wrote in message
...
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 19:27:33 -0500, Nada Tapu
wrote:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 16:39:47 -0400, wrote:

And you probably answered some theory questions about modes you'll
never use and formulas you'll never see again. Maybe we should just
eliminate the theory exam, too.

and what do we gain by doing that it is certainly an option when
eleimate code testing we eleimate something that makes the ARS look
stpuid obviously we gain by that

Look stupid? Oh, excuse me!
yes you are stupid and anothe rof the usenet cowards


There are a lot of people who don't want to be bothered with the
theory exam, either. And when it comes right down to it, what do we
really need a theory exam for?
you tell me

I think it benifits the ARS by insuring that new hams reconize the
term and the rules involved in the ARS

don't you think it does that?

Most CB'ers and electronic hobbyists
have the technical expertise to put a multi-band rig and antenna on
the air and start operating without any trouble at all.

and many so Indeed we could despense with the technical question sif
it was found to be to our benifit

They feel they
shouldn't need to take a test in order to do that, and a good case may
be made in favor of that approach. Homebrew and experiment? Sure, why
not? They can do that too. I did when I was on CB, so why can't
others? Why should I take a test that includes superflous questions
about operating modes and aspects of electronics and computers that I
have absolutely no intention of employing in my day to day station
operation?

Now allow me to put on the "other hat".

pput on such hats as you please

CW is a part of amateur radio's heritage and history.

agreed
One has to
embrace the past to realize where one is today.
that is merely one method but one is not required to emabrace the past
or to real;ize where we are today
Having said that, CW
is not an obsolete mode by any means;

it is obslete
it is timeless. It was a viable
communications mode 50 years ago, it still is today, and it will still
be perfectly viable 10,000 years from now.

which does not prevent it from being oselte

the Longbow it is still a vaible weapon today will be for some time to
come

it is none the less obeslete
It's spectrum efficient
and highly effective under adverse conditions. So what if it happens
to be dated? There is absolutlely nothing wrong with the preservation
and continued use of old but perfectly good technologies.

and I don't object to YOU doing so but I do object to your insistance
on public specturm being used to do as a complution on all those that
wish to use it
It's just
too bad if some operators feel that a certain operating mode reflects
badly on the amateur community solely because it's been around for a
long time. There is nothing "stupid" about this issue.

what is stupid is this insistance that I must help to preserve some
thing that YOU value and wish preserved and that I think we would be
better off leting it go the way of Spark

Am I supporting the elimination of the theory exam and promoting the
testing of morse skills? Of course not, although I can see how one
would reach that conclusion from my statements. I'm being purposely
obtuse.
and insulting
What amateur radio needs is BALANCE.

which it will lack as long as the ARS insist on worshiping the ONE
mode CW above the rest of the ARS combined as the leicense system does
today
It needs operators with
a rich set of skills and traits that will set it apart from the other
radio services. When those skills and traits cease to exist, the
service will perish, and eventually the spectrum will be sold to the
highest bidder.

My $.02 Draw your own conclusions.
my conclusion is that you will twist truth and logic anyway you like
to achive your end

for that matter so will I

- - . . . . . . - -

NT
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Indeed we could dispense with much of the technical qualifications some day.
The technical part is basically an attempt to make sure the amatuer is
competent enough to operate their equipment in a maner that does not
interfere with other services outside of his designated allocation of
spectrum, in other words, within FCC regulations. At such a time when all
equipment is made idiot proof and all hams use store bought idiot proofed
gear we may see this.So far the one experiment at this has failed. You think
you have something idiot proof and then guess what, someone makes a better
idiot. So I am not worried about requirement of theory going away. As far a
CW is concerned to gain the privledges hams have today they had to show they
were a national asset. Part of being that asset was our ability to process
emergency traffic should the need arrive. At the time CW was needed to
accomplish this. It is no longer needed to meet our obligation of service.
OF course this begs the question, can we fullfil our obligation. To this I
believe we can, but are we really needed. CW has been replaced by other
technologies, it would make more sense to require typing skills than CW, an
idea I dont think is so bad even though I may have trouble with twenty wpm
on a keyboard.

wrote in message
ups.com...
From: Nada Tapu on Sat, Sep 30 2006 2:23 pm


On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 20:56:08 -0400, wrote:

no slow code the number are down because with Code testing looks so
stpupid

The numbers are down for a variety of reasons, but I suspect that
computers and the internet are the major factors, not the CW
requirement.

