| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
So why do it? SC |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Slow Code wrote: So why do it? SC Just wondering... Do you really think what you post on a newsgroup is going to make ANY difference in the real world... Just because you bitch and moan on here, isnt going to make them revise the licensing rules.. Get over it and move on... |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Because Ham radio is dying. If you make it easier, you can attract more
losers who may have joined earlier. Shortwave and Ham radio is dead. If you ask the man on the street what AM or FM is? They can answer you ,it"s what the hear on their car radio. The difference is the buttons on the radio. If you ask them what shortwave is? They would not have a ****ing clue. It's DEAD. Get a life. Slow Code wrote: So why do it? SC |
cease and desist
Slow Code wrote: So why do it? but nobody is proposing to do that SC |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Because Ham radio is dying.
E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S I also hear the buggy whip industry is doing pretty lousy except in Lancaster, PA. "Douche Bag" wrote in message ups.com... Because Ham radio is dying. If you make it easier, you can attract more losers who may have joined earlier. Shortwave and Ham radio is dead. If you ask the man on the street what AM or FM is? They can answer you ,it"s what the hear on their car radio. The difference is the buttons on the radio. If you ask them what shortwave is? They would not have a ****ing clue. It's DEAD. Get a life. Slow Code wrote: So why do it? SC |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
"Bakb0ne" wrote in message oups.com... Slow Code wrote: So why do it? SC Just wondering... Do you really think what you post on a newsgroup is going to make ANY difference in the real world... Just because you bitch and moan on here, isnt going to make them revise the licensing rules.. Get over it and move on... They don't call him slowcode for nothing. |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
"EchoBlip" wrote in
t: Because Ham radio is dying. E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S I also hear the buggy whip industry is doing pretty lousy except in Lancaster, PA. "Douche Bag" wrote in message ups.com... Because Ham radio is dying. If you make it easier, you can attract more losers who may have joined earlier. Shortwave and Ham radio is dead. If you ask the man on the street what AM or FM is? They can answer you ,it"s what the hear on their car radio. The difference is the buttons on the radio. If you ask them what shortwave is? They would not have a ****ing clue. It's DEAD. Get a life. Slow Code wrote: So why do it? SC Why do we want to let in people that don't want to be hams? SC |
why not deal with the eal issue
all sounds a bit fishy to me
eal issue red herring mike wrote in message ... On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:44:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: "EchoBlip" wrote in . net: Because Ham radio is dying. E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S Why do we want to let in people that don't want to be hams? red herring why are we exclding people able to be ham nd that want to for no reason at all SC http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
why not deal with the eal issue
IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod?
ikeFNB wrote: all sounds a bit fishy to me eal issue red herring mike wrote in message ... On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:44:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: "EchoBlip" wrote in . net: Because Ham radio is dying. E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S Why do we want to let in people that don't want to be hams? red herring why are we exclding people able to be ham nd that want to for no reason at all SC http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
why not deal with the eal issue
Douche Bag wrote: IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it |
why not deal with the eal issue
an old friend wrote: Douche Bag wrote: IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything... They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be saying that you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh right) |
why not deal with the real issue
Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Douche Bag wrote: IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything... They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be saying that you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh right) well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now |
why not deal with the real issue
an old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Douche Bag wrote: IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything... They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be saying that you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh right) well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter? The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/£40 charge or just the general way of applying for it? Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant.. |
why not deal with the real issue
Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Douche Bag wrote: IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything... They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be saying that you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh right) well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter? The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/£40 charge or just the general way of applying for it? Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant.. having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those with bad attiudes than a code test not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free (the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so this might escape you I should have been clearer nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the flamers and trolls had driven them off |
why not deal with the eal issue WHAT'S AN "EAL" ISSUE, FATBOY?
