"an_old_friend" wrote in
ups.com:


Merlin3rd wrote:
The hobby is almost dead anyway,nothing is going to save it. No one
cares about Ham radio.Most people under 30 have never heard of it and
don't care. All they want is their cell phones, Ipods,etc. The FCC
can't save it by changing anything.
perhaps not but others think otherwise

OTOH the "proposal" of mr Slow Code aka Hey Stupid would finsh finsh
the ARS in 10 ten years


Just exactly what are you trying to babble out now? Having more qualified
hams will kill the service? An amateur radio license isn't worth enough
that you should have to work for it? License candidates are lazy and
won't work to get a license?

Please babble to us how requiring more proficient amateurs will kill ham
radio.

sc

On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 19:00:12 GMT, Hey Stupid wrote:

Please babble to us how requiring more proficient amateurs will kill ham
radio.

Well ...

It would probably reduce the total number of hams. But those who just
want to buy a radio, plug it in and yell at people can still buy a CB
set from RatShack.

No, please tell us how requiring code tests and more difficult technical
testing creates a "more proficient" ham?

When code testing was 13/20 WPM and the technical tests were much
harder, we still had all the idiots on the bands. Those idiots are not
more proficient. You are simply ignoring reality. Do you live in a cave
or something?


Please babble to us how requiring more proficient amateurs will kill ham
radio.

sc

J. D. B. wrote:
No, please tell us how requiring code tests and more difficult technical
testing creates a "more proficient" ham?

When code testing was 13/20 WPM and the technical tests were much
harder, we still had all the idiots on the bands. Those idiots are not
more proficient. You are simply ignoring reality. Do you live in a cave
or something?
I think he does UBL cave with the quipement reachto various websites
and NG to (like his mentor UBL) try and disupt the world that has left
him behind


Please babble to us how requiring more proficient amateurs will kill ham
radio.

sc

On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 07:25:56 -0400, "J. D. B."
wrote:

No, please tell us how requiring code tests and more difficult technical
testing creates a "more proficient" ham?

When code testing was 13/20 WPM and the technical tests were much
harder, we still had all the idiots on the bands. Those idiots are not
more proficient. You are simply ignoring reality. Do you live in a cave
or something?

The claim was "more proficient", not "generally nicer and better able
to get along with people". There will always be idiots in insert any
field but a ham who can't copy code at 1 wpm isn't more proficient
(or as proficient) at communicating under any and all conditions as
one who can.

Someone who can do something is, by definition, more proficient at
doing it than someone who can't. Requiring code tests and real
technical testing (the current tests are a joke) makes sure that most
of the people who get licensed are more proficient at receiving code
and with technical matters.

Al Klein wrote:
On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 07:25:56 -0400, "J. D. B."
wrote:

Requiring code tests and real
technical testing (the current tests are a joke) makes sure that most
of the people who get licensed are more proficient at receiving code
and with technical matters.
no it does not

most of the people that get license tody never take a code test

therfore they are not made more profeincent at Morse code even

you "facts" are well... ****ed

On 9 Jul 2006 11:23:11 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:


Al Klein wrote:
On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 07:25:56 -0400, "J. D. B."
wrote:

Requiring code tests and real
technical testing (the current tests are a joke) makes sure that most
of the people who get licensed are more proficient at receiving code
and with technical matters.
no it does not

most of the people that get license tody never take a code test

therfore they are not made more profeincent at Morse code even

you "facts" are well... ****ed

No, it's your ability to understand the difference between "are
licensed" and "get licensed" that is.

Al Klein wrote:
On 9 Jul 2006 11:23:11 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:


Al Klein wrote:
On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 07:25:56 -0400, "J. D. B."
wrote:

Requiring code tests and real
technical testing (the current tests are a joke) makes sure that most
of the people who get licensed are more proficient at receiving code
and with technical matters.
no it does not

most of the people that get license tody never take a code test

therfore they are not made more profeincent at Morse code even

you "facts" are well... ****ed

No, it's your ability to understand the difference between "are
licensed" and "get licensed" that is.
all the tech got lisenced sir
nor does passing the code even ensure that most people that pass it can
operate it

"J. D. B." wrote in
:

No, please tell us how requiring code tests and more difficult technical
testing creates a "more proficient" ham?

When code testing was 13/20 WPM and the technical tests were much
harder, we still had all the idiots on the bands. Those idiots are not
more proficient. You are simply ignoring reality. Do you live in a cave
or something?


You must be one of them lazy hams.

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 21:37:53 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

"J. D. B." wrote in
:

No, please tell us how requiring code tests and more difficult technical
testing creates a "more proficient" ham?

When code testing was 13/20 WPM and the technical tests were much
harder, we still had all the idiots on the bands. Those idiots are not
more proficient. You are simply ignoring reality. Do you live in a cave
or something?

You must be one of them lazy hams.

He's right, though. Anyone who ever heard K2SUC out of Nutley, NJ,
would agree. The repeater wars of the 60s and 70s. The 146.715
repeater on Long Island in the early 70s.

We've had our share of pre-VEC idiots. But it was never as bad as
even some of the things you hear on 75 these days. I rarely plug a
mic in.