On Oct 25, 6:57?pm, "Howard Lester" wrote:

Once I became determined to become a ham, I eagerly
learned all about it
in order to pass my Novice, and then the General, and....
and at points when
I saw the need (such as "gee, what is this 'swr' business?"),
I learned more.

I was and still am like that. A lot of radio stuff I learned simply
because it looked interesting or might be useful "someday".

But not everyone is like that. Doesn't mean they can't be
good hams.

So Steve, if you're so concerned about how these "students"
are going
to respond to your technical talks and related licensing
materials, why are
they even invited?

Anyone with interest is invited. And any good teacher tries to
match the presentation to the students.

Are they really interested in becoming hams?

*That's* the key question.

Or (at an
extreme), are you recruiting potential hams like "Psssst! Hey kid - come 'eah - you wanna get a ham license?"

Well, it's not quite like that!

The way I see it, people with interest should be welcomed and
helped. But the person has to take a certain amount of
responsibility to learn what's needed and to get set up. There's
a point where "help" turns into "doing it for" in such a way that
it actually works against the goal.

It's the old "give a man a fish/teach a man to fish" thing, aka
"learned helplessness".

If they're going to whine about "Why do I have to learn this
stuff??" then
*I* don't think they deserve the privilege of a license.

It's not "whining" to ask why the requirements exist. All
license test requirements have to justify their existence.

The Basis and Purpose of amateur radio includes the
idea that hams will know at least the basics of radio. Ohm's
Law and the relation of frequency and wavelength are
pretty basic radio stuff, therefore, they belong on the test.

Simple as that.

73 de Jim, N2EY