"J. D. B." wrote:

Not quite. Testing on rules, regulations and technical knowledge is a
bit different than testing on one specific mode of communication. I use
CW, but considered the continued archaic CW testing requirement to be
silly and outdated. It should have been dropped 30 years ago.

Anybody who can't pass the minimal 5 WPM doesn't deserve a license.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

dxAce wrote:
"J. D. B." wrote:

Not quite. Testing on rules, regulations and technical knowledge is a
bit different than testing on one specific mode of communication. I use
CW, but considered the continued archaic CW testing requirement to be
silly and outdated. It should have been dropped 30 years ago.

Anybody who can't pass the minimal 5 WPM doesn't deserve a license.
why?

and it isn't a matter f "deserving" alicense at all is about meeting
the legal mandaable requirement and now absent the treaty the code
fails to make the standards of law and the FCC knows even if you don't

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"an old freind" wrote in message
oups.com...

dxAce wrote:
"J. D. B." wrote:

Not quite. Testing on rules, regulations and technical knowledge is a
bit different than testing on one specific mode of communication. I
use
CW, but considered the continued archaic CW testing requirement to be
silly and outdated. It should have been dropped 30 years ago.

Anybody who can't pass the minimal 5 WPM doesn't deserve a license.
why?

and it isn't a matter f "deserving" alicense at all is about meeting
the legal mandaable requirement and now absent the treaty the code
fails to make the standards of law and the FCC knows even if you don't

dxAce
Michigan
USA


5 WPM is easy. esp if you use Farnsworth.

i'm at 18 WPM, and i can copy contest exchanges at 30 WPM. i haven't made a
CW QSO in 10 years!

i think the code requirement should be 13 WPM plus for the upper classes.
keeps the riff raff out.

Gravity

gravity wrote:
"an old freind" wrote in message
oups.com...

and it isn't a matter f "deserving" alicense at all is about meeting
the legal mandaable requirement and now absent the treaty the code
fails to make the standards of law and the FCC knows even if you don't

dxAce
Michigan
USA


5 WPM is easy. esp if you use Farnsworth.

easy for you

not for me

I spent 5 years in my teens taking a test every couple of weeks towrds
the end. I did get so I might pass either the sending or receiving on a
given day but never both

guess from that data I suspect isf I had the time and schedule I could
mange to pass a receiving or better still a sending test in roughly a
year bt I don't my schedule leaves very busy eroids and very slow
eriods

but all this is beside the point
nothing in the treaty give the USA the requirement to make such a test
and nothing in the consitiotn reglates the matter so the power to use
hf specturm is resvresed byt eh 10th amend to the states or the people
themselves (para the constititon

unless the power to impose a code test can be shown to exist in other
section such preahps shwoing that it is "nessacary and proper" an
arguement that could have been made say when the miltary needed to warn
us of freqs they were suing in cw or some other argument, the FCC and
th congress lack the legeal power to maintain the test if challanged,
an expensive and unpleasent task

i think the code requirement should be 13 WPM plus for the upper classes.
keeps the riff raff out.
but it did not keep the riffraf out as the folks listeningt o 80 m have
known since long before the last change

Gravity

"gravity" wrote in message news:4496bf14$0$14238

5 WPM is easy.

Nonsense.

Tell us you can do it --- tell us your mangy hound dog can do it, but steer
clear of the blanket statements. It isn't easy to one who can't do it.

"Sal M. Onella" wrote in
news:IJKlg.105$lv.102@fed1read12:


"gravity" wrote in message
news:4496bf14$0$14238

5 WPM is easy.

Nonsense.

Tell us you can do it --- tell us your mangy hound dog can do it, but
steer clear of the blanket statements. It isn't easy to one who can't
do it.


When code goes away, you're going to be the one that tells us the written
is too hard.

sc

"Slow Code" wrote in message
nk.net...



When code goes away, you're going to be the one that tells us the written
is too hard.


You wish! Of the 55 questions on my Technician License exam,
I missed one. ONE!

Technically, I'm an above average ham. Through your dirty goggles,
however,
you see me as some kind of slug because I can't do code. So wrong.

Because I already hit the twit filter on you, I won't see any reply you
send, so
play it up any way you want.

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Anybody who can't pass the minimal 5 WPM doesn't deserve a license.

That's needlessly insulting.

Sal M. Onella wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Anybody who can't pass the minimal 5 WPM doesn't deserve a license.

That's needlessly insulting.
well the is DX ace for you never be just rude whenyou can be insulting