RadioBanter - View Single Post - If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?

[email protected] · September 9th 06, 04:05 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

From: on Thurs, Sep 7 2006 6:42 pm

wrote:
From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 5:30 pm
Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: an old friend on Sun, Sep 3 2006 10:09 am

You see, learning Morse Code was "hard work" for Len back then.

The WORK only required concentration. What was HARD
was not the work but something else. Consider that I
had this female living with me that, well, maybe you
can pick up a romance novel and read about what would
happen. You don't seem to know much about such
things, only amateur radio and morsemanship...

You gave up, Len. You said yourself that it was hard work, didn't you?

No, Jimmy. I explained it to you but your can't see
that.

Choices. Return on Investment. MORE IMPORTANT things
to do. Knowledge that morse code communications was
on the way OUT in every other radio service...even in
the early 1960s. "Amateur radio" was a novelty off-
shoot, something that might be fun as a pastime...NOT
the main goal in life that you seem to think it is.

I QUIT "studying" morsemanship, Jimmy. Wasn't worth
it to me to become a 1930s-era "radio op" swearing
timeless allegiance to amateurdom. I'd already WORKED
in Big Time HF radio communications. I'd already
gotten a First Class Radiotelephone (Commercial)
license seven years before that decision point. Did
I "need" this? NO. At that point I wasn't a teen-
ager (who didn't have to work for a living) imagining
ever-lasting glory as a ham working DX on HF with CW.
I had a mate and we were planning an entire LIFE
together at that time. "Ham" radio was NOT high up
on any personal priorities then...if it was even
penciled-in at the bottom.

The point was that you tried and then gave up.

Mother Superior never gives up, does she?

I QUIT bothering with morsemanship, Jimmy. That's
all there was to that.

Morsemanship is NOT one of the Ten Commandments,
Jimmy. Neither is becoming a licensed radio
amateur. Try for some perspective. You NEED some
because your point of view goes right to the
vanishing point, all one-dimensional.

Didn't US manufacturers make cb sets?

E. F. Johnson, Bendix, General Radiotelephone (the
Burbank CA company) and just about every other
company that ever made a radio in the USA. In a
decade they would all QUIT because they couldn't
compete with lower-cost offshore production designs.

What has THAT old history to do with your attempt
at character assassination of someone's "morals?"

But learning Morse Code to the 13 wpm level needed for a General
license turned out to be not so easy for Len, so he has held a grudge
about it for decades.

No "grudge" for any amateur wanting to USE it.

Your behavior here says otherwise, Len.

Poor baby...nobody coming over to admire your work and
pretty certificates on the wall in your "radio room?"

I've been talking all along about ending the morse code
TEST for an amateur radio license in the USA.

It is the morsemen who confuse TEST with USE in here.

Even though you don't seem to want such a license.

Yes. Why do you think one "should" get an amateur
license? To work DX on HF with CW? Make "lifelong
friends" through one brief one-minute "contact" around
the globe? To have friends and neighbors "admire all
the dedication?" :-)

You've manufactured a "moral defect" which didn't exist.

Who said it was a moral defect, Len?

You simply gave up.

Tsk, Mother Superior got herself a new ruler, is busy trying
it out. Mother Superior has that nasty habit.

That doesn't change the fact that you gave up trying to learn Morse
Code because it was too much work for you.

:-) Mother Superior is very hard of understanding.

In any event, it doesn't change the fact that you gave up trying to
learn Morse Code because it was too much work for you.

Mother, er, Jimmy, I simply QUIT trying to be cognizant
of morse code. :-)

There ARE other things in life, Jimmy. Really. You
should try them some time.

You've also left out the fact of how much Morse Code is actually used
on the HF amateur bands - then and now.

What has that to do with your stubborn insistence about
"giving up" and "too hard?" Did you run out of character
assassination bullets? :-)

In other words, it was hard work because it took *you* a lot of time to
learn it.

Whoops, Mother Superior reloaded her ruler. :-)

None of that changes the fact that you gave up trying to learn Morse
Code because it was too much work for you.

Bang! Bang! Bang! Mother keeps hitting the lectern
where she lectures all day. Too bad she missed
the knuckles.

I'm sorry for your loss, Len. It's clear some things were delayed.

Go and commit auto-sexual-intercourse, Mother. Your
"sympathy" expressions are just semantic boilerplate.
SINCERITY is missing.

