[Former thread was "Is the code requirement keeping
good people out of ham radio?"]

From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm
wrote:

In other words, Len, you want to tell us what we should like and what
we should not like. What we should enjoy and what we should not enjoy.

You are in ERROR. I wasn't writing "other words." If I
wanted to write "other words," I would have written other
words.

My advocacy is to elimintate the code test for an FCC
amateur radio operators license.

Do you spend all your time TAKING TESTS?

If so, what have you done to require taking tests all the time?

If not, why are you so concerned about OTHERS taking code
tests?

If morse code radiotelegraphy is so wonderful, great, noble,
"saves lives [not really]," traditional-that-all-MUST-take
one, then what are you upset about? If it is that "good,"
then all will flock to it in great numbers.

NOT having a code test does NOT require ANYONE to "do"
something as in having to take a code test. They cannot
"do" something that isn't there to DO.

Are you upset that OTHERS who come later will not do as you
did? Why is what you HAD to do required of all OTHERS?

What is wrong with live and let live?

[Former thread was "Is the code requirement keeping
good people out of ham radio?"]

From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm
wrote:

In other words, Len, you want to tell us what we should like and what
we should not like. What we should enjoy and what we should not enjoy.

You are in ERROR. I wasn't writing "other words." If I
wanted to write "other words," I would have written other
words.

My advocacy is to elimintate the code test for an FCC
amateur radio operators license.

ELIMINATE. As in NOT having to do something.

A change of amateur radio regulations concerning the code test,
to ELIMINATE it so OTHERS don't have to DO it.

Yet you say I "tell others what to do." Why do you tell such
untruths? Why do you put your words over mine AS IF I wrote
them? Had I wanted "other words" written, I would have
written them.

How can anyone "DO" something that is not required to do?

Why are you telling ME what to do, think, write? Answer that.

What is wrong with live and let live?

[Former thread was "Is the code requirement keeping
good people out of ham radio?"]

From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm
wrote:

In other words, Len, you want to tell us what we should like and what
we should not like. What we should enjoy and what we should not enjoy.

You are in ERROR. I wasn't writing "other words." If I
wanted to write "other words," I would have written other
words.

My advocacy is to elimintate the code test for an FCC
amateur radio operators license.

Do you ENJOY taking code tests? Do you think others
"enjoy taking code tests?" No? Well why do you say
I "write in other words" when my advocacy is for NOT
doing something?

Why do YOU feel ALL should enjoy taking code tests?

Why do YOU think the FCC should keep on with code tests?
Or are you really telling all that only YOU can determine
what the FCC decides? Very strange, almost totalitarian.

Why do you wish to be "judge" on what I think, do, write?
Why do you wish to be "judge" on what OTHERS should think,
do, write? Are you a god? VERY totalitarian.

Do you consider yourself "above" all others that you can
tell OTHERS what to like, not like, enjoy, not enjoy?
Why is that?

What is wrong with live and let live?

[Former thread was "Is the code requirement keeping
good people out of ham radio?"]

From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm
wrote:

In other words, Len, you want to tell us what we should like and what
we should not like. What we should enjoy and what we should not enjoy.

You are in ERROR. I wasn't writing "other words." If I
wanted to write "other words," I would have written other
words.

My advocacy is to elimintate the code test for an FCC
amateur radio operators license.

Have I "told you" what bands to operate on, which mode
to use, when to use them? NO.

You have already taken a 20 word-per-minute code test. You
have achieved the OLD amateur extra rank with status and
privilege (all lobbied for by older amateurs who are
morsemen). Why are YOU telling OTHERS what to do?

Eliminating the code test will NOT require any newcomer to
"do" anything. No one can "do" something that isn't there
to do.

What is wrong with live and let live?

[Former thread was "Is the code requirement keeping
good people out of ham radio?"]

From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm
wrote:


In other words, Len, you want to tell us what we should like and what
we should not like. What we should enjoy and what we should not enjoy.

You are in ERROR. I wasn't writing "other words." If I
wanted to write "other words," I would have written other
words.

My advocacy is to elimintate the code test for an FCC
amateur radio operators license.

Are you against OTHERS having different likes and dislikes
than your own? You constantly demean and denigrate those
who wish to eliminate the code test...because you LIKE the
code test and insist that OTHERS who come later into amateur
radio MUST take one. Now that demonstrates that YOU are
accusatory and telling OTHERS what NOT to do. Why?

What is wrong with live and let live?

[Former thread was "Is the code requirement keeping
good people out of ham radio?"]

From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm
wrote:

In other words, Len, you want to tell us what we should like and what
we should not like. What we should enjoy and what we should not enjoy.

You are in ERROR. I wasn't writing "other words." If I
wanted to write "other words," I would have written other
words.

My advocacy is to elimintate the code test for an FCC
amateur radio operators license.

