"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message
...
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

However, as has been pointed out, you insist that your superior CW skill
is ALL that counts and that since I'm not up to your standards in that
area
I'm a "lesser ham."

It's a simple fact that you don't have operating experience

Would you like me to scan and e-mail you the logs of hundreds of contacts
on 40/80m CW? (mostly 40 ... things like Johnston Is. from SoCal with
3W)

and proficiency

No, I have not maintained proficiency ... but neither have a LOT of
code-tested
hams ... but for you, the fact that they passed (long ago) a higher-speed
Morse
test makes them forever OK ...

in Morse/CW, which I consider to be one of the most useful communications
skills in the radio amateur's arsenal.

That's just your opinion ... others find it slow, cumbersome, and boring ...
even when they HAVE achieved proficiency at 13 wpm+ ...

I have always acknowledged your
superior, professional-grade technical skills, and those of all other hams
of
all license classes who possess them.

When it suits you, it seems ... other times, we're "lazy, knuckle-dragging,
looking-for-a-freebie," etc.

However, I must reiterate, this is the AMATEUR Radio Service.

Read the FCC's view of what it's about ... particularly in the R&O
in 98-143 ... they say it's "primarily a technical service" and that
continued Morse requirements "do not comport with the purpose."
The fact is that while hams collectively and individually define what
happens in the ARS, it's the FCC that defines what SHOULD happen.
If we don't live up to those expectations, we are at risk.

The ARS has a long-standing tradition of
requiring proficiency in the use of the Morse code,

SO WHAT? We've been down this road before ... it is NOT the
FCC's legitimate regulatory purpose to prop up "tradition."

for the purpose of
permitting radio amateurs to exploit the many benefits and advantages of
that particular mode. I have consistently stated that I feel that this
skill
is
important enough to radio AMATEURS that it simply cannot be replaced,
even with technical skills which exceed licensing requirements.

This is my opinion, Carl

That is correct ... it is you opinion ... nothing more. There is no law
that I know of that requires that your opinion correlate with reality.

-- not a demonstration of any lack of due respect.
I would expect a person of your intelligence to recognize and acknowledge
the difference. Moreover, I have never held myself out as anything more
than an "average" ham, with the notable exception of occasional hyperbole
used in this newsgroup (and nowhere else) to push the buttons of
particularly
intransigent fellow participants, including your own good self.

Larry ... if you took a poll, I doubt that you'd find that those you've
demeaned
with your "hollier than thou" attitude and demeaning attacks on their value
as
hams would take your comments as "hyperbole." If it were once in a while,
with a "smiley," one would reasonably take it as hyperbole or "just pulling
chains." However, you have *quite consistently* expressed those views
and demeanded folks that you obviously consider "lesser hams" over a period
of something on the order of 5 years now ... with you it seems to be the
rule,
not the exception.

I expect you to recognize and acknowledge that difference as well.

I acknowledge that there have been occasions when you have opined that
I know quite a bit about radio ... but, as stated in my previous paragraph,
those pale by comparison to the insults to just about anyone who doesn't
meet the "Larry Roll Morse-based standard of excellence in hamdom."

I'm perfectly willing to live with the fact that we don't see eye-to-eye
code testing.
Are you?

Sure ... you have a right to your opinion ... I respect that right ... but
you do ham radio a great disservice with your elitist attitude and demeaning
comments towards those who don't share that opinion.

Carl - wk3c