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

Or just lazy people out?

Sc

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

Off the wall comment.
I learned code in 1956 and haven't had to use it yet.
Al

"Slow Code" wrote in message
link.net...

Or just lazy people out?

Sc

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

Allan9 wrote:
Off the wall comment.
I learned code in 1956 and haven't had to use it yet.
Al

I learned in 30 years later. Used it 1.5 times. Not worth the effort.

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

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

The Morse test neither helps nor hinders... It is simply another
barrier to be overcome by the motivated... If it weren't for such
barriers we would all have certificates as neurosurgeons...
If the feds want to drop CW, fine by me... If you want to discuss it
look for me on the bottom end of 160 and 80...

denny / k8do

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

"Allan9" wrote in
:

Off the wall comment.
I learned code in 1956 and haven't had to use it yet.
Al


You probably don't remember your callsign either, or do you prefer using a CB
handle?

SC

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

"Slow Code" wrote in message
. net...
"Allan9" wrote in
:

Off the wall comment.
I learned code in 1956 and haven't had to use it yet.
Al


You probably don't remember your callsign either, or do you prefer using a
CB
handle?

SC

I learned sufficient code to gain my upgrade to General in 2005 and passed
the written test the same evening. I have no interest in using code further.
I may change my mind on that later, but given my advanced years, the point
may be moot. My primary interest as a Ham is in fiddling with antennas, only
one of the 11 antennas scattered about my 7 acres was purchased. There are 5
at my detached shop/shack and 6 more back at the house to use when I desire
air conditioning while pursuing my hobby. Three of these are indoor dipoles
for use when bad weather threatens, as it often does here in southern
Oklahoma. I hope all you other gentlemen continue to enjoy the access to the
Amateur Bands allowed by what ever license class you possess.

Harold
KD5SAK

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

I'll agree with you 100%. I have a Tech license and enjoy the hobby very
much. I plan on upgrading to General once the code issue is settled. I have
always heard that "If you don't use it, you lose it". I have no interest in
the code so why should I not be allowed to enjoy Ham radio. BTW, my CB
license years back was KLW4194..


"kd5sak" wrote in message
.. .

"Slow Code" wrote in message
. net...
"Allan9" wrote in
:

Off the wall comment.
I learned code in 1956 and haven't had to use it yet.
Al


You probably don't remember your callsign either, or do you prefer using
a CB
handle?

SC

I learned sufficient code to gain my upgrade to General in 2005 and passed
the written test the same evening. I have no interest in using code
further. I may change my mind on that later, but given my advanced years,
the point may be moot. My primary interest as a Ham is in fiddling with
antennas, only one of the 11 antennas scattered about my 7 acres was
purchased. There are 5 at my detached shop/shack and 6 more back at the
house to use when I desire air conditioning while pursuing my hobby.
Three of these are indoor dipoles for use when bad weather threatens, as
it often does here in southern Oklahoma. I hope all you other gentlemen
continue to enjoy the access to the Amateur Bands allowed by what ever
license class you possess.

Harold
KD5SAK

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

Slow Code wrote:
Or just lazy people out?

Sc

I wish it would keep all you "non antenna related" goofballs
out of the antenna newsgroup. Why don't you all get some
kind of life on a group that pertains to stuff like that. IE: misc..
MK

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

"ken foshee" wrote in
:

I'll agree with you 100%. I have a Tech license and enjoy the hobby very
much. I plan on upgrading to General once the code issue is settled. I
have always heard that "If you don't use it, you lose it". I have no
interest in the code so why should I not be allowed to enjoy Ham radio.
BTW, my CB license years back was KLW4194..


That's why you'll never be an asset to the ham radio service. You're too
lazy to be an asset.

SC

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

On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 23:25:13 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

"ken foshee" wrote in
:

I'll agree with you 100%. I have a Tech license and enjoy the hobby very
much. I plan on upgrading to General once the code issue is settled. I
have always heard that "If you don't use it, you lose it". I have no
interest in the code so why should I not be allowed to enjoy Ham radio.
BTW, my CB license years back was KLW4194..


That's why you'll never be an asset to the ham radio service. You're too
lazy to be an asset.

Just what makes a person an "asset to the ham radio service"? That
sounds just as stupid as an "asset to the telephone service". Like it
or not, ham radio is just a means of communication that has world-wide
reach. Listen up, the "ham radio service" isn't some illustrious
organization. It's just a means for people around to world to chat
live. It can have great value in some emergencies, but most of it's
use is idle chatter.