One can picture Jimmy coming up to the burial party,
"Pssst...you should work on your morse code!" :-(

The fact is that you gave up because it was too much work for you. If
it were easy for you to learn, you would have learned it quickly and
passed the 13 wpm test long before 1963.

WHY? If you say it "was too hard for me" why would I have
"learned it quickly" before then?

1964 was 42 years ago, Len. From your accounts of your personal
history, you never again tried to learn Morse Code, nor to get any
class of amateur license. But you've had plenty of time to argue about
it, and make fun of others who have done what you have not.

Ahem...the elitist morsemen, the SUPERIOR radio ops,
seem to think that anyone not doing what They did is
a negative attribute. :-)

Yas, yas, I've heard that SUPERIORIY expressed for a
half century by amateurs. "We are morsemen and we're
okay!" All the while radiotelegraphy use everywhere
else but amateur radio is either dead, dying, or
stillborn.

Your idea of the ARS is "Archaic Radiotelegraphy
Society." You really should Petition the FCC to change
the title and definitions of Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R.

It's not about me, Len.

Tsk, Mother. It is ALL about you and morsemanship...
and the moral defects of those you label as "giving
up because it was too hard to learn." :-)

In amateur radio, you're not even a Novice yet.

I can't be. Have you forgotten your "numbers" postings
boilerplate? No new Novice class licenses are issued!

Sure you do, Len. That's part of why you behave the way you do here.

Tsk. I am enjoying the amusement I get out of puncturing
self-righteous hot-air balloons of morsemen.

Pop! Pop! Pop! Har har har har... :-)

In any event, it doesn't change the fact that you gave up trying to
learn Morse Code because it was too much work for you.

Was Mother Superior ever in the USMC? :-)

The plain and simple fact is that Morse Code skill is needed to pass
one of the license tests for an Amateur Radio license with HF/MF
privileges in the USA.

Sweetums, THE PLAIN AND SIMPLE FACT is that some of us have
been trying to CHANGE THE REGULATIONS of US amateur radio
by advocating the elimination of the CODE TEST. NOT the USE
of radiotelegraphy, just the elimination of the CODE TEST.

You just can't differentiate between TEST and USE. Is that
too hard for you?

The fact is that lots of Amateur Radio operators *do* use Morse Code.

Lots MORE do NOT. :-)

Now, if you are going into semantics quibbling about numbers,
you'd best show YOUR stats first. :-)

This isn't 1912, Jimmy. Really. Despite your longing to
be back in pioneering days of radio, you can't be there.

Amateur Radio is not part of those other radio services - it's a
separate and distinct radio service.

Just like Radio Control Radio Service? :-)

[Part 95, Title 47 C.F.R.]

Why should the requirements for an Amateur Radio license be determined
by what *other* radio services do, rather than by what Amateur Radio
operators do?

Aren't ham radio operators the "pool" from which the nation
can draw from? Did you pee in the pool, JImmy?

The fact of the matter, Len, is that even with all your claimed
experience, you could not communicate by radio with my Amateur Radio
station. Nor with many other Amateur Radio stations. Besides the legal
issues of a license, you just don't have the skills.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...I've already done that, Jimmy. :-)

I think that's what really bugs you in all this.

You don't THINK, Jimmy, you REACT. Somebody says the least
thing negative about radiotelegraphy and you go off on a
LECTURE spasm all about your accomplishments, how you were
a teen-age waswolf, er, ham (hairless variety) and how all
amateurs "SHOULD" become radiotelegraphers.

Very predictable. You've done it just now.

There are many things I can do better than you, Len. Morse Code is only
one of them.

I'm almost tempted to ask but all that would appear are
Jimmy's previous statements in here, making himself into
some kind of superhero. :-) [you want to live on Lois
Lane? :-) ]

On anything else, Jimmy hasn't made himself known. Such as
what he does for a living (if a life of morsemanship is
called living). Does Jimmy have a girlfriend? Boyfriend?
Any social life not requiring an antenna? Do we care?
[in general, no]

Then why do you keep trying to find out?

Curiosity...what makes a retrograde radiotelegrapher tick? :-)

Why is it you want to hold US amateur radio BACK IN TIME?

Is it too hard for you to keep up?

Exactly. Amateur radio is "radio for its own sake".

Then why all the titles, rank, status, privilege, bandplans
and attendant class distinction?

Because they're all good things, Len.

