" wrote in
ps.com:

From: Mike Coslo on Fri, Jan 19 2007 4:27 pm

wrote in news:1169250071.314393.175910
KC4UAI wrote:

Time to end the debate I suppose...

Looks like the FCC will make it official on February 23 of this
year and go along with the rest of the world. Code testing will no
longer be required for ANY class license it seems after that date.

Does that mean the Report and Order will be published in the Federal
Register before January 24?

[does that mean Miccolis can't understand what the ARRL
wrote on its web page? :-)]


Yes, it's sad to see the standards being lowered again and again.
Not just the code test, either.

[quick, someone put up a sign saying "wet floor"...a
bunch of morsemen spilled their cask of sour grape mash!]

Hi Jim,

Are you saying that the standards for, say the late 1950's
were
higher than thay are now?

Did you read my posts with the excerpts from the 1956 Ameco
study
guide and sample F.C.C. tests? Perhaps my assessment of the tests as
indeed not being more difficult is inaccurate in your opinion?

In addition, imagine my surprise when I opened up that little
booklet and saw the "sample questions" Right there, Question first,
and answer "A" through "D". Then an answer section in the back of the
book! All this in 1956, long before Bash and the present day question
pool...

After all, how may ways are there to ask the same questions?

Hello Mike.

Sigh...it's an old, old story with humans...whatever
someone did in their (relative) youth was ALWAYS "more
difficult" than what anyone else does in the present time! :-)

Don't know if you read the other post I wrote on the subject in a
different thread, but I'll repeat it here.

In trying to figure out just where this canard came from, sfter my
investigation into why the "old tests were so much harder", I came to
the conclusion that they weren't more difficult.

So where the discrepancy?


My theory is that when these old timers took the test, they weren't
all that knowlegable. So those tests were harder for them. During their
post-test lifetime, they learned more, and became more experienced.

But they forgot that they learned all that stuff, and in the
crankiness that middle aged men can fall prey to, suddnely expect that
all the new hams should know aht they do now.

I also suspect it doesn't matter. They don't dislike the new hams
because they are dumb or less qualified, they dislike new things.


I've heard that song played over and over again for as long
as I've been an adult. The lyrics might change a bit from
decade to decade but the tune is the same. :-)

All these olde-tymers walked (uphill both ways) barefoot
through the snow to take Their FCC exams. :-)

Funny you should mention 1956. It's a clear time in my
life experience. In the summer of 1956 I was at H&H
Electronics in Rockford, IL, talking to Gene Hubbel, then
a W9, later W7DI (now SK). H&H had just gotten in some
new study guides. Can't remember the publisher but I
categorized all such as "Q&A" books. Must have been at
least three different publishers around that time. I
looked through a couple of them (always a nice "feel" to
a brand new book out of the carton). An "in-your-face"
customer asked me if I was going to take a test? I
replied, "already did it in March" and pulled out my
small First 'Phone ID card. Sneering he then asked
"which [Q&A book] did I use?" I said "None" and,
disbelieving, he was about to get physical over that!
[really, some folks wander around always looking for a
fight] Gene distracted him before the small store got
torn up. [not a big problem for me to handle physical
stuff since I had been released from active Army duty in
February] I had never used any Q&A book earlier that
year because no store in town had them...had to settle
for memorizing a borrowed copy of the FCC regs then
published in loose-leaf format. Hard work, that, but
it got done, I passed my First 'Phone but never "aced"
it. Passing was good enough for me then. Didn't walk
uphill both ways to Chicago, just rode the train 90
miles (shoes always on feet) to get there. shrug

I looked in here nearly a decade ago and there were
the "in-your-face" yahoos tawkin 'bout how HARD it
was for them...in the 60s...in the 70s...etc. :-)
The really rabid ones were going on about "the GROL
ain't hard, not like the AMATEUR EXTRA!!!" :-)
They apparently were too young to remember that a
GROL didn't get created until around 1980 or so. It
eventually became a lifetime thing, no renewals
necessary. Wasn't so in 1956 when a First 'Phone
took at least two hours to complete four different
test parts, only one of which was multiple-choice.

I too am a sad to see Morse code testing go away, espcially
from a
historical view, but I fear that some of the superior attitudes, and
sometimes outright misrepresentation put forward by some hams
regarding how much better a vetting process the old old system was is
going to be a greater threat to the ARS than any code test elimination
ever was.

I really can't understand WHY some "vetting" process
was needed. A hobby is an avocation, NOT an occupation.
Survival of amateur radio never did depend on "how well
anyone sent code" nor was the country in danger if some
sent it badly...neither was it more secure if some
could send it "perfectly."

I don't really have any problems with levels of "ability" and goals
such as DX awards or contesting. I do have problems with superior hams.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

From: Mike Coslo on Sat, Jan 20 2007 6:01 pm

" wrote in
From: Mike Coslo on Fri, Jan 19 2007 4:27 pm
wrote in news:1169250071.314393.175910
KC4UAI wrote:

...

In addition, imagine my surprise when I opened up that little
booklet and saw the "sample questions" Right there, Question first,
and answer "A" through "D". Then an answer section in the back of the
book! All this in 1956, long before Bash and the present day question
pool...

After all, how may ways are there to ask the same questions?

Hello Mike.

Sigh...it's an old, old story with humans...whatever
someone did in their (relative) youth was ALWAYS "more
difficult" than what anyone else does in the present time! :-)

Don't know if you read the other post I wrote on the subject in a
different thread, but I'll repeat it here.

