"N2EY" wrote:

(snip) And amateur radio does not exist to
serve other services. (snip)


Our public service is often service to other agencies (Red Cross, MARS,
and so on).


The "pool of trained operators" thing in 97.1 is
really about the idea of the ARS being a service
where the licensees (hams) are skilled both
operationally and technically, able to do a lot
of different things well. This distinguishes it
from other services, (snip)


The pool of trained operators concept relates to our ability to do the
other things outlined in 97.1 (public service, international goodwill, and
so on). At one time, code was a necessary part of at least some of that.
That is much less so today, hence the move to change the code testing
requirement.


(snip) And public service. (snip)


I'm not aware of the use of code by any of the typical served agencies
(Red Cross, MARS, and so on).


(snip) Besides, everything hams do is either "for
enjoyment" or public service. Does that mean none
of it should be tested?


Huh? I thought I was fairly clear about all this. Code was once necessary
for the goals and purposes outlined in 97.1. At the very least, that is much
less so today (some would say it is not at all so today). That severely
weakens the justification for a unique license requirement. If the license
requirement is actually removed, code will then be tested on an equal
footing with the other operating modes (written theory). Nothing in that is
an argument for or against testing anything else.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/