We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC

Slow Code wrote:
We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC

We should have the examiners measure the size of prospective HAM's
dicks. That would get us back to the basics here that you've been
preaching about.

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Slow Code wrote:
We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

I agree. At least 100 wpm for Novice/Tech and something really hard
for General and up. Don't laugh, it's been done.

Also, lets have them memorize the Baudot code, demodulate PSK31 by ear
(no computers allowed) and launch at least one satellite into orbit.
They should be required to build an oscillator from a crystal set,
erect a 200 foot tower all by themselves and change the tubes in a
1500 watt amplifier while it is running at full output.

Hams today are a bunch of weenies.

Bill, W6WRT
who passed the 20 wpm test by about .001 wpm

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 01:37:55 GMT, Slow Code wrote:



We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC
++++++++++
And we should just read your posts if we want to know what ham radio
will be like if irrelevancy is a required subject.

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


We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC

It doesn't take a damn bit of knowlege of electronics, radio, propagation or
regulations to learn cw.
So how is cw gonna prevent the dumbing down of ham radio.
Why are you not stressing a need for better testing for technical
competentcy to prevent the dumbing down?
There are a lot of engineers, technicians and hobbyists who allready know
electronics who might be interested amateur radio, but don't have time or
interest to fool around learning code. Once licenced some, maybe many, of
these people would develope an interest in cw.

"JOHN D" wrote in message
news:4exbh.8880$Kw2.30@trndny05...

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


We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC

It doesn't take a damn bit of knowlege of electronics, radio, propagation
or
regulations to learn cw.
So how is cw gonna prevent the dumbing down of ham radio.
Why are you not stressing a need for better testing for technical
competentcy to prevent the dumbing down?
There are a lot of engineers, technicians and hobbyists who allready know
electronics who might be interested amateur radio, but don't have time or
interest to fool around learning code. Once licenced some, maybe many, of
these people would develope an interest in cw.



I personally know of very good 2 way radio techs - one who won't go for a
ham license because of the code - the other has acquired his NO-Code Tech,
but won't go any higher because he "doesn't" want to fool with the code. So,
Code "may" be keeping out some otherwise good operators. CW alone - isn't
"dumbing" down - ham. It's the "STUPID MANUALS". With them, you don't "need"
electronics, just the ability to learn a few "one liner" answers. Almost
amounts to a mouse in a maze smelling cheese to direct it. PUT SOME TEETH
back into the "THEORY". Some of the bozos I've met - can't tell the
difference from a fuse and a resistor. That is pathetic.

If you "choose" "just" to BS - CB is the way - and it too "can" be a good
hobby, if you don't have to contend with a lot of the same CRAP - of
everyone splattering, constantly saying Audio, keying up just to **** people
off, and so on. IF you choose to "LEARN" - Ham "can" be the way. But then
again, even at this point, I know some CBers who know more than many No
Coders - or even Extras for that matter. There "are" some "serious" CBers
out there who "get into" their equipment - knowledge wise. They have a
"desire" to learn. There again, they won't go ham BECAUSE of the code. It is
a two sided coin - but regardless - both CB AND HAM - have a lot of "nice"
folks and a lot of idiots - who - "could" be better operators if they tried.
These Ham tests - do "not" test the "psychological" make up of people.

Code is ok - but it's not the salvation of the world - and certainly not the
Ham hobby.

Still again - SC has "YET" to show proof of a license to back up his claims.
People need to "ignore" him and move on.

"Radiosrfun" wrote in
:

"JOHN D" wrote in message
news:4exbh.8880$Kw2.30@trndny05...

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


We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let
ham radio get dumbed down again.

SC

It doesn't take a damn bit of knowlege of electronics, radio,
propagation or
regulations to learn cw.
So how is cw gonna prevent the dumbing down of ham radio.
Why are you not stressing a need for better testing for technical
competentcy to prevent the dumbing down?
There are a lot of engineers, technicians and hobbyists who allready
know electronics who might be interested amateur radio, but don't have
time or interest to fool around learning code. Once licenced some,
maybe many, of these people would develope an interest in cw.



I personally know of very good 2 way radio techs - one who won't go for
a ham license because of the code - the other has acquired his NO-Code
Tech, but won't go any higher because he "doesn't" want to fool with the
code. So, Code "may" be keeping out some otherwise good operators. CW
alone - isn't "dumbing" down - ham. It's the "STUPID MANUALS". With
them, you don't "need" electronics, just the ability to learn a few "one
liner" answers. Almost amounts to a mouse in a maze smelling cheese to
direct it. PUT SOME TEETH back into the "THEORY". Some of the bozos I've
met - can't tell the difference from a fuse and a resistor. That is
pathetic.

If you "choose" "just" to BS - CB is the way - and it too "can" be a
good hobby, if you don't have to contend with a lot of the same CRAP -
of everyone splattering, constantly saying Audio, keying up just to ****
people off, and so on. IF you choose to "LEARN" - Ham "can" be the way.
But then again, even at this point, I know some CBers who know more than
many No Coders - or even Extras for that matter. There "are" some
"serious" CBers out there who "get into" their equipment - knowledge
wise. They have a "desire" to learn. There again, they won't go ham
BECAUSE of the code. It is a two sided coin - but regardless - both CB
AND HAM - have a lot of "nice" folks and a lot of idiots - who - "could"
be better operators if they tried. These Ham tests - do "not" test the
"psychological" make up of people.

Code is ok - but it's not the salvation of the world - and certainly not
the Ham hobby.

Still again - SC has "YET" to show proof of a license to back up his
claims. People need to "ignore" him and move on.


Tnx, 73, Good luck on the code test.

SC

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Slow Code:


We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

People have only so much time and energy to spend on ham radio or
anything else. Spending hours on CW is truly dumb when they could be
spent on aspects of the hobby that are really important.

Bill, W6WRT

Bill Turner wrote:
People have only so much time and energy to spend on ham radio or
anything else. Spending hours on CW is truly dumb when they could be
spent on aspects of the hobby that are really important.

Knowing how to operate and apply EZNEC is a magnitude
more useful to me than Morse Code.
--
73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

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


We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC Ham
radio was dumb enough to let you in. Can't get any dumber.