In trying to figure out just where this canard came from, sfter my
investigation into why the "old tests were so much harder", I came to
the conclusion that they weren't more difficult.

So where the discrepancy?

My theory is that when these old timers took the test, they weren't
all that knowlegable. So those tests were harder for them. During their
post-test lifetime, they learned more, and became more experienced.

But they forgot that they learned all that stuff, and in the
crankiness that middle aged men can fall prey to, suddnely expect that
all the new hams should know aht they do now.

I also suspect it doesn't matter. They don't dislike the new hams
because they are dumb or less qualified, they dislike new things.

Absolutely...in my observation also. But, an addition:

Some really and truly do NOT like new anybodies. They
want to keep their little local "in-group" intact, nice
and comfortable, secure with everyone "in-tune" to one
another. [see the "No Lids, Kids, or Space Cadets"
type or Wince Ficus' "Slow Code" alter-ego]

For many middle-agers, their (sudden?) realization of
their own mortality will make new things uncomfortable.
They want, desire, and strive for the secure, the
comfortable old concepts that they managed to adapt to.
I would suppose that's rooted with the #1 human desire
of SURVIVAL (sex is only #2). Natural enough.

That age group and that striving for security through
keeping the OLD extends all throughout human groupings.
It's really a very basic lesson in psychology classes.
[I didn't learn it from my wife the retired social
worker but rather from two mandatory psych classes for
CA engineering majors a very long time ago]

Too many make out like "THE TEST" is some god-awful
ordeal or a Battle Between Good and Evil or some kind
of cataclysmic EVENT that shakes their being to
their core. For some who have been very sheltered
that might be true. :-)

I've taken all sorts of "tests" in my life and would
rate everyday WORK as being much more meaningful.
Produce results according to spec and one "passes"
(gets the paycheck regularly). Can't do the work?
Maybe not a "fail" exactly but it's a good time to
start collecting Want Ads or think about moving into
Sales. [Sales doesn't do all that work but they sure
talk about how much they do and how good they are...]


I don't really have any problems with levels of "ability" and goals
such as DX awards or contesting. I do have problems with superior hams.

Sigh...well, superior anybodies will happen. Those are
the "salesmen types" who are selling themselves, fueled
by their ego. Some are found in here and there were lots
of them in here before. :-) Usually they want to
CONTROL things, make order (usually their way), and
demand respect from their "inferiors." They can be
spotted right away. They won't learn and probably
can't understand why most folks just don't like them.

I was questioning the "necessary vetting" and the "time
in grade" concept for "advancement" to "higher classes."
For one thing, I can't see this whole business of ANY
class structure in a hobby activity. If someone NEEDS
rank-status-title, let them join a fraternal order that
has various grades of "poohbahs" or whatever, wear silly
uniforms, and do the "tradition" thing. :-)

The actual operation of a "radio" is usually very easy
and any average-intelligence human can learn it quickly.
An activity that has lots of jargon attached to it might
need some extra hours to memorize all the new terms and
how they are used, but the actual operation doesn't take
long at all. Comments about "years of service" has
always sounded bizarre and absurd to me in a hobby radio
activity. :-) Yes, telegraphy skill DOES require a
lot of practice but that is a psycho-motor skill really
unrelated to operating a radio...and certainly unrelated
to knowing HOW a radio works.

I've always said that, to me (and many others I've
worked with) radio and electronics is totally
fascinating. Ham radio is a good place to get
acquainted with that fascination possibility. That
hobby doesn't come close to encompassing all that is
in electronics, but it's a start. If an individual
LIKES the technology, they will naturally seek to
learn more about it. NOBODY has to fulfill some
kind of artificial "qualifications" test to learn nor
are they "inferior" if they didn't get those artificial
"qualifications" and be awarded a class-conscious
Title of "superiority." Yet there are "superior"
beings who strut around Telling others what they
should like and what not to like and all should
"respect" all those who push others around. Ech.
That's NOT what an enjoyable hobby is about...

Nice talkin' at ya Mike, have fun with the mobile
antenna project.

LA

Mike Coslo wrote:

Don't know if you read the other post I wrote on the subject in a
different thread, but I'll repeat it here.

In trying to figure out just where this canard came from, sfter my
investigation into why the "old tests were so much harder", I came to
the conclusion that they weren't more difficult.

So where the discrepancy?

Mike, there is none.

My theory is that when these old timers took the test, they weren't
all that knowlegable. So those tests were harder for them. During their
post-test lifetime, they learned more, and became more experienced.

I've said as much before, but perhaps not as clearly.

But they forgot that they learned all that stuff, and in the
crankiness that middle aged men can fall prey to, suddnely expect that
all the new hams should know aht they do now.

Some of these guys wished they were middle aged...

Regardless, either they've spent a lifetime in the industry, or a
lifetime as an amateur, and would like to think that everything they
know now was on the tests they took 30 years ago. It was not. And
they didn't know it back then.

I also suspect it doesn't matter. They don't dislike the new hams
because they are dumb or less qualified, they dislike new things.

IS THIS THE SAME MIKE COSLO THAT USED TO POST HERE???

Is someone forging your name and email address???

They do like new things when they emulate old things, such as the $350
jewelled Morse Code Keys, and No-Code Technicians like Val Germann who
bash no-coders who have no intention of learning the code.

snip

I don't really have any problems with levels of "ability" and goals
such as DX awards or contesting. I do have problems with superior hams.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

I don't have a problem with people who achieve a lot.

Forget license class... what did you actually do with your license?