Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #361   Report Post  
Old July 18th 03, 02:45 PM
Carl R. Stevenson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Bill Sohl"
writes:

So convince the FCC that some august body of hams (elected? appointed?
approved by?) should take over setting FCC part 97 rules.


Works for me.


I believe that Bill's comment was tongue in cheek ... it won't fly, because
the FCC has a mandate and cannot abdicate its responsibilities.

Besides, if you think Congress suffers "gridlock" on contentious issues,
imagine how bad a body of hams would be ... worse than partisan politics,
for sure :-(

Carl - wk3c


  #363   Report Post  
Old July 18th 03, 04:12 PM
Mike Coslo
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bert Craig wrote:
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ...

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
.com...

Carl,

I'm going to do something that some might not expect me to do,
agree. I think that in the frenzy to defend CW testing, some have
tried many different angles. Not that these angles aren't correct wrt
CW itself, just not the retention of CW testing. This is where the use
of the FCC to defend the dropping of CW testing becomes almost
silly...because to be quite honest, the FCC really doesn't care all
that much about the ARS anyway and ANYTHING that'll ease the
administration over the same is more than welcome. So saying "we don't
have to do our homework because daddy says so" doesn't mean that the
homework is unimportant, it means that daddy doesn't care.


I don't agree with the analogy ... the FCC *does* care about the
Amateur Radio Service ... they just don't belive that requiring Morse
tests serves any legitimate regulatory purpose



Please stop right there. What's the hang-up with this "regulatory
purpose" stuff. I don't believe it's ALL about regulatory, it's has
something to do with a rich tradition wrt a mode that is still widely
used today. Tradition really does count for something and requiring
folks to learn the very basic level in order to pass a 5-wpm hardly
constitutes a "barrier." This is very likely how many will get their
only taste of Morse.


You would think so, but its too hard!


Neither CW or it's proponents will sell it on
it's own merits. Sad to say, but many of today's generation just don't
understand why they "have to" learn all that stuff they'll never use.


Dude! It's like such a waste of time, yaknow? I'll never be interested,
and like "Americon Idol" is on tonight!


The recent Regents fiasco is a grim reminder. Only 12 students passed
the test that was really no harder than many folks had taken in years
past. The first reaction..."the test's too hard," from both the
parents and the kids.


Of course! how is little Buffy and Adrian going to get into a good
college if they don't have the grades? S make those tests easier.


Rather than take the heat, the DOE is going to
give them an easier test. Behold the result of second generation
underachievement. I strongly disagree, Carl. I think it's a "spot-on"
analogy. It'd almost be amusing if it weren't so sad.


Carl thinks we make dum analogies.

any more (other than
complying with requirements in the ITU Radio Regs that require(d)
Morse tests for folks whose licenses granted privs in the bands
below 30 MHz ... a requirement that has ceased to exist as of
July 05, 2003 ...) (Read the quotes from their R&O again ... it's
quite clear.)



No need, the words of those who are seeking less administrative work
are hardly meaningful. Hmmm, avoiding work...some commonality.


Sadly, many have lost sight of what this was really all about. Element
1 (Domestically, that is.) Rather than investing some time and effort
to satisfy a very basic requirement that is an extremely important
part of AR tradition,


"Some time and effort" can vary widely across the spectrum of
individuals ... for some it can be easy, for others it's nearly impossible.
Just as some folks can't "carry a tune in a bucket" with respect to
singing ability, Morse involves a "mode-specific aptitude" that folks
possess (or don't) in widely varying degrees.



If by "mode-specific aptitude," you mean sitting ones you-know-what
down for 20 mins./day for a mo. and trying some good old-fashioned
study/practice, you'd have a point.


Takes longer in some cases. Took me six months of hard work. but so what?


I'll go out on a limb, and say that a person that does not have the
time to learn the material does not have the time for the hobby. Written
or Morse.

That is really what my whole argument is. I don't give a hoot if a
person uses or doesn't use Morse. I really don't. I suck at it. I've got
some physical attributes that make morse code unenjoyable for me.

But I don't like lazy people one little bit. Sorry, but I don't. And
behind all the rhetoric and bluff and bluster, in almost all cases it
boils down to laziness.

I really wish that folks would stop trying to lean on "tradition" ...
maintaining "tradition" is NOT a legitimate regulatory goal that
should drive the requirements for licensing, plain and simple.



I wish folks would stop leaning on "regulatory" as if it's ok just
because big brother says so. Especially at the 5-wpm level, puh-lease.


Wouldn't it be great if all the PCTA people would just go away?

- Mike KB3EIA -

  #364   Report Post  
Old July 18th 03, 04:14 PM
Brian Kelly
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message gy.com...
"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...

Great post Bert, ya sed it all, I wish I'd written it. Your Regents
analogy was masterful. They don't have the gumption to achieve so dumb
the exams to "their" achievement level and their "problem" goes away.

w3rv


No the problem won't go away as the next generation of people will have even
lower achievement and will demand that the tests be made simpler yet.


I couldn't agree more Dee. But these are the times of politically
correct dumb downs, they're too short-sighted to see beyond today.
They want. Right now. No matter what.


