-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In .com writes:

On Apr 9, 8:22 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:


Changes in requirements don't have any effect
when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists.


I don't believe that there is any significant percentage of the
general population of the USA who has never heard of ham radio.

I believe that there is a significant difference between "never heard"
of ham radio versus just aren't aware of aspects of ham radio that may
be appealing to them personally. The latter is far more prevalent, and
worrisome, in my opinion. What is the lay perception of ham radio?
Probably the most positive is that of of hard-core techies with antennas
all over their houses and cars (as hard-core techies are the force
behind popular, sometimes useful, things like the space program,
cellular telephones, digital music, HDTV, the Internet, etc.). Being
admired as techie heroes doesn't necessarily mean that a lot of people
want to become such techie heroes themselves, however. The most
negative image would be that of reclusive individuals engaging in an
obscure, possibly obsolete, pastime with no apparent redeeming social
value beyond preserving history and reminiscing about the past.

Over the years, I have observed the following common reactions by the
lay public to ham radio publicity and recruitment:

- Oh, isn't that like CB?

- So, can I set up my own broadcast station and play whatever music I
want?

- My grandfather/uncle/father/brother/cousin was into that many years
ago, is it still around?

- I'm really not deeply technical, is that for me?

- I do consider myself a techie, but would ham radio give me any useful
training or experience beyond what I could already get from
traditional academic or vocational programs?

The editorials linked by Ed Mitchell, KF7VY, in his "last column" below
are at least 8 years old or more, but I think they are still relevant to
the current discussion (though there has been some regulatory relief
since he wrote them, especially with regard to digital modes and
spread-spectrum):

http://www.hamradio-online.com/1999/oct/lastcolumn.html

I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow
ham radio.

That does seem to be the main strawman that's been built up by some (not
all) who would fight for the status-quo to the bitter end, and appear to
want to transfer the blame for lack of growth to others. Would a
stagnant service that wasn't shrinking, but wasn't growing, be any
better or worse than trying to appropriately embrace change?

I don't even care if ham radio grows or doesn't grow. There are
millions of hams on planet Earth, more than enough to fill my logs on
any mode I choose through at least the next four sunspot cycles.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Let's hope those sunspot cycles are better than the last few. I can't
recall any really good HF propagation since at least the late 1980's,
and certainly nowhere near the all-time peak in recorded history that
occurred in the 1950's (or so I'm told by my elders).

- --
73, Paul W. Schleck, K3FU

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger for PGP Public Key


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS)

iD8DBQFGHARk6Pj0az779o4RAjY/AKCBEHFZ+PL2qUffAGWNbUvBO9/H/gCgtvcR
xHQTZqqUXR7IWCCGY4mcLbU=
=v9/9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----