"Good" for WHAT, Jimmy? So you can preen and posture with
your title, rank, status, privilege over others? Sure looks
that way. You did it via morsemanship, regulations lobbied
for by older morsemen who started before your time. You want
to be BETTER than others, Jimmy, be "admired by your friends
and neighbors" visiting your radio room.

I think you would like it if Amateur Radio became just like cb,

You mean Citizens Band Radio SERVICE?

[try not to end sentences with a comma...bad form, OM]

You are IN ERROR, Jimmy. Look up the one on using an HP-25
calculator to convert Noise Bridge readings. That was
developed to aid some local friends on antenna measurements.

That's not a project, Len.

You aren't a "judge," Jimmy. All you seem to know is how
to "get out the chassis punches" for your "projects."
[probably Greenlee punches, made in my home town...I've
visited the little corner at Greenlee where they were
made...:-) ]

None of them was a "how to build it" article, though.

Wow, Mother Superior put on overalls over her habit!

And the whole "Digital Techniques" stuff was in QST more than 5 years
earlier.

ARRL invented radio? :-) Ohio State had the first
electronic computer, before ENIAC's time, before
Colossus in the UK. Did QST invent digital logic,
Jimmy? :-) [I think Texas Instruments and several
other makers would disagree with you]

You conveniently forget the two-plus years I spent with
Ham Radio magazine as an Associate Editor.

Right - looking over *other people's* work.

You are ****ed at EDITORS? Jimmy, haven't you gotten
published YET? Work on your people skills, Jimmy, maybe
you can make it in some MODERN technology magazine, not
the "Electric Radio" webzine.

And yet in all of that, learning Morse Code was too much work for you.

Poor Mother, just can't put the spanking ruler on "safe."

No, DUMB work. Waste of my time.

You just proved my point, Len. If it were easy for you, you'd have
learned it quickly and moved on.

Tsk, tsk, Jimmy. You want to MANUFACTURE a character deficit
just to put someone down? You really need to work on your
people skills.

Why do I need morse?
Why does anyone need morsemanship? To keep the USA
safe from terrorists? BWAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's still a license requirement, and it's a useful skill in Amateur
Radio.

"Useful" only for doing radiotelegraphy. :-)

The FCC has NO requirement for radio amateurs to ONLY
use radiotelegraphy.

The LAW requiring a morse code test can be ELIMINATED,
Jimmy. Really. It isn't a God-given Commandment. You
are free to use radiotelegraphy all you want. Enjoy.
Just don't try to force others to do as you had to do.

I was on-call 24/7 with the scheduling times. NCOs got
stuck with that. Longest I worked was 34 hours, one time.

A lot of people are on call 24/7 in their jobs, Len. Many do not have
all the personnel you had at ADA, either.

We don't know where or if you work at all, Jimmy. You've
never served in the military yet you claim "more knowledge"
about the military than any veteran. Oh, and C Company
[that's Transmitters at the time] only had about a hundred
personnel total; four operating teams of about a dozen
men each, only one team on duty at any one time.

I've worked longer than 34 hours at a stretch more than a few times,
too. I don't recommend it, but it can be done.

Never fails. Jimmy da morseman can do "everything"
better, faster than any no-code-test-advocate. Sort
of like "citius, altius, morseus" in "radiosport." :-)

It doesn't matter what someone else has done, Len - if they disagree
with you, it's guaranteed you'll make fun of them and their
accomplishments.

You want PRAISE for being a retrograde radiotelegrapher
in a hobby activity?!? BWAAAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

Sweetums, long ago you came on in the archtypical
Mother Superior attitude, parroting ARRL-speak, sounding
like you were 120 years old or something, speaking
Maxims as if you invented radio and amateur radio. And
that was on an AOL newsgroup, not this one! :-) Always,
always, ALWAYS with this "morsemanship is the best" PR BS
on the burner. Let's see, you were this wunderkind who
became an extra amateur before high school graduation,
worked PART-time through college to get two degrees.
And now you work for some organization somewhere
involved in the "transportation industry?" You put
something like that in a Comment to the FCC, right? You
haven't said it in here, have you?

So why should anyone tell you what they've done?

No problem. If you claim to have invented radio, fine,
you are honest because you are an Extra and you are a
MORSEMAN! Everyone understands that "you're a morseman
and you're okay." [the Circus is in town!]

You surely remember what he has said about CHILDREN in the past.

