RadioBanter - What of NCI?

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)

- Policy (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/)

- - What of NCI? (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/26600-what-nci.html)

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Brian wrote:

Dick Carroll wrote in message ...
Brian wrote:

To be honest, I don't think there is any answer that will satisfy you.

Brian

At least not a truthful one.

Well then, that's it. Jim isn't satisfied with truthful answers. No
wonder he keeps asking.

You haven't even provided truthful responses now. You've been asked.
You have declined. You've provided reasons such as, "The questions are
just too hard". Jim and I have continued to ask because you've
continued to be evasive.

Dave K8MN

Most of the answers were given long, long ago. Whether you or Jim
believe me isn't my problem.

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
y.com...

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
Phil Kane wrote:
On 16 Jul 2003 03:06:13 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:

Well, here's an idea. Should you find later that you need to learn
about
something, have you ever heard of books? I find them very useful.

How long does one have to read the book to learn how to play the
piano?

Why should one be forced to learn to play the piano if what one REALLY
wants to do is to play one or more OTHER instruments?

Would there be ANY sense in a rule that said "You can't play any other
instrument, no matter how good you might be at it, unless you first
demonstrate
that you can play the piano proficiently." ???

I don't think so ...

Carl - wk3c

You have to learn to play the piano to get a degree in music whether you
plan to be a teacher or performer on some other instrument. Even if you
will never have a need to play the piano, you still must learn it to get
that music degree.

However they don't have to become proficient on the piano just like hams
don't have to become proficient at Morse. In either case, they only have
to
learn the basics.

As stated many times before, a ham radio license is NOT a degree or
certificate
of graduation ... it is a "learner's permit."

Nice try, but no prize... care to play again?

Carl - wk3c

"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
Would there be ANY sense in a rule that said "You can't play any other
instrument, no matter how good you might be at it, unless you first
demonstrate that you can play the piano proficiently." ???

All depends on who defines "proficiently". The amateur radio code test
we have now is roughly equivalent to being able to pound out a few
bars of "Chopsticks" with two fingers on the piano. Even the old code
tests didn't get much beyond the "Heart and Soul" level, compared to
what was considered proficient by knowledgeable folks.

So what? The point is that there is no NEED for ANY level of Morse
proficiency any more.

Carl - wk3c

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
N2EY wrote:

Complex compared to what? More complex than a PC? Or was there too
much talk and too little action?

Maybe it was a solution in search of a problem.

Looks like another job for Brute Force Cybernetics, the company which
creates a need, then fills it.

Maybe it would be better handled by Vogon Heavy Industries

http://www.vogon.com/vhi

73 de Jim, N2EY

WWHD

On 18 Jul 2003 05:17:42 -0700, N2EY wrote:

OTOH, millions of young children today are "forced" to learn how to do
basic arithmetic even though inexpensive calculators have been around
for decades.

What "learning"? Go into your local fast-food place or grocery
store and see the blank look on the clerk's face if s/he has to make
change and the register is not working.....

Would there be ANY sense in a rule that said "You can't play any other
instrument, no matter how good you might be at it, unless you first
demonstrate that you can play the piano proficiently." ???

But hey, we're missing the point here. Why should any musical
performance skill be needed to get a music degree, unless a person
wants to be a performer?

Most conservatories and music degree programs require piano
proficiency no matter what the instrument or specialty (performance,
composing, whatever) is. I got away from that by studying voice
privately, but that's the exception.

This is the 21st century, and we've got synthesizers out the wazoo
that cost far less than, say, a Martin guitar or a Steinway piano.
And which are much easier to learn how to use. Why focus so much
time and effort on learning a "manual motor skill" to play one
instrument - any instrument - when there are machines which will do
the job with much less effort and error-free?

Effort and error rate aren't the real criteria of music performance.
Creating it by human effort/input is.

This isn't far-fetched. The new contract for musicians who play on
Broadway has reduced the size of the orchestra required for a Broadway
musical performance, and allows for the use of recorded and
synthesized music. (Musicians are a major cost item in Broadway stage
prodcutions - or so the producers tell us). Why not go one better and
simply use recorded/synthesized music in all long-running shows?

You are really looking forward to a visit from Petrillo's goons,
aren't you ??? James Caesar Petrillo (the Idi Amin of the American
Federation of Musicians) may be dead but his legacy lives on. They
manhandled me when I was a recording engineer in college (mid-1950s)
and I haven't forgotten.

Heck, some folks are even beginning to use synthesized voices rather
than singers, as was done in some of the music for the 1997
blockbuster "Titanic".

The day that I go into a synagogue and hear a synthesized cantor
leading services is the day that I find another congregation. (You
do know that I have been trained as a cantor.)

