|
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message I dunno. I doubt it though. I wonder if a person who doesn't want to jump through hoops is going to do much of anything that he/she doesn't want to do. Mike, Do you seriously believe that just because someone is not interested in Morse that they could not be interested in, and contribute in valuable ways to, other aspects of ham radio? Do you seriously not believe that? An engineer can always get a technician's license. Why aren't we seeing this happening? At least in my area, the Engineers with tech licenses are there as they transition through the ranks. "Elmering" new hams who are not technical on the technical aspects designing new modes writing useful ham software building networks public service communications A technician engineer can do that emergency/disaster communications "SKYWARN" etc., etc. A technician Engineer can do all of these things. Just because someone isn't interested in jumping through the Morse hoop, doesn't mean that they are so selfish that they can't/won't contribute. If your premise is true, then why aren't there loads of Technician level Engineers? In fact, I would give a whole lot more credence to a group of technically savvy Engineers who have their Technician's license, and they tell the ARRL and FCC. "Hey here we are folks! We're not going one level past Technician because we simply don't believe in the Morse code requirement." It would have been nice to have hordes of technically competent Technician level Engineers at the vangaurd of the Anti-Morse movement. Instead we apparently have those who say "we won't participate at all unless everything is to our liking, if your premise is to be believed. Umm, Carl.... you are here! You have have achieved your goal, at least will be very soon. I'm going to have to assume the reason is to engage in a little gloating? So you're getting what you want on all counts. You really wouldn't have to hear all us PCTA's crying if you didn't want to. In other words, if you want to discuss it, we're here. Lessay we all do what you want, and "just live with it". I guess that means we're supposed to shut up. Then you wouldn't have the fun of discussing it with us, or even telling us to "just live with it". I don't think you would like that very much.. I'm not here to gloat ... I'm here to make sure that newcomers hear the news and aren't overly tainted by being totally awash in PCTAs to the point that they think all hams are that way and decide that ham radio isn't really for them after all, because of a false perception that it's totally populated with the sort of folks that they'd really not like to associate. :-) I think you just said that a person who is a PCTA is someone not to be associated with?!?!?!?!? Thanks for the "locker room wall" post! 8^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
Mike Coslo wrote: Carl R. Stevenson wrote: I'm not here to gloat ... I'm here to make sure that newcomers hear the news and aren't overly tainted by being totally awash in PCTAs to the point that they think all hams are that way and decide that ham radio isn't really for them after all, because of a false perception that it's totally populated with the sort of folks that they'd really not like to associate. :-) I think you just said that a person who is a PCTA is someone not to be associated with?!?!?!?!? Thanks for the "locker room wall" post! 8^) Mike, that's mild stuff for Carl. Go Googling for his posts and get an education in bilgewater postings. |
Dick Carroll wrote:
Arnie Macy wrote: "JJ" wrote ... You mean you and Larry boy don't know semaphore Dick? Why that is just plain LAZINESS. You know, when conditions are so bad that you and Larry have to rely on CW and your faithful CW rigs gives up the ghost or conditions get SO bad that CW can't even get through you and Larry could save the world by using semaphore, if you had that skill, that is. ________________________________________________ _______________________ I have to presume by your comment, JJ that you indeed know semaphore. Otherwise, you look stupid when you chastise them for a skill you don't possess. And, of course -- I'm sure it's just plain LAZINESS on your part. What else could it be? Arnie, if learning semaphores had been a licensing requirement for the ARS, I would have learned it along with lots of others, like it or not. Hear, Hear! I sure wouldn't have sat on my backside for most of my lifetime carping about how 'unnecessary' it all was to make me jump through some "useless" hoop. Hear, Hear! Alas, poor Richard, they are those we now seek to bolster our ranks. Now if Carl can get to then before those nasty PCTA's with whom they don't want to associate! - Mike KB3EIA - |
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote ...
