Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

On 4 Sep 2006 18:13:27 -0700, wrote:


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.

and yet no problem for the ARRL's marketing director to hop over to
Yeasu


He is forever tainted...

Wow, Goobers united!

I don't think Yaesu/Vertex Standard has a policy which precludes the
hiring of those who worked at the League.

The League's policy doesn't preclude the candidacy of those who
*previously* worked in professional communications or the manufacture
and marketing of amateur radio equipment. They deal with those who work
in such fields *currently*, at the time of the election.

Likely candidates for ARRL volunteer positions are what? retirees?

Just what the hobby needs more of...

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
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.

The ARRL's rules regarding candidacy for elected ARRL positions existed
decades before Carl's run. The matter is moot since Carl's mouth would
have precluded his being elected had he qualified for candidacy. The
skeletons were pouring forth from the r.r.a.p. closet.

Dave K8MN

You're describing halloween.

If you take Carls remarks in context, there are a lot of hams that
would agree with him, and would welcome a scrapper in the white house,
err volunteer office.

wrote:
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?

FCC considered it a different class of license until it was phased out.

What priveleges did it convey?

Same *operating* privileges as General. However, over its history, the
Conditional had some unique characteristics.

First off, you could only get a Conditional if you lived more than a
certain distance from an FCC exam point, or were disabled enough to be
physically unable to travel to an exam session. The Conditional
distance changed a few times over the history of that license, and the
amount of CONUS that was "Conditional territory" changed dramatically.

Second, until the mid-1950s, if a Conditional moved closer to an exam
point than the Conditional distance, they had 90 days to show up at an
FCC exam session and re-test for the General.

Third, the Conditional did not convey any test-element credit for
higher class licenses. If a non-disabled Conditional wanted an Advanced
or Extra, they had to get to an exam point, and would have to retake
the General code and theory before being allowed to try the other exam
elements.

Sounds like the "original" dumbed down license if there ever was one.
Even the FCC didn't trust the system which granted conditional
licenses.

Why do some OF's state that
they had a General when, in fact, they held the Conditional license?

I don't know - ask *them*.

Was there shame associated with the Conditional license?

Not that I know of. Why should anyone be ashamed of any class of
license?

Why all the retesting?

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.

No, true.

The Technician Plus class was created in the early 1990s - about 1993.

1993 is the early 1990s. The Technician-without-code-test went into
effect February 14, 1991.

The technician (with code) and the technician (without code) ran
concurrently until the Plus was developed.

Two different licenses with the same name.

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.

That's right. From February 1991 to about mid-1993, both flavors of
Technician were simply "Technician". It was left to the licensee to
keep documentation.

They weren't different flavors. They were different license classes
with the same name.

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.

Maybe not. However, note that:

- The FCC did create the Tech Plus license class

- The FCC could have reduced the code test requirement for all license
classes to 5 wpm long before 2000, but they didn't. FCC even went
through the additional complexity of medical waivers for a decade
before reducing the code test requirement

- Despite all their pronouncements about code testing in the various
NPRMs and R&Os, FCC has not yet changed the rules about code testing
from those imposed in 2000. It's been more than three years since the
treaty changed, yet they won't even say when they will make a decision.
If FCC doesn't value the Element 1 accomplishment, why have they
retained it for so long?

You tell me?

Maybe changes to Part 97 are not a high priority to FCC.

Even when the FCC addresses amateur related issues, they do so poorly.

Those are the plain and simple facts, Len.

Those are almost the plain and simple facts, Jim.

Are you taking stage magician lessons? You've FAILED.

How is it a failure for someone to state the facts?

Simple. Your "facts" failed. I corrected them, but you need not thank
me.

My facts were correct - the "early 1990s" did not mean Fenruary 14,
1991.

The fact is that there were two different technician licenses. You
counted only one.

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

Sweetums, do NOT go into your smokescreening by diversion
routine again. That's SO transparent.

You don't really know what caused the 1951 restructuring, do you, Len?

I didn't think so.

(rest of Len's errors snipped for sake of time and space).

Are you going to tell us again?

You don't seem to know, either

How far is it to the moon?

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

wrote:


On 4 Sep 2006 18:13:27 -0700, wrote:



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.

and yet no problem for the ARRL's marketing director to hop over to
Yeasu


He is forever tainted...