The ready-built Personal Computer first appeared in 1976,
30 years ago (the "IBM PC" debuted in 1980, 26 years ago).
The Internet went public in 1991, 15 years ago.
"Restructuring" to drop the morse test rate to 5 WPM
for all such tests happened only 6 years ago.

The peak licensing of 737,938 happened on 2 Jul 03, just
3 years ago. [they've been dropping at an average of 7K
per year ever since]

I disagree on your reasons stated in your quote above.

When I ask technical people about why they haven't
acquired an interest in amateur radio, I never get the CW requirement
as a response.

Strange, I hear that response. Having been IN radio-
electronics for over a half century, I DO know some
"technical people." :-)

Manual radiotelegraphy was a MUST to use early radio
as a communications medium. The technology of early
radio was primitive, simple, and not yet developed.
On-off keying was the ONLY practical way to make it
possible to communicate. Morse code was then already
mature and a new branch of communications was open
to use by downsized landline telegraphers.

They simply view the whole service as outmoded in the
face of modern telecommunications.

PART of that IS true. NOT all of it.

What IS outmoded (technically) is sitting only on HF
and "working" other stations with morse radiotelegraphy.
Amateur radio is the ONLY radio service still using
morse radiotelegraphy for communications purposes.

Another thing outmoded is the strict "necessity" to use
a formalism in "procedure" AS IF it was "professional"
radio. That formalism was established between 50 to 70
years ago. Amateur radio, by definition, is NOT
professional. Too many olde-tymers want to PRETEND
they are pros in front of their ham rigs.

But, there is still an enormous area of the EM spectrum
that is still open for experimentation, for just the fun
of doing something out of the ordinary above 30 MHz.
That can be a very different RF environment, much much
different than the technology available in the 20s and
30s. It has exciting possibilities...except for the
rutted and mired olde-tymers unable to keep up with new
things, secure in their own dreams of youth and simple
technological environment.

Let's face it.. the romance is gone.

Oh, boo hoo...the "romance" of the 1930s is gone? Yes,
it IS. The "pioneering of the airwaves" below 30 MHz
has been DONE...mostly by the pros of radio (despite what
the ARRL claims). DONE a long time ago. The solid-state
era came into being about 45 years ago and has
revolutionized ALL electronics (radio is a subset of that).

Except as memorabilia trinkets of the past, GONE is the
analog VFO, GONE is the one-tube regenerative receiver,
GONE is the single-crystal-single-frequency Tx, GONE is
the big, bulky AM modulator amplifier, GONE is the not-
knowing-when-the-bands-are-open (solar activity and
ionosonding solved that and HF MUF is a predictable
item that can be found by a computer program). Except
for the boatanchor afficionados, vacuum tubes are GONE
for nearly everything but high-power transmitters.

The radio world of today is NOT that of 1950, nor of
1960, nor 1970, nor even 1980s. It keeps changing,
advancing, the state of the art never static. For the
stuck-in-the-mud olde tymers that is terrible...they
feel insecure on not being able to keep up, become
aggressive to newcomers ("no kids, lids or space
cadets") and retreat to the "secure" mode of their
youth, "CW." But, they want to make sure They get
the respect they feel they've "earned" (as if) so
they try and try and try to bring all down to THEIR
level...the code test MUST stay..."because."

There are 100 million two-way radios in use in the USA
alone, millions more in other countries. Those are the
cellular telephones. There are millions of VHF and UHF
transceivers in the USA, working daily for public
safety agencies, ships, private boats, air carriers as
well as private airplanes. There are tens of thousands
of HF transceivers in use in the USA, users being
everyone from government agencies to private boat
owners, ALL exclusive of amateur radio users. Where is
the "romance" in all this Plenty from a cornucopia that
all have grabbed? It is GONE, yes.

But, NEW "romances" await. DIFFERENT ones, I'd say a
helluva lot more complex than old, simple "radio." We
can't relive old "romances" except in our minds and we
can't grow physically younger. Only person-to-person
romance is TRUE, the other "romance" is of the
imagination, of the fantasy of what was once there.
This fantasy "romance" can't be brought back. It can't
be legislated into remaining static. The rules and
regulations have to change to keep up with the NOW.