Oh yes - something about his difficulty including them in what he sees
as an adult activity. Also, he proposed a minimum age requirement for
an amateur license even though he had absolutely no evidence of
problems caused by the licensing of young people. Then there's his
accusating the ARRL and some VEs of "fraud" in licensing some young
children.

Tsk, tsk, Mother Superior grabs Herr Robust's swagger stick
and beats on a 7-year dead horse! All because you need to
denigrate a no-code-test advocate who disagreed with your
absolute rules? [on FCC 98-143, the NPRM which eventually
became the latest "restructuring" of US amateur radio]

You really love Necro-Equine Flagellation, don't you? :-)

How many radio amateurs are enforcement problems because of their
youth?

Let it GO, Jimmy. That old argument of yours is senile
and in dementia. That was over seven years ago and the
FCC did their decision thing and "restructuring" (of
2000) happened.

If you still think that 6 year olds and
9 year olds are MATURE, your head isn't on straight.

Can you name even *one* case where the "maturity" of a young radio
amateur was an issue in an FCC enforcement action?

Try answering the subject. Here it is again as a
question: DO YOU THINK 6 YEAR OLDS AND 9 YEAR OLDS
ARE MATURE?

Well, do you?

OTOH, your behavior here indicates that you, Len, are nowhere near
mature enough to operate an Amateur Radio station. It's a good thing
you're on Usenet and not the Amateur Radio bands.

BWAAAHAHAHA!!!! Jimmy, eat my shorts. :-)

Mother Superior, go to the laundry room...you may have
wet yourself getting so angry. :-)

The FCC thought I was mature enough to issue a First
'Phone license to me in 1956...three decades later they
issued me a PLMRS station license for business purposes.
Before that the US Army thought I was mature enough to
supervise an HF communications operating team in 1954.
Several electronics corporations have thought me mature
enough to have design responsibility on corporate work
in electronics.

But, YOU say I'm "nowhere near mature enough to operate
an amateur radio station?!?" BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!

Doogie Micollis, PhD (Piled higher Deeper) says NO!

hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe

It's not a manufactured dispute, Len. You brought it up, now you don't
want to hear about it.

Let's review that one:

You and some of your neighbors tried to keep the zoning ordinances in
your neighborhood stuck in the past.

Okay, so this is retro on not on amateur radio, but let's
review how Jimmy MANUFACTURES something out of nothing.

When the original part of my "neighborhood" was zoned,
it was all Residential, Single Family homes. Normally
such residential zones remain as-is for many decades.
They aren't whim-changed to the "latest model" in zoning
codes...especially residential zones. Those who live IN
those residences aren't "stuck in the past." A house is
a house is a HOME.

Despite all the changes that have
occured since the early 1960s, you did not want the zoning changed.

What were "all the changes that have[sic] occured since
the early 1960s" in my neighborhood, Jimmy? You really
don't know, do you? Several hundred houses were
completed in my 'neighborhood,' all to R zoning code
(single family, residential). About 15 acres were
never developed in the middle of that due to too much
earthmoving necessary. That remained undeveloped for
about 38 years, ownership of that land passing through
several companies. The next-to-the-last land owner
wanted to change the zoning laws to "R1" which meant
multi-family residences...read APARTMENTS. That owner
managed to get the zoning code changed over the protests
of several of us and the neighborhood association at
a city zoning board meeting in the middle of the 1990s.
Those of us who LIVED adjacent to that undeveloped
property had to accept it. Several years went by and
nothing came of the plans presented to the neighborhood
at the local church meeting hall. Land values were
rising.

The next-to-the-last land owner went bankrupt and the
15 acre parcel was sold to a developer who requested
a neighborhood association public review of what they
wanted. We met, three meetings in all. This developer
planned for 44 homes, all single-family residences,
all meeting the ORIGINAL zoning code requirements. That
developer needed 9 months of earth moving about a quarter
million cubic yards of soil to make those lots; it was
a VERY rough terrain to begin with. The 44 houses were
built (sold before completion, despite the rising cost
of homes) in a gated community called "Montelena."
Very upscale. The neighborhood association did not
fight that. We were back to the original zoning code,
all single family residences.

You
wanted a piece of undeveloped land near your house developed only in
ways you approved of.

Absolutely, but as the neighborhood association as a group
wanted it (over 400 residence members). Those of us who
OWN residences and LIVE in them understand that a residence
area should change zoning laws as little as possible.