|
why not deal with the real issue
an old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Douche Bag wrote: IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything.... They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be saying that you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh right) well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter? The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/£40 charge or just the general way of applying for it? Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant.. having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those with bad attiudes than a code test not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free (the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so this might escape you I should have been clearer nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the flamers and trolls had driven them off Yep, im british. I can see your point about the FCC complaints, lack of funding is the usual reason for them not to bother to go after ham violators. If they charged users then they would be able to use that money to go after the retards who clog todays airwaves... And the flamers/trolls havent driven us all off, we just go into hiding until we see something of interest, and just ignore the rest... |
why not deal with the real issue
Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Douche Bag wrote: IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything... They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be saying that you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh right) well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter? The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/£40 charge or just the general way of applying for it? Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant.. having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those with bad attiudes than a code test not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free (the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so this might escape you I should have been clearer nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the flamers and trolls had driven them off Yep, im british. I can see your point about the FCC complaints, lack of funding is the usual reason for them not to bother to go after ham violators. If they charged users then they would be able to use that money to go after the retards who clog todays airwaves... And the flamers/trolls havent driven us all off, we just go into hiding until we see something of interest, and just ignore the rest... indeed but you can't discuss any changes as I suspect you have ntoiced and for that matter I have never seen why we have to have all of us geting our license by the same path indeed I have always liked an idea with some folks talking a rule and safety test (and being confined to built equipment) and pay a fee while others would takerigourous test and no fees |
why not deal with the real issue
an Old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Douche Bag wrote: IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod? wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything... They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be saying that you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves... Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh right) well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter? The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/£40 charge or just the general way of applying for it? Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant.. having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those with bad attiudes than a code test not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free (the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so this might escape you I should have been clearer nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the flamers and trolls had driven them off Yep, im british. I can see your point about the FCC complaints, lack of funding is the usual reason for them not to bother to go after ham violators. If they charged users then they would be able to use that money to go after the retards who clog todays airwaves... And the flamers/trolls havent driven us all off, we just go into hiding until we see something of interest, and just ignore the rest... indeed but you can't discuss any changes as I suspect you have ntoiced and for that matter I have never seen why we have to have all of us geting our license by the same path indeed I have always liked an idea with some folks talking a rule and safety test (and being confined to built equipment) and pay a fee while others would takerigourous test and no fees So basically ur saying that you should be able to either 1. Pay for your license and Take a beginner test (to prove your competent) or 2. Take a Intermediate Test and get free license after passing If this is what you mean, then i can see your logic and i would fully support a system like this... Only problem is that just like Slow Code and the other trolls who try to change the Ham world, we wouldnt be able to do anything either, its down to the corporations, not us little people... |
Uhhhhhhhh...Morkie, Could We PLEASE Do This In Englsih?
|
Uhhhhhhhh...Morkie, Could We PLEASE Do This In English?
wrote:
On 22 Aug 2006 19:46:56 -0700, "Bakb0ne" wrote: an Old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: an old friend wrote: Bakb0ne wrote: indeed I have always liked an idea with some folks talking a rule and safety test (and being confined to built equipment) and pay a fee while others would takerigourous test and no fees So basically ur saying that you should be able to either 1. Pay for your license and Take a beginner test (to prove your competent) or 2. Take a Intermediate Test and get free license after passing If this is what you mean, then i can see your logic and i would fully support a system like this... basicaly yes Sure...Why not... Let's just throw out the whole concept of really LEARNING...But of course this is the course that the Amateur Radio Service has been going since Bash bashed it to death. I still say he should be dragged behind a jeep over a rocky road. Only problem is that just like Slow Code and the other trolls who try to change the Ham world, we wouldnt be able to do anything either, its down to the corporations, not us little people... well maybe I am naive but if Ham could get it together to support something different that was not hard to run (from the FCC's point of view) I suspect we would get it English...The primary language of this forum is E N G L I S H! Steve, K4YZ |
If the ARS is dead why do you still keep your license Steve? Necrophilia perhaps?