Fred Maia, W5YI, was quoted as saying something along that line WRT the Tech test ... but Fred is just *one* of the Directors of NCI, and I can state that his view in that regard is NOT NCI policy and is not shared by me or the rest of the NCI board. (IIRC, Fred also said he'd like to make the Extra test more rigorous ...) [Of course, NCI was never in favor of removing the digital/CW sub bands either, right?] No, we were not ... and we never said we were. If you "google" or whatever, you will, I am sure, find numerous instances of me saying that I would *not* favor an expansion of the phone bands at the expense of the digital/CW sub-bands, because I wouldn't want to see the future development of digital modes impeded. (the rest snipped) __________________________________________________ _______________________ That could be what I was thinking of. Quoted by ya'll referring to Fred. But I distinctly remember there being a discussion about lowering the technical test requirements and that NCI was in favor of that. Now, as to Digital/CW sub-bands. Below is the official comment by NCI -- it sure sounds like they would roll over and play dead if it should ever come to supporting the keeping of sub-bands for Digital/CW. Do you read it differently, Carl? __________________________________________________ ________________________ "d. Third, Mr. Kane recommends that there be no regulatory distinction made between modes of transmission. This point would likely gain mixed, but significant support amongst NCI's membership, and it should be pointed out that this is the norm in the rest of the world and no real harm seems to have come from the lack of restrictive sub-band-by-mode limitations such as those currently embodied in the Commission's Rules." From NCIs Reply comments to the NPRM Arnie - KT4ST |
Brian Kelly wrote:
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ... "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Carl R. Stevenson wrote: I await the influx of all these engineers and the advances they will bring Amateur Radio. Don't hold your breath waiting for either. Heh, heh. Thanks Brian, I was starting to turn blue there! 8^) You're right, it isn't going to happen. Did anyone seriously say they were really interested in Ham radio, but the Morse Code test kept them out? just har dto imagine that someone really interested would do that. Right on the money. I have reported that, in my over 32 years in the RF communications business, I have worked with MANY very competent engineers who would be interested in ham radio, but can't/won't be bothered with wasting their time jumping through a silly Morse code "hoop." Some have become hams since they could get meaningful HF privs for "only" 5 wpm ... I'm sure that more will once they can do the same without having to waste their time on even 5 wpm ... these are folks that could pass a technical test well beyond the Extra. Do you doubt that, even without Morse proficiency, they could/would make good hams and could contribute to the service? Brings up a question Carl: You're a seasoned EE and have been a ham for many years. What technology-based contributions have you made to the service? I understand he is working on some sort of device that PCTA's will have to use so that we can be identified on the air, so that the new hams will know not to associate with us! ;^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
JJ wrote:
Carl R. Stevenson wrote: Fred Maia, W5YI, was quoted as saying something along that line WRT the Tech test ... but Fred is just *one* of the Directors of NCI, and I can state that his view in that regard is NOT NCI policy and is not shared by me or the rest of the NCI board. (IIRC, Fred also said he'd like to make the Extra test more rigorous ...) Having known Fred Maia personally in the past, I would not put much stock in anything he has to say. So he is incorrect in this? - Mike KB3EIA - |
"Alun Palmer" wrote ...
How do you know they are not here? Do you really know what each of us majored in? I really don't think so. __________________________________________________ _________________________ The numbers speak louder than any person -- or the lack thereof. See how easy that was? Arnie - |
"Kim W5TIT" wrote ...
