| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Bye Bye CW
Just because my Great Grandfather had to 'crank start' his car, we should
ALL have to learn how to do it prior to driving. And his wife had to use a 'crank style' telephone, therefore we ALL should have to master that technology PRIOR to using a cell-phone just because they did. Additionally, we should ALL have to learn the computer language known as 'Basic' or 'Fortran' PRIOR to using a PC because I and so many others had to learn it. And EVERYONE should be required to learn an antiquated mode known as CW before they get on HF because some 18th century guy invented it. Either catch-up with the times, or get the HELL out of the way! Like it or not, CW is TOAST! |
.:\:/:.
+-------------------+ .:\:\:/:/:. | PLEASE DØ NØT | :.:\:\:/:/:.: | FEED THE TRØLLS! | :=.' - - '.=: | | '=(\ € € /)=' | Thank you, | ( (æ) ) | rec.radio.cb NG | /`-vvv-'\ +-------------------+ / TRØLL \ | | @@@ / /|,,,,,|\ \ | | @@@ /_// /^\ \\_\ @x@@x@ | | |/ WW( ( ) )WW \||||/ | | \| __\,,\ /,,/__ \||/ | | | (______Y______) jgs /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\//\/\\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ |
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 05:08:52 -0500, Radioman wrote:
.:\:/:. +-------------------+ .:\:\:/:/:. | PLEASE DØ NØT | :.:\:\:/:/:.: | FEED THE TRØLLS! | :=.' - - '.=: | | '=(\ € € /)=' | Thank you, | ( (æ) ) | rec.radio.cb NG | /`-vvv-'\ +-------------------+ / TRØLL \ | | @@@ / /|,,,,,|\ \ | | @@@ /_// /^\ \\_\ @x@@x@ | | |/ WW( ( ) )WW \||||/ | | \| __\,,\ /,,/__ \||/ | | | (______Y______) jgs /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\//\/\\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Trolls need FOOD too, don't they? Actually IF they got rid of code, then HOW would the yuppies relax to low tech Beep Beeps dit dat? Dave!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!! -----= 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! =----- |
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 07:52:07 GMT, "Hamguy" wrote:
Just because my Great Grandfather had to 'crank start' his car, we should ALL have to learn how to do it prior to driving. And his wife had to use a 'crank style' telephone, therefore we ALL should have to master that technology PRIOR to using a cell-phone just because they did. Additionally, we should ALL have to learn the computer language known as 'Basic' or 'Fortran' PRIOR to using a PC because I and so many others had to learn it. And EVERYONE should be required to learn an antiquated mode known as CW before they get on HF because some 18th century guy invented it. Either catch-up with the times, or get the HELL out of the way! Like it or not, CW is TOAST! CW has been as good as dead for years. Only the delusional or in many cases senile amateurs think that a CW requirement can actually benefit amateur radio in the long run. Some believe that a CW requirement is a good filter, but CW itself is a backward step in time. A more current, and better filter would be a higher technical test standard that would include the newer technologies. It should not be a cake walk. If the argument is to filter the undesirables then technical testing should be the filter and should be repeated every few years for all current amateurs. Only that way can you truly filter the undesirables. The drunks, the sour old men, and the senile idiots that ruin amateur radio today. P.S. I have no problem with voluntary CW use. |
|
P.S. I have no problem with voluntary CW use.
they should form a niche for the cw users and note it on the license with an asterik or some sort of identifier. if people really want to use cw then they can fly the badge... I can see the QRZ.COM listings now, WA3MOJ-* (I was going to use a SK, but I have more respect then that...) |
Radioman wrote: P.S. I have no problem with voluntary CW use. they should form a niche for the cw users and note it on the license with an asterik or some sort of identifier. if people really want to use cw then they can fly the badge... I can see the QRZ.COM listings now, WA3MOJ-* (I was going to use a SK, but I have more respect then that...) hehehe |
Radioman wrote in message ...
