slow code:kook on parade
 

an old friend wrote:
Slow Code wrote:
" wrote in
oups.com:

From: "an old friend" on Sun, Sep 3 2006 2:41 pm

slow code:kook on parade

Morse has no value in todays society...

And I agree "slow code:kook on parade"

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
 

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

From: an old friend on Sun, Sep 3 2006 10:09 am

ARRL was first a very small group of local New Englanders,
formed 5 years after the first (and still surviving) national
organization, the Radio Club of America.

But it didn't stay that way for long. By the time of the 1917 shutdown
- just three years after ARRL was founded - it was a national
organization.

One of the cofounders, Charles H. Stewart, 3ZS, lived right here in
Radnor, PA. Hardly "local" in those days.

Heck, Jim, you're going to ruin one of Leonard's rants.

I'm just pointing out some plain, simple facts.

Stewart, as I recall, succeeded HPM.

You are confusing Charles H. Stewart with Kenneth B. Warner. It was KBW
who succeeded HPM.

KBW was a major part of ARRL from the early days until his death in the
late 1940s. IMHO he was as important in the 1930s and 40s as Maxim was
in the teens and 20s. KBW is just not as well known.

There were lots of
"national club" competitors in the 1920s but those eventually
dropped out.

Name some.

RCA still exists but is not much concerned with
amateur radio.

It is a very small organization whose main activities seem to be
honorary and historical.

Why are those guys always living in the past? ;-o

Well, there you have it.

Prior to the Internet going public in 1991, the only major
presence for US amateur radio in DC was the legal firm on
retainer from the ARRL.

There was nothing to stop others from doing the same thing. Nor from
contacting FCC directly.

ARRL kept promoting themselves as
"representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but
suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions.

Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly,
and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS.

Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is
suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved.

Have you forgotten the profile already?

That changed dramatically once the FCC got their website
going and ramped up to take Comments electronically. The
ARRL had to retain a second firm in DC for lobbying.

All ECFS did was to make it easier to petition and comment.

Correct. It also saved a stamp. In the case of a number of Len's
comments, it saved him lots of stamps.

It should be remembered that, back in 1998, Len couldn't get ECFS to
work for him and had to mail his comments to FCC. Meanwhile, thousands
of us whom he denigrates had no problem filing comments online, even
then.

The evidence is an observation of the number and kind of
Comments on 98-143 "restructuring" versus Comments on
all those Petitions and last year's NPRM concerning code
testing elimination. The pro-code-test advocates' Comments
were straight out of the League hymn book about morsemanship
with a few adding in nebulous advantages for "homeland
security" necessities! [those Petitions began after 11 Sep
01]

??

You know--the ARRL hymnal. It's filled with songs rallying government
to the ARRL. Len's sense of the surreal is working overtime.

Ah - now I understand.

The fact is that the majority of individuals who commented supported
the retention of at least some Morse Code testing. The majority also
supported elimination of the Morse Code test for the General Class
license.

However, the most likely outcome is that FCC will just drop Element 1
completely. The surprising thing is that it has taken so long.

What is more telling about the League's stubbornness on their
pro-code-test stance is that the IARU took a firm stand on
changing the ITU-R amateur radio regulations compulsory
(by administrations) morse testing for any license having
below-30-MHz privileges...the IARU wanted it OPTIONAL by all
administrations (at their discretion) a good year BEFORE
WRC-03. The ARRL wanted to keep the compulsory regulation.

Not true! Not true at all, Len.

The fact is that way back in 2000 or 2001, the ARRL BoD changed their
policy wrt S25.5. They decided to neither support nor oppose changes to
ITU-R S25.5.

Given the strong support from many other member countries to change
S25.5, the ARRL's no-opinion policy pretty much guaranteed there would
be majority support to change S25.5.

After WRC-03 the League took a neutral stance, neither for
nor against code testing in the USA. It's still a "ARRL
versus the World" situation.

Wrong again, Len!

In ARRL's petition to FCC, they proposed eliminating the Morse Code
test for General but retaining it for Extra.

Len isn't going to let facts stand in his way. His mind is made up.

Like concrete: all mixed up and firmly set.

The majority of individuals commenting on the NPRM wanted the test
eliminated for General.

The majority of individuals commenting on the NPRM wanted the test
retained for Extra.

The two majorities are not composed of all the same individuals, but
they *are* majorities.

Thank you, Rick! You spoke volumes of reality in this new
millennium.

And you're still just as stupid as you were before you read it.

Now, now, "Slow," you are starting to sound like one of those
inbred bigoted morsemen in here. You can't discuss anything
reasonable-like, only cuss at those who disagree with you. :-)

yet I do wonder if he isn't Robeson somedays but I am pretty sure he is
just another bitter old that bought into "incetive Licesning) the brain
child of the ARRL

It should be abundantly clear that "Incentive Licensing" was
never about "advancing" in amateur radio beyond getting TITLE,
RAND, and STATUS.

