View Single Post
  #66   Report Post  
Old October 12th 03, 07:01 PM
Carl R. Stevenson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message
...
In article , "Kim W5TIT"


writes:

Therein lies the problem with the whole CW test (TEST, *test*) debate.

The
minute one takes on the "no" CW test argument, it is generally met with

an
attitude that an end CW use (USE, *use*) is being favored or called for.


Kim:

Code testing has always been the thing which generated code use.


I would assert that being forced to learn code to gain access to HF
"soured" more people on code use than it encouraged ... of course,
some percentage of folks decided they liked code and continued to
use it, but MANY simply endured something they had no interest in
to get past the test, then "threw away the key."

Remember the old adage "honey is better than vinegar."

In the absence of a code testing requirement, there will be progressively
fewer hams who have never been exposed to learning the code as a
result of the requirement. Since the requirement was the principle
motivation to learn the code, code use *will* decline once code testing
is abolished. Therefore, testing and use are two closely interrelated
concepts.


Translation: Larry and his "kindred spirits" are either unwilling to expend
the effort to (or incapable of *politely*) encourage people to "give the
code a try and see if you like it." And, they are apparently unwilling to
take "No thanks, not interested" for an answer. Thus, they continue to
seek to have the FCC mandate an arguably counter-productive "recruiting
program" for them ...

73,
Carl - wk3c