P.S. I have no problem with voluntary CW use. they should form a niche for the cw users and note it on the license with an asterik or some sort of identifier. if people really want to use cw then they can fly the badge... I can see the QRZ.COM listings now, WA3MOJ-* (I was going to use a SK, but I have more respect then that...) Scott why is it every chance you get you troll wa3moj? |
jim wrote: they should form a niche for the cw users and note it on the license with an asterik or some sort of identifier. if people really want to use cw then they can fly the badge... They have one.. It's called being a General, Advanced, or Extra class ARO. -SSB |
sideband wrote:
jim wrote: they should form a niche for the cw users and note it on the license with an asterik or some sort of identifier. if people really want to use cw then they can fly the badge... They have one.. It's called being a General, Advanced, or Extra class ARO. -SSB But -all- are required to learn a mode of communication that many have no interest in, to date. That may be changing. Do all General, Advanced, or Extra class operators use CW? |
I do, but rarely. I know others that haven't since they tested, and I
know yet others who recently got their tickets who only work CW and digital modes. The point is this: Why bitch, moan, and complain about it, especially in a CB newsgroup, where CW has no real bearing? Whatever the requirements to get a license become, there will still be CW ops out there. -SSB Steveo wrote: sideband wrote: jim wrote: they should form a niche for the cw users and note it on the license with an asterik or some sort of identifier. if people really want to use cw then they can fly the badge... They have one.. It's called being a General, Advanced, or Extra class ARO. -SSB But -all- are required to learn a mode of communication that many have no interest in, to date. That may be changing. Do all General, Advanced, or Extra class operators use CW? |
|
Dave or Debby wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 05:08:52 -0500, Radioman wrote: .:\:/:. +-------------------+ .:\:\:/:/:. | PLEASE DØ NØT | :.:\:\:/:/:.: | FEED THE TRØLLS! | :=.' - - '.=: | | '=(\ € € /)=' | Thank you, | ( (æ) ) | rec.radio.cb NG | /`-vvv-'\ | +-------------------+ / TRØLL \ | | @@@ / /|,,,,,|\ \ | | @@@ /_// /^\ \\_\ @x@@x@ | | |/ WW( ( ) )WW \||||/ | | \| __\,,\ /,,/__ \||/ | | | (______Y______) jgs /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\//\/\\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Trolls need FOOD too, don't they? Actually IF they got rid of code, then HOW would the yuppies relax to low tech Beep Beeps dit dat? Dave!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lots of those yuppies think CW sounds like fingernails on a chalkboard. |
sideband wrote:
I do, but rarely. I know others that haven't since they tested, and I know yet others who recently got their tickets who only work CW and digital modes. The point is this: Why bitch, moan, and complain about it, especially in a CB newsgroup, where CW has no real bearing? No bitching or moaning, just chatter. Whatever the requirements to get a license become, there will still be CW ops out there. -SSB Agreed, more power to them. Steveo wrote: sideband wrote: jim wrote: they should form a niche for the cw users and note it on the license with an asterik or some sort of identifier. if people really want to use cw then they can fly the badge... They have one.. It's called being a General, Advanced, or Extra class ARO. -SSB But -all- are required to learn a mode of communication that many have no interest in, to date. That may be changing. Do all General, Advanced, or Extra class operators use CW? |
|
|
|
Old School wrote:
On 01 Feb 2004 19:18:19 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote: I have no Idea what your talking about. On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:09:11 -0500, Lou wrote: Of course not, with that empty head of yours. How did you get so old Bruce? According to qrz.com you are 311 years old!!! Born in 1698!!! Hahahaaa! No wonder your stupidity shows.... Bruce is a real stuffy prick, and this no-code **** is eating his belly out. lol -- Plymouth Motorcycle: http://www.allpar.com/history/plymouth/motorcycle.html |
On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 21:39:19 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . On 01 Feb 2004 20:59:58 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote: Actually it is highly unlikely that it will go through as proposed. The FCC will consider this petition along with the 14 others and probably come up with something entirely different if history is any indicator. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee you are correct. One thing that will probably not make it is FREE Handouts for Techs to General How is it FREE if everyone still has to study and pay for it? Are you this dumb? The ARRL has proposed an automatic upgrade from Tech to General with no additional testing and no submission of forms. i.e. The FCC would simply make a few keystrokes in the database to accomplish this. Since it requires no effort, no test, no submittal of forms and no fee on the part of the Technician, I'd say that qualifies as a free handout for the Technicians. However, the FCC's history so far demonstrates that they will not go for automatic upgrades so that part of the proposal has a high probability of getting dumped. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE If that is so, then how would the FCC handle streamlining the licensing. It is the FCC that wants this. The ARRL is the body that has thrown in the NO-CODE. Everyone is putting this onto the techs, what about the Advanced Licensees that will have a free hand out (in your words) to extra? No one is bitching at them!!! Its all comes down to the CODE either way you look at it. |