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

wrote:
I wish it would keep all you "non antenna related" goofballs
out of the antenna newsgroup. Why don't you all get some
kind of life on a group that pertains to stuff like that. IE: misc..

I believe that r.r.a.policy was created to keep such
off of r.r.a.misc
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

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

Denny wrote:

The Morse test neither helps nor hinders...

You are uninformed and only half-right. It does not help, it hinders.

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

Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
I wish it would keep all you "non antenna related" goofballs
out of the antenna newsgroup. Why don't you all get some
kind of life on a group that pertains to stuff like that. IE: misc..

I believe that r.r.a.policy was created to keep such
off of r.r.a.misc
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

I believe that you are correct.

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

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

On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 23:50:31 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

wrote in
oups.com:


Denny wrote:

The Morse test neither helps nor hinders...

You are uninformed and only half-right. It does not help, it hinders.



Yes, it hinders.

It keeps out the stupid and lazy. Individuals that really don't what to be
hams if it requires knowledge and skill to get a license.

BULL****! Code is NOT KNOWLEDGE!!! I have NO problem learning
technical info that helps me use the radio properly. Code is not
needed to do that.

Get off your high-horse already.

Make them stay on CB and FRS. They're not an asset to the service.

CB and FRS don't have the range.

And neither are you.

Who the **** are YOU to make such a statement? You snot nosed,
arrogant PRICK! You do NOT know the kind of person that I am!! Wake up
and smell the cappuccino! Code is obsolete! Knowing code does NOTHING
to make somebody an "asset to the service". And, could you explain
what makes a person an "asset to the service"?

What fantasy do you hold that you would believe that your tiny-fisted
tantrums would have more weight than that of a leprous desert rat,
spinning rabidly in a circle, waiting for the bite of the snake?

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

Who the **** are YOU to make such a statement? You snot nosed,
arrogant PRICK! You do NOT know the kind of person that I am!! Wake up
and smell the cappuccino! Code is obsolete! Knowing code does NOTHING
to make somebody an "asset to the service". And, could you explain
what makes a person an "asset to the service"?

Jeez,
Chill out, eh?

What fantasy do you hold that you would believe that your tiny-fisted
tantrums would have more weight than that of a leprous desert rat,
spinning rabidly in a circle, waiting for the bite of the snake?


Waxing poetic now?

Yes it's obsolete. Yes, it's fun.

Should it be used to qualify? Let the FCC decide (soon).

If it is eliminated, will that change the "Service"? Maybe.

Will CW disappear? Probably not.
Historically, it defined ham radio, so it has a special place in the
hearts of very many hams. It's natural that they sort of cling to it.

Will CW's elimination be the end of ham radio? Of course not.
Ham radio will cease when all the hams die off. New hams are needed,
with or without code.

My personal hope is that a significant minority of these new hams will
take up CW and learn to enjoy this mode. It truly is a fun mode. I
hope people will WANT to learn it.

Compulsory things are seldom welcome,,,some are necessary. Is CW a good
requirement for ham radio? I guess it has probably outlived its day.

A requirement related to other digital modes would make a good
replacement. True?

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

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:19:27 -0400, jawod spake
thusly:




Who the **** are YOU to make such a statement? You snot nosed,
arrogant PRICK! You do NOT know the kind of person that I am!! Wake up
and smell the cappuccino! Code is obsolete! Knowing code does NOTHING
to make somebody an "asset to the service". And, could you explain
what makes a person an "asset to the service"?

Jeez,
Chill out, eh?

Sorry, but I get upset with people who make statements that are easily
taken as personal insults.

What fantasy do you hold that you would believe that your tiny-fisted
tantrums would have more weight than that of a leprous desert rat,
spinning rabidly in a circle, waiting for the bite of the snake?


Waxing poetic now?

Yes it's obsolete. Yes, it's fun.

I found it to be cold and impersonal.

Should it be used to qualify? Let the FCC decide (soon).

Here in Canada, they already have. I believe the FCC will soon.

If it is eliminated, will that change the "Service"? Maybe.

Probably not.

Will CW disappear? Probably not.
Historically, it defined ham radio, so it has a special place in the
hearts of very many hams. It's natural that they sort of cling to it.

Let them cling, they are free to do so.

Will CW's elimination be the end of ham radio? Of course not.
Ham radio will cease when all the hams die off. New hams are needed,
with or without code.

I totally agree.