Wow, Goobers united!

I don't think Yaesu/Vertex Standard has a policy which precludes the
hiring of those who worked at the League.

The League's policy doesn't preclude the candidacy of those who
*previously* worked in professional communications or the manufacture
and marketing of amateur radio equipment. They deal with those who work
in such fields *currently*, at the time of the election.


Likely candidates for ARRL volunteer positions are what? retirees?

Volunteer positions are not elected positions. Read up on it.

Just what the hobby needs more of...

I welcome all the retirees amateur radio can get, just as I welcome all
of the young people and all of those in between.

Dave K8MN

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

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.

The ARRL's rules regarding candidacy for elected ARRL positions existed
decades before Carl's run. The matter is moot since Carl's mouth would
have precluded his being elected had he qualified for candidacy. The
skeletons were pouring forth from the r.r.a.p. closet.

Dave K8MN


You're describing halloween.

I'm describing statements made by Carl. If those are Halloween, so be it.

If you take Carls remarks in context, there are a lot of hams that
would agree with him...

There's not much evidence of that. Who might they be--the MoveOn.org of
ham radio?

Dave K8MN

and would welcome a scrapper in the white house,
err volunteer office.

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
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.

We're both wrong. Stewart also died in 1936. His death announcement
was in the same April, 1936 issue of QST as Maxim's. K.B. Warner was
never President of the ARRL. He was the Secretary. Maxim was succeeded
by Eugene Woodruff W8CMP of State College, Pennsylvania.

Yup.

KBW was also General Manager. He died in 1948.

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.

He was quite well known in his day. He was certainly a shaper of policy.
From what I've read, he was known as a tyrant among the staff.

Interesting.

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.

Living in the past is fine with Leonard, as long as he is the one doing it.

Exactly


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?

I will never, ever forget the accurate profile of Len's likely actions.

Not so much "likely" as "practically guaranteed"

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.

I'd forgotten that. There must have been another meltdown in the
Anderson home comm center.

Despite the fact that 98-143 had an unusually long comment period, too.

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.

Len especially likes:

No. 73 "Armageddon Day" (sung to the tune of "Graduation Day") and

No. 88 "Maxim Will Haunt You" (sung to the tune of "Moonlight Becomes You")

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.

It doesn't seem to be a surprise to Len. He seems to think that there's
a plot afoot, set in motion by the ARRL.

I thought McCarthyism was long gone...


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.

Concrete is all thick and heavy, isn't it?

Usually. Also brittle, rough, and very weak in some characteristics.


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.

Heh.

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).

Len generally capitalizes "PROFESSIONAL". The term seems to have
connotations of rank, status and privilege to him.

Now you are beginning to understand.

So it must be the South African rand...

I'm sticking with the Rand Corporation. I think Len believes that
there's a large, secret report being generated somewhere.

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


Facts notwithstanding.

After all, he has read, cut and pasted Thomas White.

Except that White's commentary ends about 1927


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...

Thomas White doesn't have it?

Not online.


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?

The effect is the same: to take facts and make them state something
different than they'd generally reveal.

IOW, to tell untruths.

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

Yup.


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.

My mentor, A.G. Timberlake W8MN was one. Andy held the General and
later the Advanced. He received the W8MN call by virtue of having
gotten his first ticket in 1923.


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.

I was able to obtain K8MN in a similar manner, though I didn't opt for a
sequentially issued callsign. I requested a specific call. You were
way ahead of me in obtaining the Extra ticket. I didn't get mine until
1977.

It is clear that it really bothers Len that some of us got our amateur
licenses as "teeners", and rapidly progressed to the highest class of
license.

That it chafes Len, is tough.


All sorts of things chafe Len.

...apparently none moreso than hams talking about amateur radio, a field
in which he is not a participant.

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 often, after having read something, he'll lecture as if he is an
expert in a field, even when he has no actual experience. Reading about
rebuilding an automatic transmission is not the same as being able to
rebuild the contraption.

Exactly. Being able to describe a bicycle doesn't mean someone can ride
one.

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.

A couple of motor skills stymied him.

I don't think so.

I think what bothered him was that Morse Code was not so easy for him
to learn, and that he didn't see how he could make money with Morse
Code skill. That made it a bad thing to Len.

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.