No doubt what started ham radio was an experiment using the best of what was around then. Perhaps you'd like to move into the most recent century, Dick. If ham radio were "invented" today, it would never even get near CW. __________________________________________________ _______________________ Or SSB, Kim. Arnie - KT4ST "What Hath God Wrought?" |
Alun Palmer wrote:
"Guessing" wrote in news:bXVPa.1425$Bd5.445@fed1read01: I still maintain it is all a matter of achieve or cop out. Make excuses or meet a challenge. And you are correct "Code aptitude and IQ are completely unrelated" So much for the "Engineer copout" It has nothing to do whether you or I like or dislike the code. I disagree. If someone doesn't like CW, why on earth should they be forced to train as a CW operator to get accesss to phone frequencies? This is a hobby. It has nothing to do with "Antiquated technology" I don't think CW can match PSK or TOR, so it is somewhat antiquated, IMHO Well, Alun, what say we just get rid of all the "antiquated" technologies? Our anonymous friend is right. It has nothing to do with "I'll never use code" On the contrary. I don't use code, so why did I have to learn to use it? You don't have to learn anything you don't want to learn. It has everything to do with "Want HF Ham Ticket -- Pass the Test "(at the moment) If dropped is all OK with me. Times and requirements change as they should. So you have no trouble with the oncoming changes, then? I do. A Celebration of Entropy Black and white -- yep sure is -- society, government, et al make it that way. Don't Drink and Drive, 3 strikes you are outta here -- Pass the Test -- pretty black and white to me. So you don't beleive anyone should try to change any of the rules? As for Anyone who used the code as an excuse for not becoming a ham, just wasn't serious about it. An unsupported assertion, and untrue I have talked with hundreds and I mean hundreds of folks and VE's over the years and here are the copouts. I don't have time. The most common one. VE's here have found that 15 min a day EVERY day practice and in a month --90%+ pass the code test BUT the other 10% spend all night on the boob tube. Usually that is just an excuse, I agree. My XYL uses it all the time! I'll never use code. (You may never have to parallel park either) (if they still require that) No, that one is valid. I can't take tests (Has Drivers License and a BSEE) Its a lot easier to get on CB Its too expensive (has $1000 computer, can't afford a Swan 350 at $250) That one makes me smile too That Swan should be outa the picture. It's antiquated technology. Its so illogical (so is a job interview at times) Notice I didn't even mention whether I am a Ham or not -- Tech no-code or Extra ---pro or anti-code -- cause that ain't got nothing to do with -- PASS THE TEST "Alun Palmer" wrote in message . .. "Guessing" wrote in news:QWCPa.913$Bd5.644@fed1read01: Someone squawked As an engineer myself, I can verfiy that lots of engineers have told me exactly that. Whether they would get a licence once code testing is abolished might be another matter. Nonsense and a big copout It happens to be the truth, whether you like it or not If you want a BS/MS/PHD Degree -- pass the tests Want a driver license -- take a test Want a job - take a drug test and physical exam and perhaps a professional test Want insurance -- take a physical exam Want to be an apprentice (JourneyPerson) -- take the test Want to advance in the Military -- take the test Pass the Bar (Legal that is) Pass Da Test Nurses CPR for sure and maybe ACLS Tests Sobriety Test -- Try to dodge this one et al tests Want an HF Ham license -- take the code and Technical/Rules et al test Code won't be included in that for much longer. I assume that since you just say 'take the test' about everything, that you must have no problem with that. I certainly don't! Otherwise we have CB and FRS. And one who listens on these bands ought to be totally inspired to get a Ham Ticket !!! Simple as that. You live in a 'black and white' world, don't you? Anyone who used the code as an excuse for not becoming a ham, just wasn't serious about it. An unsupported assertion, and untrue If 10 to 17 year olds can do it, why can't an engineer or any other college grad ??? Code aptitude and IQ are completely unrelated Did any of those "Engineers" get a No-Code Tech license ?? Yes, I did (although I did code eventually) Didn't think so !! |
"N2EY" wrote in part ...
There are at least three different kinds of knowledge - facts, concepts and skills. __________________________________________________ _________________ In government service we refer to these as KSAs, Knowledge, Skill, Ability Arnie - KT4ST |
Arnie Macy wrote: "d. Third, Mr. Kane recommends that there be no regulatory distinction made between modes of transmission. This point would likely gain mixed, but significant support amongst NCI's membership, and it should be pointed out that this is the norm in the rest of the world and no real harm seems to have come from the lack of restrictive sub-band-by-mode limitations such as those currently embodied in the Commission's Rules." From NCIs Reply comments to the NPRM Yup, they're brain dead. Or never actaually got on the air and took a good look around at what was going on. |
