RadioBanter - View Single Post - What makes a Pro code test Amateur a Troglodyte?

October 13th 03, 10:49 PM

In article ,
(Hans K0HB) writes:

"Kim W5TIT" wrote

At any rate, so you're bringing up the scenario
that someone outside the FCC would bring up a petition to ban a mode.
Hmmmmmm, hadn't thought of that--but why? Why would anyone want to have a
mode banned? I mean, seriously, what would be gained?

As to "what would be gained", that obviously depends on who is
advancing the petition and what their agenda might be.

There's another more contemporary example than the AM situation. On
20M there is a small group of experimenters who are playing with
something they call "enhanced SSB". This is regular old SSB, but
these guys are enamored of excellent audio quality and spend a great
deal of time (and money) modifying their radios and microphone/audio
systems to gain the very best audio fidelity that they can manage.
This results in bandwidth usage greater than typical SSB (nominally
3KHz) but less than AM (nominally 6KHz).

This operation, although it consists of only a small number of
enthusiasts (perhaps less than 20 stations) and is situated on only
one small segment of the HF bands, has been the subject of many
complaints to the FCC (for occupying more bandwidth than necessary),
and Hollingsworth has gone so far as to make note of it in a speech at
a hamfest last winter. He warned that such use of the spectrum might
lead to FCC rule changes.

Now mind you, this "mode" uses less space than an AM signal conveying
the same information. It logically follows that if this "mode" is
banned for being spectrum-inefficient, then the
even-more-spectrum-inefficient DSB AM mode probably would fall to the
same regulatory action. (I'm not suggesting that FCC is always
logical, however grin.)

So back to your "Why would anyone want to have a mode banned?"
question. Ask yourself why people have targeted a few stations on
"enhanced SSB" (perhaps 4.5KHz wide), but do not complain about many
more DSB AM stations on the bands (perhaps 6KHz wide)? Could it be
that they simply have a personal agenda which is not evident from the
facts?

Now look at the persistent demeaning language here against Morse code
users, and it doesn't take much imagination to expect that a "no more
CW use" petition might show up at the Commission some day soon.

"Persistent demeaning language against morse code?!?"

That's quite biased, if not bigotted. If code-lovers want to be "in your
face" about their alleged "superiority in radio" for that singular ability,
and do so for years, and years before the Internet went public in 1991,
then I think your language use is both biased and quite "loaded."

The PCTA constantly want to equate elimination of the code test
with elimination of morse code as a mode. That shows two things:
unjustified paranoia by code-lovers; a necessity to claim an old
psychomotor skill in order to get them artificial status, rank, and
privilege in amateur radio.

Since NO OTHER RADIO SERVICE involved in communications has
retained morse codings as a primary mode of communications
interchange, long-time radio amateurs desiring retention of a code
test can only be seen in the light of demands that "others do as they
did" to love, honor, and obey morse code in order to have them
retain their rank, status, and privileges.

If a relatively small group of biased and bigotted old-timers insist
that elimination of a federal TEST for morse code ability is
"persistent demeaning language" in an open forum, publicly accessible,
then there isn't much hope of "consensus" among the whole and
certainly not conciliation.

There is only the capitulation of the majority to a minority's desire
to accept "persistent demeaning language" as truth.

That is a selfish demand by those no longer "superior."

LHA