"Bill Sohl" wrote ...

Arnie, in global communications, SSB has pretty much seen its day too.
Comms are now digital and via satellite for many ships. Telecommunications,
both terrestial, microwave and satellite are almost exclusively digital.
Even so, no one is asking to shut down SSB in ham radio any more than CW is
being asked to shut down. Use it all you want...the test isn't needed to
use the mode.
__________________________________________________ ______________________

That's not the take that JJ has. He continually refers to it as antiquated
and obsolete -- not worth using in EMCom. I completely disagree with his
assessment, and can prove it. The test was not at issue in this thread.

Arnie -
KT4ST

Larry Roll K3LT wrote:



Uh, no, not quite. You see, Mr. Carroll is YOUR moral

Are you suggesting I am an immoral person?

and intellectual
superior,

That that is a real laugh.

therefore it is appropriate for you to address him in a form
which shows proper respect.f

When he dose something to deserve respect, he will get my respect.
Belittling other hams just because they do not feel the same
fanatical zeal toward CW as you and Dick do, does not deserve any
respect. When you and Dick stop seeing other hams as inferior to
you, then you might get some respect. Because of your "I am
superior because I operate CW, that makes me a real ham" attitude
toward other hams means you have not earned any consideration for
respect through your participation in this forum.

It is still MISTER JJ to you and Dick.

Larry Roll K3LT wrote:


Funny thing is, most of the No-Code Techs in my club haven't upgraded
yet, in spite of the meager 5 WPM code test requirement. What a bunch
of maroons!

There is why you deserve no respect, calling fellow hams morons.
Perhaps there are those who choose not to upgrade, what is wrong
with that? You are really pathetic Roll, the only way you can make
yourself feel some importance is to belittle someone else. Get use
to it Roll, those no code Techs are just as much a ham as you are.
If fact you don't come up to the level as a person the those
no-code Techs.

Dick Carroll wrote:

Bill Sohl wrote:


You
are (IMHO) clearly not up to the task of recruiting new hams
by proactively advocating CW use.




Just as I would have skipped learning the code if it hadn't been a licensing
requirement, too.

Then what is your problem with the fact that some have a no-code
license and possibly the code requirement will be dropped?
Goodness, if code testing were not a requirement and you skipped
learning the code, then you would not be a "real" ham.

"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message
...

Now that it seems as though code testing will finally be abolished in the
ARS, let's amuse ourselves with a bit of speculation as to what this will
mean in terms of future growth in the numbers of licensed amateur radio
operators in the United States. What do you think will happen? How
much growth do you think will occur, and how fast?

I predict that there will be no significant growth in new licensees.
Now, all we need to do is define the term "significant growth." We
currently
have around 600-some kilohams in the US. I'd call a five percent growth
factor, or 30,000 newly-licensed radio amateurs, to be significant. Let's
give this a year to happen. I say it won't. How say you? Keep in mind
that at this stage of the discussion, I'm just trying to establish
reasonable
parameters -- so let's all weigh in and try to arrive at a consensus as to
what any future growth could be. Then we can commit to our numbers
and see who gets it right -- or at least close.

73 de Larry, K3LT


Let's say a 5% growth above the current growth rate (the latter figure has
shown up previously on this news group but do not remember the figure). The
rate of growth of hams already exceeds the rate of growth of the general
population (again the data has shown up before on this newsgroup).

However, like you, I believe that there will be no noticeable increase in
the number of new hams and only a temporary surge in the number of upgrades.

What's sad is that when conditions deteriorate during a QSO and you say to
the other party "let's switch to CW" there will be too many who can't and
you'll just have to terminate the QSO.

Elimination of the code requirement may actually cause a loss in the ham
ranks, if not in numbers at least in activity. The elimination will
probably coincide with the early part of the bottom of the current sunspot
cycle. People will upgrade and quite a few will be so disappointed at the
poor activity that they will become quite inactive on HF and this
disappointment could spill over and affect their activity on VHF/UHF.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Dave Heil" wrote in message
...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote:

I like kyaking, but I don't believe that everyone should be a proficent
kyaker to go into the water.

You'd think that one who likes "kyaking" could spell "kayak", Squiggy.
Looks like you've chosen a poor analogy. Your view would more properly
expressed by stating that with modern power boat technology, no
individual should be forced to jump through the swimming hoop.

Dave K8MN

disregarding the intended disparagement via the "nickname"

OK, so I mistyped ...

No, your analogy distorts what I was trying to say. Of course,
anyone who goes boating should know how to swim ... but
hams that are allowed to operate high power should know at
least the basics of RF and high voltage safety as well. These
are simple issues of personal safety and the safety of others.

However, not knowing Morse does not pose a risk to anyone,
and therefore my analogy of a particular "mode" of water sport
being required arbitrarily for ALL who wish to enter the water
is a more accurate analogy to the situation being discussed.

Carl - wk3c

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...


"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote:

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...

Ah, so Shannon also speeded up light and other electromagnetic radiation,
then.
Right.

Dick,

Are really so dense that you actually think that's what I said??? (If so,
that's really sad.)

What I was saying was not that the RF signals travel faster with more
modern digital modes than with Morse, but rather that those modes
can transmit the MESSAGE CONTENT faster (and in many cases
more reliably than a human operator doing Morse).

You're the one who seems brain dead ...

I'm perfectly willing to let it go at that and allow the readership to
draw
their own conclusions.

Do so at your own peril :-)

Carl - wk3c

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote ...

I'm not saying that CW is totally obsolete ... and I won't presume to
speak
for JJ ... I just know that there are much better digital modes available
and that CW's main purpose these days is as a recreational activity for
those who like it. I like kyaking, but I don't believe that everyone
should
be a proficent kyaker to go into the water.

__________________________________________________ _________________________

Sheesh, Carl -- does everything have to be about the test with you? I
would
maintain that there are much better forms of communication than 60 plus
year
old SSB (but for our use in the ARS it is a quite efficient mode). I am
strictly talking about the mode -- *not* testing. Do you think it's as
efficient as SSB? Yes or No

Arnie -
KT4ST

Arnie,

You asked me if I thought that Morse was "obsolete." For other than
recreational use, I think that's largely so.

Does that mean I want to ban/limit/restrict its use? No, of course not.

And yes, the conversation/debate here has ALWAYS been about
the TEST, and that's what all the fuss has been about. Some CW
enthusiasts believe that the sky will fall if Morse testing is dropped.
(More like they will have to share "their" bands with more folks
and they will have to do their own "recruiting" of new Morse fans
to ensure that they continue to have someone to communicate with
in that mode as the actuarial tables take their toll on existing, code-
using hams ... and I am NOT trying to "rush along" any OTs, just
talking "facts of life" when I mention actuarial tables.)

Another factor is that SOME folks (Dick, Larry, and others, actually
BELIEVE that their Morse proficiency makes them "REAL HAMS"
and that those who are not interested in, or proficient in, Morse are
in some way "lesser beings."

Morse is "obsolete" in the following way:

It has been supplanted, in virtually every service except ham
radio (where it has been maintained as a "tradition," "hazing ritual,"
etc.), by more modern, efficient, reliable, and convenient means
of communications. (horse vs. car or airplane, for example)

So, in that sense, it is obsolete (in practical terms on an overall
basis), though it does live on (and I expect will for a very long
time) as an avocation on a recreational basis.

Carl - wk3c

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote ...

If find your comparison of yourself (and Larry) to Forest Gump to be most
appropriate :-) "Stupid is as stupid does." was the saying from the movie
... and while I don't actually think either you or Larry actually ARE
stupid, you both certainly ACT that way.

__________________________________________________ _________________________

And when did you become the expert on who and who is not intelligent,
Carl?

Arnie -
KT4ST

Arnie,

I was voicing my opinion of the way that Dick, Larry, and a few others ACT.
You will note that I said I didn't actually think they ARE stupid ... but
that they
ACT that way (IMHO).

Of course, they are free to feel the same way about me, and I'm sure they do
because I don't buy their quasi-religious fervor vis a vis "Morse makes the
REAL HAM." etc.

Carl - wk3c

Bill Sohl wrote:

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...


Bill Sohl wrote:

You
are (IMHO) clearly not up to the task of recruiting new hams
by proactively advocating CW use.

Just as I would have skipped learning the code if it hadn't been a
licensing
requirement, too.

So much for your advocacy of morse to new hams.
You made my point.

Bill you have been quite consistant about missing the entire point. When there is no
code test
most hams won't learn Morse code. I know that taxes you not a bit, so that means that
you don't
care whether or not hams will be losing it as a viable mode. Which shows how
shortsighted you
are, right along with the rest of NCI. And yes, FCC too. Of course they have far
bigger fish to fry
than to worry about a trivial detail involving the ARS. The least time they must
spend on ARS issues the better for them, whatever the end result.