RadioBanter - View Single Post - What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?

[email protected]

From: on Mon, Oct 30 2006 3:58 pm

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

EXCESSIVE QUOTING not germane to posting elided

Half of all USA licensed amateurs are licensed under a Code-Free
license.

You mean the Technician? If so, they are a considerable amount less
than half.

40% is more like it.

49.5% according to your very own postings.

You are mistaken, Brian.

Tsk, everyone not in-line with your prissy pedantry of
"exact word definition" is "mistaken." :-)

Or "in error." Or just about any other adjective set
stopping short of actually USING the word "LIAR." :-)

The Technician license does not make up 49.5% of US hams. The total of
Technicians and Technician Pluses reaches about that level. (All
Technician Pluses are Morse Code tested).

Do all those Plusses love, honor, and obey morsemanship?

Do you have 'accurate' statistics on that? Or just the
PCTA-biased 'stats' from Joe Speroni?

In addition, many hams whose licenses say "Technician" are code tested
and have some HF privileges.

Yes, in YOUR mind they DO love, honor, and obey morse...

So, if one strips away the Micollis massaging of morse,
the NO-CODE-TEST Technician class is STILL the LARGEST
US amateur radio class. Overwhelmingly.

The MAJORITY (no shaving of fractions there) of newcomers
are getting INTO US amateur radio via the NO-CODE-TEST
Tech class. Just enough to barely keep the total of all
licensees at the same level they were three years ago.

Attrition is keeping the EXPIRED numbers so large. Some
must be quitting the ARS before their lives are over...

btw, no US amateur radio license is "code-free". All of them can use
Morse Code.

BY THE WAY, prissy pedant, the phrase "code-free" refers
to the LICENSE TEST. TEST, Mother Superior. TEST.

Add to that those who rarely used code.

Why?

Even if someone rarely uses it, that means they still remember it and
can use it at some level.

I was wrong to write only two adjectives. It should be
three: Prissy, ****Y pedant. You have morse code on
the brain. [there might be a medical cure for that...]

Len claims to be a "PROFESSIONAL in radio-electronics" (whatever that
is) but he messes up on the length of an antenna for a radio service he
has claimed to use.

So, you did NOT see my own acknowledgement of my typo?

Of course not. You are operating in character-assassin mode
and SELECTIVELY highlight 'errors.' :-)

I've gotten money in return for services rendered. In the legal
sense that means I have done "professional work." The IRS thinks
so, the California Franchise Tax Board thinks so, and both have
been given the proper income tax copies.

I don't "claim" anything when I've handled an R-C control box
and flown a model aircraft. I simply DID it. :-) No morse
code or test for same required, NO license needed!

The Morsemen

Who are they?

Tsk, tsk, tsk, a worshipper at the shrine of Eniac and double-
dipped EE who CAN'T FIGURE THAT OUT?!? :-)

It is all those PCTAs who do 1906 thinking in the year 2006.

One of them is YOU. Another one is the knuckle-spanking
Mother Superior that you turn into when you go cross-dressing.
:-(

I simply want to know where all those stations are supposed to come
from.

...from off-shore manufacturers? :-)

...for "under $100" using salvage from "old TV sets?" :-)

So what? I don't read everything written to rrap. Larry hasn't posted
here in *years*.

All of three...that we know about. :-)

Jeez you're thick.

No, Brian, I'm not "thick". You just did a poor job of explaining.

You ARE thick. You couldn't figure out what "morsemen" are.

The reason FCC stopped doing testing was to save money.

It doesn't cost the FCC anything for an amateur to show up for testing,
unless you want to claim that the examinees got to file a voucher for
their travel.

Actually it cost FCC a lot of money to do testing.

It was the travel distance that was key in the creation of the
Conditional license, not the desire for the FCC to save money.

I was writing about the reason the FCC stopped doing license testing
for *all* license classes. That's part of the reduction in
requirements.

Oh, my, ON-LINE REDEFINITIONS! Goll-eeee, Gomer, you sure
NEED to win each and every argument, don't you? :-)

Tsk, tsk, tsk, the FCC privatized *ALL* radio operator
license testing. That's not just amateur...it involves
ALL RADIO SERVICES.

Hello? If you are going to MISDIRECT, at least be
ACCURATE about it! That's only common sense, and a
bit of fair play.

Justice.

The subject was the reduction in license requirements by FCC giving
over the testing to VEs.

The FCC "gave over" nothing to the COLEMs? Tsk, tsk!

Maybe. But they didn't even make the effort to define Morse Code in
the rules for the last 3 R&Os.

Why should they? Is there any doubt?

LEGALLY, the FCC does NOT define morse code WORD RATE.

The FCC defines a lot of technical requirements in Part 97.
Yet they keep thinking the CCITT-ITU Telegram Standard will
define word rate. It does not.

Yet they tell you that the exam myst be
5WPM, and you've got all these VEs getting to define what that means.

It's not a problem to anyone with common sense.

Tsk, you prattle on about "common sense." You haven't figured
out what "morsemen" are or "morsemenship" is after over a year
of use in here?!? :-)

If I considered your opinion to be wrong, do I get to call you a liar?

Why would you do that?

Have I ever called *anyone* here a liar?

You don't KNOW?!? :-)

You need to go Google yourself. :-)

Maybe not. The narcisstic would enjoy it too much. That
would be like emotional masturbation. :-)

Enjoy!