Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 10:54:45 -0400, "Dee Flint"
spake thusly:


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
et...
Dee Flint wrote:
The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders appear to
want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience, or
understanding of the requirements.

Speaking as a ham licensed for 50+ years, I would say a
lot of the divisiveness stems from coded hams trying to
substitute Morse code skill for technical knowledge and
intelligence.

Ham#1: "I've got a PhD in RF Engineering."

Ham#2: "Who cares, I flunked out of high school but
I can do 40 wpm at Morse code. So there!"

Eliminate the code requirement and triple the difficulty
of the technical exams. Problem solved.

Nope, won't solve the problem.

The solution is to accept people as true hams that passed the exams existing
at the time they were licensed. PERIOD!!

The solution is to accept the people who are licensed, regardless of
weather or not you agree with the test method.

My dad got his drivers license back in 1943 with NO test at all! They
just asked him "Are you blind?" He said "No" and the response was
"That will be $1 please".

I got my license in 1978 and I had to take driver training and pass 2
tests. According to some of the pro-code logic here, I should walk up
to him and tell him that he is not a real driver and that I am better
at driving than him. That would go over like a lead balloon.

Mark Morgan is a retard
 

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 17:30:27 -0400, "Lloyd Davies Slappa"
wrote:


and remains one no matter whose id is being stolen
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

Get back to being led around by Lloyd Davies, you clueless retard. You have
to be the easiest play on the net.

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:47:14 -0400, "Dee Flint"
spake thusly:


"Opus-" wrote in message
.. .

[snip]

Sorry, but I can say for an absolute fact that your 're wrong. It had
kept me out of ham radio and I know exactly what kind of person that I
am. And before the obligatory "lazy" word is trotted out, I have to
work for the pay cheque that buys the radio, pays the rent for the
building that the radio is in and pays for the tower that is in the
back yard. I have to work extra to pay MORE for a place where I am
allowed a tower, as opposed to less expensive digs.

Honestly, I can't believe how some pro-coders look down on no-coders
with such contempt. I was once a member of a "live steam" model
railroad club. These were larger model steam trains that ran with real
steam instead of electric power. They could be run with either propane
or coal, depending on the individual. The guys who built their
locomotives from scratch NEVER looked down on the guys who bought
theirs from a classified ad. The guys burning coal did NOT call the
propane guys "lazy". We all enjoyed a fine hobby and club meetings
were always good fun and most informative. It was great for a
mechanic, like myself, to rub shoulders with experienced retired
machinists who built these locomotives. At one of our "open houses",
which were located outdoors at the club track, my daughter took her
first steps.

Isn't ham radio supposed to be like that? Is there no camaraderie?

Yes ham radio is supposed to be camaraderie. People are supposed to help
each other. The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders
appear to want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience, or
understanding of the requirements. In addition, most of us have experienced
people who said they could not learn code but upon questioning find that
they did not use a good training method and did not train correctly. Yet
when they decided they were tired of waiting did learn it and got their
upgrade. Then finding out how useful it was in ham pursuits were glad that
they had done it.

That does NOT justify the snot-nosed attitude.

So far of each of the reasons that people put forth as to why they can't
learn it have been disproven by the example of other people with the same
problem having gone ahead and done it. The 5wpm level is obtainable
although some of the problem do make faster speeds a problem (constant
tinnitus may be a severe problem at 20 wpm for example). My ex-OM had 70%
hearing loss in both ears and severe tinnitus. He passed the 5wpm. I know
people with dyslexia who have passed. The blind have passed. Even the deaf
have passed using flashing lights or vibrating pads.

Bravo for them. But that does not explain why some pro-coders are such
snot-rags.

Do you have competitions in your model railroading activity? If you enter
that competition, you all have to follow the published rules with no
exceptions. If it is a competition for the "homebrewers", then those who
don't do so can enjoy viewing them but they cannot enter into the
competition.

No competitions, just a bunch of guys who like live steam model
trains. The club did not exist for that.

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 21:39:24 GMT, Opus- spake thusly:

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 10:54:45 -0400, "Dee Flint"
spake thusly:


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. net...
Dee Flint wrote:
The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders appear to
want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience, or
understanding of the requirements.

Speaking as a ham licensed for 50+ years, I would say a
lot of the divisiveness stems from coded hams trying to
substitute Morse code skill for technical knowledge and
intelligence.

Ham#1: "I've got a PhD in RF Engineering."

Ham#2: "Who cares, I flunked out of high school but
I can do 40 wpm at Morse code. So there!"

Eliminate the code requirement and triple the difficulty
of the technical exams. Problem solved.

Nope, won't solve the problem.

The solution is to accept people as true hams that passed the exams existing
at the time they were licensed. PERIOD!!

The solution is to accept the people who are licensed, regardless of
weather or not you agree with the test method.

My dad got his drivers license back in 1943 with NO test at all! They
just asked him "Are you blind?" He said "No" and the response was
"That will be $1 please".

I got my license in 1978 and I had to take driver training and pass 2
tests. According to some of the pro-code logic here, I should walk up
to him and tell him that he is not a real driver and that I am better
at driving than him. That would go over like a lead balloon.

I forgot to mention that my dad has had a perfect driving record, not
one ticket in 63 years. [yes, I did ask him] As for me, I have been
known to fracture a traffic law or two. I ended up paying a hefty
price for that but my record is clean now.

So, you see, lack of testing did not make my dad a bad driver while
training and testing did not make me a good driver [at least not back
in my teen years]. But then, I am a mechanic and I can rebuild a
transmission in my back yard and you're not a real driver if you
can't.