"RAND"?

Do you mean Remington Rand, Ayn Rand, or the South African monetary
unit?

It is obviously a reference to the Rand Corporation--all very hush hush.

I disagree!

Remington Rand wasn't part of Len's CV.

Ayn Rand promoted her philosophy of Objectivism, which demanded strict
adherence to reality, not the surreal. Also, a core value of
Objectivism was the value of the individual and individual
accomplishment. Not something Len likes to acknowledge, unless it's
*his* personal value and accomplishment.

OTOH, Len's value system places a high value on being a "professional"
(meaning being paid for something) and how much material wealth a
person has amassed (so they can pay CASH for things like Japanese-made
general-coverage receivers).

So it must be the South African rand...

It is abundantly clear that Len's mind is made up. He KNOWS what
incentive licensing was about.

Facts notwithstanding.

That was VERY important to the controlling
coterie of the League, folks who wanted to be "better" than
others...in a hobby activity.

Nope. That's not what it was about at all, Len. Do try to get your
history straight.

The fact is that the "incentive licensing" changes were an attempt to
*return* to a system something like that which existed before February
1953. The complexity of the final result was due in large part to it
being pieced together from the numerous non-ARRL proposals mentioned
earlier.

btw, the 1951 restructuring that gave us the license classes with names
rather than letters was not primarily driven by ARRL.

Of course Len does not know where it actually came from...

What "incentive licensing" DID create was just the opposite of
"good fellowship" among amateurs, that of CLASS DISTINCTION
and a "pecking order" based largely on morsemanship.

How so?

Did you forget about the written tests?

Don't ruin his rant, Jim. He needs to massage a few facts to make
things fit with his conclusion.

Massage or mangle?

Fact is, ARRL proposed in 1963 that there be *no* additional code
testing for full privileges - just an additional written test.

The
morsemen won it. Never mind that radio technology was already
far advanced from the 1930s' style of amateur radio and that
morse code was falling by the wayside in every other radio
service, the League still (stubbornly) held to the belief that
all amateurs "should" be able to be morse skilled...even four
decades after the 1930s.

How many other radio services used Morse Code in 1966, Len?

Let's see...there were the military, particularly the US Navy and Coast
Guard, the maritime services, various government agencies, some press
services, and of course amateur radio.

Was there a shortage of trained radiotelegraphers during the Vietnam
War?

The League lobbied for and got the "vanity license" system so
that olde-tymers could get their 1x2 and 2x1 super-special
guru-status callsigns. Even more status symbolism.

Should accomplishment not be rewarded?

Len shouldn't confuse the Vanity Callsign System with the earlier FCC
decisions, beginning in 1968 to award 1x2 calls to those who held the
Extra and had been licensed for a certan number of years.

Actually, there were forms of "vanity" callsigns long before 1968. In
fact, if you search qrz.com, you may still be able to find amateurs
with 1x2 callsigns who are not Extras.

That was
later modified to include any Extra Class licensee without a minimum
number of years licensed. There was no periodic fee charged for those
callsign changes.

That's how I got N2EY in 1977. I simply asked FCC for a 1x2 when I
moved to New York State, and it was sequentially issued. I'd been an
Extra for seven years by then.

That it chafes Len, is tough.

All sorts of things chafe Len.

Combining
"vanity" calls and "incentive licensing" there was a perfect
setup for all who managed to get both to crow and holler they
WERE BETTER than all others. Good fellowship went out the
window...rank, status, title RULED.

Perhaps in Len's mind, it did.

btw, Len, did you ever manage to get your Extra out of the box? It's
been more than six and a half years now...

Len still hasn't opened the box to obtain any amateur radio license.
He's been carping in this newsgroup for a decade or so and inertia rulez.

Further, you are ten kinds of short on ability to threaten.
Your threats and "orders" become recycled electrons doing
nothing but dissipating a tiny bit of heat. yawn

amasing how they keep resorting to threats and orders

That's all they have left in this new millennium, Mark.

Some of them, such as Blow Code and Hambrecht still think
they are "better than others" in all aspects, not just
morsemanship.

Well, maybe they are, Len. Or maybe they aren't.

Why does it bother you so much?

Do you have a need to look down on everyone?

There are those doing something in which Len is not a participant. Some
of those who are participants are perceived by Len to have rank, status
and privilege. In amateur radio, Len would have to begin as all did--at
the bottom. He'd have no rank, status or privilege for quite some time.
There'd be those who would think they were "better" than him. There
are others who'd actually BE better than him. The thought chafes him.
Len isn't an instant anything in amateur radio. He isn't yet a neophyte.