"Guessing" wrote in message news:kTWPa.1427$Bd5.928@fed1read01... "Alun Palmer" wrote in message ... "Guessing" wrote in news:bXVPa.1425$Bd5.445@fed1read01: Alun I respect you opinions. Just like I don't like some laws (blue or otherwise) and CC&R's in the HOA in which I live -- I can express a personal emotion or opinion as you have. But my point is that thousands who hate the code have passed the code test because they had to in order to achieve their goals. If one's desire to get on HF is high enough, the code should not be a deterrent as many have proved. And they didn't like proving it. Just because thousands did it before, doesn't justify keeping it (the 5 wpm test). I still maintain it is all a matter of achieve or cop out. Make excuses or meet a challenge. And you are correct "Code aptitude and IQ are completely unrelated" So much for the "Engineer copout" It has nothing to do whether you or I like or dislike the code. I disagree. If someone doesn't like CW, why on earth should they be forced to train as a CW operator to get accesss to phone frequencies? This is a hobby. Because the FCC sez so -- don't mix emotions with the law. It is not a hobby -- FCC Part 97 sez it is a Service. (That ought to stir up a hornets nest!!) BUT, you seem to say...accept it and never try to change it. The ITU just dropped mandatory testing...for one of the reasons being they didn't see any need to keep it. Not one country spoke in favor of keeping mandatory code as an ITU requirement. It has nothing to do with "Antiquated technology" I don't think CW can match PSK or TOR, so it is somewhat antiquated, IMHO Besides the point The point being, in any case, that no one is saying don't use morse anymore. The ONLY issue is the test. It has nothing to do with "I'll never use code" On the contrary. I don't use code, so why did I have to learn to use it? FCC sez so -- you are making an excuse to avoid the requirement. Logic has nothing to do with it -- its the law. It's the law today. That'l change relatively soon. Ask a lawyer about that one. Hey I want to be a BSEE, why do I have to take History classes ???? You don't have to take history classes in some schools to get a BSEE. It has everything to do with "Want HF Ham Ticket -- Pass the Test "(at the moment) If dropped is all OK with me. Times and requirements change as they should. So you have no trouble with the oncoming changes, then? None at all. Good!. Black and white -- yep sure is -- society, government, et al make it that way. Don't Drink and Drive, 3 strikes you are outta here -- Pass the Test -- pretty black and white to me. So you don't beleive anyone should try to change any of the rules? Of course change is inevitable. But for now -- buckle up Or just wait it out a few months. As for Anyone who used the code as an excuse for not becoming a ham, just wasn't serious about it. An unsupported assertion, and untrue I have talked with hundreds and I mean hundreds of folks and VE's over the years and here are the copouts. I don't have time. The most common one. VE's here have found that 15 min a day EVERY day practice and in a month --90%+ pass the code test BUT the other 10% spend all night on the boob tube. Usually that is just an excuse, I agree. My XYL uses it all the time! Mine Too !! I'll never use code. (You may never have to parallel park either) (if they still require that) No, that one is valid. Try telling that to the FCC -- meantime Pass The Test Or wait till it changes. (SNIP) Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
Dick Carroll wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote: Dick Carroll wrote: Arnie Macy wrote: "JJ" wrote ... You mean you and Larry boy don't know semaphore Dick? Why that is just plain LAZINESS. You know, when conditions are so bad that you and Larry have to rely on CW and your faithful CW rigs gives up the ghost or conditions get SO bad that CW can't even get through you and Larry could save the world by using semaphore, if you had that skill, that is. ______________________________________________ _________________________ I have to presume by your comment, JJ that you indeed know semaphore. Otherwise, you look stupid when you chastise them for a skill you don't possess. And, of course -- I'm sure it's just plain LAZINESS on your part. What else could it be? Arnie, if learning semaphores had been a licensing requirement for the ARS, I would have learned it along with lots of others, like it or not. Hear, Hear! I sure wouldn't have sat on my backside for most of my lifetime carping about how 'unnecessary' it all was to make me jump through some "useless" hoop. Hear, Hear! Alas, poor Richard, they are those we now seek to bolster our ranks. Now if Carl can get to then before those nasty PCTA's with whom they don't want to associate! Isn't it special, Mike? Carl is, unfortunately evidently not one of a kind, he's just probably the worst example. Well, I'm dissapointed. Speaking of the No-coders, I wonder where the king of them all is? He should be riding in with a heavenly host of trumpets blowing....... - Mike KB3EIA - |