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of hamradio?
 

Opus- wrote:
... that does not explain why some pro-coders are such snot-rags.

It is usually because they don't have a clue technically
and base their entire level of self esteem on skill in an
obsolete mode. Kicking out all the people with an IQ of
less than 110 out of amateur radio would probably solve
the whole problem.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

Opus- wrote in
:

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 14:23:50 -0400, Dave spake
thusly:

What lie??

It's not a lie that code has kept good people out of ham radio.


Whaaaaaaaaa!

SC

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

"Slow Code" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Opus- wrote in
:

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 14:23:50 -0400, Dave spake
thusly:

What lie??

It's not a lie that code has kept good people out of ham radio.


Whaaaaaaaaa!

SC

It is obvious that it hasn't kept unpleasant people out of Amateur Radio..

Harold
KD5SAK

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

"Opus-" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 10:54:45 -0400, "Dee Flint"
spake thusly:


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. net...
Dee Flint wrote:
The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders appear to
want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience, or
understanding of the requirements.

Speaking as a ham licensed for 50+ years, I would say a
lot of the divisiveness stems from coded hams trying to
substitute Morse code skill for technical knowledge and
intelligence.

Ham#1: "I've got a PhD in RF Engineering."

Ham#2: "Who cares, I flunked out of high school but
I can do 40 wpm at Morse code. So there!"

Eliminate the code requirement and triple the difficulty
of the technical exams. Problem solved.

Nope, won't solve the problem.

The solution is to accept people as true hams that passed the exams
existing
at the time they were licensed. PERIOD!!

The solution is to accept the people who are licensed, regardless of
weather or not you agree with the test method.


Which is exactly what I said.

My dad got his drivers license back in 1943 with NO test at all! They
just asked him "Are you blind?" He said "No" and the response was
"That will be $1 please".

I got my license in 1978 and I had to take driver training and pass 2
tests. According to some of the pro-code logic here, I should walk up
to him and tell him that he is not a real driver and that I am better
at driving than him. That would go over like a lead balloon.

Not according to my logic. He met the requirements of the time and you have
met the requirements of yours.

Dee

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

"Opus-" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:47:14 -0400, "Dee Flint"
spake thusly:


"Opus-" wrote in message
. ..

[snip]

Sorry, but I can say for an absolute fact that your 're wrong. It had
kept me out of ham radio and I know exactly what kind of person that I
am. And before the obligatory "lazy" word is trotted out, I have to
work for the pay cheque that buys the radio, pays the rent for the
building that the radio is in and pays for the tower that is in the
back yard. I have to work extra to pay MORE for a place where I am
allowed a tower, as opposed to less expensive digs.

Honestly, I can't believe how some pro-coders look down on no-coders
with such contempt. I was once a member of a "live steam" model
railroad club. These were larger model steam trains that ran with real
steam instead of electric power. They could be run with either propane
or coal, depending on the individual. The guys who built their
locomotives from scratch NEVER looked down on the guys who bought
theirs from a classified ad. The guys burning coal did NOT call the
propane guys "lazy". We all enjoyed a fine hobby and club meetings
were always good fun and most informative. It was great for a
mechanic, like myself, to rub shoulders with experienced retired
machinists who built these locomotives. At one of our "open houses",
which were located outdoors at the club track, my daughter took her
first steps.

Isn't ham radio supposed to be like that? Is there no camaraderie?

Yes ham radio is supposed to be camaraderie. People are supposed to help
each other. The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders
appear to want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience,
or
understanding of the requirements. In addition, most of us have
experienced
people who said they could not learn code but upon questioning find that
they did not use a good training method and did not train correctly. Yet
when they decided they were tired of waiting did learn it and got their
upgrade. Then finding out how useful it was in ham pursuits were glad
that
they had done it.

That does NOT justify the snot-nosed attitude.

No it doesn't but there are a lot of "better than thou" types in all areas
of human endeavor. Ignore them or you'll drive yourself nuts.


So far of each of the reasons that people put forth as to why they can't
learn it have been disproven by the example of other people with the same
problem having gone ahead and done it. The 5wpm level is obtainable
although some of the problem do make faster speeds a problem (constant
tinnitus may be a severe problem at 20 wpm for example). My ex-OM had 70%
hearing loss in both ears and severe tinnitus. He passed the 5wpm. I
know
people with dyslexia who have passed. The blind have passed. Even the
deaf
have passed using flashing lights or vibrating pads.

Bravo for them. But that does not explain why some pro-coders are such
snot-rags.


As I said, human nature has a lot of negative aspects no matter what the
activity. All one can do is ignore it and do their personal best.

Do you have competitions in your model railroading activity? If you enter
that competition, you all have to follow the published rules with no
exceptions. If it is a competition for the "homebrewers", then those who
don't do so can enjoy viewing them but they cannot enter into the
competition.

No competitions, just a bunch of guys who like live steam model
trains. The club did not exist for that.

Still my point is that when there are rules, one is obliged to follow them
whether they like them or not.

Dee, N8UZE

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Opus- wrote:
... that does not explain why some pro-coders are such snot-rags.

It is usually because they don't have a clue technically
and base their entire level of self esteem on skill in an
obsolete mode. Kicking out all the people with an IQ of
less than 110 out of amateur radio would probably solve
the whole problem.

Not hardly. A couple of the most obnoxious people I know rate as geniuses
on IQ tests. Brain power and social graces are independent attributes.

Dee, N8UZE