That's where I was going with my earlier comments. Len will not accept
being classified as a beginner in anything. He rants at length about
radio amateurs having "rank, status and privilege", when "rank status
and privilege" would seem to be very important to him.

So when you see those rants, remember that Len is really talking about
himself.

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.

Sure it does.


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.

Len's been ranting here for better than a decade. Perhaps he's just a
late bloomer.


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.

Heh.

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".

...and if one isn't interested in the things radio amateurs do, why
would one be concerned with them? Why would one devote better than ten
years of his life to haunting an amateur radio newsgroup?

To damage/destroy amateur radio. Remember that he has commented to FCC
in great volume on a radio service in which he is completely
uninvolved.

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.

That hasn't stopped him for lambasting you over your own homebuilt
equipment.

He's just jealous. Not only is he unable to build a rig like mine, but
he is unable to use one. Not Qualified.

Maybe Len feels that undertaking anything which doesn't result in profit
for him, is simply beneath him.

Profile needs a rework to include that.

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.

...and the experience hardened his heart.

and mind...

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.

I'd say so. Fortunately such circuits are mostly handled via landline
and satellite these days. That makes outages more rare, but it doesn't
rule them out. Equipment can and does fail and human error occurs.
All the "have to" talk in the world can't prevent that.


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.

Len's suspicious of the League and suspicious of children. W8MN was 15
when he became a radio amateur. My late friend John Fox W4JBP was only
12 when he became a ham in 1912 (before Federal licenses were required).
I still have the REO spark coil he used in getting on the air.

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.

Point taken.

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?


That's one, but the real estate thing was only to serve his personal
interest. Regarding amateur radio, Len's advocacy is...Hey, wait a
minute! Do you suppose Len's self-appointment to advocacy in amateur
radio regulation is self-serving?

Ya broke da cipher!

Note that Len's real estate thing was an attempt to prevent others from
doing what they wanted with their property.

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.

Sorry.

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...

Oops! I might get UnWiseman worked into a lather.

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.

I think they'll pry a microphone from Len's cold, dead fingers. Of
course it won't be connected to an amateur radio transmitter.

Len should be working on improving his Morse Code skills.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

wrote:

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

Stewart, as I recall, succeeded HPM.


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

We're both wrong. Stewart also died in 1936. His death announcement
was in the same April, 1936 issue of QST as Maxim's. K.B. Warner was
never President of the ARRL. He was the Secretary. Maxim was succeeded
by Eugene Woodruff W8CMP of State College, Pennsylvania.


Yup.

KBW was also General Manager. He died in 1948.

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.

He was quite well known in his day. He was certainly a shaper of policy.
From what I've read, he was known as a tyrant among the staff.


Interesting.

It wasn't the first I'd heard of it but George Hart's serialized memoirs
in the QCWA Journal were the most recent.


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?

I will never, ever forget the accurate profile of Len's likely actions.


Not so much "likely" as "practically guaranteed"

Yep.



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?

The effect is the same: to take facts and make them state something
different than they'd generally reveal.


IOW, to tell untruths.

Yes, to fabricate, to lie.

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

Yup.


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.

My mentor, A.G. Timberlake W8MN was one. Andy held the General and
later the Advanced. He received the W8MN call by virtue of having
gotten his first ticket in 1923.


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.

I was able to obtain K8MN in a similar manner, though I didn't opt for a
sequentially issued callsign. I requested a specific call. You were
way ahead of me in obtaining the Extra ticket. I didn't get mine until
1977.


It is clear that it really bothers Len that some of us got our amateur
licenses as "teeners", and rapidly progressed to the highest class of
license.

....in what he views as primarily an adult activity, heh.



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 often, after having read something, he'll lecture as if he is an
expert in a field, even when he has no actual experience. Reading about
rebuilding an automatic transmission is not the same as being able to
rebuild the contraption.


Exactly. Being able to describe a bicycle doesn't mean someone can ride
one.

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.

A couple of motor skills stymied him.


I don't think so.

I think what bothered him was that Morse Code was not so easy for him
to learn, and that he didn't see how he could make money with Morse
Code skill. That made it a bad thing to Len.

But if his decades-long interest in amateur radio was genuine, wouldn't
it figure that Len would have continued in his efforts to master morse.
Wouldn't he have done it for the love of radio? Must everything be
about making money?