My personal hope is that a significant minority of these new hams will
take up CW and learn to enjoy this mode. It truly is a fun mode. I
hope people will WANT to learn it.

I always found it to be boring.

Compulsory things are seldom welcome,,,some are necessary. Is CW a good
requirement for ham radio? I guess it has probably outlived its day.

A requirement related to other digital modes would make a good
replacement. True?

I completely agree. If you want to filter out the less serious, then
use a relevant method. Here in Canada, in order to get a no-code
licence, you must get at least 80% on the technical. And technical
prowess will always be important regardless of the mode of
communication.

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

Opus- wrote:
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:19:27 -0400, jawod spake
thusly:

Who the **** are YOU to make such a statement? You snot nosed,
arrogant PRICK! You do NOT know the kind of person that I am!! Wake up
and smell the cappuccino! Code is obsolete! Knowing code does NOTHING
to make somebody an "asset to the service". And, could you explain
what makes a person an "asset to the service"?

Jeez,
Chill out, eh?

Sorry, but I get upset with people who make statements that are easily
taken as personal insults.

"Stuff happens."

BTW, this "Jawod" signed a message on rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
as "AB8O." I found a blank on that call sign at QRZ.


Yes it's obsolete. Yes, it's fun.

I found it to be cold and impersonal.

I agree. Manual radiotelegraphy has NONE of the body language
or tone of voice or much of anything that is normal in everyday
person-to-person contacts. Using this monotonic form of
very early radio allows any user to be anything they want with
no real references to anything but the ability to send telegraphy.


Should it be used to qualify? Let the FCC decide (soon).

Here in Canada, they already have. I believe the FCC will soon.

If it is eliminated, will that change the "Service"? Maybe.

Probably not.

Heh heh...if the test is eliminated the expressed outrage,
anguish, and horror will be a horrendous wail never to be
silenced until the last code key is pried from cold, dead
fingers! :-)


Will CW disappear? Probably not.
Historically, it defined ham radio, so it has a special place in the
hearts of very many hams. It's natural that they sort of cling to it.

Let them cling, they are free to do so.

I'd say "clog" as in cholesterol clogging those "hearts."

"Jawod" uses "many" AS IF it were quantitative. Not so much
in the USA now. The US Technician class licensees now
number about 49% of all, twice as large a number as the
General class. I doubt they want to hear such facts.


Will CW's elimination be the end of ham radio? Of course not.
Ham radio will cease when all the hams die off. New hams are needed,
with or without code.

I totally agree.

In the USA the number of newcomers is not able to keep pace
with the expirations of licensees. That trend has been evident
for more than a year. [see www.hamdata.com] The majority of
new licensees are Technician class. Novice class, the
supposed traditional "beginner" license has been expiring at a
steady rate for years before the US changes in 2000.


My personal hope is that a significant minority of these new hams will
take up CW and learn to enjoy this mode. It truly is a fun mode. I
hope people will WANT to learn it.

I always found it to be boring.

"Jawod" and other morsemen think that all will "like" what they
like. They really don't understand what other citizens want.


Compulsory things are seldom welcome,,,some are necessary. Is CW a good
requirement for ham radio? I guess it has probably outlived its day.

A requirement related to other digital modes would make a good
replacement. True?

I completely agree. If you want to filter out the less serious, then
use a relevant method. Here in Canada, in order to get a no-code
licence, you must get at least 80% on the technical. And technical
prowess will always be important regardless of the mode of
communication.

That sounds fair. In general I've approved what Industry Canada
does on communications regulations...a bit more than what the
FCC does for US civil radio services.

Gee...What A Coincidence, Lennie...
 

wrote:
Opus- wrote:
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:19:27 -0400, jawod spake
thusly:

Who the #### are YOU to make such a statement? You snot nosed,
arrogant #####! You do NOT know the kind of person that I am!! Wake up
and smell the cappuccino! Code is obsolete! Knowing code does NOTHING
to make somebody an "asset to the service". And, could you explain
what makes a person an "asset to the service"?

Jeez,
Chill out, eh?

Sorry, but I get upset with people who make statements that are easily
taken as personal insults.

"Stuff happens."

BTW, this "Jawod" signed a message on rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
as "AB8O." I found a blank on that call sign at QRZ.

What a coincidence...I used QRZ's database search engine and found
a blank when I entered "Leonard H. Anderson".

Funny, eh...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ

Gee...What A Coincidence, Lennie...
 

