"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Kim" dont

writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Kim"

writes:

We'll see. I think it's going to depend upon the fervor for which the
amateur radio community approaches the FCC and all that bit of
"stuff."

There will be proposals all over the place. The smart money will wait
for
treaty ratification.

Tradition is a strong thing, and I think tradition may have a lot to
do
with how timely the cancellation of a CW requirement will be.

Look at how much effect 'tradition' had on the restructuring. Zip, nil,
nada.

True, but that was for a *reduction* in the requirement. I'm not so sure
there will be major support for a complete elimination of the CW
requriement--in some form or another.

The majority of comments to the Restructuring were for at least two code
speeds. FCC said no.

IMHO the majority opinion today, even among those who haven't taken a code
test, is that Element 1 should stay. But there is no requirement that FCC
follow majority opinion.

Do you seriously believe that the 200 thousand or more
non-code techs support keeping element 1? And, as you
note below...this ain't no ballot issue.

And we may not even get the chance to express an opinion. Once the treaty
is
ratified, FCC has the authority to simply dump Element 1 with no NPRM or
NOI.

Zactly!

The pity is that we must go through this again.

Tell it to those who will write the proposals to dump Element 1

The amateur community is
still not over the backlash from the changes a few years ago.

Heck, there are some who are not over the changes of 1968-69 - even though
they
were not hams back then!

I must be living in a cave then as I've
yet to meet anyone that wasn't a ham
prior to 68/69 yet is complaining
of the changes made then.

You think this is bad, Kim, you shoulda heard the wailing and moaning and
gnashing of teeth back in the '60s when "Incentive Licensing" was proposed
and
enacted.

BUT that denied existing privilegs to many hams...espeially Generals.
No such LOSS of privileges would accompany the end of Element 1.

(SNIP)

At least that's the way I see it. I
wonder how much shareholders realize that there is complete insanity
inside
the realm of large corporate entities who constantly spend huge dollars
on
organizational/operational changes, often just to change again in less
than
a year!

All true. But in the area of code testing, FCC has been constantly moving
in
the direction of reduction/elimination for at least 28 years.

Of course that doesn't mean they will act logically now that the end is in
sight.

Are you saying we should keep Element 1, Kim?

Should be an interesting answer :-)

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK