"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message
...
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

Dick,

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.

Carl - wk3c

Carl:

If the fact that Dick and I support the concept of retaining code
proficiency
testing in order to be able to possess a unique and highly effective radio
communications skill is being "stupid," then I must plead guilty. Keep in
mind that Mr. Gump was a war hero, a successful businessman, and a
keen investor who became a multi-millionaire. I should be so "stupid!"

73 de Larry, K3LT

Larry,

You apparently didn't see the movie, didn't get it, or have forgotten.

1) Forest Gump was (mentally) "slow"
(in an effort to be politically correct :-)

2) His successes were essentially a(n improbable) series of
"dumb luck" episodes.

3) He did, however, have a good and kind heart and always
treated people with respect.

Too bad you ACT LIKE you only meet the first two criteria ...

I withdraw my comparison.

Carl - wk3c

Dick Carroll wrote:

JJ wrote:


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.


Evidently you skipped code or you'd have some idea what ham radio would/will
be without it. NO? no surprise, coming from you. That leaves you clueless, but we
already knew that.

Hate to burst you bubble Dickie, but I sat in front of an FCC
examiner in the Dallas office and took my code test.

Larry Roll K3LT wrote:

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.

I dunno, Larry, Carl Stevenson and his Magpies of Morbidity have so traumatized
themselves
and we-don't-know-how-many others among the uninformed into believing that Morse is
nothing
short of torture, to the point that there may indeed be quite an influx of new
codeless hams.

I believe, however, that Hans is right - most of the people who want to be on HF are
already
there, given the ridiculously easy testing of the past couple decades of the VE
system. But that
kind of conclusion is of the "eye of the beholder" sort where the attitude of the
testee is paramount.
If he thinks it's "hard", then hard is what it is.

You see, what those folks can't know is that Morse is a language, for those who
learn it to skill.
When you sit and listen to it coming in as words, rather than attempting to
laborously convert "dots and dashes", in their vernacular, into letters, then letters
into words, it is an entirely different phenomena. You and I know that. They don't




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

Arnie Macy wrote:

"JJ" wrote ...

Since the beginning of the use of phone in ham radio, I would be interested
to know of any disaster where ham radio was used for communications and CW
was the only means of communications that could get through. I don't mean CW
was used just because someone wanted to or because they only had CW
capabilities, but because it was the ONLY mode that could get through.
__________________________________________________ ________________________

We used it when Floyd hit in 1999. We were having a hard time getting
through on SSB, so switched over to CW and continued ops until the band
conditions improved. CW didn't "save the day", but it sure came in handy
when needed. It is still an integral part of our EMA plan. Remember, in
disaster planning, we try to use *all* of the tools available to us. Maybe
one day, the light will come on for you and you'll understand that concept.

Not dear ol' closed-minded JJ. Wouldn't take much to make a Carl out of him.

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote:


I was monitoring a MARS net a few years back, that was being conducted
in some rather lousy band conditions. One station tried to check into
this net using CW because the ops couldn't get through to the NCS
using SSB. The NCS told them that CW was not a valid operating mode
for checking into a MARS net. Draw your own conclusions.

I am curious as to why CW would not be a valid operating mode on a
MARS net.

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote:

apparently Dick, Larry, and their ilk have never been
to, or don't remember the lessons of, the Wouff Hong initiation.

Ah so, that's the source of Carl's problem. Somebody Wouff Hong'ed him
for flunking the 13wpm code test!

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...


"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote:

apparently Dick, Larry, and their ilk have never been
to, or don't remember the lessons of, the Wouff Hong initiation.

Ah so, that's the source of Carl's problem. Somebody Wouff Hong'ed him
for flunking the 13wpm code test!


I rest my case ... it would appear the Dick, at least, fits my comment
above.
May the ghost of "TOM" haunt him until he wises up and acts like a nice
ham :-)

Carl - wk3c

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Kim W5TIT wrote:
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message
...

John:

I agree that Morse code proficiency has nothing to do with speaking or
typing -- but the ability to effectively employ the Morse/CW mode -- at
speeds greater than 5 WPM -- will keep you communicating when conditions
prevent you from communicating by voice or digital modes. You have done
nothing but provide personal, anecdotal proof that reducing code testing
requirements down to a mere 5 WPM maximum was NOT a good thing!



You know...the claim that CW "will keep you communicating when
conditions
prevent you from communicating by voice or digital modes" has been made
time
and time again. Time and time again there have been requests for proof
of
this claim. None has been provided.

To state something does not make it so.

You never watched Star Trek TNG, eh?

- Mike KB3EIA -


heh heh. We should all take lessons from that saga!

Kim W5TIT


---
Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
Complaints to

"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, the only effort you are willing to expend is one which is forced upon
you?

Kim W5TIT


---
Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
Complaints to

"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message
...
In article , "Kim W5TIT"
writes:

So, what're you gonna say to those who will
obviously be a better ham than you because they learned CW out of
wanting
to, not needing to?

Kim W5TIT

Well, Kim, if any show up, I'll be the first to congratulate them!
However,
I hope you'll forgive me for not holding my breath in the meantime!
You
see, I've become somewhat accustomed to the occasional whiff of oxygen!

73 de Larry, K3LT


Something tells me you don't have to worry about people looking for
congrats
from you, Larry.

Kim W5TIT

Kim:

So be it. In any case, the coming generation of New Age, Dumbed-Down,
No-Coder hams aren't likely to seeking any kudos from me on their CW
skills. I would hope that any who learned the code and became proficient
with it's use on-the-air, would do so for their own personal gratification
and
to add that skill to their overall capability as a radio amateur. Of
course,
that is a concept that you will naturally reject, out of the necessity of
your
agenda to justify your own lack of useful communications skills. Don't
worry -- our expectations of you are small.

73 de Larry, K3LT


Larry, I am so far ahead of you in terms of overall capability and
contribution that you're a speck of dust in my rear view mirror.

Kim W5TIT


---
Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
Complaints to