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.

That's where I was going with my earlier comments. Len will not accept
being classified as a beginner in anything. He rants at length about
radio amateurs having "rank, status and privilege", when "rank status
and privilege" would seem to be very important to him.


So when you see those rants, remember that Len is really talking about
himself.

That's been quite clear for a very long time.


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".

...and if one isn't interested in the things radio amateurs do, why
would one be concerned with them? Why would one devote better than ten
years of his life to haunting an amateur radio newsgroup?


To damage/destroy amateur radio. Remember that he has commented to FCC
in great volume on a radio service in which he is completely
uninvolved.

But why? Is it only that Len was stymied in his efforts to master morse
code? Could it be that he was thwarted in obtaining a promotion by
someone who was a ham, or might he have been snubbed by a radio amateur?

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.

That hasn't stopped him for lambasting you over your own homebuilt
equipment.


He's just jealous. Not only is he unable to build a rig like mine, but
he is unable to use one. Not Qualified.

Shouldn't a PROFESSIONAL like Len be able to whip together something as
simple as a phasing-type SSB transmitter of his own design (he doesn't
care for equipement which appeared in QST or The Radio Amateur's
Handbook) in a week or two of spare time in his well equipped home workshop?


Maybe Len feels that undertaking anything which doesn't result in profit
for him, is simply beneath him.

Profile needs a rework to include that.

It is hardly worth the bother. After all, the profile has been correct
95% of the time.

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.

...and the experience hardened his heart.


and mind...

....and set hime upon a course to damage amateur radio.


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?


That's one, but the real estate thing was only to serve his personal
interest. Regarding amateur radio, Len's advocacy is...Hey, wait a
minute! Do you suppose Len's self-appointment to advocacy in amateur
radio regulation is self-serving?


Ya broke da cipher!

Well, it wasn't as if it was issued by the NSA.

Note that Len's real estate thing was an attempt to prevent others from
doing what they wanted with their property.

....to the benefit of those who had already built. He didn't care about
those about to begin construction, those who came after he did. He was
only concerned about the good old boys club made up of those who had
already contructed buildings. He wanted to stick to the old ways, the
established ways. He wanted no changes to his turf.



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.

I think they'll pry a microphone from Len's cold, dead fingers. Of
course it won't be connected to an amateur radio transmitter.


Len should be working on improving his Morse Code skills.

There's as much chance of that happening as his flapping his wings and
flying to Malibu.

Dave K8MN

From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 7:40 pm


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)

Tsk, M. Superior does ruler-spank and forgets her habit needs
cleaning. :-)


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.

Clever, casually omitting the period between the "mid-1970s"
up to 1991 and the creation of the no-code Technician class.


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

"Lucense?" :-)

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.

The FCC didn't think that manual morsemanship was worth their
decision in granting ANY amateur license in the 1990 NPRM.

Those are the plain and simple facts, Len.

Those are almost the plain and simple facts, Jim.

Jimmy is a Code Bigot -and- Code Zealot. He CANNOT be corrected
on anything by a no-code-test advocate.


How is it a failure for someone to state the facts?

Simple. Your "facts" failed. I corrected them, but you need not thank
me.

Jimmy "thanks" only other morsemen. :-)


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

Sweetums, do NOT go into your smokescreening by diversion
routine again. That's SO transparent.

You don't really know what caused the 1951 restructuring, do you, Len?

I didn't think so.

Tsk. M. Superior at it again. :-)

In 1951 I was graduating from Senior High School, coming up
on Draft eligibility and the Korean War was going hot and
heavy in northeast Asia. I went to work full-time as an
illustrator to get enough money to attend a good art school.
A radio hobby was way low on my priority list then. [I would
voluntarily enlist in the US Army in early 1952]

Where was Jimmy in 1951? Did he exist? No. 1951 is 55 years
ago. Was Jimmy somehow "impressed" with the moral necessity
to be an amateur morseman before conception?!? Probably so...
morsemanship is in his jeans.

Jimmy thinks it HIGHLY IMPORTANT that all get amateur radio
history (as told by the ARRL) CORRECT. Failure to do so,
showing the slightest imperfection of factual detail (as
lectured by Jimmy) is a moral and ethical felony
punishable by ruler-spank and personal denigration. :-(

(rest of Len's errors snipped for sake of time and space).

