In article , JJ writes:

That statement just convinced a few thousand people to try CW on its
own merits...NOT!

And convinced some that ham radio is not for them if they have to
associate with people like Larry with his superior attitude. It is
people like Larry and Dick with their attitudes toward others who
do not share their zeal for CW that do more harm for ham radio
than not having those CW skills ever could.

JJ:

I will not presume to speak for Dick, but I think your comment regarding
my "zeal" for CW is a bit overstated. I *like* CW, and I use it a lot, but
I don't have what I would describe as any particular "zeal" for the mode.
The truth is, for at least the last three years, most of my operating has
been in digital modes, mainly PSK-31 and RTTY. However, since I
possess reasonable (20 - 25 WPM) proficiency in Morse code, I am
always able to fall back on CW when conditions don't permit me to
continue effective communication on PSK-31 or other digital modes --
and believe me, I have encountered that situation many times. You
see, my ears and brain can continue to make sense out of CW
signals that are severely degraded, long after my digital software gives
up and only prints gibberish on the screen. Moreover, if I were a better
CW operator than I am, I'm sure that I would experience an even more
dramatic demonstration of this effect. Therefore, I am a firm believer
in the Morse/CW mode, and believe that the best way to cause radio
amateurs to become proficient in this mode is (or was) code testing
as part of licensing requirements.

I did not become a proficient CW operator out of any particular love
of Morse code. It was the requirement to learn it in order to obtain
full HF privileges that caused me to learn it, gain operating experience
in it, and eventually to become convinced of it's practicality and
indispensability among the operating skills that a fully capable radio
amateur can possess.

73 de Larry, K3LT