"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com...
"Brian" wrote in message
om...
S. Hanrahan wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 14:38:36 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:

The exam does not exclude anyone who cares to make the effort to learn.
And
Farnsworth IS Morse since it relates a letter directly to a sound
without
counting dots and dashes.

Actually the Farnsworth method is Morse Code

It is not.

Only at 20 WPM does Farnsworth and Morse use the same character and word
rate.

Nowhere is there a definition that says the character rate and word rate
MUST be the same for it to be Morse.

Then it's not Morse Code.

There is standard spacing and
Farnsworth spacing and the variety of spacing that you hear on the air.
There are some really fine operators who have near perfect standard spacing
but the rest of us vary. That doesn't mean we aren't sending Morse.

It means that we are desparately trying to, except in the case of
DICK/W0EX who purposely sends poor code in order to thwart the
computer code readers.

He should be cited.

If you
read the manuals on Morse, they give recommended element, character, and
word spacings for standard operation but that is all.

Recommended?

It does not mandate
that the relative spacing meet any particular standard to be considered
Morse code.

So you say that Morse cannot be defined, yet the FCC demands you pass
an exam that has barred people from the medium and high frequencies.
It is whatever you want it to be.

hihi

That doesn't sound like good government to me.