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:

Opus- wrote:

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:19:27 -0400, jawod spake
thusly:


Who the #### are YOU to make such a statement? You snot nosed,
arrogant #####! You do NOT know the kind of person that I am!! Wake up
and smell the cappuccino! Code is obsolete! Knowing code does NOTHING
to make somebody an "asset to the service". And, could you explain
what makes a person an "asset to the service"?


Jeez,
Chill out, eh?

Sorry, but I get upset with people who make statements that are easily
taken as personal insults.

"Stuff happens."

BTW, this "Jawod" signed a message on rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
as "AB8O." I found a blank on that call sign at QRZ.


What a coincidence...I used QRZ's database search engine and found
a blank when I entered "Leonard H. Anderson".

Funny, eh...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ


I am not "Leonard H. Anderson"

Gee...What A Coincidence, Lennie...
 

jawod wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:

BTW, this "Jawod" signed a message on rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
as "AB8O." I found a blank on that call sign at QRZ.

What a coincidence...I used QRZ's database search engine and found
a blank when I entered "Leonard H. Anderson".

Funny, eh...?!?!

I am not "Leonard H. Anderson"

I know you're not.

I was jabbing Lennie in the ribs about supposedly not finding
someone (you?) under a certain call when HE'S not in there either.
Never has been.

Sorry for the confusion.

Steve, K4YZ

Gee... Robesin wastes system resources on futile QRZ searches...
 

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
Opus- wrote:
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:19:27 -0400, jawod spake
thusly:

Who the #### are YOU to make such a statement? You snot nosed,
arrogant #####! You do NOT know the kind of person that I am!! Wake up
and smell the cappuccino! Code is obsolete! Knowing code does NOTHING
to make somebody an "asset to the service". And, could you explain
what makes a person an "asset to the service"?

Jeez,
Chill out, eh?

Sorry, but I get upset with people who make statements that are easily
taken as personal insults.

"Stuff happens."

BTW, this "Jawod" signed a message on rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
as "AB8O." I found a blank on that call sign at QRZ.

What a coincidence...I used QRZ's database search engine and found
a blank when I entered "Leonard H. Anderson".

Funny, eh...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ

Funny? No.

Stupid? Yes.

I guess the only excercise you ever get is your exercise in futility.
Even Len will tell you that he's not a ham, but you knew that already.

Gee...What A Coincidence, Lennie...
 

K4YZ wrote:
jawod wrote:

K4YZ wrote:

wrote:


BTW, this "Jawod" signed a message on rec.radio.amateur.homebrew
as "AB8O." I found a blank on that call sign at QRZ.

What a coincidence...I used QRZ's database search engine and found
a blank when I entered "Leonard H. Anderson".

Funny, eh...?!?!

I am not "Leonard H. Anderson"


I know you're not.

I was jabbing Lennie in the ribs about supposedly not finding
someone (you?) under a certain call when HE'S not in there either.
Never has been.

Sorry for the confusion.

Steve, K4YZ

I'm not in hiding.

No worries.

73,

John
AB8O

Gee... Robesin wastes system resources on futile QRZ searches...
 

From: on Sat, Sep 23 2006 1:51 pm

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
Opus- wrote:
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:19:27 -0400, jawod spake


What a coincidence...I used QRZ's database search engine and found
a blank when I entered "Leonard H. Anderson".

Funny, eh...?!?!

Funny? No.

Stupid? Yes.

I guess the only excercise you ever get is your exercise in futility.
Even Len will tell you that he's not a ham, but you knew that already.

The USMC imposter feels compelled to vent hate against
all who disbelieve him. shrug Never mind that he has
NEVER made available ANY third-party proof of his alleged
18-year USMC career. He feels that everyone "must"
believe his words and never mind any proof.

Back in 1998-1999 on FCC 98-143 ("Reconstruction NPRM)
there DID exist a licensed radio amateur named Leonard
H. Anderson...but his mailing address was in Montana,
not California where I've been since 1956.

When I checked QRZ under AB8O, the bio page was there but
all response data had been deleted. Why I have no idea.
One will have to ask John (AB8O, "Jawod") about that.

