RadioBanter - View Single Post - Some thoughtful comments from another forum on the code/nocode debate

October 1st 03, 10:41 PM

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
(Hans K0HB) wrote in message
. com...
"N2EY" wrote

1) Back in '78, the students learned Morse Code as part of their CG
training,
so there was no other training needed for them to get Extra Class
amateur
licenses. Today, they would need to put in some of their own time,
and
a bit of
effort, learning Morse at 5 wpm for that test.

You know Jim, the more I ponder this paragraph, the more I think you
may just have hit on an important way of grading the dedication (and
therefore "value") of any given amateur licensee.

Well, that wasn't my intent at all. I was merely pointing out that for
some folks, getting a license involves a lot of learning and the
related effort, while others already have the skills and knowledge.

The point is that licensing should be based on one's demonstration
of the required qualifications, no more, no less.

That's your point, Carl, not my point.

OK, we'll put you down for "not demonstrating qualifications."

The original story told how, back in 1978, the whole class of CG folks
went down to FCC and became Extras, while today none of them did.

1978 was 25 years ago. This isn't 1978.

In 25 years, a child could be conceived, raised, educated, and become
a working adult on their own.

Things are NOT static in time just because they are (apparently) fresh
in your mind.

My point was simply that there are significant differences between the
1978 and 2003 situations, such as:

- the 1978 class was 'required' to take the test, and means provided
to do so (do you think they went on their own time? used their own
transportation? paid any fees?).

- the 1978 class had already learned all they needed to know to pass
the 1978 tests.

Which means WHAT?

Members of ANY branch of the US military in 1978 were ALL
volunteers. ALL.

If someone already has the knowledge to pass the tests, fine.

You can't change that situation anyway.

Is this to be entirely about the PAST...again?

You cannot undo history. That has already happened...that's why it is
called history.

You can NOT use the PAST as a valid argument to have any knowledge,
skills, arts, or crafts preserved for the present and future with any
validity.

There is no "value added" in "making them work for it"

Who said there was? The point is that the 1978 class had a completely
different situation from the 2003 class.

You are slowly beginning to see reality. Congratulations.

... if
they have the knowledge they are qualified, period.

So would you agree with Kim that anyone who can pass the required
tests should be allowed into the ARS?

Are you talking about the USCG or US amateur radio?

You are confusing, hopping around on subjects...

The ONLY agency awarding grants (in the form of licenses) for operating
on allocated amateur radio frequencies is the FCC. The USCG has
nothing to do with it.

(and likely
they worked for it or they wouldn't have the knowledge anyway,
so the logic of "making them work (more)" fails)

It is a fact of human nature that most people value a thing more if it
took some investment of themselves to acquire.

Which leads everyone to the implied reason of all PCTAs arguing for
the retention of code testing: They had to do it so everyone else had
better damn well do it, too!!!