Are you going to tell us again?

(Jim's errors kept for posterity)

His errors should be pasted on his posterior.

Jimmy is never wrong. He is a morseman.

Dum tacet clamatto.

From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 5:30 pm

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


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.

Tsk. M. Superior is in her innuendo habit...

I explained that but you can't use my explanation and
have to manufacture a NON-reason of your own.

In the early 1960s I did make an attempt to get my
morse cognition skill up to 13 WPM, using mainly code
tapes (magneitc). I'm not sure of the reason I had
then, probably some pressure from co-workers who were
into SSB voice; my lab boss at Ramo-Wooldridge was Ed
Dodds, W6ERU, had a nice Collins setup in Woodland
Hills, beam antenna, regular skeds with a friend in
New Zealand. While CB (on 27 MHz) had been authorized
in 1958, it had only spread so far in 1962 since the
off-shore electronics industry hadn't yet begun to
invade the market. My E.F. Johnson Viking Messenger
had been removed from my 1953 Austin-Healey (an
excellent ground plane with all-aluminum body) since
my first wife coerced me into getting Detroit Iron.
Apartment dwelling was not good for CB then, nor for
amateur radio. We went house-hunting.

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.

No, Jimmy, that's YOUR ploy in here. :-)

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.

No "grudge" for any amateur wanting to USE it. A view
only against the alleged "necessity" to demonstrate
morsemanship just to GET a license.

You've manufactured a "moral defect" which didn't exist.
You've conveniently OMITTED the fact that eleven years
before then I began working Big Time HF radio comms where
there was NO manual morse code used nor required. CB
had already been authorized on HF five years before and
required NO test whatsoever, certainly NOT morse code.
Seven years before that I'd been granted a First 'Phone
commercial license, again not requiring any manual morse
code demonstration yet I could (commercially) operate on
HF using that. There arose what Cecil Moore would later
term "return on investment" given the readily-observable
CHANGE in communications already taking place in the
late 1950s.

In using code tapes there was no "difficulty" in learning
the tone patterns, only the TIME needed to get them down
well enough. TIME is not an unlimited quantity and a LOT
of things needed my time in my twenties. If I had to
choose between a girlfriend (and later wife) and "morse
code practice," those code tapes would be kicked to the
gutter. If you think opposite, just shove a J-38 up yer
bum and have an orgasm, morse style.

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.

I bought a house in 1963. Shortly thereafter my (then)
wife was diagnosed with cancer. She died in 1964. I
was then 31 and stuck with a bunch of bills that
required a second job to break even. Night college
classes had to be postponed for an indefinite period.
I kept the house.

With all that, you indefatiguable little character assassin,
you thought it was NECESSARY TO STUDY MORSE CODE?!?!?

If you really thought that, you have all the emotional
sensitivity of a lump of wet clay...or an aberrant
outlook that isn't in Psych 101 or 102 textbooks. Too
twisted for my undergrad knowledge of psychology.

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.

I'm not a "novice" in radio, Jimmy. Neither do I have
any emotional need for Rank, Status, Title in a HOBBY
activity. Since remodeling one unused bedroom into an
office, I haven't even mounted the RCA "first-patent"
plaque given to me by Chief Engineer Ray Aires nor the
picture of me getting it with Jim Hall, KD6JG, my
immediate manager at the time looking on. My wife is
the same way (I do the bragging about her) and her
'sheepskins' (3) are in storage up north. All of my
First 'Phone and GROL certificates and single college
certificate are in the big safety deposit box down
here; don't need them. I am secure in myself and what
I can do.

Outside of the amateur radio pecking order, WHAT GOOD IS
MORSEMANSHIP TODAY? It isn't used for regular comms by
any other radio service. There isn't one single Public
Safety radio service that uses manual morse code. There
isn't even one surviving landline morse code telegraph
circuit now. I've communicated by radio from land, from
a cockpit (at the controls) in the air, from the sea
(Ventura Harbor area), from a moving vehicle, from a
stationary vehicle, while on march in the Army with a
PRC-8 on my back. All during the last half century.
No "TITLES" necessary to do any of that or to do it well.

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.