Out of curiosity last year ( two years ago?) I did a
Search for my name. It is somewhat common, surname
certainly, given name slightly. Interesting results:

A USMC Major (a real one) with the Navy's Blue Angels
was named Leonard Anderson. :-) Think about that:
USMC, a real commissioned officer, and good enough to
fly as part of the Blue Angels! Kind of beats this
"CAP Captain" posing in a used poopy suit with snot on
his moustache. Poor CAP man is only single-engine
rated yet loved to say he was "pilot in command!" :-)

There was a black actor in an entertainment registry
named Leonard Anderson. Buff, hunky guy maybe 30.
There was a white music teacher named Leonard Anderson,
maybe coming up on 50, not a "hunk" but appreciated by
his school and community.

A quick name search at QRZ this morning turns up three
licensed US radio amateurs named Leonard Anderson, but
none of them have the same middle initial.

Now all that is really irrelevant except to members
of the morseketeers in here, namely Heil. In order not
to offend his apparent sensibilities, one MUST have a
valid amateur radio license in order to talk about
obtaining an amateur radio license! That is to avoid
"telling him what to do!" :-)

NB: NO ONE can tell Heil what to do. He tells all
others what to do. :-)

This is all so hilarious! :-)

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

wrote:
On 22 Sep 2006 20:46:15 -0700, "
wrote:


Opus- wrote:

If it is eliminated, will that change the "Service"? Maybe.

Probably not.

Heh heh...if the test is eliminated the expressed outrage,
anguish, and horror will be a horrendous wail never to be
silenced until the last code key is pried from cold, dead
fingers! :-)

well I am hopeing some of them will be silenced chlucting at their
hearts when they read the R&O

Careful, Mark, we can't say such things due to "threats" against
the pro-coders. :-) They are muy touchy about threats against
Them.


That sounds fair. In general I've approved what Industry Canada
does on communications regulations...a bit more than what the
FCC does for US civil radio services.

indeed if they had been willing say 10 years ago to go along with what
Canada has now (which was proposed by members of NCI) this would be
over long since

Well, Mark, it is like this: Some of those who have the cool
HOBBY of amateur radio think they are "servicemen" in the
"service of their country" for having that hobby. We can't say
nasty to them because that is not "nice." They rank
themselves as equivalent to soldiers, sailors, and airmen.

They want the ILLUSION that they are doing great and
meritorious SERVICE. Especially the morseketeers. That is
important to them. The illusion, that is. Screw the reality
part of it, that doesn't apply to them (they think).

Never mind that US amateur radio licensee numbers are holding
static with a slight downturn over the past three years. Oldsters
are signing off permanently and newcomers are going in through
the no-code-test Technician class. Most of the latter are STAYING
no-code. [General Of The Amateurs Miccolis says otherwise but
then he loves cooking the stats to suit his own taste]

As time goes on with the code test gone, the amateur bands
WILL change. But, it will be slow since humans are living longer
now. Human attrition will, nonetheless, happen. Oldsters don't
want to think about that but it is inevitable to all of us. The
oldsters want to preserve the illusion that they are still "young,"
believing in the old, antiquated ways they were impressed with.
Why some even believe they are a "service to the country" by
having that hobby.

There's no argument with those ancient morseketeers, certainly
no "discussion." To them, all must be preserved. [read
mummified] Ptui.

Gee... Robesin wastes system resources on futile QRZ searches...
 

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

Opus- wrote in
:

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:19:27 -0400, jawod spake
thusly:




Who the **** are YOU to make such a statement? You snot nosed,
arrogant PRICK! You do NOT know the kind of person that I am!! Wake up
and smell the cappuccino! Code is obsolete! Knowing code does NOTHING
to make somebody an "asset to the service". And, could you explain
what makes a person an "asset to the service"?

Jeez,
Chill out, eh?

Sorry, but I get upset with people who make statements that are easily
taken as personal insults.


SNIP

It's hilarious watching how violent CB'er hams get. ROFL.

How's your Code practice coming along?

SC

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

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 23:59:03 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

Opus- wrote in
:

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 08:19:27 -0400, jawod spake
thusly:




Who the **** are YOU to make such a statement? You snot nosed,
arrogant PRICK! You do NOT know the kind of person that I am!! Wake up
and smell the cappuccino! Code is obsolete! Knowing code does NOTHING
to make somebody an "asset to the service". And, could you explain
what makes a person an "asset to the service"?

Jeez,
Chill out, eh?

Sorry, but I get upset with people who make statements that are easily
taken as personal insults.


SNIP

It's hilarious watching how violent CB'er hams get. ROFL.

****, but you're stupid. Where is the violence? But that is typical of
bigots. Always deflecting, never answering..usually because they lack
the ability.

How's your Code practice coming along?