Actually there's a bit more to it than that.

If you recall, Len once set out to get an amateur license, and
reportedly got up to 7 or 8 wpm before he gave up on learning Morse
Code.

You see, learning Morse Code was "hard work" for Len back then.

He's apparently one of those folks who does "book learnin'" rather
easily - let him read something and he'll lecture you on it endlessly.
Some of what he says will actually be right, too.

But learning Morse Code to the 13 wpm level needed for a General
license turned out to be not so easy for Len, so he has held a grudge
about it for decades.

Now you may wonder why, if Len could do 7 or 8 wpm at one point, he
didn't just get a Novice license, and improve his Morse Code skills by
operating, as most of us did.

The answer should be obvious: No way would Len allow himself to be
classified as a "Novice". That license did not carry the appropriate
title or status for him.

They LIKE that. So much so that they are
in great personal fear of losing that very precious rank,
status, title, and privilege that MIGHT happen if the
code test is eliminated.

How will any currently licensed amateur lose anything if the Morse Code
test is eliminated?

They will LOSE their "better
than you" rationalization.

How?

If they really are better than you, they'll still be better without the
test. And vice-versa.

Precisely. They'll also have much more experience in amateur radio than
Leonard H. Anderson. Those who are proficient in the use of Morse, will
always be a leg up on Leonard.

So what? People have all kinds of skills, experience, etc. I'm sure
there are things where Len has more experience/knowledge/skill than I,
and things where I have more experience/knowledge/skill than he.

The former doesn't bother me, but the latter seems to bother him no
end.

Internally the sky will have
fallen on their self-perceptions.

Personally, I think radio and electronics is totally
fascinating.

Me too. Amateur radio particularly.

Seconded. How it must burn to have professed a decades-long interest in
something only to remain an outsider.

An outsider by choice. There has been a US amateur radio license with
no Morse Code test for the past 15-1/2 years. All other classes of US
amateur radio license have required only a 5 wpm code test since 2000.

So much so that I made a career choice of
it while studying for an entirely different sort of
work.

Funded by the taxpayers, too.

...and you'll note that Len is back to talking careers.

Think of the South African rand.

That's one of
the wonderful things about amateur radio. One can work in something
quite far afield from radio and still have a rich and rewarding
experience in amateur radio. One of my local friends works at a funeral
home. One works as a jail guard. One is a retired teacher. All find
much enjoyment in amateur radio.

Exactly. Amateur radio is "radio for its own sake".

Professional work, not some amateur dabbling,
yet I liked to make electronic things in my home
workshop.

Does being paid for something make someone automatically "better", Len?

It apparently does, unless it something made through dabbling in his
home workshop.

In case you've forgotten, Len did some writing for the now-defunct
amateur radio magazine "ham radio". He got paid for those articles, of
course. None of his articles were actual projects, though.

Things other than work-related tasks. It
is FUN, personally rewarding, not "work."

But not rewarding enough for you to get an amateur radio license, it
seems.

...and learning morse would apparently be "work" for Leonard.

"hard work", actually. That's why he gave up on it.

Or have you gotten that Extra out of its box, as you told us you were
going to do, way back on January 19, 2000?

He talks the talk, but has trouble with the walk.

I got into Big Time HF comms 53 1/2 years ago and have
seen what modes DO work well and on a 24/7 basis on
long-haul circuits that HAD to be kept working.

Using equipment supplied and paid for by others. With a team of several
hundred people trained to do the job.

It is always Big Time in the Len recounting. At least he has dropped
the claim that HE worked 24/7. My personal experience with PROFESSIONAL
long haul circuits that HAD to be kept working is that they don't
always. When a healthy solar flare comes along, you might as well mail
'em a letter.

Looks like a deep seated insecurity on Len's part, though.

That doesn't make you more qualified to judge what amateurs do -
self-funded and largely self-trained.

Years
later some KID is trying to "moralize" me into "working
on morsemanship?"

Is youth somehow wrong, Len?

You surely remember what he has said about CHILDREN in the past.

Oh yes - something about his difficulty including them in what he sees
as an adult activity. Also, he proposed a minimum age requirement for
an amateur license even though he had absolutely no evidence of
problems caused by the licensing of young people. Then there's his
accusating the ARRL and some VEs of "fraud" in licensing some young
children.

He (or she) can go shove it
somewhere...until he (or she) can prove they've done
more than I in radio communications...which they have
NOT done yet in here.

I see.

What if someone older than you, with more radio experience, told you
that you should work on your morse code skills? How would you react?

How about if someone younger than Len, but with more experience in radio
told him?

See the profile...it wouldn't matter.

