View Single Post
  #9   Report Post  
Old August 19th 03, 07:36 PM
Carl R. Stevenson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"N2EY" wrote in message
m...
I think you meant "rationale"

And here it is:

1) Morse code is widely used in the ARS, particularly HF/MF amateur
radio.


So??? That use is purely a matter of choice ... those who chose to use
Morse should have the freedom of choice to learn it and to so ... however,
at the same time, those who are not interested in using Morse should not
be forced to learn it in order to gain HF privileges ...

2) Knowledge of morse code can only be measured by a practical skill
test.


Excuse me ... I think you mean "proficiency in " not "knowledge of" ...
those are important distinctions ... I have no problem with test questions
on the theory of OOK Morse ("What's the necessary bw for x wpm?"
"What are "key-clicks" and how can they be prevented?" etc.) But a
proficiency requirement as a condition of access to HF is totally out of
line.

3) Morse code offers unique advantages to the radio amateur, but these
advantages are only available if Morse code skills are learned.


Other modes also offer "unique advantages" ... those advantages are in
the eye of the beholder and largely subjective ... those who believe that
it is advantageous to learn/use Morse will do so ... those who don't should
not be forced.

4) All of the above support the Basis and Purposes of the ARS.


The FCC disagrees ...

[snipped the remainder of debate on privs vs. license class as
irrelevant to the Morse question]

Carl - wk3c