"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Dick Carroll wrote:

Bill Sohl wrote:


"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...


Bill Sohl wrote:
You
are (IMHO) clearly not up to the task of recruiting new hams
by proactively advocating CW use.

Just as I would have skipped learning the code if it hadn't been a
licensing requirement, too.

So much for your advocacy of morse to new hams.
You made my point.


Bill you have been quite consistant about missing the entire point. When
there is no
code test
most hams won't learn Morse code. I know that taxes you not a bit, so
that means that
you don't
care whether or not hams will be losing it as a viable mode. Which shows
how
shortsighted you
are, right along with the rest of NCI. And yes, FCC too. Of course they
have far
bigger fish to fry
than to worry about a trivial detail involving the ARS. The least time
they must
spend on ARS issues the better for them, whatever the end result.


I don't think there is any point missed at all. I think that those who
oppose the test know very well that elimination of the test will
eventually eliminate use.

Strange that there are many things people do which are
long past relative to modern needs (archery, old cars,
etc.) without any testing needed to continue interest
in and to bring newcomers to the interest. IF morse
dies without testing then that's a sad commentary on
"how great it is" as promoted by PCTAs in this newsgroup.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK