On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 07:03:01 -0400, Spamhater wrote:

Don't
open your mouth without facts which you have yet to provide any of in
support of your lawlessness aim to sidestep a part you're apparently too
damned lazy to do.

He's an EXTRA class licensee......

The Twilight Zone.....

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

D. Stussy wrote:

I disagree that what is left means that any Technician or Novice has any HF
privilege at all. The FCC rule still says that these licensees must show
compliance with a non-existent regulation. Since they CANNOT COMPLY with a
non-existent [international] regulation, they LACK the privilege.

The compliance was met when it was required by international regulation
(and it is still required by FCC regulations). According to your logic
then no license class has any HF privileges since we met the compliance
of an international regulation that no longer exists. So all license
classes that took a code test are now non-compliant, so looks like we
are all off HF until the FCC changes the rules.
GEEEEESSSSHHHH!!

D. Stussy wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Jim Hampton wrote:

Please re-read Phil's reply again. You missed the point as to each
administration is free to do as they please. So far, the FCC has not seen
to eliminate the Morse requirement. Period.


If any entity has a choice, then how can it be called a requirement?

The international requirement meant that all entities had to require a
code test for HF privileges. Now the international requirement has been
dropped, now each entity can decided for itself if it wants to require a
code test for HF privileges, and until the FCC changes the rules, it is
still required for U.S. hams. What is so hard to understand about that?

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:53:45 GMT, "Phil Kane"
wrote:

You must really enjoy playing wannabe lawyer --- and missing the
target. The issue of code and the ADA was hashed out by the FCC
several years ago. Nothing changed.

Phil from now on I will refer to you as Prince Jr.

Listen Prince Jr., I can discuss anything regarding US law and express my
opinions. Just because you are ARRL lawyer trying to force morse code down the
throats of the disabled and helped destroy Amateur radio by keeping it a elite
club doesn't mean I shouldn't voice my opinion. I have never said I was a
lawyer or even a wannabe lawyer, good god I bet you are proud of your pals that
are going after ten year old children trading muppet songs on the Internet.
The reason disability recognition didn't change was because there was a
international agreement that stopped the disabled who could not receive code
from being exempt. Now that the international regulation has been changed to
delete mandatory morse code proficiency the disabled should be provided a
exemption promptly. (That is my opinion, is that OK Prince Jr?)
Is it ok if I express my opinion Prince Jr? Or are you like the morons sending
me carbon copies of complaints they are sending to Hollingsworth AKA "Prince"
for daring to tell the FCC and the ARRL they are bone heads that have destroyed
Amateur radio for selfish reasons.
I mean I'm not the only person that thinks this about the ARRL, FCC and the
morse code lunatics that have kept the ranks of ham radio so small it is ripe
for the pickings by the commercial entities. The utilities will destroy HF with
BPL and the rest of 50 Mhz and up bands that are worth billions of dollars will
be sliced up in short order.
All this time I was praying the ARRL and FCC would come around and I was a
sucker to be a ARRL member for all those years. Then when it is time to dump
the code the crazed bunch of "morse code or death" bunch sneak one in the back
door. Now the cocksuckers want to drag out the death of morse code requirements
for years.
Who the hell was the ARRL board and staff saving the bands for? It certainly
isn't for the average American citizen to become a ham radio operator. If you
listen to ten meters it appears the truck drivers are now taking it over, so
thank the ARRL and FCC for that.
Thanks for sharing Prince Jr. I hope it was OK for this ham radio operator of
twenty years to express his opinion. Should I include a legal disclaimer on all
my post from now on? I hope you will not report me to the Oregon Bar
Association.




--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 13:41:24 -0400, "Spamhater" wrote:

Get off your lazy ass and learn 5 WPM CW.

Pal I can receive CW at 18 WPM and I even have a fancy certificate from the US
government to prove it.

--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

Keith ) writes:
I mean I'm not the only person that thinks this about the ARRL, FCC and the
morse code lunatics that have kept the ranks of ham radio so small it is ripe
for the pickings by the commercial entities. The utilities will destroy HF with
BPL and the rest of 50 Mhz and up bands that are worth billions of dollars will
be sliced up in short order.

When was the last time you heard about amateur radio in your local newspaper
or on your local tv stations? When your local ham clubs have an event, be
it club meetings, Field Day, hamfest or something else that the public might
like to know about, do they bother to get listed in the local events columns,
and try to get mention on TV and radio, and even post to your local
newsgroups?

Or to put it another way, how did you find out about amateur radio?

When I was a kid, I learned about it when there was an article in
a publication intended for children. When I discovered hobby electronic
magazines, amateur radio was still a part of those magazines, though
it was right on the cusp of their disappearing. But when I could try
for a license, I had to dig around to find a local ham club, going to
the ARRL because I didn't know of any local clubs, and had no way of
finding them.

One of the failures of amateur radio is that it doesn't do a particularly
good job of outreach. Notice there is a big difference between trying
to sell something to fill seats, and trying to share something because
it's important to you and you want others to know about it.

Over the 31 years since I've been licensed, my impression is that
amateur radio has increasingly disappeared from public view. Yes,
there is the argument that ham radio has less and less relevance,
but that just means people need to work harder at conveying thei
importance of the hobby to themselves.

