RadioBanter - ARRL members, I need your help.

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)

- General (https://www.radiobanter.com/general/)

- - ARRL members, I need your help. (https://www.radiobanter.com/general/94521-arrl-members-i-need-your-help.html)

ARRL members, I need your help...[snip]

"Steve N." wrote in
:

Slow,
Can you address any of my comments in my previous, or here ?

My arguement has always been for the quality of the hams.

OK. Given this, is it true that everything else is unimportant to you -
only the quality? [there always have been jerks around.]

So let's have more?

You appreciate something more that you had to work to achieve, and
respect
the rewards
it gives.

I think I can agree with this. Give a kid a car or whatever, and he's
more likely to treat it badly. Make him work for it and he appreciates
the value and shows the appropriate care with it..

Cheapening something makes it disposable.

Yea.... I understand that having to do the CW thing is more work and
more likely that the licence will be valued, but what about putting the
prospective ham through other, more rigorous hoops, like electronic
theory, emcom, etc. Why won't more modern "hoops" work the same way to
bolster the individual's respect for the service?

Yes, 85% passing score for writtens.

Ham numbers are declining.

I believe this is true, but what is you reason for stating this? Are
you
glad this is happening or sad or indifferent?

The numbers don't matter, quality does. Reasoning a service is good
because it has lots of members, CB should be great then, but it's like a
kindergarten.

sc

ARRL members, I need your help...[snip]

Slow Code wrote:
"Steve N." wrote in
:

Ham numbers are declining.

I believe this is true, but what is you reason for stating this? Are
you
glad this is happening or sad or indifferent?

The numbers don't matter, quality does.
number do Matter this line show you as a complete fool
Reasoning a service is good
because it has lots of members, CB should be great then, but it's like a
kindergarten.

it also suffering from ZERO danger of losing it freqs either

still nothing in your materail even suggests that CW testing is good
for the ARS

besudes you and your freinds have failed to convine the FCC of ithat

read the NPRM

if you can't sell even if it were the truth it would not matter

sc

ARRL members, I need your help.

ARRL members,.[snip]

"Slow Code" wrote in message
t...
"Steve N." wrote in
:

Slow,
Can you address any of my comments in my previous, or here ?

Unfortunately, it appears not too well..

is it true that everything else is unimportant to you -
only the quality? [there always have been jerks around.]

So let's have more?

...is not an answer to my question and this question provides no clue.
It implies I said that more jerks will result from those that will always be
there...I think. or that I want more...

You appreciate something more that you had to work to achieve, and
respect the rewards it gives.
...snip...
Yea.... I understand ... but what about putting the
prospective ham through other, more rigorous hoops, like electronic
theory, emcom, etc. Why won't more modern "hoops" work the same way to
bolster the individual's respect for the service?

Yes, 85% passing score for writtens.

OK, 85% is another kind of hoop. but Please answer my "Why" question.

Ham numbers are declining.

I believe this is true, but what is you reason for stating this? Are
you glad this is happening or sad or indifferent?

The numbers don't matter, quality does.

OK, so this seems to answer my other question. While I agree, that in
a perfect world I would also restrict licences to only those who have a
decent head on their shoulders...however, do _you_ trust _me_ to decide
whose head is good?

These are my last questions:
Do you believe:
1- CW and 85% on exams will prevent or seriously limit the number of
knuckleheads who sneek through?
2- That I am lying when I tell of some no-code techs that I personally know
are the most serious, level headed and law abiding hams I know?
3- That I am lying when I tell you that I also know some very good hams who
came up through CB and are just as law abiding when on the ham bands as
anyone, just as serious about being good citizens, do emergency prep work
and help others?

Reasoning a service is good because it has lots of members,

[ is incorrent reasoning] is what the implied completion of that sentence
is.

I agree. There have been and are some pretty wacko organizations.
....but...

CB should be great then, but it's like a kindergarten.
Is a gross generalization. How often do you listen? How many "CB'ers"
have you recently talked to?

I listen once in a while just to see what's going on and be able to speak
with first hand knowledge, and do hear some garbage, but I also hear of how
it has helped in aread and ther ewere no hams around to help. Also, some
areas have been worse than others,

1- I believe you have a limited view of CB [and no, I haven't been a "CB'er"
but I have carried a radio on a few, I think two long trips where I would
have trouble getting into repeaters for long periods.]. I have been helped
by "CBers".
2- what percentage of CB users are jerks?
3- What percentage of hams are jerks? then...
4- What percentage of jerks makes the service bad?

My suggestions
CW optional as it is now for *ALL* modes, but remove from the tests...except
possibly for Extra - my jury's still out on this.
85-87% on tests, but
Much more on propagation, antenna systems and emergency station operations
and emergency communications and laws.

Then some others in the "if I were Amateur Radio Service God" department...
Currency requiremets like pilots that include familiarity recent
developments.
Proof of license, and that you can understand, explain and operate at least
90% of the functions on a radio in order to buy.
If I wanted to be an old timer, I'd also require construction of
something...knowledge of the history of ham Radio.
Then being more modern, something like proficiency in software, digital
modes and satellite ops.
Gee, I should spend more time on these.... not. More important fish to
fry.

