On 21 Jul 2003 03:06:36 GMT, ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)
wrote:

It is not unusual for amateur radio organizations to take a "politically
correct" stance code testing. Even FISTS, and organization which
hails itself as "The International Morse Preservation Society" does not
"officially" support the concept of Morse code testing for an amateur
radio license. I have been a member of FISTS, but haven't paid my
dues since '01. I may "re-join," even though my FISTS number is good
for life whether I pay the dues or not, since paying up only gets me a
rather lame newsletter.

Since I'm not that big a fan of CW, the FISTS newsletter - focusing
understandably on CW - wasn't all that interesting to me either, but I
did get a kick out of the little cartoons on the back of the few
issues I've seen...which incidentally were drawn by the very same
Arnie Macy, KT4ST, who occasionally takes time out from his busy
schedule to participate in this very NG.

I received my U.K. call, G0LYW, in 1989 whilst stationed at RAF
Mildenhall, UK. I operated mainly 40- and 20-meter CW, and, oddly
enough, a bunch of 2-meter SSB.

How were 2m operating conditions there, anyway? Seems like there might
be a lot of temperature inversion ducting going on with so much water
around. Just wondering.

Alun, my opinion of you as a ham is not dependant on your usage of CW.

That's not quite what you said in your last post to this thread, where
you agreed to consider a full-fledged ham an Extra who operated at
least 40% of the time in CW.

All I ask is that you don't whine about it, and that as a ham, you make an
effort to do something more challenging than just yakking into a
microphone. That would imply the use of at least one digital mode. CW
operation would be the icing on the cake, and go a long way to impress
me. However, I'm not here to be impressed by you, or anyone else. At
the end of the day, your participation as a ham will always be driven by
whatever provides you with the greatest satisfaction, and I don't begrudge
anyone having fun on their own terms.

Yeah...as long as "their own terms" happen to measure up to your
standards with respect to choice of operating modes. Come on, OM,
that's two-faced and you know it. Whether it's CW, phone, PSK31, SSTV,
packet, Hellshrieber, MSK16, or ATV, it's still radio, and this is the
Amateur *Radio* Service.

However, the code testing debate
was started by those claiming that code testing was impinging on the
development of technical skills within the ARS, which is patently untrue.

As far as I'm concerned, the code testing debate started back in 1975
when the Communicator Class license was proposed. Unless a no-code
license was proposed before that, in which case, feel free to
enlighten me.

Therefore, before you judge me, you must understand where I've been
coming from throughout this debate -- that code testing imparts a
useful skill on radio amateurs, and increases their overall communications
capabilities. Those who don't know the code or use it regularly simply
are not qualified to judge those who support code testing requirements.

Ever heard this befo "Judge not, lest ye yourself be judged?"

I for one would like to see a little less judging and a little more
mutual respect for our fellow hams. At the risk of sounding like a
broken record (anybody remember those?), it's all radio regardless.
Anyone who has bothered to obtain the license must have some interest
in radio, or so one might tend to think...so why not view that
interest as something in common and leave it at that?

73 DE John, KC2HMZ