Meanwhile, the licensing requirements have become less and less.
About fifty years ago, you might say the halfway point of
amateur radio, your FCC introduced the then-novel novice license, to make
the entry requirements simpler. A simple test, a 5wpm code test, limited
operating priviliges, and only valid for a year. Over the years,
that was modified for less restrictive rules, and more priviliges.
The US Technician license came out at the same time, and originally
was only good for 220MHz and above. That too was modified tremendously
over the years. Then the code was dropped for the technician class.

Here in Canada, we had a no-code license a quarter century ago. But
virtually nobody used it. Then in 1990, we got restructuring, and
there was an entry level license that did not require a code test.

So over fifty years, half of the time that amateur radio has been
around, it has become increasingly simpler for people to join the hobby
in North America.

Yet, instead of doing a better job of outreach, the focus is always
on making the license requirements simpler. Keep it up, and there
will be absolutely no entry requirement.

You think we need numbers to justify the bands, so you want to
lessen entry requirements. But that may be a false path. Maybe
we justify the ham bands because it is something more than a place
to yak it up.

Maybe the kids that use to come to ham radio aren't even hearing
about the hobby in the first place. Maybe if they knew, it could
be as appealing as it was to me when I was ten. Maybe like me,
the code and theory tests are not impediments to joining the hobby,
but a sense of accomplishment when they are passed. I was twelve,
and went from 0 to 12wpm in four months, and I know I was always
disappointed that I took the test (well, I had to go back a second
month to pass the code test) in the last week of grade 6, because
I was unable to boast to the kids at school.

Maybe the need or lack of a code test isn't an issue to many people,
because they haven't heard of amateur radio in the first place.

Methinks you don't have a clue about the history of amateur radio.
It didn't start when some regulatory body decided there should
be a place for people to talk to their heart's delite. There
were radio hobbyists almost as soon as Marconi spanned the Atlantic
in 1901, when there were no rules and there wasn't even any use
for radio. Those hobbyists played with this new thing, and in
part helped to propel the field along. I'm not sure you could
separate amateur from professional in those days. It was only
once there started to be uses for radio that any rules were put
in place. And amateur radio became a service in those early
days by virtue of staking out a claim right from the start.

Dilute the entry requirements too much, and what do you have
to justify the bands, other than large numbers?

But shift it back to where the test is not just an obstacle
to overcome, and you may again make the hobby something that
society in general benefits from.

Michael VE2BVW

JJ wrote:
Phil Kane wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 07:03:01 -0400, Spamhater wrote:


Don't
open your mouth without facts which you have yet to provide any of in
support of your lawlessness aim to sidestep a part you're apparently too
damned lazy to do.


He's an EXTRA class licensee......

The Twilight Zone.....

So we have an EXTRA class licensee encouraging illegal operation on the
ham bands. Obviously the code test wasn't a good enough filter in this case.

Most of the assertions that a code test should be required are
based on the (illogical) premise that if an idiot (the poster)
can pass the test, anyone can and everyone should.

Keith works that one to death.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Please re-read Phil's reply again. You missed the point as to each
administration is free to do as they please. So far, the FCC has not seen
to eliminate the Morse requirement. Period.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/24/03

On 26 Jul 2003 22:30:49 -0700, (gimmie freebie)
wrote:

Hey Keith may be you can help me. I have been diagnosed as a dyslexic
and have ADD. My disability prevents me from concentrating for more
than a few minutes so I can't take any code test or written test let
alone study for them.

I managed with both, so I figure you can, too.

May not be as easy as some folks, but it's time you studied.

snip
--
Nobody but a fool goes into a federal counterrorism operation without duct tape - Richard Preston, THE COBRA EVENT.

"C" wrote in message
...

My only gripe with the code is the testing. It is stated as a 5 word
per minute test. When I challenged the test a few weeks ago I found that
it is actually anywhere from 13 to 18 words per minute, not 5 words per
minute. The 5 words per minute is a lie....

Why not tell it like it is.... Those giving the test do not want to make
it easy for anyone who has a learning disability or not. I have never
been able to memorize anything easily when in school, and was accused of
being from lazy to stupid. My father told me that I was ignorant because
I was partly colorblind. I do not want sympathy, just after studying for
almost a year to pass the 5 word per minute test for what it is suppose
to be not what someone who is more proficient with the code wants it to
be.....

If my General CSCE expires again (this will be #2) I will never take it
again and will have lost desire in a hobby that I grew up working in for
the last 39 years.......

C.





In article ,
"Spamhater" wrote:

"Keith" wrote in message
...
On 27 Jul 2003 15:22:47 -0700, (Rich) wrote:

I know a bed ridden quad who dictated 20 wpm to his wife.He uses a
straw
cw keyer.

Can he hear? That is what we are talking about.

--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

There are cases where flashing lights are used for such a thing OR
vibrating
surfaces..... so being deaf is no excuse either. There ARE provisions.
The
main thing is, that IF the person is that handicapped, it is up to THEM
or
their family to provide any testing accessories to suit their needs, to
allow the VEs to send the text. The VEs are not required to provide
specialized equipment to cater to the handicaps needs.



Not trying to be a smart ass here...but...how do you know it was 13 if you
say you can't copy 13???. Could it be he was sending the characters fast
and making the spacing long. I.E. Farnsworth method, which is the
recomended way to conduct a test?

If you want to quit. Thats your choice. I would suggest you go to a
different test place with different folks instead.

Dan/W4NTI