Kim W5TIT wrote: I think some PCTAs are darned great people and I have no problem associating with them. I think some NCTAs are darned great people and I have no problem associating with them. Now, you Dick, as a PCTA? Well, Carl's expression above says it all. Kim W5TIT Larry and Dick are perfect examples of the elitist types of hams to whom a new or prospective ham attends a ham club meeting sees as an example of ham radio, and decides they don't want to have anything to do with ham radio. |
"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
... "Carl R. Stevenson" wrote ... Fred Maia, W5YI, was quoted as saying something along that line WRT the Tech test ... but Fred is just *one* of the Directors of NCI, and I can state that his view in that regard is NOT NCI policy and is not shared by me or the rest of the NCI board. (IIRC, Fred also said he'd like to make the Extra test more rigorous ...) [Of course, NCI was never in favor of removing the digital/CW sub bands either, right?] No, we were not ... and we never said we were. If you "google" or whatever, you will, I am sure, find numerous instances of me saying that I would *not* favor an expansion of the phone bands at the expense of the digital/CW sub-bands, because I wouldn't want to see the future development of digital modes impeded. (the rest snipped) __________________________________________________ _______________________ That could be what I was thinking of. Quoted by ya'll referring to Fred. But I distinctly remember there being a discussion about lowering the technical test requirements and that NCI was in favor of that. NCI was NOT in favor of that ... Fred, and Fred alone, in his capacity on the QPC, stated something to the effect that HE thought that since most Techs use store-bought rigs, the Tech test could be simplified. I (and as I recall, all of the other NCI directors who spoke on the subject) disagreed with that view. However, Fred ALSO indicated that he thought that the Extra written test could/should be made more rigorous. Now, as to Digital/CW sub-bands. Below is the official comment by NCI -- it sure sounds like they would roll over and play dead if it should ever come to supporting the keeping of sub-bands for Digital/CW. Do you read it differently, Carl? __________________________________________________ ________________________ "d. Third, Mr. Kane recommends that there be no regulatory distinction made between modes of transmission. This point would likely gain mixed, but significant support amongst NCI's membership, and it should be pointed out that this is the norm in the rest of the world and no real harm seems to have come from the lack of restrictive sub-band-by-mode limitations such as those currently embodied in the Commission's Rules." Simply stating the facts as perceived in terms of the membership's views. This is NOT NCI's issue though ... though, as I have said over and over, I *personally* would hate to see the digital/CW sub-bands overrun by SSB. Carl - wk3c |
Dick Carroll wrote: JJ you're about as dippy as they're made these days. One of us says he beleives that it's important for hams to learn to do morse code because it's a good, really simple and viable communications mode for hams, and suddenly you've got us all packaged up as ogres. You haven't a single clue, and you'r so far off that you have no clue that you have no clue. Probably a good thing, dipschitz like you, if intelligent, might be something of an annoyance. As it is you come in somewhere below a gnat. I haven't packaged anyone who supports CW mode as an ogre, just those who choose to use derogatory terms to describe fellow hams who choose not to learn or use CW or put the importance on it you do, you know, like those dumbed-down lowly, not "real hams" good-for-nothing, no-techical knowledge, no-coders. I must really get under your skin Dickie. |
"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om... (N2EY) wrote in message ... What will be very interesting to see is what effect complete elimination of code testing has on the number of new hams and the overall growth of the ARS. More than three years ago, the 13 and 20 wpm code tests, and the medical waivers, were dumped by FCC. Result was growth of about 11,000 hams - and a lot of already-licensed hams got upgrades. Sure doesn't seem like there were a lot of people being kept out by the 13 and 20 wpm code tests. And of that 11,000 how many do you 'spose are engineers who wouldn't have become hams unless the code test was dropped to 5 wpm? And of those, how many of these newly minted ham engineers will ever make any "contribution to the service"? I don't think that's a very fair question. How many long-licensed/current hams have ever made a contribution to the service? I suspect not many by your definition, so it's not even a good question, let alone a fair one. btw - I'm an engineer, and none of the tests were a deterrent for me. 73 de Jim, N2EY w3rv Kim W5TIT --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net Complaints to |