K4YZ wrote: wrote: Sure...Why not... Let's just throw out the whole concept of really LEARNING...But of course this is the course that the Amateur Radio Service has been going since Bash bashed it to death. I still say he should be dragged behind a jeep over a rocky road. why are you still a ham then? |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
I have been into Shortwave and Police communications since the days of
putting crystals into my 8 channel regency scanner from Montgomery Wards. I am 41, college educated, and technically savy. Today I am going to go and take my license to be a certified Technician no code ham. So far every test I have taken online I have achieved a passing score without doing any studying other that the knowledge I have accumulated over the past 30 years of being a shortwave, military comm, and police comm listener. I hope that others in the hobby do not have the same attitude that you possess and are favorable to me being new to the hobby (I am a bit shy out the gate but warm up quickly). The fact that the fcc has made this test so much more attainable is a good thing because it invites those (like myself) who decide to join this hobby as a result of the test being passable with a basic understanding of the radio spectrum and laws of using the spectrum for which you are licensed to use. More people available to be a part of the hobby is a good thing. So why would you want to try to weed them out?? Almost sounds like you are being a bit of a radio snob. Just my 2 pennies worth. Keith On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 22:50:37 GMT, Slow Code wrote: So why do it? SC |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
wrote in message ... I have been into Shortwave and Police communications since the days of putting crystals into my 8 channel regency scanner from Montgomery Wards. I am 41, college educated, and technically savy. Today I am going to go and take my license to be a certified Technician no code ham. So far every test I have taken online I have achieved a passing score without doing any studying other that the knowledge I have accumulated over the past 30 years of being a shortwave, military comm, and police comm listener. I hope that others in the hobby do not have the same attitude that you possess and are favorable to me being new to the hobby (I am a bit shy out the gate but warm up quickly). The fact that the fcc has made this test so much more attainable is a good thing because it invites those (like myself) who decide to join this hobby as a result of the test being passable with a basic understanding of the radio spectrum and laws of using the spectrum for which you are licensed to use. More people available to be a part of the hobby is a good thing. So why would you want to try to weed them out?? Almost sounds like you are being a bit of a radio snob. Just my 2 pennies worth. Keith It sounds like you want to be a ham so you will be welcome. The point that some people are trying to make is that attracting people who do not want to be hams is rather pointless. They'll be talked into getting a license by some overzealous person telling them how easy it is and then will end up not participating because they don't have an interest in it. Dee, N8UZE |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message ... I have been into Shortwave and Police communications since the days of Just my 2 pennies worth. Keith It sounds like you want to be a ham so you will be welcome. not by you most likely if he expresses an opinion you don't like The point that some people are trying to make is that attracting people who do not want to be hams is rather pointless. is that the point? then you are worng It far from pointless although it is less valueble than atracting and retaining those that realy want to be hams They'll be talked into getting a license by some overzealous person telling them how easy it is and then will end up not participating because they don't have an interest in it. Thus pseaks Dee Flint Like Robeson a supreme judge of other people as I have an elitist bitch to the original poster you find these number they can not be escaped but they are not the majority Dee, N8UZE |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
"an old freind" wrote in message ups.com... I have an elitist bitch Your she-male wife. Sober up before you post, you drunken fool. |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Truth wrote: Your she-male wife. Sober up before you post, you drunken fool. no wismen I don't have a she male wife inded she male are by and large the sole pruview and scared wannabe gays that lack the guts to just come out and have sex with another man to sober up I would have to get druk first that is the facts deal with it or shove you monitor up your ass and plug it in |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
"an old freind" wrote in message oups.com... Truth wrote: Your she-male wife. Sober up before you post, you drunken fool. inded she male All that booze in your rotten skull is finally make you tell the truth this one time. Check yourself into a dry out clinic you pathetic lush. "an old freind" wrote in message oups.com... inded she male |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
not Truth wrote: All that booze in your rotten skull is finally make you tell the truth this one time. Check yourself into a dry out clinic you pathetic lush. no booze is there or my system at al I said she males you preview of scared men like yourself I don't don't have a shemale wife, shemale are fun but they are by and large pretty ****ed up mentaly rather like you wismen If I want a cock I go for a man if I want pussy I go fo r a fmeale simple as that |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
|
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Markie, Just ignore them.
