RadioBanter - View Single Post - 05-235

November 23rd 05, 10:53 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Wed 16 Nov 2005 19:09
wrote:
From: "Bill Sohl" on Wed 16 Nov 2005 08:35
wrote in message
an old friend wrote:
wrote:
Bill Sohl wrote:

Way back in time the pro-coders managed to set themselves up as
"extra" amateurs BECAUSE of their telegraphy skill, all through
lobbying to keep morse code as the "hot ticket."

Not true, Len.

ABSOLUTELY TRUE, Miccolis. Everyone realizes it. Why not
admit that it is so?

Let's go through it, shall we? Pro-coders (one can only wonder if Len
means those who favored morse testing, those who favored morse use or
those who were simply proficient at morse code) made up their own
regulations. It isn't explained how or if these "pro-coders" all became
Extra Class ticket holders. Extra Class license holders can't obtain
that license without passing the most difficult theory and regulatory
written exam offered in U.S. amateur radio and not all of those with
morse code skills became Extra Class licensees. Len's statement appears
to have some gaping holes.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. NO "holes," Heil. An abbreviated synopsis
is all.

Big holes, Len.

Before Restructuring took effect in 2000, the Extra code test
rate was 20 WPM.

Unless a medical waiver was obtained, in which case the Extra
could be had for a code test of as little as 5 wpm.

The "modern" Extra class license was added in the 1951 restructuring
that
also added the Novice and Technician class licenses. The code test
speed
for the Extra was set at 20 wpm at that time.

That's what Len said.

No, it isn't. He left out the part about the medical waivers, which
became a reality in 1990.

He also said "the pro-coders managed to set themselves up as
"extra" amateurs BECAUSE of their telegraphy skill, all through
lobbying to keep morse code as the "hot ticket.""

which wasn't the case at all.

I'm sure that people with disabilities really get under your skin.

Nope - not at all.

Why? Because the older-timers influencing
the NAAR lobbyists thought they were hot snit for amateur
radio because so many had been professional telegraphers.

No, that's not true at all.

It does have that appearance.

How?

The ARRL did not create the Extra class license in 1951. They did
not lobby for it either.

Why don't hams working for the FCC have
to put away their licenses as to not incur a conflict of interest?

What hams worked at FCC in 1951?

That would like having a big oil president and vice president holding
oil stocks.

Do you think they don't?

It was a way of keeping the old pro status past retirement.
Since they were already skilled in telegraphy, they got a free
set of perquisites in a HOBBY activity.

What about the thousands of others - like myself - who earned the
license because we wanted the privileges? In my case, that was
in 1970, at the age of 16.

You mom and dad provided you with three hots and a cot.

So? That's what responsible parents do.

I also had to go to school and make acceptable grades. Do all assigned
chores at home and work (yes, I worked then). Plus all the usual
activities of a kid my age back then.

Or what? Let's say you brought home a "D" in math and science.

Math and science were two different subjects in my high school. Let's
see...

In math:

9th grade: Algebra 1
10th grade: Geometry
11th grade: Algebra 2 and Trigonometry
12th grade: AP Calculus

In science:

9th grade: Introductory Physics
10th grade: Chemistry
11th grade: Biology
12th grade: AP Physics

Never brought home any "D" marks so I don't know what would have
happened.

I suspect that if I had, there would have been no ham radio until the
marks improved.
Of course I had a built-in advantage because I'd learned a lot of math
and science for ham radio before I ever got to high school. I earned
the Advanced in the summer between 8th and 9th grade, you see.

Prove that the "old First Phone" examination was "less hard"
than the Amateur Extra exam. You never completed that last
test element on your alleged Commercial radio operator license
and could only get a SECOND class.

Kindly prove that the old Amateur Extra was less difficult than the old
First Phone.

Heil, quit being the snotty lil kid trying to turn tables. That
makes YOU look dumb. I took all the test elements for a First
'Phone 49 years ago. I've seen the test elements for an Extra
of that time.

Where?

Back then those test elements were only given by FCC examiners. They
were not legally available to folks like you (outside of FCC). In fact,
back then
FCC required 2 years' experience as a General or higher license just to
*try*
the Extra test.

Dick Bash disagreed with you then and he disagrees with you now.

How? Dick Bash did not see the actual exams except by taking them.

Then he published them.

And FCC did nothing about it. Some in the FCC wanted to prosecute,
but the higher ups didn't allow it. Phil Kane has told about it
first-hand -
he was working in the office where Bash did his thing at the time.

Whether Bash broke the letter of the law or not isn't clear, but it
*is*
clear that he broke the spirit of the law. If, back then, FCC had
thought
it was OK for people to see the actual exams, they would have been
published
(as they are now) rather than going through the additional work of
making
up study guides.

The Commercial license was still more difficult
than the amateur...NOT because I took any, but because the
Commercial license covered a LOT more EM territory, a LOT more
modes in Commercial radio then.

But you don't really know because you didn't take both. Some of those
who *did* take both say the Extra written was "harder".

It's important that you should work harder for a hobby endeavor than
for a commercial endeavor.

Wasn't too hard for a 16 year old between 10th and 11th grade. In fact,
I'd have gotten it more than a year earlier except for the 2 year
waiting period.

"The Man" still keeping you down?

Not at all. Experience was part of the requirement back then. It was
and is
a good idea.

"A Morse Code Exam would be a barrier to Morse Code use." N2EY

Brian Burke, you have written that quote here several times, and
claimed I
wrote it. But I did not write that sentence - you did. Check google and
show us what I actually wrote on that subject.

I agreed with you then and I agree with you now.

You're only agreeing with something you wrote. Not what I wrote.

In all fairness, I should recheck the quote.

Yes, you should. And its context.