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

Brian wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Brian wrote:

Dick Carroll wrote in message ...
Brian wrote:

To be honest, I don't think there is any answer that will satisfy you.

Brian

At least not a truthful one.

Well then, that's it. Jim isn't satisfied with truthful answers. No
wonder he keeps asking.

You haven't even provided truthful responses now. You've been asked.
You have declined. You've provided reasons such as, "The questions are
just too hard". Jim and I have continued to ask because you've
continued to be evasive.

Most of the answers were given long, long ago. Whether you or Jim
believe me isn't my problem.

Sure, it's your problem. You have a credibility problem, one which is
compounded by your saying that you've already answered the questions.

You haven't done so and your tale remains vapor.

Dave K8MN

X-A-Notice: References line has been trimmed due to 512 byte limitationAbuse-Reports-To: abuse at airmail.net to report improper postings
NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library1-aux.airnews.net
NNTP-Posting-Time: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 20:16:15 -0500 (CDT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: !X@U/1k-Y-#+3:P-T$! (Encoded at Airnews!)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165

"Dave Heil" wrote in message
...
Brian wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...
Brian wrote:

Dick Carroll wrote in message
...
Brian wrote:

To be honest, I don't think there is any answer that will
satisfy you.

Brian

At least not a truthful one.

Well then, that's it. Jim isn't satisfied with truthful answers.
No
wonder he keeps asking.

You haven't even provided truthful responses now. You've been asked.
You have declined. You've provided reasons such as, "The questions
are
just too hard". Jim and I have continued to ask because you've
continued to be evasive.

Most of the answers were given long, long ago. Whether you or Jim
believe me isn't my problem.

Sure, it's your problem. You have a credibility problem, one which is
compounded by your saying that you've already answered the questions.

You haven't done so and your tale remains vapor.

Dave K8MN

heh heh...he just doesn't understand the concept of "not my problem," Brian!
;)

Kim W5TIT

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message
...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
y.com...
Somehow I think you are misunderstanding my point of view. If they do
not
wish to exercise the privileges that come with an upgrade, then there is
no
need to upgrade and that's fine with me. It's those who want the
privileges
and whine about having to do the work to get them that bother me.

BUT, have you ever actually known anyone who has really whined? That has
become such a cliche. What I mean is, those of us who do not believe that
CW should be a part of requirements for ham licensing are simply
exercising
the same "rights" we would in any other type of situation in which change
is
desired. No difference at all.

Yes I have. Both in person and on the internet, there have been numerous
individuals who simply refuse to upgrade until and unless the requirement
goes away. Whether or not it should be part of the licensing is an entirely
different issue than refusing to upgrade because one doesn't agree with that
requirement. While some may consider that approach to be a protest, it is
an ineffective protest as refusing to take the test won't get it eliminated.

I have seen people express opinions about CW--on both sides. I would not
classify any of them as whining. For instance, you have your opinion
behind
your desire to have CW remain a part of the ham radio licensure process.
The same for me on the opposite side of the fence. Is it either of us
that
is whining?

It's interesting how, because someone desires something different from
another, it is labeled as whining. I sure haven't seen any evidence of
whining. I didn't like studying the CW part of the Tech+ license; I don't
like using CW; and I don't think CW should be a part of testing.

No that is not whining because you actually went ahead and took the test.
Having studied the basic material, you are now have some background on which
to judge whether or not to pursue CW any further.

Is any of that whining?

I have had 2 CSCE's now for the morse code test, and let both of them
slip
as I see no need exercise the use of those privileges, nor can I at
this
point due to operational limitations. But apparently upgrades are
even
more
important to some here more than god.

Again, no one has a problem with a person who prefers not to upgrade and
explores those areas for which he/she is licensed. The problem arises
when
someone wants the upgrade privileges without the upgrade work.

Is that what you would classify as whining? I do not. And, you say that
someone who "wants the upgrade privileges without the upgrade work" is a
whiner. What if that person actually becomes politically involved in the
process and effects change to their--and a potential majority of
like-thinkers--way of thinking? What is so whiney(?) about that? I
respect
anyone who is willing to desire and then who is willing to effect change
through our political processes in order to *attempt* to have things their
way.

That is still a process in this country--at least for a little while
longer.

I have no problem with people working to affect a change through the
political process. The ones that I have a problem with are those who would
not take time out to pass the code while they work on achieving this change.
The process has taken a couple of decades. Who would want to wait that long
to upgrade just to avoid the code test? Such people are indeed whiners if
they can't take a little time out of their political efforts to pass the
code. While I do not agree with those who want to eliminate the code test,
if they are operating from a position of having taken the test while they
work the political end, they they have my respect. Why? Because the didn't
waste decades waiting to get on HF.

As I said before, people who are not interested in upgrading don't bother
me. They are getting what they want out of their ham activities.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE