Cecil Moore wrote:

wrote:
How they compare to the current exams is a matter of opinion. IMHO
the old exams covered fewer subjects but covered them in much more
detail.

Having received a pink ticket from the FCC as a teenager in 1959 for the
spurious emissions of a homebrew HF transmitter I think I was more dangerous in
those days, even after having passed that 'more detailed' technical General
test.

That's probably true. So do "we" want new hams to
have a broad-shallow knowledge or a narrow-deep
knowledge?

Does it make a difference? Virtually everyone now is running commercially built
relatively foolproof equipment (appliances). Chances are way better these days
that the stuff is clean even when operated by a non-technical person (most
hams).

I suggest the former would be more valuable

Memorizing the regulations makes sense, but having to memorize the engineering
stuff is just plain silly. Especially with no real understanding behind it.
Course I'm still operating under a license obtained under Bash... 8-O

to the "service".

Service? This is a hobby that on average probably has less technical people than
those in the RC model aircraft crowd.

AaronJ wrote:
Service? This is a hobby that on average probably has less technical people than
those in the RC model aircraft crowd.

From Webster's: "service - an administrative division,
as of a government"
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:

AaronJ wrote:
Service? This is a hobby that on average probably has less technical people than
those in the RC model aircraft crowd.

From Webster's: "service - an administrative division,
as of a government"

From the Noah Pro definition of hobby:
"avocation, by-line, sideline, spare-time activity, an auxiliary activity"

Which of our definitions better fits ham radio, service or hobby...

AaronJ wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
From Webster's: "service - an administrative division,
as of a government"

From the Noah Pro definition of hobby:
"avocation, by-line, sideline, spare-time activity, an auxiliary activity"

Which of our definitions better fits ham radio, service or hobby...

It is by law, Part 97, the "Amateur Radio Service".
That part cannot be argued. The "service" that is
performed is by the federal government for the
benefit of US citizens.

It also meets the definition of "hobby". It is not
a choice of either/or. It is both.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

From: Cecil Moore on Mon, Jan 22 2007 9:07 am

AaronJ wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:

From Webster's: "service - an administrative division,
as of a government"

From the Noah Pro definition of hobby:
"avocation, by-line, sideline, spare-time activity, an auxiliary activity"

Which of our definitions better fits ham radio, service or hobby...

It is by law, Part 97, the "Amateur Radio Service".
That part cannot be argued. The "service" that is
performed is by the federal government for the
benefit of US citizens.

Welp, putting dictionaries aside, I rather prefer
the FCC's own definition of the word "service" in
regard to ALL of Title 47 C.F.R. (of which Part 97
is one of the smaller Parts):

"The word 'service' is a regulatory term, denoting
a type and kind of radio activity being regulated."

All throughout Title 47 is found the word "service"
such as Private Land Mobile Radio SERVICE, Aviation
Radio SERVICE, and (gasp!) Citizens Band Radio
SERVICE! :-)

It also meets the definition of "hobby". It is not
a choice of either/or. It is both.

Ahem, that's an interpretation. I prefer what the
FCC itself uses in regards to definitions...and also
note that the FCC is chartered by Congress to only
US civil radio. Military SERVICE is governed by the
Department of Defense and military radio use is done
in cooperation with the NTIA. By law, the FCC
cannot regulate military radio service.

One problem with so many amateur licensees is their
imaginations leading them to believe (wrongly) that
their (defacto) hobby is a form of "national service"
just by being federally licensed. That imagination
makes them think they are more than just hobbyists.
They reinforce that by boastfully pointing to their
volunteer efforts in helping their communities. In
truth, ANY citizen can volunteer to help their
community (in or out of emergency situations)
without any "license" of any kind. That's called
"civic duty," sometimes "civic responsibility."

I've nothing against anyone pipe-dreaming or doing
the wish-fulfillment dreaming. However, such
fantasy role-playing should NOT be codified in law
NOR be some kind of "definition" which is really
a grossly-distorted interpretation. Politicians
are constantly reinforcing such pipe-dreaming and
fantasy role-playing by proclaiming the "goodness"
and "nobleness" of ALL KINDS of activities. But,
those proclamations are just the usual political
bull**** done to favor certain groups and get the
politicians' names into public media.

US amateur radio is basically a HOBBY, a radio
activity of NON-pecuniary compensation, forbidden
by law to be a broadcasting service. It is
regulated by charter of the Congress due to the
nature of laws of physics and the propagation of
electromagnetic waves...something that applies to
ALL radio, not just amateur radio.

wrote:
snip
...



Len:

Sorry for snipping it all.

Great work of text, logic and facts!

So, you claim hams are nothing more than
"Glorified-CB'ers-with-visions-of-grandeur?"

Well, the CB'ers have claimed that for decades! grin

Warmest regards,
JS

John Smith I wrote:
wrote:
snip
...



Len:

Sorry for snipping it all.

Do that again and I'll have Governor Arnie "pay you a visit..."

Remember that Stockton ain't far from Sacramento...:-)

Great work of text, logic and facts!

So, you claim hams are nothing more than
"Glorified-CB'ers-with-visions-of-grandeur?"

Nah...only SOME of them. Peyote-munchers or stash
puffers or the sweet nothings desperately searching for
ANY kind of title-rank-status that they never had.

Well, the CB'ers have claimed that for decades! grin

Yanno (to use your own expression), I've NEVER heard
that claim. Really. But, I don't hang out with CB-ers,
just give a listen once in a while. All I hear (besides
heterodynes) are ordinary folks gabbing, communicating,
and so forth, hardly anyone using the Gog-diven, OFFICIAL
Language of Radio hamspeak. Roger that, old-timer? :-)

Warmest regards,

Thank you but I will appreciate just some warmth. I hope
the San Walk-In is suffering less from this alleged
"global warming" Arnie wants to put off. Brrrrrr.

Overranout, beep, beep,

LA

wrote:
One problem with so many amateur licensees is their
imaginations leading them to believe (wrongly) that
their (defacto) hobby is a form of "national service"
just by being federally licensed.

Like I said, the Amateur Radio Service is a one-way
national service being offered *BY* the federal government
*TO* qualified members of the ARS. It is the federal
government that is serving amateur radio, not the other
way around.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Like I said, the Amateur Radio Service is a one-way
national service

And I thought amateur radio was mainly 2-way

Cecil Moore wrote:
AaronJ wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
From Webster's: "service - an administrative division,
as of a government"

From the Noah Pro definition of hobby:
"avocation, by-line, sideline, spare-time activity, an auxiliary activity"

Which of our definitions better fits ham radio, service or hobby...


It is by law, Part 97, the "Amateur Radio Service".

Ah, if Webster's fails then try again using the Federal Regs huh...

That part cannot be argued.

Your *usage* can be argued though. Heck anything can be argued...

The "service" that is performed is by the federal government for the
benefit of US citizens.

You said (quote):
"Seems to me that a ham who is a jack-of-all-trades-
and-master-of-none would be more valuable to the
"service" than one who is ignorant of most trades
and master of one."

If as you say the "service" is that performed by the Government for the
citizens, then how does your sentence make any real sense? Use hobby and it
makes perfect sense.

It also meets the definition of "hobby". It is not a choice of either/or. It is both.

It is both only if service = hobby. And service does not equal hobby, that was
my point. Everybody here knows what you meant including me. 'Service' has been
used for 'hobby' as long as 'CW' has been used for 'code'. And most hams think
that service means that we perform some kind of terribly useful service to the
public. But the truth be told, we are more a pain in the butt to both the public
and the government than any kind of real service. There. Now can we stop with
the semantics...