Anyone who wanted to live or build in your
neighborhood should have to do it the way you did it, and no other way.

Bad repetition in addition to being highly inaccurate. The
neighborhood association wanted the original single-family
residence zoning kept. Not just me, several hundred others
all were of the same opinion about our homes and adjacent
areas. Oh, and there are dozens of basic house plans
in several hundred acres of "my" neighborhood and only 2
others are of the same plan as mine. Your "no other way"
allegation is baseless and rather juvenile. :-)

People trying to Get Into Sun City had to pass muster - go through a
hazing ritual - in the way *you* determined, even though so much has
changed since the early 1960s.

I have NO idea what the requirements are for Sun City. Never
been there. Isn't that in another state? "My" neighborhood
is NOT a retirement community, Jimmy. My city is a suburb of
the city of Los Angeles, adjacent to the incorporated city
of Burbank, CA, and L.A. suburbs of North Hollywood, Arleta,
Sunland, and Tujunga. Arleta is the only "city" that was
created since 1970 and it is several miles away; it was just
a political-boundary change out of parts of Sun Valley and
Pacoima.

Except the zoning commission disagreed.

Los Angeles has NO jurisdiction in Sun City, sweetums.

Tsk, tsk, Jimmy tries to equate LIVING with amateur radio
morsemanship. He must "live" in that, his fantasy world
of beeps and sounds...and up ahead a sign, the
Jimmyzone!

Ralphs, Vons, Albertsons chains all sell food made by
professional food growers and producers.

Not Ralphs. Ralph's.

INCORRECT. That supermarket chain has a copyrighted
corporate name, logo of RALPHS. No apostrophe.

Jimmy, you got my post office city name WRONG and
you try to correct me on spelling a common food
supermarket chain, one that we shop at regularly?

You not only need to work on your people skills but
also your geographic skills. :-)

Use Mapquest if you have to, but don't venture into
areas you have NO knowledge about...unless you WANT
to get shot down.

The code test issue was never about me or "whether or not
I get a license."

Then why are you so obsessed with it, Len?

"Obsession" is yours, retrograde amateur morseman. :-)

As a supposed electronics professional you don't seem
unaware of how much the electronics-radio field has
changed in your lifetime. [not my problem]

YOU are obsessed with morsemanship and try to anchor
a hobby activity to standards and practices that
existed long before you were born. You denigrate
anyone against the retention of the code test at
every opportunity.

I'm just advocating the elimination of the code test
for a US amateur radio license, any class. If morse
code telegraphy is so great, noble, and true, people
will take it up on their own; there's no valid
reason a federal agency has to enforce morsemanship
by a license test. The only "reasons" presented by
the amateur morsemen are emotional, they had to
test for it so everyone else has to test for it.

There has NEVER been a manual operating skill test
for any other allocated mode other than morsemanship
since 1912 and the creation of the first US radio
regulatory agency...yet the FCC has many allocated
modes in US amateur radio. Further, the FCC (created
in 1934, 72 years ago) does NOT mandate sole morse
code use by US radio amateurs, any class. Even
further, the USA has not been bound by any ITU-R
radio regulations absolute mandate to maintain a
code test for an amateur license for 3 years since
July, 2003, the end of WRC-03.

You need to take a look at what YOUR personal motives
are in taking it so hard about those of us who seek
removal of the code test. Several possibilities exist
the

1. You are just a Code Bigot. Bigots always
approve actions of similar bigotry in others.

2. You are a control freak determined to make
all obey YOUR commands.

3. You should understand that manual morse code is
a dead or dying mode in ALL radio services; there
is NO need to keep the manual morse test to
provide a "pool" of trained morsemen for the
national interest.

4. You are scared that removal of the code test
will end your bragging rights, of self-defined
"importance" of rank-title-status-privilege
based largely on morsemanship.

5. You are an elitist snob who has the "deep
insecurity" of NEEDING rank-status-title
to make you appear "better" than others.

6. You are a supreme egotist, judging all on your
accomplishments and denying those of others.

You fill at least one of those 6 things above,
possibly several; irrelevant and a detail as to
which but your actions DO show fitting at least one
of them. You have to understand that there are a
great number of other citizens who also wish the code
test removal. You have to understand that such
a position is NOT some idiotic moral imperfection
but rather a reasonable opinion based on the
advancement of technology of all radio by this
first decade of the new millennium.