I have served my country in the US Army. You have NOT.
Yet you have often, sometimes repeatedly "told me what I
should have been doing, what my training was, what my
duties should have been ("fighting" far from where the
actual warfare was actively in progress which would have
meant I would have been court martialed for disobeying
orders I'd been given).

You have told me all sorts of things about the military
yet you were NOT trained by the military. You have NOT
served...but you say you "served in other ways." How?
By playing with your radios under a federal license in a
HOBBY activity? Do you think that airplane modelers
"serve their country" in aeronautical technology by
flying their R-C planes in parks?

wrote:
[Former thread was "Is the code requirement keeping
good people out of ham radio?"]

From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm
wrote:

In other words, Len, you want to tell us what we should like and what
we should not like. What we should enjoy and what we should not enjoy.

You are in ERROR. I wasn't writing "other words." If I
wanted to write "other words," I would have written other
words.

You might well have been better off to have chosen other words.

My advocacy is to elimintate the code test for an FCC
amateur radio operators license.

Your recent posts make lie of your statement. So does your spelling of
eliminate.

I have served my country in the US Army. You have NOT.

....that you know of.

Yet you have often, sometimes repeatedly "told me what I
should have been doing, what my training was, what my
duties should have been ("fighting" far from where the
actual warfare was actively in progress which would have
meant I would have been court martialed for disobeying
orders I'd been given).

I'd surely love to see the post from Jim which outlined what you should
have been doing in the military or what your training was or what your
duties should have been.

Are we to understand that you disobeyed orders and went somewhere near
the front to experience that artillery barrage which you recounted in
your now classic "sphincter post"? Did you receive any punishment for
that? Where and when did that take place? Can your friend Gene confirm
it?

You have told me all sorts of things about the military
yet you were NOT trained by the military.

....that you know of.

You have NOT
served...but you say you "served in other ways." How?
By playing with your radios under a federal license in a
HOBBY activity?

Please point out the portion of Part 97 which mentions "HOBBY".

Do you think that airplane modelers
"serve their country" in aeronautical technology by
flying their R-C planes in parks?

I dunno, Len. Do r/c flyers do a lot of public service and emergency
work? Are they the original Predator drone guys?

BTW, in regard to your new subject line, no radio amateur can be told
what to do by you. You'll be happier if you learn to live with it.

Dave K8MN

wrote:
From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm
wrote:

My advocacy is to elimintate the code test for an FCC
amateur radio operators license.

"elimintate"?

You advocate a lot more than changes to Morse Code testing, Len.

Do you spend all your time TAKING TESTS?

Not at all. But I've spent a lot more time taking Amateur Radio license
tests than you have.

If so, what have you done to require taking tests all the time?

If not, why are you so concerned about OTHERS taking code
tests?

It comes down to this, Len:

I think that further reductions in the license test requirements for an
Amateur Radio license are not a good idea. That includes reductions in
either code or written testing.

That's all there is to it.

If morse code radiotelegraphy is so wonderful, great, noble,
"saves lives [not really]," traditional-that-all-MUST-take
one, then what are you upset about? If it is that "good,"
then all will flock to it in great numbers.

I think that having Morse Code skill at a basic level is part of the
skills that all radio amateurs should have.

NOT having a code test does NOT require ANYONE to "do"
something as in having to take a code test. They cannot
"do" something that isn't there to DO.

What are you talking about, Len? You sound very confused.

Are you upset that OTHERS who come later will not do as you
did?

Others cannot do as I did, Len.

Why is what you HAD to do required of all OTHERS?

What I did is not required of "all OTHERS", Len.

I think that further reductions in the license test requirements for an
Amateur Radio license are not a good idea. That includes reductions in
either code or written testing.

In the past 25 years, the requirements for an FCC amateur radio license
have been gradually but steadily reduced. At each reduction, those
pushing for the reduction said the reductions were needed to insure
growth, to attract more technically-oriented people, and much more.

But the growth in numbers in the 1990s was less than in the 1980s.
There's been a net loss since 2000. The reductions have not attracted
more technically-oriented people. Etc.

What is wrong with live and let live?

You're allowed to live, Len.

That doesn't mean there are no standards.

wrote:
wrote:
From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm
wrote:

My advocacy is to elimintate the code test for an FCC
amateur radio operators license.

"elimintate"?

You advocate a lot more than changes to Morse Code testing, Len.
so?

"an old Enema" wrote in
oups.com:


wrote:
wrote:
From: on Tues, Oct 3 2006 3:25 pm
wrote:

My advocacy is to elimintate the code test for an FCC
amateur radio operators license.

"elimintate"?

You advocate a lot more than changes to Morse Code testing, Len.
so?


Some hams like me want increase or at least maintain the integrity of the
service. You and Len want it to be like CB.

SC