I'm not, nor will I ever. If code means associating with bigots like
you, then I want no part of it. Much rather talk to civilized people.

KB9RQZ Says Learning Code is EASY!
 

wrote:

More Morkie Mularkie

Why does Morkie insist that I am lying about HIS insistance that
Learning Code is EASY...?!?!?

I'm not.

Here's YOUR words AGAIN, Morkie:

Message-ID: .com

KB9RQZ Said: "oh learning code is easy"

There you have it, folks! Morkie says learning code is easy!

Quoted Word For Word!

Steve, K4YZ

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

Opus- wrote:

SNIPPED


I'm not, nor will I ever. If code means associating with bigots like
you, then I want no part of it. Much rather talk to civilized people.

Then we will gladly acknowledge that you desire to leave this NG.

We don't need the profanity, the attitude and the whimpering.

All in favor, say AYE! ...

KB9RQZ Says Learning Code is EASY!
 

K4YZ wrote.:
wrote:

More Morkie Mularkie

Why does Morkie insist that I am lying about HIS insistance that
Learning Code is EASY...?!?!?

I'm not.

Here's YOUR words AGAIN, Morkie:

Message-ID: .com

KB9RQZ Said: "oh learning code is easy"

There you have it, folks! Morkie says learning code is easy!

Quoted Word For Word!

Steve, K4YZ

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

Dave wrote in
:

Opus- wrote:

SNIPPED


I'm not, nor will I ever. If code means associating with bigots like
you, then I want no part of it. Much rather talk to civilized people.

Then we will gladly acknowledge that you desire to leave this NG.

We don't need the profanity, the attitude and the whimpering.

All in favor, say AYE! ...



Aye.

SC

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

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 08:43:52 -0400, Dave spake
thusly:

Opus- wrote:

SNIPPED


I'm not, nor will I ever. If code means associating with bigots like
you, then I want no part of it. Much rather talk to civilized people.

Then we will gladly acknowledge that you desire to leave this NG.

Are you saying that there are no civilized people in this newsgroup?
Talk about attitude.

We don't need the profanity, the attitude and the whimpering.

Then tell the pro-coders to quit insulting and labeling people.

All in favor, say AYE! ...

Nay.

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

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 23:15:45 GMT, Slow Code spake
thusly:

Dave wrote in
:

Opus- wrote:

SNIPPED


I'm not, nor will I ever. If code means associating with bigots like
you, then I want no part of it. Much rather talk to civilized people.

Then we will gladly acknowledge that you desire to leave this NG.

We don't need the profanity, the attitude and the whimpering.

All in favor, say AYE! ...



Aye.

What are YOU saying "aye" for? YOU'RE the bigot.

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

Made Extra in 1995 and had to do 20wpm. I did it and have NEVER used CW
since and have no intention to ever do so..even if "someone is dying!"
IMHO it is an outdated requirement and will/should be dropped altogether
very very soon....



"Nada Tapu" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 23:23:03 GMT, Slow Code wrote:


Or just lazy people out?

Sc

It certainly didn't keep me out, and I wasn't all that crazy about
learning it, either.

NT

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

Barry OGrady wrote in
:

On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 22:54:46 -0500, Nada Tapu wrote:

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 23:23:03 GMT, Slow Code wrote:


Or just lazy people out?

Sc

It certainly didn't keep me out, and I wasn't all that crazy about
learning it, either.

More to the point, are there more licensed amateurs since the code
requirement was removed years ago?


No, numbers are decreasing because ham radio has been dumbed down so
having a ham license isn't worth anything anymore and people are leaving.

SC

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

Slow Code wrote:
No, numbers are decreasing because ham radio has been dumbed down so
having a ham license isn't worth anything anymore and people are leaving.

Therefore, if the ARS required MENSA membership, there would
be more hams?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

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

wrote:
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 00:36:36 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

No, numbers are decreasing because ham radio has been dumbed down so
having a ham license isn't worth anything anymore and people are leaving.

no slow code the number are down because with Code testing looks so
stupid

Code testing is absurd. The government shouldn't be in the merit badge
business.

If you really need a merit badge to hang on the wall, listen to W1AW
during a qualifying run....

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

Cecil Moore wrote:
Slow Code wrote:

No, numbers are decreasing because ham radio has been dumbed down so
having a ham license isn't worth anything anymore and people are leaving.

Therefore, if the ARS required MENSA membership, there would
be more hams?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Guys don't have mensas. If they did, this would be called the "Women's
League of Coders."

;^)