" wrote in
ups.com:
Alun L. Palmer wrote:
John Smith I wrote in
news:cGYlh.25$WW2.223285 @news.sisna.com:
wrote:
...
The big question is why Len is so interested in changing the rules
of amateur radio,
when he's not involved with amateur radio in any other way.
Perhaps it just bothers him that someone is having fun?
Now I'd say that must be a trick question, as certainly, on the
surface, it appears only a moron would ask such a thing!
I'd say Len would do little or nothing to hinder anyone from having
"fun." Now, for instance, say they were hogging up all the radio
freqs for a good 'ole boys club, he'd be a ****ed as hell--and
rightly so!
That is all you are seeing. Len don't give a chit about children
having fun ...
JS
I must admit he could be annoyed at a load of Morse code operators
monopolising a chunk of phone spectrum. I always was too, but only
because I wanted to use that spectrum. He apparently doesn't want to
use it, which is a little harder to understand.
Tsk, tsk. My advocacy (in the last few years) has been (among
other political issues, all local) simply to end the morse code test
for an amateur radio license. The morsemen just don't understand
that and I neither pity nor "envy" them.
The morse code test has long been a political issue. Keeping it
defies all logic (except to the terminally brainwashed) in the whole
wider world of radio extending well beyond amateurism.
Now, last I looked, the US federal government will accept ANY
citizen's comments on ANY subject...including radio regulations.
The US federal government does not "require" some kind of
license in a particular radio service to "allow" comments to enter.
One can comment to the FCC on matters of Mass Media
(broadcast or wired interstate) without having to be IN those
communications services or be "licensed" in them. It should be
that way in regards to a hobby radio activity such as amateur
radio...but some in here object to that so strongly that they
continue to attack anyone not agreeing with their points of view.
BTW, Len, I have an EE degree and used to work in an EMC lab (EMC
being what most people call radio interference, approximately
speaking). Some people hear that and jump to the conclusion that I was
in ham radio enforcement, which makes me laugh, because I never was. I
could just add that I moved into the law, but the same people would
probably think that I was prosecuting interference cases (!) whereas
in fact I am a patent agent.
You've mentioned that before in here and I respect that.
My point is that many hams are (or were) radio professionals, but not
all of us drop references to our professional experience when we are
talking in a group of hams, except where it's actually relevant to the
discussion. I have met a few people who claim they could never be hams
because they have professional experience in radio, but I have never
understood that point of view.
You've misjudged my point of view. I mention that I am (and
have been for a long time) a paid electronics engineer (i.e., a
"professional" in the generic sense of the term). It should,
but does not (to some) indicate where my opinions are coming
from. Nothing in that experience has led to any "hate of
amateurs" or any sort of bigotry against amateur radio. What
I *AM* against is the insular, fairy-tale sort of mindset, the one
rooted in a time decades past, where old-time amateur radio
"is" what radio is all about and that long-time amateurs are
"more expert" in radio (entire) than all others.
Get a licence and try 'slumming' on the ham bands, Len. You won't be
the only one, you know!
I do not regard "getting on" amateur radio as "slumming" or
any other derogatory term. Amateur radio is basically a hobby
endeavor involving radio and I think that all should have some
form of hobby (their time permitting). I will never regard
amateur radio as a form of modal-ethical lifestyle that rules
a life as some seem to do.
In the political battle of "pro-coders" versus no-code-test
advocates, the NCTA have "won." FCC 06-178 will soon
become law. What is seen in here now is a bunch of Sour
Grapes sippers, Whining all sorts of things...and tossing out
false charges of "motivation" and personal descriptions.
Sigh...the insular lifestylers of morsemanship in hamdom keep
venting their spleens in here, attacking all who do not conform to
Their desires. Once FCC 06-178 becomes law, I will drop
commentary on the code test in here. I've said that many times
before in here and now I've said it again. Watch this space for
the spleen-venters angrily spout off on my "motivations" again. :-)
I have to admit that retribution does indeed feel good. To those
rabid morsemen, I just "flip them the bird" and smile... :-)
Note: That "ieee.org" is a free forwarding alias for e-mail that I
can enjoy and not some "constant mention of professionalism."
:-)
I think you misunderstand me, Len. All I'm saying is that there are quite a
few radio professionals who are also radio hams, and you ought to at least
give it a try.
I have been opposed to code testing for the last 35 years, but it's all
over bar the shouting.
As for the age limit thing, we used to have a lower limit of 14 in the UK,
but it was dropped completely and never missed. The only really valid issue
IMHO is safety from abuse by adults, and that is an issue with the Internet
and in many other situations. I don't think it's a reason to keep kids off
the air.
The only RL life case I know of involving ham radio was someone in an area
where I used to live who allegedly enticed local boys into his radio shack,
If you think about it, preventing them from having their own licences could
have made his station all the more interesting to them.