They only tease you because of the stupid things you say when you follow up. Just ignore them and they'll give up. Stop giving them reasons to tease you. It only makes you look more stupid. "an old freind" wrote in message ps.com... not Truth wrote: All that booze in your rotten skull is finally make you tell the truth this one time. Check yourself into a dry out clinic you pathetic lush. no booze is there or my system at al I said she males you preview of scared men like yourself I don't don't have a shemale wife, shemale are fun but they are by and large pretty ****ed up mentaly rather like you wismen If I want a cock I go for a man if I want pussy I go fo r a fmeale simple as that |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Slow Code wrote:
So why do it? SC You got in...are YOU worried? |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
[censored] wrote: Slow Code wrote: So why do it? SC You got in...are YOU worried? having gotten his he wants to blow up the feild so nobody else can have it |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Ok, what if you were stranded on a desert island, and had to use code to
save someone's life? Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code? And if you could build the radio out of coconuts, why not just build one with a mic and speak the miracle of life into being? rb wrote in message ... On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 23:25:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: wrote in : The fact that the fcc has made this test so much more attainable is a good thing because it invites those (like myself) who decide to join this hobby as a result of the test being passable with a basic understanding of the radio spectrum and laws of using the spectrum for which you are licensed to use. If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? no they would not I can use CW well enough to save someone life with if that should occour SC http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Not Lloyd wrote:
I can't use CW well enough to save myown life with it muchless someone elses. we know |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
"Woody" wrote in message news:qqpIg.7318$Xl5.4731@trnddc06... Ok, what if you were stranded on a desert island, and had to use code to save someone's life? Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code? And if you could build the radio out of coconuts, why not just build one with a mic and speak the miracle of life into being? rb wrote in message ... On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 23:25:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: wrote in : The fact that the fcc has made this test so much more attainable is a good thing because it invites those (like myself) who decide to join this hobby as a result of the test being passable with a basic understanding of the radio spectrum and laws of using the spectrum for which you are licensed to use. If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? no they would not I can't use CW well enough to save myown life with it muchless someone elses. -- Mark caught forging using Steve's name. "Steve's" post has headers: X-Complaints-To: X-Submitted-By: 66.82.9.42 Your reply contains headers: NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.82.9.42 Injection-Info: 38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.82.9.42 'Nuff said. www.marksspamblog.blogspot.com |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code?
"Woody" wrote in message news:qqpIg.7318$Xl5.4731@trnddc06... ....Remember the smoke signals...remember the smoke signals...remember the smoke signals... Jack Ok, what if you were stranded on a desert island, and had to use code to save someone's life? Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code? And if you could build the radio out of coconuts, why not just build one with a mic and speak the miracle of life into being? rb wrote in message ... On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 23:25:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: wrote in : The fact that the fcc has made this test so much more attainable is a good thing because it invites those (like myself) who decide to join this hobby as a result of the test being passable with a basic understanding of the radio spectrum and laws of using the spectrum for which you are licensed to use. If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? no they would not I can use CW well enough to save someone life with if that should occour SC http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
"Woody" wrote in news:qqpIg.7318$Xl5.4731@trnddc06:
Ok, what if you were stranded on a desert island, and had to use code to save someone's life? Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code? And if you could build the radio out of coconuts, why not just build one with a mic and speak the miracle of life into being? rb Markie could. He learned out to do it watching Gilligans Island. SC |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
Slow Code wrote: Markie could. He learned out to do it watching Gilligans Island. why don't you just admit it you care about people safety or the public just your own petty staus |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
"Not Lloyd" anon@anon wrote in message ...
"Woody" wrote in message news:qqpIg.7318$Xl5.4731@trnddc06... Ok, what if you were stranded on a desert island, and had to use code to save someone's life? Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code? And if you could build the radio out of coconuts, why not just build one with a mic and speak the miracle of life into being? rb They did it on Gilligans Island. You could possibly build batteries using what is available depending on the island. -- Suffer, unto me. Indulge, my every need. UV Count 1 Vote Mark Morgan for THICK AS A BRICK in August 2006! Vote rec.radio.amateur.policy for Busted Urinal in August 2006! |
Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
DrDeath wrote:
"Not Lloyd" anon@anon wrote in message ... "Woody" wrote in message news:qqpIg.7318$Xl5.4731@trnddc06... Ok, what if you were stranded on a desert island, and had to use code to save someone's life? Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code? And if you could build the radio out of coconuts, why not just build one with a mic and speak the miracle of life into being? rb They did it on Gilligans Island. You could possibly build batteries using what is available depending on the island. Ginger or Mary Ann? -- Suffer, unto me. Indulge, my every need. UV Count 1 Vote Mark Morgan for THICK AS A BRICK in August 2006! Vote rec.radio.amateur.policy for Busted Urinal in August 2006! LOL!!!!!!!! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:00 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com