On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:19:04 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Jim wrote:
Pretty much agree with Doc, altho, after the last "restructureing", the
value of a license is worthless!

The only value in a license are the privileges granted. The privileges
granted haven't changed appreciably. I had full access to all ham bands
in 1953 and I still have full access to all ham bands in 2004. I lost
11m and 220 MHz but gained the WARC bands. The value of my license is
very close to what it was in 1953.

Unfortunately, there are far too many for whom the value of their
license is measured in how many people it allows them to look down
their noses at. Their only motivation for moving up was so they could
gloat over how much better they are than anyone that isn't up to their
standards. This is also the primary reason that contests and awards
are rubbed in our faces in most of the magazines and newsletters. This
is the crowd the ARRL has been cutivating for years, because they
don't care about advancing the state of the art, or building their own
equipment, helping others, or any of the other aspects of the hobby
that used to make it great. They simply want to buy the newest,
coolest, fanciest or most expensive rig to help them along on their
ego trip, which keeps the advertisers happy.

Somebody let me know when QST no longer has any contests or award
notices in it. Then I *might* be interested in looking at it again.

Bob McConnell
N2SPP

I disagree with your premise Bob, I hope that you are not so insecure with
your manhood that you would find the success of others a threat.

Many of us older farts strive for excellence, we use various means to
measure how we compare to others. Do not confuse pride in accomplishment
with ego.

In spite of what the feel good types tell you, competition is a basic human
instinct. Keeping score is the way to quantify the competition.

To distain the accomplishments of others as "ego" is both supercilious and
lacking in the basic understanding of the human condition.

"Bob McConnell" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:19:04 -0600, Cecil Moore

Unfortunately, there are far too many for whom the value of their
license is measured in how many people it allows them to look down
their noses at. Their only motivation for moving up was so they could
gloat over how much better they are than anyone that isn't up to their
standards. This is also the primary reason that contests and awards
are rubbed in our faces in most of the magazines and newsletters. This
is the crowd the ARRL has been cutivating for years, because they
don't care about advancing the state of the art, or building their own
equipment, helping others, or any of the other aspects of the hobby
that used to make it great. They simply want to buy the newest,
coolest, fanciest or most expensive rig to help them along on their
ego trip, which keeps the advertisers happy.

Somebody let me know when QST no longer has any contests or award
notices in it. Then I *might* be interested in looking at it again.

Bob McConnell
N2SPP

Bob McConnell wrote:
Unfortunately, there are far too many for whom the value of their
license is measured in how many people it allows them to look down
their noses at.

At 6'4", I don't usually need a ham license for that. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

You Sir have the opportunity to corrct all that. The beauty of Ham radio is
that anyone can start a club.

Maybe it's time you do so and correct all the ills you have observed.

Remember every one has a purpose in life, even if only as a bad example. Now
that you know what NOT to do, the rest is easy.


"Bob McConnell" wrote in message
...
I have very little problem with my manhood. I have a son with a Master

They ****ed and Moaned when incentive licensing hit...

And they still **** and Moan when non-incentive licensing hits..

what goes around, comes around...

Pete

In article et,
"Dr. Daffodil Swain" wrote:

HUH? Most FCC "engineers" can't pass this test! They have EE's which have
nothing to do with assembling QRP rigs. They don't teach soldering in
school. Get a life.

There aren't many of those guys (FCC "engineers) left in the Commission,
since Uncle Billy and his henchman ALGORE, reinvented the Commission,
and layed off 75% of the Field Operations Folks. Better look for some
other folks to admin your goofy exams and build your QRP Radio's.

me

I suspect that Bob McConnell is being facetious with his suggestion about
building a QRP rig as part of a ham examination.


"Me" wrote in message
...
In article et,
"Dr. Daffodil Swain" wrote:

HUH? Most FCC "engineers" can't pass this test! They have EE's which
have
nothing to do with assembling QRP rigs. They don't teach soldering in
school. Get a life.

There aren't many of those guys (FCC "engineers) left in the Commission,
since Uncle Billy and his henchman ALGORE, reinvented the Commission,
and layed off 75% of the Field Operations Folks. Better look for some
other folks to admin your goofy exams and build your QRP Radio's.

me

If you can't build one from a few parts and get it on the air, you don't
deserve to be called a ham.

Any CBer or welfare ham can turn on the latest, greatest, Kenwood.

If you have even the most rudimentary understanding of electronics, you
should be able to build a transmitter.

How about something as simple as a crystal, a digital hex inverter and some
wire and a couple of capacitors?

Whoops! that requires knowledge not gained from memorizing a set of
questions.

Mores the pity! There have been no real hams since the FCC stopped giving
the exams. If that ****es people off, please take note of the mistletoe
pinned to my coat tail....


"geocal" wrote in message
...
I suspect that Bob McConnell is being facetious with his suggestion about
building a QRP rig as part of a ham examination.

Hey Bob,
I get QST...always have. The contesting stuff doesn't interest me, so I just
ignore it. Occasionally I'll see a familiar call and think "hey, I know
that guy", then move on.
73
Joe KB8QLR
--
Be sure to check-out our webpages...
http://www.angelfire.com/jazz/kb8qlrjoe/index.html
New pictures & links being added frequently.
"Bob McConnell" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:19:04 -0600, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Jim wrote:
Pretty much agree with Doc, altho, after the last "restructureing", the
value of a license is worthless!

The only value in a license are the privileges granted. The privileges
granted haven't changed appreciably. I had full access to all ham bands
in 1953 and I still have full access to all ham bands in 2004. I lost
11m and 220 MHz but gained the WARC bands. The value of my license is
very close to what it was in 1953.

Unfortunately, there are far too many for whom the value of their
license is measured in how many people it allows them to look down
their noses at. Their only motivation for moving up was so they could
gloat over how much better they are than anyone that isn't up to their
standards. This is also the primary reason that contests and awards
are rubbed in our faces in most of the magazines and newsletters. This
is the crowd the ARRL has been cutivating for years, because they
don't care about advancing the state of the art, or building their own
equipment, helping others, or any of the other aspects of the hobby
that used to make it great. They simply want to buy the newest,
coolest, fanciest or most expensive rig to help them along on their
ego trip, which keeps the advertisers happy.

Somebody let me know when QST no longer has any contests or award
notices in it. Then I *might* be interested in looking at it again.

Bob McConnell
N2SPP

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:55:05 GMT, "geocal" wrote:

I suspect that Bob McConnell is being facetious with his suggestion about
building a QRP rig as part of a ham examination.


I was beginning to wonder if anyone caught that. The initial
suggestion was that a ham license was worth less after the last
restructuring eliminated half of them and reduced the CW requirement.
My sarcastic reply was that if they wanted to revert to a time when
the license was more difficult to obtain, they weren't going back far
enough, but should revert all the way to the era when only an FCC
engineer was qualified to test and issue licenses. Then add the
assembly to really separate the hams from CBers that can memorize the
text book.

Apparently, high schools no longer teach sarcasm as a literary device.
Even my pseudo HTML tag didn't clue them in.

I am curious about one thing. In 1977 I took the FCC test series for
the commercial phone license. I breezed through third class and passed
the second class elements, but missed first class by 6 points. If I
had turned around and taken the amateur tests at that time, without
the code requirement, what license would I have ended up with?

Bob McConnell
N2SPP