Sorry, guys, I just couldn't resist a little chain jerking here.
73, Steve, K9DCI

At lease I got sc to answer a few questions ... sort of.

ARRL members, I need your help.

Back in the day when I got my Advanced, my Tech class Elmer pointed out that
if you don't know the code, how do you know what repeater you're on?

Most automated identifications are still Morse code and it is still legal.

It is sad that Morse code is so under utilized. It is a testimony to the
lack of interest in the greatest tool for weak signal work. If you have no
interest in learning Morse code, than you affirm that your communications
capabilities should be limited to voice capabilities. Who in emergency
communications believes that their capabilities should be limited by a lack
of expertise? Perhaps they believe that emergency commumications should be
restricted to FRS? Rediculous!

Still, we see even avid DXers throw in the towel on a weak one when Morse
code would have cut through the pile-up in a heart beat. A friend in High
School made DXCC in 2 years on CW only, with a 100 watt radio and dipoles!

The fact remains that those who hate the code are clueless to its
effectiveness. Their only defense is ignorance. Sad!

AC6TK

wrote in message
oups.com...

N9OGL wrote:
Why??? Morse Code does not make you a better radio operator, On air
experiance does. This idea that morse code makes you a better operatror
is nothing more then a myth.

Todd N9OGL
General Class Operator

You only say that because you had to struggle to get the 5 wpm code
required now, Toad.

ARRL members, I need your help.

JB wrote:
Back in the day when I got my Advanced, my Tech class Elmer pointed out that
if you don't know the code, how do you know what repeater you're on?
you know byt eh freq and pl tone you have set

It is sad that Morse code is so under utilized. It is a testimony to the
lack of interest in the greatest tool for weak signal work. If you have no
interest in learning Morse code, than you affirm that your communications
capabilities should be limited to voice capabilities. Who in emergency
communications believes that their capabilities should be limited by a lack
of expertise? Perhaps they believe that emergency commumications should be
restricted to FRS? Rediculous!

Still, we see even avid DXers throw in the towel on a weak one when Morse
code would have cut through the pile-up in a heart beat. A friend in High
School made DXCC in 2 years on CW only, with a 100 watt radio and dipoles!

The fact remains that those who hate the code are clueless to its
effectiveness. Their only defense is ignorance. Sad!

AC6TK
butyou need to face facts it aint happening

ARRL members, I need your help.

"JB" wrote in message
...
Back in the day when I got my Advanced, my Tech class Elmer pointed out
that
if you don't know the code, how do you know what repeater you're on?

Most automated identifications are still Morse code and it is still legal.

It is sad that Morse code is so under utilized. It is a testimony to the
lack of interest in the greatest tool for weak signal work. If you have
no
interest in learning Morse code, than you affirm that your communications
capabilities should be limited to voice capabilities. Who in emergency
communications believes that their capabilities should be limited by a
lack
of expertise? Perhaps they believe that emergency commumications should
be
restricted to FRS? Rediculous!

Still, we see even avid DXers throw in the towel on a weak one when Morse
code would have cut through the pile-up in a heart beat. A friend in High
School made DXCC in 2 years on CW only, with a 100 watt radio and dipoles!

The fact remains that those who hate the code are clueless to its
effectiveness. Their only defense is ignorance. Sad!

AC6TK

You made good points until your last paragraph. I do not have the time nor
desire to learn the code. If I were to learn it long enough to pass the test
and never use it from day to day, then it will soon be forgotten. I think
that if a person wants to advance, code should be part of the process and
tested on a regular basis, but also have restrictions for those that do not
or cannot use code or the hobby will fade away. To do away with the code
would be wrong as it has it's uses, but to expect everyone to learn it keeps
fresh blood from entering into a noble but dying hobby.

ARRL members, I need your help.

"JB" wrote in :

Back in the day when I got my Advanced, my Tech class Elmer pointed out
that if you don't know the code, how do you know what repeater you're
on?

Most automated identifications are still Morse code and it is still
legal.

It is sad that Morse code is so under utilized. It is a testimony to
the lack of interest in the greatest tool for weak signal work. If you
have no interest in learning Morse code, than you affirm that your
communications capabilities should be limited to voice capabilities.
Who in emergency communications believes that their capabilities should
be limited by a lack of expertise? Perhaps they believe that emergency
commumications should be restricted to FRS? Rediculous!

Still, we see even avid DXers throw in the towel on a weak one when
Morse code would have cut through the pile-up in a heart beat. A friend
in High School made DXCC in 2 years on CW only, with a 100 watt radio
and dipoles!

The fact remains that those who hate the code are clueless to its
effectiveness. Their only defense is ignorance. Sad!

AC6TK

Amen brother.

ARRL members, I need your help.

"DrDeath" wrote in
:

"JB" wrote in message
...
Back in the day when I got my Advanced, my Tech class Elmer pointed out
that
if you don't know the code, how do you know what repeater you're on?