"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
... Mike Coslo wrote: Carl R. Stevenson wrote: I'm not here to gloat ... I'm here to make sure that newcomers hear the news and aren't overly tainted by being totally awash in PCTAs to the point that they think all hams are that way and decide that ham radio isn't really for them after all, because of a false perception that it's totally populated with the sort of folks that they'd really not like to associate. :-) I think you just said that a person who is a PCTA is someone not to be associated with?!?!?!?!? Thanks for the "locker room wall" post! 8^) Mike, that's mild stuff for Carl. Go Googling for his posts and get an education in bilgewater postings. I think some PCTAs are darned great people and I have no problem associating with them. I think some NCTAs are darned great people and I have no problem associating with them. Now, you Dick, as a PCTA? Well, Carl's expression above says it all. Kim W5TIT --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net Complaints to |
"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message ... "Arnie Macy" wrote in message ... "Kim W5TIT" wrote ... No doubt what started ham radio was an experiment using the best of what was around then. Perhaps you'd like to move into the most recent century, Dick. If ham radio were "invented" today, it would never even get near CW. __________________________________________________ _______________________ Or SSB, Kim. Arnie - KT4ST "What Hath God Wrought?" Well, yeah. But my comments were specifically to Dick and were angled at his argument for CW. Heck, yeah. I think if ham radio were "invented" today, we'd pretty much need to be computer experts... Kim W5TIT If radio were invented today, no amateur radio service would even be allowed to exist. The governments would hog it all. They've already tried to take it away more than once. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote: "Kim W5TIT" wrote in message ... "Arnie Macy" wrote in message ... "Kim W5TIT" wrote ... No doubt what started ham radio was an experiment using the best of what was around then. Perhaps you'd like to move into the most recent century, Dick. If ham radio were "invented" today, it would never even get near CW. __________________________________________________ _______________________ Or SSB, Kim. Arnie - KT4ST "What Hath God Wrought?" Well, yeah. But my comments were specifically to Dick and were angled at his argument for CW. Heck, yeah. I think if ham radio were "invented" today, we'd pretty much need to be computer experts... Kim W5TIT If radio were invented today, no amateur radio service would even be allowed to exist. The governments would hog it all. They've already tried to take it away more than once. Naw, the politically connected money would soon own the whole show. |
"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
... "Dee D. Flint" wrote: "Kim W5TIT" wrote in message ... "Arnie Macy" wrote in message ... "Kim W5TIT" wrote ... No doubt what started ham radio was an experiment using the best of what was around then. Perhaps you'd like to move into the most recent century, Dick. If ham radio were "invented" today, it would never even get near CW. __________________________________________________ _______________________ Or SSB, Kim. Arnie - KT4ST "What Hath God Wrought?" Well, yeah. But my comments were specifically to Dick and were angled at his argument for CW. Heck, yeah. I think if ham radio were "invented" today, we'd pretty much need to be computer experts... Kim W5TIT If radio were invented today, no amateur radio service would even be allowed to exist. The governments would hog it all. They've already tried to take it away more than once. Naw, the politically connected money would soon own the whole show. Dick, the huge chip on shoulder is filled with gangue green. Kim W5TIT --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net Complaints to |
JJ wrote: Kim W5TIT wrote: I think some PCTAs are darned great people and I have no problem associating with them. I think some NCTAs are darned great people and I have no problem associating with them. Now, you Dick, as a PCTA? Well, Carl's expression above says it all. Kim W5TIT Larry and Dick are perfect examples of the elitist types of hams to whom a new or prospective ham attends a ham club meeting sees as an example of ham radio, and decides they don't want to have anything to do with ham radio. JJ you're about as dippy as they're made these days. One of us says he beleives that it's important for hams to learn to do morse code because it's a good, really simple and viable communications mode for hams, and suddenly you've got us all packaged up as ogres. You haven't a single clue, and you'r so far off that you have no clue that you have no clue. Probably a good thing, dipschitz like you, if intelligent, might be something of an annoyance. As it is you come in somewhere below a gnat. |
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in part ...