On 01 Feb 2004 22:07:53 GMT, Steveo
wrote: Old School wrote: On 01 Feb 2004 19:18:19 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote: I have no Idea what your talking about. On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:09:11 -0500, Lou wrote: Of course not, with that empty head of yours. How did you get so old Bruce? According to qrz.com you are 311 years old!!! Born in 1698!!! Hahahaaa! No wonder your stupidity shows.... Bruce is a real stuffy prick, and this no-code **** is eating his belly out. lol It sure is and him and a few other will be alone on HF |
"Old School" wrote in message ... On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 21:39:19 GMT, "Dee D. Flint" wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . On 01 Feb 2004 20:59:58 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote: Actually it is highly unlikely that it will go through as proposed. The FCC will consider this petition along with the 14 others and probably come up with something entirely different if history is any indicator. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee you are correct. One thing that will probably not make it is FREE Handouts for Techs to General How is it FREE if everyone still has to study and pay for it? Are you this dumb? The ARRL has proposed an automatic upgrade from Tech to General with no additional testing and no submission of forms. i.e. The FCC would simply make a few keystrokes in the database to accomplish this. Since it requires no effort, no test, no submittal of forms and no fee on the part of the Technician, I'd say that qualifies as a free handout for the Technicians. However, the FCC's history so far demonstrates that they will not go for automatic upgrades so that part of the proposal has a high probability of getting dumped. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE If that is so, then how would the FCC handle streamlining the licensing. It is the FCC that wants this. The ARRL is the body that has thrown in the NO-CODE. Everyone is putting this onto the techs, what about the Advanced Licensees that will have a free hand out (in your words) to extra? No one is bitching at them!!! Its all comes down to the CODE either way you look at it. A number of people ARE upset about the free upgrades proposed for the Advanced also. There's no reason that they should get them. They can get off their behinds and take the test. The focus is on the Techs not because of the code but because there are so many more of them than Advanced licensees and because the Techs generally have a lot less experience overall. The FCC did not solicit petitions or initiate an NPRM of their own. At this time the FCC doesn't really care one way or the other about the code issue. There were 14 petitions thrown into the hopper before the ARRLs, several of which proposed no-code licensing. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
|
|
|
On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:44:07 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 21:39:19 GMT, "Dee D. Flint" wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . On 01 Feb 2004 20:59:58 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote: Actually it is highly unlikely that it will go through as proposed. The FCC will consider this petition along with the 14 others and probably come up with something entirely different if history is any indicator. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee you are correct. One thing that will probably not make it is FREE Handouts for Techs to General How is it FREE if everyone still has to study and pay for it? Are you this dumb? The ARRL has proposed an automatic upgrade from Tech to General with no additional testing and no submission of forms. i.e. The FCC would simply make a few keystrokes in the database to accomplish this. Since it requires no effort, no test, no submittal of forms and no fee on the part of the Technician, I'd say that qualifies as a free handout for the Technicians. However, the FCC's history so far demonstrates that they will not go for automatic upgrades so that part of the proposal has a high probability of getting dumped. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE If that is so, then how would the FCC handle streamlining the licensing. It is the FCC that wants this. The ARRL is the body that has thrown in the NO-CODE. Everyone is putting this onto the techs, what about the Advanced Licensees that will have a free hand out (in your words) to extra? No one is bitching at them!!! Its all comes down to the CODE either way you look at it. A number of people ARE upset about the free upgrades proposed for the Advanced also. It isnt showing here! All on the techs! There's no reason that they should get them. They can get off their behinds and take the test. The focus is on the Techs not because of the code but because there are so many more of them than Advanced licensees and because the Techs generally have a lot less experience overall. You started out with no experience just like everyone else. You arent born with it, so you explanation is flaud! The FCC did not solicit petitions or initiate an NPRM of their own. At this time the FCC doesn't really care one way or the other about the code issue. There were 14 petitions thrown into the hopper before the ARRLs, several of which proposed no-code licensing. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE If the FCC does'nt care about the code, then why would they throw out this proposal which includes what the FCC has been wanting (Streamlining)? kf6foz |
"Old School" wrote in message ... On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:44:07 GMT, "Dee D. Flint" wrote: There's no reason that they should get them. They can get off their behinds and take the test. The focus is on the Techs not because of the code but because there are so many more of them than Advanced licensees and because the Techs generally have a lot less experience overall. You started out with no experience just like everyone else. You arent born with it, so you explanation is flaud! No my explanation is not flawed. I started with no experience but STUDIED and worked for each level that was required. I gained experience as I went just as today's Technicians should be required to do. By the way, turn on your spell checker. The FCC did not solicit petitions or initiate an NPRM of their own. At this time the FCC doesn't really care one way or the other about the code issue. There were 14 petitions thrown into the hopper before the ARRLs, several of which proposed no-code licensing. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE If the FCC does'nt care about the code, then why would they throw out this proposal which includes what the FCC has been wanting (Streamlining)? kf6foz The ARRL proposal will require a major rewrite of most of Part 97. This will involve a lot of work for the FCC. The so-called streamlining will not justify this major overhaul since maintaining a database requires the same work whether the license class field has 3 possible entries or 5 possible entries. Note that there has been no indication that the FCC has been pushing for any additional streamlining of the system since the last overhaul in 2000. For these reasons, the ARRL proposal (and several others that amount to major overhauls) are the least likely ones to go through. The least amount of effort for the FCC will be to do nothing. The second least amount of effort for the FCC will be to simply drop the code test for one or more license classes but otherwise leave them alone. The only change in the rules would be deleting references to Element 1. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 23:41:21 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 22:44:07 GMT, "Dee D. Flint" wrote: There's no reason that they should get them. They can get off their behinds and take the test. The focus is on the Techs not because of the code but because there are so many more of them than Advanced licensees and because the Techs generally have a lot less experience overall. You started out with no experience just like everyone else. You arent born with it, so you explanation is flaud! No my explanation is not flawed. I started with no experience but STUDIED and worked for each level that was required. I gained experience as I went just as today's Technicians should be required to do. By the way, turn on your spell checker. I dont spell the best and never claimed to be. Techs have to take a test like all other hams have to take a test. Only difference is the level of examination. Your simple explanation here in this post would support the NO-CODE cause as well. When you have the experiance, go for it. Most techs can operate a simple HF rig unless they are total dummies like Bruce and Dan. I dont expect a new tech to understand ever function on a Yaesu ft767GX, but I can guarantee you that if the new tech has had any experience with 11 meters, he would figure it out faster than one who hasn't. So lets all keeps the New Hams up on UHF/VHF to learn and get experience before we turn them loose on hf? Now it sounds like your trying to say that VHF/UHF is not as good as HF! What is it you phoney people want? The FCC did not solicit petitions or initiate an NPRM of their own. At this time the FCC doesn't really care one way or the other about the code issue. There were 14 petitions thrown into the hopper before the ARRLs, several of which proposed no-code licensing. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE If the FCC does'nt care about the code, then why would they throw out this proposal which includes what the FCC has been wanting (Streamlining)? kf6foz The ARRL proposal will require a major rewrite of most of Part 97. This will involve a lot of work for the FCC. The so-called streamlining will not justify this major overhaul since maintaining a database requires the same work whether the license class field has 3 possible entries or 5 possible entries. Note that there has been no indication that the FCC has been pushing for any additional streamlining of the system since the last overhaul in 2000. For these reasons, the ARRL proposal (and several others that amount to major overhauls) are the least likely ones to go through. The least amount of effort for the FCC will be to do nothing. The second least amount of effort for the FCC will be to simply drop the code test for one or more license classes but otherwise leave them alone. The only change in the rules would be deleting references to Element 1. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE The FCC has made references to the Streamlining. It will be alot of work in order to change the system, but in the long run, it will be much easier to maintain. Think about it, they will only have to maintain 3 groups of licenses, Novice, General and Extra instead of 6, Novice, Tech, Tech +, General, Advanced and Extra. It is very true that the easiest way out of this is to drop the code, but drop it period for all Licenses. |
"Old School" wrote in message ... What is it you phoney people want? No free upgrades. Even if code is dropped they should have to take the written. What is so hard to understand about that? The FCC has made references to the Streamlining. It will be alot of work in order to change the system, but in the long run, it will be much easier to maintain. Think about it, they will only have to maintain 3 groups of licenses, Novice, General and Extra instead of 6, Novice, Tech, Tech +, General, Advanced and Extra. Like I said, it does not make the system easier to maintain. For current license class, the database only needs a single field. It doesn't matter if there is a choice of 3 possible entries or 6 possible entries. It's a single keystroke in a single field. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 02:53:10 GMT, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . What is it you phoney people want? No free upgrades. Even if code is dropped they should have to take the written. What is so hard to understand about that? Absolutley nothing! The FCC has made references to the Streamlining. It will be alot of work in order to change the system, but in the long run, it will be much easier to maintain. Think about it, they will only have to maintain 3 groups of licenses, Novice, General and Extra instead of 6, Novice, Tech, Tech +, General, Advanced and Extra. Like I said, it does not make the system easier to maintain. For current license class, the database only needs a single field. It doesn't matter if there is a choice of 3 possible entries or 6 possible entries. It's a single keystroke in a single field. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I should correct myself, it wont make the system easier to maintain, however it will reduce the amount of paper work, printing supplies and confusion at the testing site and printing facility. Therefore it will help reduce confusion at the FFC offices. |
|
On 02 Feb 2004 13:43:00 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote:
You dont have any facts! That you want to hear And he avoids it again. |
|
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:41:17 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this
mindspring.com wrote: "WA8ULX" wrote in message ... If the FCC does'nt care about the code, then why would they throw out this proposal which includes what the FCC has been wanting (Streamlining)? kf6foz He still doesnt get it Well Bruce, like I say.....Ya jest cain't fix stupid. Dan/W4NTI It's obvious, they couldn't fix you or Bruce. |
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:18:51 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this
mindspring.com wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 13:33:10 -0500, Lou wrote: On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:21:23 +0100, "Helmut" wrote: Its not them, the CBLUSSERS AN`D KNUCKLE.... as you call them, dear poor old man Bruce, making me ashamed to be a ham myself. Its you allone, and these human beeings never stopping to accept decisions from the ITU, IARU and FCC. International, all the decisions were made and are validated. And the little America will run behind. I always thought, the Americans, they are the leaders of the world! Not in Amateur Radio. Their highest class amateurs are too old, stupid and shortminded to be. 73 de OE8SOQ Helmut Even though I can be included in this group, because of idiots like Bruce, I have to agree with Helmut. Unfortunately he makes us ALL look bad. :( We aren't all like him though. Fortunately there are more good operators here in America than bad ones like Bruce. The problem with Bruce is, He is all mouth and no action. America needs to move forward with all aspects. People like Bruce are the one that hold this country back from progress. All I can say now is, he and his little leet group of CBextra buddies will be all alone. All of us other open minded hams like Helmut and HLR will be be having fun talking on our rigs while you sit there waiting for someone to beep you. 73 de kf6foz How does wanting to preserve the past mean he is holding things back? You no code geeks are the short sighted ones. Just because it is old, does NOT MEAN you should throw it out with the trash. Dan/W4NTI None of us have said anything about throwing it in the trash. Some of these NO-CODERs are gonna get there code because of the mystery of code. It's like watching a scrambled cable tv channel, makes you wonder what is going on. I don't want to see code gone as in never used again. Keep it part of the Amateur Community, but don't force it on others. There is other ways of preserving code which I see on Field Day and Swap Meets also at Club Meetings. Keep it alive by discussing it and doing competitions like field day. |
"Old School" wrote in message ... On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:18:51 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 13:33:10 -0500, Lou wrote: On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:21:23 +0100, "Helmut" wrote: Its not them, the CBLUSSERS AN`D KNUCKLE.... as you call them, dear poor old man Bruce, making me ashamed to be a ham myself. Its you allone, and these human beeings never stopping to accept decisions from the ITU, IARU and FCC. International, all the decisions were made and are validated. And the little America will run behind. I always thought, the Americans, they are the leaders of the world! Not in Amateur Radio. Their highest class amateurs are too old, stupid and shortminded to be. 73 de OE8SOQ Helmut Even though I can be included in this group, because of idiots like Bruce, I have to agree with Helmut. Unfortunately he makes us ALL look bad. :( We aren't all like him though. Fortunately there are more good operators here in America than bad ones like Bruce. The problem with Bruce is, He is all mouth and no action. America needs to move forward with all aspects. People like Bruce are the one that hold this country back from progress. All I can say now is, he and his little leet group of CBextra buddies will be all alone. All of us other open minded hams like Helmut and HLR will be be having fun talking on our rigs while you sit there waiting for someone to beep you. 73 de kf6foz How does wanting to preserve the past mean he is holding things back? You no code geeks are the short sighted ones. Just because it is old, does NOT MEAN you should throw it out with the trash. Dan/W4NTI None of us have said anything about throwing it in the trash. Some of these NO-CODERs are gonna get there code because of the mystery of code. It's like watching a scrambled cable tv channel, makes you wonder what is going on. I don't want to see code gone as in never used again. Keep it part of the Amateur Community, but don't force it on others. There is other ways of preserving code which I see on Field Day and Swap Meets also at Club Meetings. Keep it alive by discussing it and doing competitions like field day. Dang...something I can agree with. You know something? I suggested the three license system a long time ago to the FCC. And I also suggested a endorsement program. Such as for various 'specialty' modes. SSTV, CW, Digital, etc. These would require the applicant to show some degree of competence in those modes, such as at a club. It was totally ignored of course. Dan/W4NTI |
Steveo wrote: Old School wrote: On 02 Feb 2004 13:43:00 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote: You dont have any facts! That you want to hear And he avoids it again. He doesn't use CW anymore than I do. Your wife said you got CW tatooed on your left ass cheek. |
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 00:58:55 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this
mindspring.com wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:18:51 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 13:33:10 -0500, Lou wrote: On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:21:23 +0100, "Helmut" wrote: Its not them, the CBLUSSERS AN`D KNUCKLE.... as you call them, dear poor old man Bruce, making me ashamed to be a ham myself. Its you allone, and these human beeings never stopping to accept decisions from the ITU, IARU and FCC. International, all the decisions were made and are validated. And the little America will run behind. I always thought, the Americans, they are the leaders of the world! Not in Amateur Radio. Their highest class amateurs are too old, stupid and shortminded to be. 73 de OE8SOQ Helmut Even though I can be included in this group, because of idiots like Bruce, I have to agree with Helmut. Unfortunately he makes us ALL look bad. :( We aren't all like him though. Fortunately there are more good operators here in America than bad ones like Bruce. The problem with Bruce is, He is all mouth and no action. America needs to move forward with all aspects. People like Bruce are the one that hold this country back from progress. All I can say now is, he and his little leet group of CBextra buddies will be all alone. All of us other open minded hams like Helmut and HLR will be be having fun talking on our rigs while you sit there waiting for someone to beep you. 73 de kf6foz How does wanting to preserve the past mean he is holding things back? You no code geeks are the short sighted ones. Just because it is old, does NOT MEAN you should throw it out with the trash. Dan/W4NTI None of us have said anything about throwing it in the trash. Some of these NO-CODERs are gonna get there code because of the mystery of code. It's like watching a scrambled cable tv channel, makes you wonder what is going on. I don't want to see code gone as in never used again. Keep it part of the Amateur Community, but don't force it on others. There is other ways of preserving code which I see on Field Day and Swap Meets also at Club Meetings. Keep it alive by discussing it and doing competitions like field day. Dang...something I can agree with. You know something? I suggested the three license system a long time ago to the FCC. And I also suggested a endorsement program. Such as for various 'specialty' modes. SSTV, CW, Digital, etc. These would require the applicant to show some degree of competence in those modes, such as at a club. It was totally ignored of course. Dan/W4NTI Nice to agree on one thing at least! :) and it wouldn't have been ignored by me... |
"Old School" wrote in message ... On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 02:53:10 GMT, "Dee D. Flint" wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . What is it you phoney people want? No free upgrades. Even if code is dropped they should have to take the written. What is so hard to understand about that? Absolutley nothing! The FCC has made references to the Streamlining. It will be alot of work in order to change the system, but in the long run, it will be much easier to maintain. Think about it, they will only have to maintain 3 groups of licenses, Novice, General and Extra instead of 6, Novice, Tech, Tech +, General, Advanced and Extra. Like I said, it does not make the system easier to maintain. For current license class, the database only needs a single field. It doesn't matter if there is a choice of 3 possible entries or 6 possible entries. It's a single keystroke in a single field. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I should correct myself, it wont make the system easier to maintain, however it will reduce the amount of paper work, printing supplies and confusion at the testing site and printing facility. Therefore it will help reduce confusion at the FFC offices. The FCC generally doesn't even see the paperwork anymore. The VECs enter it right on-line. Thus there is no confusion at the FCC offices as they aren't doing any of the work. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
I have had my Tech license for about a year now, and have been learning the
code. I am getting very close to being able to take the code test. I find it a lot of fun and look forward to operating on the HF bands. If everyone could play nice and stay on their own freqs for CW, SSB, etc. the code requirement could be lifted. That would be an ideal situation where everyone could enjoy amateur radio using their favorite method of communication. But since that normally doesn't happen, the requirement stays. If the CW requirement is abolished after I have my licensee, so be it. But I'll have something the no-coders don't... a working knowledge of another way of communication that has been around in the past, present, and will remain with us in the future. I have enjoyed this hobby so far, and am looking forward to getting on the HF bands in the future. I also look to the "old-timers" and "newbies" alike for help, guidance, and just good conversation. Just my 2 cents worth... Doug/KC8YEC "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message ink.net... "Old School" wrote in message ... On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:18:51 GMT, "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote: "Old School" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 13:33:10 -0500, Lou wrote: On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 19:21:23 +0100, "Helmut" wrote: Its not them, the CBLUSSERS AN`D KNUCKLE.... as you call them, dear poor old man Bruce, making me ashamed to be a ham myself. Its you allone, and these human beeings never stopping to accept decisions from the ITU, IARU and FCC. International, all the decisions were made and are validated. And the little America will run behind. I always thought, the Americans, they are the leaders of the world! Not in Amateur Radio. Their highest class amateurs are too old, stupid and shortminded to be. 73 de OE8SOQ Helmut Even though I can be included in this group, because of idiots like Bruce, I have to agree with Helmut. Unfortunately he makes us ALL look bad. :( We aren't all like him though. Fortunately there are more good operators here in America than bad ones like Bruce. The problem with Bruce is, He is all mouth and no action. America needs to move forward with all aspects. People like Bruce are the one that hold this country back from progress. All I can say now is, he and his little leet group of CBextra buddies will be all alone. All of us other open minded hams like Helmut and HLR will be be having fun talking on our rigs while you sit there waiting for someone to beep you. 73 de kf6foz How does wanting to preserve the past mean he is holding things back? You no code geeks are the short sighted ones. Just because it is old, does NOT MEAN you should throw it out with the trash. Dan/W4NTI None of us have said anything about throwing it in the trash. Some of these NO-CODERs are gonna get there code because of the mystery of code. It's like watching a scrambled cable tv channel, makes you wonder what is going on. I don't want to see code gone as in never used again. Keep it part of the Amateur Community, but don't force it on others. There is other ways of preserving code which I see on Field Day and Swap Meets also at Club Meetings. Keep it alive by discussing it and doing competitions like field day. Dang...something I can agree with. You know something? I suggested the three license system a long time ago to the FCC. And I also suggested a endorsement program. Such as for various 'specialty' modes. SSTV, CW, Digital, etc. These would require the applicant to show some degree of competence in those modes, such as at a club. It was totally ignored of course. Dan/W4NTI |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:28 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com