Total agreement here, our obligation of service to to earn our privlegdes
doesnt end with what we have done but with what we have done lately.

Jimmie D wrote:
Total agreement here, our obligation of service to earn our privlegdes
doesnt end with what we have done but with what we have done lately.

The "service" provided by the Amateur Radio Service
is a service provided *by* the federal government
*to* the citizens who meet the amateur radio licensing
requirements. There is no governmental requirement or
obligation that amateur radio operators render any public
service at all. Amateur radio licensees are not even
required to own a radio.

"Service", in this context, is just an administrative
division of government.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
Slow Code wrote:
wrote in
ups.com:
an_old_friend wrote:

But if you and Markie ever get full HF privledges, God & Hiram Help us.

Why? Do you fear us working out of band Frenchmen? We could do that
just as well on 6 Meters.

BB I belieeve you have mentioned passing a code test at some point that
would allow you fullaccess to hf today I could look up your license or
you could tell me

I passed the Novice exam in Nov 1986. 5WPM. I'm presently a General,
so I'm fully qualified to work out of band Frenchmen on 6M or on HF.
Maybe they'll even put me in for the ARRL's A-1 Operator Club.

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
news
Jimmie D wrote:
Total agreement here, our obligation of service to earn our privlegdes
doesnt end with what we have done but with what we have done lately.

The "service" provided by the Amateur Radio Service
is a service provided *by* the federal government
*to* the citizens who meet the amateur radio licensing
requirements. There is no governmental requirement or
obligation that amateur radio operators render any public
service at all. Amateur radio licensees are not even
required to own a radio.

"Service", in this context, is just an administrative
division of government.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

No, I am talking about the service we should be providing. In the spirit of
JFK's "ask not what your contry can do for you speech". You are correct that
there is no requirement as defined by law but there certainly is a moral one
that should be defined by your character.

Jimmie D wrote:
No, I am talking about the service we should be providing. In the spirit of
JFK's "ask not what your contry can do for you speech".

JFK's speech contradicting this country's founding
principles was just democratic rhetoric. This country
was founded "for the people" NOT for the government.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

"an_odd_freak" wrote in
ups.com:


wrote:
Slow Code wrote:
wrote in
ups.com:
an_old_friend wrote:

But if you and Markie ever get full HF privledges, God & Hiram Help
us.

Why? Do you fear us working out of band Frenchmen? We could do that
just as well on 6 Meters.
BB I belieeve you have mentioned passing a code test at some point that
would allow you fullaccess to hf today I could look up your license or
you could tell me



The FCC still has the old CB calls in a database?

SC

"Jimmie D" wrote in
:


wrote in message
...
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 19:27:33 -0500, Nada Tapu
wrote:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 16:39:47 -0400, wrote:

And you probably answered some theory questions about modes you'll
never use and formulas you'll never see again. Maybe we should just
eliminate the theory exam, too.

and what do we gain by doing that it is certainly an option when
eleimate code testing we eleimate something that makes the ARS look
stpuid obviously we gain by that

Look stupid? Oh, excuse me!
yes you are stupid and anothe rof the usenet cowards


There are a lot of people who don't want to be bothered with the
theory exam, either. And when it comes right down to it, what do we
really need a theory exam for?
you tell me

I think it benifits the ARS by insuring that new hams reconize the
term and the rules involved in the ARS

don't you think it does that?

Most CB'ers and electronic hobbyists
have the technical expertise to put a multi-band rig and antenna on
the air and start operating without any trouble at all.

and many so Indeed we could despense with the technical question sif
it was found to be to our benifit

They feel they
shouldn't need to take a test in order to do that, and a good case may
be made in favor of that approach. Homebrew and experiment? Sure, why
not? They can do that too. I did when I was on CB, so why can't
others? Why should I take a test that includes superflous questions
about operating modes and aspects of electronics and computers that I
have absolutely no intention of employing in my day to day station
operation?

Now allow me to put on the "other hat".

pput on such hats as you please

CW is a part of amateur radio's heritage and history.

agreed
One has to
embrace the past to realize where one is today.
that is merely one method but one is not required to emabrace the past
or to real;ize where we are today
Having said that, CW
is not an obsolete mode by any means;

it is obslete
it is timeless. It was a viable
communications mode 50 years ago, it still is today, and it will still
be perfectly viable 10,000 years from now.

which does not prevent it from being oselte

the Longbow it is still a vaible weapon today will be for some time to
come

it is none the less obeslete
It's spectrum efficient
and highly effective under adverse conditions. So what if it happens
to be dated? There is absolutlely nothing wrong with the preservation
and continued use of old but perfectly good technologies.

and I don't object to YOU doing so but I do object to your insistance
on public specturm being used to do as a complution on all those that
wish to use it
It's just
too bad if some operators feel that a certain operating mode reflects
badly on the amateur community solely because it's been around for a
long time. There is nothing "stupid" about this issue.

what is stupid is this insistance that I must help to preserve some
thing that YOU value and wish preserved and that I think we would be
better off leting it go the way of Spark

Am I supporting the elimination of the theory exam and promoting the
testing of morse skills? Of course not, although I can see how one
would reach that conclusion from my statements. I'm being purposely
obtuse.
and insulting
What amateur radio needs is BALANCE.

which it will lack as long as the ARS insist on worshiping the ONE
mode CW above the rest of the ARS combined as the leicense system does
today
It needs operators with
a rich set of skills and traits that will set it apart from the other
radio services. When those skills and traits cease to exist, the
service will perish, and eventually the spectrum will be sold to the
highest bidder.

My $.02 Draw your own conclusions.
my conclusion is that you will twist truth and logic anyway you like
to achive your end

for that matter so will I

- - . . . . . . - -

NT
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Indeed we could dispense with much of the technical qualifications some
day. The technical part is basically an attempt to make sure the amatuer
is competent enough to operate their equipment in a maner that does not
interfere with other services outside of his designated allocation of
spectrum, in other words, within FCC regulations. At such a time when
all equipment is made idiot proof and all hams use store bought idiot
proofed gear we may see this.So far the one experiment at this has
failed. You think you have something idiot proof and then guess what,
someone makes a better idiot. So I am not worried about requirement of
theory going away. As far a CW is concerned to gain the privledges hams
have today they had to show they were a national asset. Part of being
that asset was our ability to process emergency traffic should the need
arrive. At the time CW was needed to accomplish this. It is no longer
needed to meet our obligation of service. OF course this begs the
question, can we fullfil our obligation. To this I believe we can, but
are we really needed. CW has been replaced by other technologies, it
would make more sense to require typing skills than CW, an idea I dont
think is so bad even though I may have trouble with twenty wpm on a
keyboard.


If CW has been replaced by other technologies, why aren't more amateurs
doing the modernized modes? It's because they don't want too. Ham radio
has been dumbed down and we can't even force hams to use them to be
proficient communicators.

CW isn't preventing the modernization of ham radio, Laziness is.

SC

wrote in
ups.com:


Slow Code wrote:
wrote in
ups.com:
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
Jimmie D wrote:

Im sure the numbers would look even wose if the licenses expired
sooner. Most of the new hams I know lose interest in a couple of
years, long befor the licence expires.

Those darned new hams. They never should have been licensured in
the first place. Didn't have the ooomph to get licensed when the
tests were harder so they weren't really that innerested in the
first place. Didn't show the proper dedication.

and of course none of the failure of hams to reamin hams is due to
bull**** they must endure from other hams

Of course not! Ham radio is a swell fellowship of men. What you see
on RRAP n't ham radio.

But if you and Markie ever get full HF privledges, God & Hiram Help us.

Why? Do you fear us working out of band Frenchmen? We could do that
just as well on 6 Meters.


And on CB.


SC

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
om...
Jimmie D wrote:
No, I am talking about the service we should be providing. In the spirit
of JFK's "ask not what your contry can do for you speech".

JFK's speech contradicting this country's founding
principles was just democratic rhetoric. This country
was founded "for the people" NOT for the government.

--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

His statement was "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you
can do for your country"
I dont remember the word government being mentioned in it.

The words are true even if he was less than sincere. If we are not this
country then what is. This country is "we the people" so ultimately it
including amatuer radio is our responsibility not that which you call the
government.. . It was a call to service, a call to serve this country, a
call to serve its people.. You are correct on one point. It was democratic
rhetoric but damned good rhetoric. But as my grandmother used to say, "Even
Satan will tell the truth if it serves him".

Jimmie