Dee D. Flint, N8uZE


w3rv
  #365   Report Post  
Old July 18th 03, 04:19 PM
Mike Coslo
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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


I would have been a much more
valuable asset to the amateur community if I'd had access to HF those
years I didn't simply because of Morse ...



I share your pain, Carl. I've often thought of my wasted years, not
being in the House of Representatives.




I just cannot grasp how otherwise (presumably at least reasonably)
intelligent people can cling to insistence on the acquisition of such
a mechanical skill in such a quasi-religious fashion.



I understand your inability to grasp the situation...in a
quasi-sarcastic way.


This whole thing is making me quasi-queasy! ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -



  #366   Report Post  
Old July 18th 03, 04:25 PM
Mike Coslo
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

Next time you talk about folks "putting forth effort to achieve
a goal" think about that one. Maintaining a population of Morse
users is/seems to be YOUR goal ... it's not my job, nor the FCC's.


Not my goal!



Then bitch about it to the folks who you think DO favor phone band


expansion

and leave me (and NCI) out of that one ... it's not our agenda.



So Carl, does that mean that after they drop the Morse test here in the
Us of A, that you'll be done with the group as far as NCI goes? Your
agenda is achieved here. ;^)



Not exactly ... NCI's goal is GLOBAL ... NCI's work is not over
as soon as the US drops Morse testing ... there are a LOT of other
countries.


I know that, but this is primarily a US newsgroup, with a few others
thrown in. I doubt too many people here will be interested in the
remaining countries Morse/No Morse material.


(Though it's beginning to look like the US will, because of process,
be one of the slower ones to act on the changes adopted by
WRC-03 ... the Swiss hams have already received their letters giving
them HF privs ... the UK will reportedly act before the end of the
month ... and others are lining up ...)

It will be very interesting to watch the dominoes fall ...


Congratulations.

- Mike KB3EIA -

  #367   Report Post  
Old July 18th 03, 07:00 PM
Carl R. Stevenson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Wouldn't it be great if all the PCTA people would just go away?

- Mike KB3EIA -


Nah ... the ridiculous arguments you folks make for keeping a
Morse test requirement just make NCI's job easier :-)

(read the MO&O where the FCC blew away all of the
petitions for reconsideration of dropping the 13 and 20 wpm
tests ... :-)

Carl - wk3c


  #368   Report Post  
Old July 18th 03, 07:02 PM
Carl R. Stevenson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

I just cannot grasp how otherwise (presumably at least reasonably)
intelligent people can cling to insistence on the acquisition of such
a mechanical skill in such a quasi-religious fashion.



Maybe we're just not that smart, Carl. And you're arguing with us! Face
it, you're enjoying all this, and having a good time rubbing our nose in

it.

- Mike KB3EIA -



Mike,

Its really NOT my intention to "rub noses in it" ... honest ... if it comes
across that way, I apologize.

What I *am* trying to do is counter the illogical with some logic and
the political/regulatory/technical realities.

Carl - wk3c

  #369   Report Post  
Old July 18th 03, 07:10 PM
Brian Kelly
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ...
"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
Alun Palmer wrote in message

. ..

Bringing the phone subbands in line with other countries in Region 2

would
be sufficient


Seeing as how the USA has more hams than any other country in Region
2, why not have those other countries get their phone subbands in line
with the USA?


Because they are soverign nations with the right to regulate the use of
the radio spectrum within their jurisdictions as they see fit and according
to their needs, as long as they are not in violation of the ITU Radio
Regulations.

Because most of the rest of the world does it the same way they do
and the US is virtually alone in its sub-band by mode regulations.

Jim ... I realize that your question above was *probably* (at least
partly) tongue in cheek, but it does sort of smack of American
arrogance ... and to some of the other countries in region 2, perhaps
something approaching "Yankee imperialism."


Wrong. The fact that the FCC does not allow us to run phone as far
down the bands as the DX does shelters the DX from the U.S. hordes.
That's about as "anti Yankee Imperialism" as it gets in ham radio.


Carl - wk3c


w3rv
  #370   Report Post  
Old July 18th 03, 07:56 PM
Carl R. Stevenson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message

...
"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
Seeing as how the USA has more hams than any other country in Region
2, why not have those other countries get their phone subbands in line
with the USA?


Because they are soverign nations with the right to regulate the use of
the radio spectrum within their jurisdictions as they see fit and

according
to their needs, as long as they are not in violation of the ITU Radio
Regulations.

Because most of the rest of the world does it the same way they do
and the US is virtually alone in its sub-band by mode regulations.

Jim ... I realize that your question above was *probably* (at least
partly) tongue in cheek, but it does sort of smack of American
arrogance ... and to some of the other countries in region 2, perhaps
something approaching "Yankee imperialism."


Wrong. The fact that the FCC does not allow us to run phone as far
down the bands as the DX does shelters the DX from the U.S. hordes.
That's about as "anti Yankee Imperialism" as it gets in ham radio.


Brian,

How many heads of Latin American radio regulatory agencies do you
know personally? (If the answer is "None." how can you presume to
know their likely reaction to the US trying to tell them how to do things
in their own country?)

Again, I *presume* that Jim's question was tongue in cheek.

I do know those folks and meet with them several times a year ...
they wouldn't take kindy to being ordered around in the
way that Jim jokes about above ...

Carl - wk3c



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:00 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017