John Smith I wrote:
--strange they ALL seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?

Isn't it slightly analogous to universities preferring
teachers with PhD degrees?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Jan 28, 10:45 am, Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
--strange they ALL seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?Isn't it slightly analogous to universities preferring
teachers with PhD degrees?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Universities and the public would be better served with teachers
having a Masters degree and real work experience... instead of a bunch
of bickering eggheads who've never had to earn a living.

wrote:

...
Universities and the public would be better served with teachers
having a Masters degree and real work experience... instead of a bunch
of bickering eggheads who've never had to earn a living.


Your point is very valid and well taken here ...

Regards,
JS

wrote:
Universities and the public would be better served with teachers
having a Masters degree and real work experience... instead of a bunch
of bickering eggheads who've never had to earn a living.

Master's degrees are acceptable for a lot of university
teaching jobs. However, Bachelor's degrees alone are often
not acceptable.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:

...
Master's degrees are acceptable for a lot of university
teaching jobs. However, Bachelor's degrees alone are often
not acceptable.

Cecil:

Why that Masters may make you suitable for the position, if a suitable
doctorate shows up--hes' got the job ...

Too bad too, I have met a lot of Masters I would like to work with, more
so than the disagreeable doctorate they hired

Regards,
JS

John Smith I wrote:
Why (while?) that Masters may make you suitable for the position,
if a suitable doctorate shows up--hes' got the job ...

Probably not for the same salary cap. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
Why (while?) that Masters may make you suitable for the position, if
a suitable doctorate shows up--hes' got the job ...

Probably not for the same salary cap. :-)

Cecil:

OH YEAH. I do envy that salary cap! LOL

Regards,
JS

Cecil Moore ) writes:
John Smith I wrote:
--strange they ALL seem to have extra licenses, isn't it?

Isn't it slightly analogous to universities preferring
teachers with PhD degrees?

In this case, no.

I don't see a bias in the proposed moderators in the proposed moderated
newsgroup.

But, moderators are generally there to keep the junk out of the newsgroup,
not to edit content. They aren't there to evaluate what is being said,
they are there to determine whether the post is off-topic and/or will
cause problems in the newsgroup.

It would take a pretty incapable person to not be able to tell the difference
between what was on-topic and what doesn't belong. We are talking about a
pretty clear divide. ANd even borderline posts, it doesn't require High
Learning to decide, it requires judgement.

I'm not convinced that the moderators for this proposed newsgroup actually
need to be hams. Some guy walking in off the street is just as capable
as making most of those judgements as anyone else. The caveat being
that their unfamiliarity with the hobby might make them let things slip
through, when they didn't know the difference between amateur radio and
CB or something else. But even then, that's not tied to needing a piece
of paper, it's tied to whether someone is familiar enough with the hobby.

I would argue that there is a bias in even making an analogy to higher
learning. Because there is something about the tone of all this proposed
newsgroup that sure seems to place it in academia, and I'm not convinced
that is a good thing.

Michael VE2BVW

Michael Black wrote:

...
I don't see a bias in the proposed moderators in the proposed moderated
newsgroup.
...

You took a blue pill ...

Regards,
JS

"Michael Black" wrote in message
...

[snip]

I'm not convinced that the moderators for this proposed newsgroup actually
need to be hams. Some guy walking in off the street is just as capable
as making most of those judgements as anyone else. The caveat being
that their unfamiliarity with the hobby might make them let things slip
through, when they didn't know the difference between amateur radio and
CB or something else. But even then, that's not tied to needing a piece
of paper, it's tied to whether someone is familiar enough with the hobby.

I would argue that there is a bias in even making an analogy to higher
learning. Because there is something about the tone of all this proposed
newsgroup that sure seems to place it in academia, and I'm not convinced
that is a good thing.

Michael VE2BVW


I would agree that the moderators only really need to be people of good
judgment. None of us really object to off-topic posts to any great degree.
What is objectionable is that there are several people who seem to feel a
need to stoop to name calling, profanity, vulgarity, ad hominem attacks and
so on rather than indulge in the simple pleasure of debate.

You will notice that the most vehement of those opposing the moderated news
group are those that have the worst behavior. It seems that all they really
want is to insure that they have targets to continue their tactics.

Of course we could just filter them but every few days you have to add
another as they keep coming up with new IDs. My killfile is huge these
days.

Dee, N8UZE