Once, a very long time ago, I thought that becoming a
"ham" was a cool deal. That was before the commsats,
before technology had fully gotten with the semi-
conductor era, before the wonderful way we can get
over most of the world via PCs and the Internet.

What about your posting of January 19, 2000?

In addition to that, what about the fact that he is paying for internet
service and that invariably, that internet circuit goes through wires
somewhere? The cellular telephone is a wonderful thing too, but it
isn't a substitute for amateur radio. It'd be pricey too.

Why
IS it that some have to be a grand champion of the
1930s over seven decades later? What are THEY trying
to prove? I could care less about 1930s technology
and the "radio standards" of then. I live in the NOW.

Then why do you tell us so much about your past?

If he didn't, he couldn't regale us with tales of his days in Big Time
HF radio!

btw, if you are *not* interested in becoming a ham, why are you so
vocal about the requirements?

Didn't you know, Jim? Len's made himself an ADVOCATE for
something-or-other.

Keeping real estate zoning regulations as they were 40+ years ago?

If some dumb**** wants to moralize about "working" and
"investing" he (or she) can go get some flagellation
and suffer themselves for their own "cause." I'm not
about to join him (or her) in such moralistic self-
abuse/mis-use.

You sure seem to spend a lot of effort arguing about it, though.

Why?

His life is otherwise empty, depsite the comfortable income, two
mortgage-free homes and the like. Maybe Len can take a part-time job as
bag boy at Ralph's.

No, Ralph's requires that everything be Pretty Good. Including the
ketchup.

If these self-styled emperors want to
flap their new clothes in my direction, I'll just keep
on pointing out that they are NAKED (and ugly).

Perhaps they are simply holding up a mirror.....

Len often acts ugly. I prefer not to think of him as naked.

Please don't go there...

Gee, Len, it's been more than three years since the ITU treaty changed.
Some countries have eliminated Morse Code testing, some haven't, and at
least one (Canada) has worked out a unique solution to the debate.
Meanwhile the USA rules on the subject haven't changed since 2000.

Are you frustrated because your will has not become law...yet?

Whether Len is ever a radio amateur or not, I'm not going to lose any
sleep over it.

Nor I. Besides, it's just not going to happen.

73 de Jim, N2EY

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
 

wrote:
From: on Sun, Sep 3 2006 5:10 pm


wrote:

Jim, welcome back. I guess Coslo's BBS was a little too quiet?

billy beeper

Ahem...Coslo's attempt at an amateur radio "forum" hasn't had
a new posting since 20 Feb 06. Seven months of quiet.

Or maybe all the new posts got tangled with his "to the edge
of space" balloon experiment and floated off? :-)




"To Infinity And Beyond!!!"

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
 

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

ARRL kept promoting themselves as
"representative" allegedly for the amateur to the FCC but
suspiciously more like a "filter" of amateurs' opinions.


Why are you suspicious, Len? Anyone could petition the FCC directly,
and many did, long before the Internet and ECFS.

Len is suspicious of the League's elections of Directors too. Len is
suspicious of a number of things in which he isn't involved.

Interesting how Carl was barred from running for section office.
Professional talent need not apply - we only want amateurs.

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
 

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Sun, Sep 3 2006 1:49 pm

(whole bunch of Len's errors and insults snipped in the interest of
time and space)

The fact is that the "incentive licensing" changes were an attempt to
*return* to a system something like that which existed before February
1953. The complexity of the final result was due in large part to it
being pieced together from the numerous non-ARRL proposals mentioned
earlier.

If that is true (and it is not) then there were FIVE classes
of amateur radio licenses prior to "incentive licensing." :-)

Actually, there were six classes of amateur radio licenses in the USA
from 1951 until the mid-1970s. They were Novice, Technician, General,
Conditional, Advanced and Extra.

Was the Conditional actually a class of license or a method of taking
the exam? What priveleges did it convey? Why do some OF's state that
they had a General when, in fact, they held the Conditional license?
Was there shame associated with the Conditional license?
well I'll "conseed that one if he likes jst makes thing more Byzantine

In the mid-1970s the Conditional was phased out. When a Conditional was
renewed or modified, the FCC changed the license class to General.

Hmmmm? Almost interesting.

The number of amateur radio license classes in the USA remained at 5
until the Technician Plus lucense was created in the early 1990s.

False. The Technician with 5wpm code ran concurrently with the
Technician license without code. That lasted for about two years, then
we got the "Plus" as a marker for the code accomplished.

But then the strangest thing happened. It went back to "Technician"
and you have to keep track of your code "accomplishment" yourself.
Doesn't sound like the FCC values the code "accomplishment" all that
much.
indeed

Neither does the text of NPRM last year

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
 

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
 

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
 

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.
 

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.