Simply stating the facts as perceived in terms of the membership's views. This is NOT NCI's issue though ... though, as I have said over and over, I *personally* would hate to see the digital/CW sub-bands overrun by SSB. __________________________________________________ ______________________ Your position as to Digital/CW subands is well documented, Carl. I was simply quoting the "official" reply comments of NCI to the NPRM. It seems pretty clear that, in general, they will be very soft on this issue. Maybe, with your influence, you could convince them otherwise. Arnie - KT4ST |
Dee D. Flint wrote:
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message ... "Guessing" wrote in message news:kTWPa.1427$Bd5.928@fed1read01... "Alun Palmer" wrote in message ... "Guessing" wrote in news:bXVPa.1425$Bd5.445@fed1read01: Ask a lawyer about that one. Hey I want to be a BSEE, why do I have to take History classes ???? You don't have to take history classes in some schools to get a BSEE. Broaden the category to Socio-Humanistic electives or whatever equivalent term that your college uses and you will find that you do have to take a certain amount of them. And everyone regardless of major has to take English even though they should already be proficient at that before they get there. You have to take quite a few "unnecessary" courses in college to get a degree in any field. Unless you are a "non-traditional student" at old PSU, you have to take Physical Education classes. My son is taking Karate this semester, as a required course. It has no bearing on his eventual carreer, yet he may elect to not take it, and not graduate. He has to take some history, to and there are plenty of other classes that have a questionable relevence to his eventual carreer. Even the Electrical engineers have to take these classes. The idea is actually sound, as it helps produce a more well rounded individual. It also takes into account that a person may not have the same "core competencies" their entire career. A narrowly focused education may prepare a person for a carreer that eventually dissapears. - Mike KB3EIA - |
JJ wrote:
Kim W5TIT wrote: I think some PCTAs are darned great people and I have no problem associating with them. I think some NCTAs are darned great people and I have no problem associating with them. Now, you Dick, as a PCTA? Well, Carl's expression above says it all. Kim W5TIT Larry and Dick are perfect examples of the elitist types of hams to whom a new or prospective ham attends a ham club meeting sees as an example of ham radio, and decides they don't want to have anything to do with ham radio. Gee, you guys are sensitive! Both Larry and Dick are very outspoken, and I have disagreed with both of them at times. So What??? I like them both. Who the heck say everyone has to agree with everyone else? - Mike KB3EIA - |
JJ wrote:
Kim W5TIT wrote: I think some PCTAs are darned great people and I have no problem associating with them. I think some NCTAs are darned great people and I have no problem associating with them. Now, you Dick, as a PCTA? Well, Carl's expression above says it all. Kim W5TIT Larry and Dick are perfect examples of the elitist types of hams to whom a new or prospective ham attends a ham club meeting sees as an example of ham radio, and decides they don't want to have anything to do with ham radio. Hey JJ, you have a real name and maybe a callsign? Or are you just here from the cb group doing a little trolling? - Mike KB3EIA - |
Dick Carroll wrote: JJ it's just another minor rrap irritant that you're another dip**** who spouts off without having a hint of a clue. No problem,we've had plenty of them here on rrap to date. You and Kim fit really well together. Now I know I am getting under your skin when you resort to the childish vulgar name calling. Good! Oh, don't think just because you try to be anonymous that no one can find out who you are. That's been tried here before. If I was interested at all I'd already know. I'm not, but some others will probably be. So who am I? |
Kim W5TIT wrote: And, so once you "find out" who JJ is, Dick, what would you be doing with that? You're making veiled threats now, are you? Kim W5TIT He's gonna come punch me in the nose with his CW key. |
Mike Coslo wrote in
: Alun Palmer wrote: "Guessing" wrote in news:bXVPa.1425$Bd5.445@fed1read01: I still maintain it is all a matter of achieve or cop out. Make excuses or meet a challenge. And you are correct "Code aptitude and IQ are completely unrelated" So much for the "Engineer copout" It has nothing to do whether you or I like or dislike the code. I disagree. If someone doesn't like CW, why on earth should they be forced to train as a CW operator to get accesss to phone frequencies? This is a hobby. It has nothing to do with "Antiquated technology" I don't think CW can match PSK or TOR, so it is somewhat antiquated, IMHO Well, Alun, what say we just get rid of all the "antiquated" technologies? Our anonymous friend is right. No. although I'm glad spark isn't allowed! It has nothing to do with "I'll never use code" On the contrary. I don't use code, so why did I have to learn to use it? You don't have to learn anything you don't want to learn. On the