really bothers you.

But - and this is very important in the NPRM 05-143 decision -
the FCC has ALREADY made ALL ALLOCATED MODES OPTIONAL TO USE.

Always been that way, Len.

In fact, an amateur license does not have to be used at all. In many
services, if a license is not used, it is revoked by FCC.

There just isn't ANY mandate to exclusively use radiotelegraphy
except on two small slivers of the lower end of 6m and 2m.

No amateur has to use those segments.

But, getting the amateur license to use ANY amateur band
below 30 MHz still requires passing a telegraphy test!

And that's a very good thing.

I'm seeking to eliminate that telegraphy test.

Why? It has no effect on you.

There's no
point in having it except as a vestige of pride still felt
by those long-timers who once considered themselves as
'compagnons de telegraphe' because the human-made regulations
gave them status-rank-privileges BECAUSE of that telegraphy
test.

That's a real load of bull, Len.

One point in having the test is that Morse Code is a big part of
today's amateur radio.

I and thousands upon thousands of others have operated
radio transmitters legally and competently at frequencies
below 30 MHz without being required to know or use any radio-
telegraphy skills.

But not as radio amateurs. You were a transmitter technician in the
Army and a cber. Sorry, that experience does not qualify you to
operate an amateur radio station. FCC agrees.

That "plain, simple fact" shows the
hypocrisy of the PCTA in demanding the retention of the
telegraphy test.

No hypocrisy. Just an opinion that disagrees with yours.

That test regulations does NOT serve the
public,

Yes, they do.

only the few already-licensed in amateur radio who
consider, self-righteously superior through passing a
telegraphy test.

Nope.

Now, if you wish to start some program to teach real
beginners in radio the skills of telegraphy, I am not
against that. Feel free to use what allocations you've
been granted. So far. Beep your little Orion to outer
space if you want.

Remember, what YOU consider to be "necessary" is NOT
shared by the public,

Says who?

"The public" was invited to comment on this very issue. And the
majority (55%) of those who bothered to comment say that
at least some Morse Code testing *is* necessary for an amateur
radio license of at least Extra class.

is NOT a physical requirement to
operate any RF emitter below 30 MHz.

Neither is a written test, Len. Millions of people have used HF
transmitters without passing *any* test, you know.

It is just your
personal desire.

Getting rid of the test is just *your* personal desire.

You are not yet a god of anything,
are not divine.

Neither are you, Len.

You are simply inflexible and self-
righteous, seeking to retain federally-mandated testing
in skills which you passed some time ago.

You've told us how great things are for you many, many times, Len.
As if all that somehow explains your obsession.

"Obsession?!?" :-)
Trying to change federal law is an "obsession?"

In your case, yes, it is. You are obsessed.

Incorrect. It is PERSISTENCE.

No, in your case it's an obsession.

It is IDEALISM, a quest to
make things better for others who share some of my interests.

And who would those "others" be?

It is many things but it is definitely not some deviant
obsession.

It's clearly an obsession for you.

On the other hand, those who have met old test regulations
and insist and insist that those should be kept for the
future are suspect.

Why? Because they're persistent and idealistic?

Their self-righteousness is suspect.
Their failure to change with a changing reality is suspect.
Their obstinancy on keeping the old ways forever in this
new millennium are suspect. Their perceived self-worth
is threatened by feared loss of status and privilege,
perhaps even rank in the pecking order of the "amateur
community."

Man, you really can pile up the bullstuff, Len.

You can write "YES it IS" all you want. Obtaining an amateur radio
license isn't about those things.

True, the U.S. amateur radio test regulations have nothing
about baby shoes or taking little baby steps.

RIGHT NOW the U.S. amateur test regulations require a
telegraphy test for any class privileges below 30 MHz.
THAT is what many are trying to change.

NPRM 05-143 is about ELIMINATING that code test. Change
for the future, for the public...the public in the
Commission's language is ALL OF US, not just the personal
desires of the few who have met and passed telegraphy
tests.

Most of the public who bothered to comment do not agree with complete
code test elimination, Len.

Then why are you so unfriendly here, Len?

Because both Miccolis and Heil are decidedly unfriendly to
all who disagree with them.

Well, that's not true of me, anyway.

K2UNK and I disagree mightily on many things, including the Morse Code
test. Yet we are friendly. Same is true of myself and K0HB. And many
others.

In fact, Len, it seems that *you* are the unfriendly one.