Riiiight, world's greates DXer, amateur radio is SOOOO much
more advanced than every other radio. [barf, har har]

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,

IMPOSSIBLE in Jimmyworld. :-) [he will almost say that
outright]

and things where I have more experience/knowledge/skill than he.

Morsemanship, obviously. Something in great demand these
days of the 1930s. Morse champions are to be rewarded with
titles of nobility. Long live the morsemen. Huzzah.

On anything else, Jimmy hasn't made himself known. Such as
what he does for a living (if a life of morsemanship is
called living). Does Jimmy have a girlfriend? Boyfriend?
Any social life not requiring an antenna? Do we care?
[in general, no]



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

Then why all the titles, rank, status, privilege, bandplans
and attendant class distinction?


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.

That is a moral deficit? :-)

You are IN ERROR, Jimmy. Look up the one on using an HP-25
calculator to convert Noise Bridge readings. That was
developed to aid some local friends on antenna measurements.
Look at the footnotes on that article and some of the
examples. The whole "Digital Techniques" series was based
on personal descriptions to others (some of which were
amateurs)...the last one on a Phase-Frequency Detector was
based on the prototyping I did, partly on an old Apple ][,
for an optical interferometer.

You conveniently forget the two-plus years I spent with
Ham Radio magazine as an Associate Editor. Look on the
mastheads for proof of that. Did that under Alf Wilson
(W6NIF, took over after Jim Fisk suddenly died) and
Rich Rosen (K1RR?). I opted out from HR from time
pressure of self-employment...and learning that publisher
Skip Tenney was going to sell HR to CQ.


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

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

No, DUMB work. Waste of my time. Why do I need morse?
Why does anyone need morsemanship? To keep the USA
safe from terrorists? BWAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


It is always Big Time in the Len recounting.

It was NOT "Big Time?" What do you call 36 to 43 HF
transmitters ON at any one time, power outputs of 1 KW
to 40 KW, relaying 220 thousand message a month, the
third largest station in ACAN-DCS? :-)

You need to see the following then:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...phabetSoup.pdf

I didn't make that one, just copied it. Circa 1962.
Produced by the Japan Signal Overseas Battalion, a
merging of the old "71st" and "72nd" battalions.


At least he has dropped the claim that HE worked 24/7.

I was on-call 24/7 with the scheduling times. NCOs got
stuck with that. Longest I worked was 34 hours, one time.

Jimmy Noserve not know stuff like dat. He never be in
military serving his country. Jimmy "serve country in
different ways," the 'different' very, very undefined.

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.

Tsk, from the 80s and later? :-)

Military has used all kinds of comms spectra/modes from
1980 onwards, mostly microwave...comm sats, troposcatter
(both microwave, work right through solar flares) and HF
which is delayed only a few hours on CERTAIN HF routes.
HF radios with ALE (Automatic Link Establishment, not
the drink).

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

The only "deep seated insecurity" I have is the folding
chairs on the patio. The webbing is damaged by 25-30
years of solar radiation. Seat oneself in them now and
there is a great deal of "deep seated (to the floor)
insecurity." :-)

Must decide whether to get webbed ones or solid
plastic replacements. Still have the homebuilt
swing sofa out there.


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.

"Accusating?" :-)

I was not "accusating" the ARRL. I said their actions
were "grandfatherly" to a pair of cute six-year-olds. I
gave NO outright accusation if that's what your raging
character assassination words tried to say. :-)

FCC amateur radio regulations are written such that ANY
licensee, regardless of age, can operate (within bounds
of their license class) at any time. Says NOTHING about
"parental supervision" of six-year-olds or even nine-
year-old Extras.

Correct, legal operation of radios requires MATURITY of
RESPONSIBILITY. If you still think that 6 year olds and
9 year olds are MATURE, your head isn't on straight.

If nine-year-olds can become Extras, then what does that
say about the MATURITY level of other Extras? :-)

Tsk, tsk, still bitching about a Comment I made to the
FCC in January 1999? Seven years ago and you still
can't let go of it? Not a good mental picture of you,
Jimmy.


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?

What has THAT manufactured dispute of yours to do with
ANY radio?!?

Oh, you are homeless? (in Radnor, PA?)

Jimmy got no sense of LIVING on his own PROPERTY?

Jimmy and Davie only care about amateur morse code, ham
radio, and growing antennas...


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.