Most automated identifications are still Morse code and it is still
legal.

It is sad that Morse code is so under utilized. It is a testimony to
the lack of interest in the greatest tool for weak signal work. If you
have no
interest in learning Morse code, than you affirm that your
communications capabilities should be limited to voice capabilities.
Who in emergency communications believes that their capabilities should
be limited by a lack
of expertise? Perhaps they believe that emergency commumications
should be
restricted to FRS? Rediculous!

Still, we see even avid DXers throw in the towel on a weak one when
Morse code would have cut through the pile-up in a heart beat. A
friend in High School made DXCC in 2 years on CW only, with a 100 watt
radio and dipoles!

The fact remains that those who hate the code are clueless to its
effectiveness. Their only defense is ignorance. Sad!

AC6TK

You made good points until your last paragraph. I do not have the time
nor desire to learn the code. If I were to learn it long enough to pass
the test and never use it from day to day, then it will soon be
forgotten. I think that if a person wants to advance, code should be
part of the process and tested on a regular basis, but also have
restrictions for those that do not or cannot use code or the hobby will
fade away. To do away with the code would be wrong as it has it's uses,
but to expect everyone to learn it keeps fresh blood from entering into
a noble but dying hobby.

No. If they're too lazy to learn CW they can stick with CB, FRS, Cell
Phones, and two tin cans with a piece of string in between.

SC

ARRL members,.[snip]

"Steve N." wrote in
:

"Slow Code" wrote in message
t...
"Steve N." wrote in
:

Slow,
Can you address any of my comments in my previous, or here ?

Unfortunately, it appears not too well..

is it true that everything else is unimportant to you -
only the quality? [there always have been jerks around.]

So let's have more?

...is not an answer to my question and this question provides no
clue.
It implies I said that more jerks will result from those that will
always be there...I think. or that I want more...

You appreciate something more that you had to work to achieve, and
respect the rewards it gives.
...snip...
Yea.... I understand ... but what about putting the
prospective ham through other, more rigorous hoops, like electronic
theory, emcom, etc. Why won't more modern "hoops" work the same way
to bolster the individual's respect for the service?

Yes, 85% passing score for writtens.

OK, 85% is another kind of hoop. but Please answer my "Why"
question.

Ham numbers are declining.

I believe this is true, but what is you reason for stating this?
Are you glad this is happening or sad or indifferent?

The numbers don't matter, quality does.

OK, so this seems to answer my other question. While I agree,
that in
a perfect world I would also restrict licences to only those who have a
decent head on their shoulders...however, do _you_ trust _me_ to decide
whose head is good?

These are my last questions:
Do you believe:
1- CW and 85% on exams will prevent or seriously limit the number of
knuckleheads who sneek through?
2- That I am lying when I tell of some no-code techs that I personally
know are the most serious, level headed and law abiding hams I know?
3- That I am lying when I tell you that I also know some very good hams
who came up through CB and are just as law abiding when on the ham bands
as anyone, just as serious about being good citizens, do emergency prep
work and help others?

Reasoning a service is good because it has lots of members,

[ is incorrent reasoning] is what the implied completion of that
sentence
is.

I agree. There have been and are some pretty wacko
organizations.
...but...

CB should be great then, but it's like a kindergarten.
Is a gross generalization. How often do you listen? How many
"CB'ers"
have you recently talked to?

I listen once in a while just to see what's going on and be able to
speak with first hand knowledge, and do hear some garbage, but I also
hear of how it has helped in aread and ther ewere no hams around to
help. Also, some areas have been worse than others,

1- I believe you have a limited view of CB [and no, I haven't been a
"CB'er" but I have carried a radio on a few, I think two long trips
where I would have trouble getting into repeaters for long periods.]. I
have been helped by "CBers".
2- what percentage of CB users are jerks?
3- What percentage of hams are jerks? then...
4- What percentage of jerks makes the service bad?

My suggestions
CW optional as it is now for *ALL* modes, but remove from the
tests...except possibly for Extra - my jury's still out on this.
85-87% on tests, but
Much more on propagation, antenna systems and emergency station
operations and emergency communications and laws.

Then some others in the "if I were Amateur Radio Service God"
department... Currency requiremets like pilots that include familiarity
recent developments.
Proof of license, and that you can understand, explain and operate at
least 90% of the functions on a radio in order to buy.
If I wanted to be an old timer, I'd also require construction of
something...knowledge of the history of ham Radio.
Then being more modern, something like proficiency in software, digital
modes and satellite ops.
Gee, I should spend more time on these.... not. More important fish to
fry.

Sorry, guys, I just couldn't resist a little chain jerking here.
73, Steve, K9DCI

At lease I got sc to answer a few questions ... sort of.

Maybe you have a few CB buddies you'd like to see get licensed, and
dumbing things down will help, I don't know. Outcome based licensing. No
one wants to be a ham if they have to work a little harder for the license
and so no one wants to support having a good test to get one.

sc