Maybe Davie can go stick a plastic shopping bag on his head?

Breathe deep with it on, Davie. Use your hands to
tap out morse code if you get in trouble. :-)

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

Ralphs, Vons, Albertsons chains all sell food made by
professional food growers and producers. AMATEURS
aren't wanted as growers/producers. Maybe at Tressieras
or Food4Less, but we don't go there.

BTW, quit trying to glean info on where the Burbank HRO
outlet is, it moved. You might tell Stevie the Imposter.
It isn't across the street from the Ralphs market where
we shop for food.


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

Please don't go there...

You have a repugnance to seeing naked human beings, Jimmy?

Oh, yes, you are unmarried, right?


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.

The code test issue was never about me or "whether or not
I get a license." That is in your weird, manufacture-the-
worst-personal-assassination scenarios, Jimmy and Davie.

Long ago and several times since then I've said that my
actions are for ending the US manual morse code test for
an amateur radio license. There is NO "personal" motive
in that...you are confusing PERSISTENCE with 'personal.'

You two need to take a look at what YOUR personal motives
are in taking it so hard about those of us who seek
removal of the code test. Several possibilities exist
the

1. Either of you (or both) are just Code Bigots,
bigots always approving of actions of similar
bigotry in others.

2. Either of you (or both) are control freaks determined
to make all obey YOUR commands.

3. Neither of you, despite claims otherwise, understand
that manual morse code is a dead or dying mode in
ALL radio services; there is NO need to keep the
manual morse test to provide a "pool" of trained
morsemen for the national interest.

4. Either of you (or both) are scared that removal of
the code test will end your bragging rights, of
self-defined "importance" of rank-title-status-
privilege based largely on morsemanship.

5. Either of you (or both) are elitist snobs who have
the "deep insecurity" of NEEDING rank-status-title
to make you appear "better" than others.

Either of you (or both) fit one of those 5 things above,
possibly several of them. Irrelevant and a detail as to
which but your actions DO show fitting at least one of
them. Both of you have to understand that there are a
great number of other citizens who also wish the code
test removal. Both of you have to understand that such
a position is NOT some idiotic moral imperfection but
rather a reasonable opinion based on the advancement of
technology of all radio by this first decade of the new
millennium. Try to keep up. Unless it is too hard for
you...

wrote:
From: on Mon, Sep 4 2006 7:40 pm
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Sun, Sep 3 2006 1:49 pm

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.

"Incentive licensing" went into effect in the late 1960s. There were
six classes of license prior to "incentive licensing".

Clever, casually omitting the period between the "mid-1970s"
up to 1991 and the creation of the no-code Technician class.

That wasn't the time period under discussion. Incentive licensing was
in effect then.

The incentive licening changes of 1967 to 1969 did not create any new
license classes.

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

Sweetums, do NOT go into your smokescreening by diversion
routine again. That's SO transparent.

You don't really know what caused the 1951 restructuring, do you, Len?

I didn't think so.

Tsk. M. Superior at it again. :-)

You don't know, do you, Len? Or maybe you do know, but don't want to
admit it, because doing so would show the errors in your anti-ARRL
rants.

In 1951 I was graduating from Senior High School, coming up
on Draft eligibility and the Korean War was going hot and
heavy in northeast Asia. I went to work full-time as an
illustrator to get enough money to attend a good art school.
A radio hobby was way low on my priority list then. [I would
voluntarily enlist in the US Army in early 1952]

Bully for you, Len. What does that have to do with your mistakes and
ignorance?

By the time I was graduating from high school, I'd already had an
Amateur Extra class license for two years and had been a licensed radio
amateur for almost five years. Then I went to EE school. Graduated in
four years, having worked all the way through those years.

The war in those days was in Southeast Asia. Some people my age went,
others did not.

But it's not really about me, Len. Whether I was around in 1951 or not
has no effect on the non-ARRL groups that influenced FCC back then.

The fact is that you simply don't know much about amateur radio
history, and what you do know is full of errors and bias.

Where was Jimmy in 1951? Did he exist? No.

So what? Can a person only talk about things that happened during their
lifetime? You rant on and on about what Maxim and ARRL did, years
before *you* existed.

The difference is that you repeatedly get the facts wrong.

----

Len, you should work on improving your Morse Code skills.