contrary, I had to learn code to get HF phone. It certainly wasn't done willingly It has everything to do with "Want HF Ham Ticket -- Pass the Test "(at the moment) If dropped is all OK with me. Times and requirements change as they should. So you have no trouble with the oncoming changes, then? I do. A Celebration of Entropy All systems tend to maximise entropy. You must know that. Black and white -- yep sure is -- society, government, et al make it that way. Don't Drink and Drive, 3 strikes you are outta here -- Pass the Test -- pretty black and white to me. So you don't beleive anyone should try to change any of the rules? As for Anyone who used the code as an excuse for not becoming a ham, just wasn't serious about it. An unsupported assertion, and untrue I have talked with hundreds and I mean hundreds of folks and VE's over the years and here are the copouts. I don't have time. The most common one. VE's here have found that 15 min a day EVERY day practice and in a month --90%+ pass the code test BUT the other 10% spend all night on the boob tube. Usually that is just an excuse, I agree. My XYL uses it all the time! I'll never use code. (You may never have to parallel park either) (if they still require that) No, that one is valid. I can't take tests (Has Drivers License and a BSEE) Its a lot easier to get on CB Its too expensive (has $1000 computer, can't afford a Swan 350 at $250) That one makes me smile too That Swan should be outa the picture. It's antiquated technology. It has it's place, if it is available for a low enough price Its so illogical (so is a job interview at times) Notice I didn't even mention whether I am a Ham or not -- Tech no-code or Extra ---pro or anti-code -- cause that ain't got nothing to do with -- PASS THE TEST "Alun Palmer" wrote in message ... "Guessing" wrote in news:QWCPa.913$Bd5.644@fed1read01: Someone squawked As an engineer myself, I can verfiy that lots of engineers have told me exactly that. Whether they would get a licence once code testing is abolished might be another matter. Nonsense and a big copout It happens to be the truth, whether you like it or not If you want a BS/MS/PHD Degree -- pass the tests Want a driver license -- take a test Want a job - take a drug test and physical exam and perhaps a professional test Want insurance -- take a physical exam Want to be an apprentice (JourneyPerson) -- take the test Want to advance in the Military -- take the test Pass the Bar (Legal that is) Pass Da Test Nurses CPR for sure and maybe ACLS Tests Sobriety Test -- Try to dodge this one et al tests Want an HF Ham license -- take the code and Technical/Rules et al test Code won't be included in that for much longer. I assume that since you just say 'take the test' about everything, that you must have no problem with that. I certainly don't! Otherwise we have CB and FRS. And one who listens on these bands ought to be totally inspired to get a Ham Ticket !!! Simple as that. You live in a 'black and white' world, don't you? Anyone who used the code as an excuse for not becoming a ham, just wasn't serious about it. An unsupported assertion, and untrue If 10 to 17 year olds can do it, why can't an engineer or any other college grad ??? Code aptitude and IQ are completely unrelated Did any of those "Engineers" get a No-Code Tech license ?? Yes, I did (although I did code eventually) Didn't think so !! |
"Radio Amateur KC2HMZ" wrote in message ... On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 00:19:01 -0400, "Bill Sohl" wrote: Ask a lawyer about that one. Hey I want to be a BSEE, why do I have to take History classes ???? You don't have to take history classes in some schools to get a BSEE. Correct...but, in my opinion, still misses one major point, namely that an amateur radio license and a BSEE are entirely different. Agree. A BSEE is a degree awarded at the *end* of an academic pursuit for the purpose of recognizing successful completion thereof and to certify that the recipient has acquired significant knowledge in the field. By the time you get a BSEE, you're supposed to have forgotten more about electrical engineering than most people have ever learned. It'll get you a decent job even if you bluffed your way through and really don't know shinola. It's supposedly proof of an accomplishment, that being a well-rounded education, with particular emphasis in a specialized field. That's why most (not all) institutes of higher learning require classes in things like history, literature, and other stuff that would seem unrelated. Well said...Agree 100% If I were Larry Roll, I'd lament that I've seen so many people with college degrees that still couldn't fill out a job application properly, that the requirements for a college degree must have been seriously dumbed down over the past thirty years, but I'm not, so I won't. Nevertheless, I have worked with people who held engineering degrees yet could not compose a coherent memo for circulation in their own department. Sad but true. I have encountered the same thing with folks that hold PHD's too... academically brilliant in their own environment but don't let them near a customer. An amateur radio license is a document awarded at the *beginning* of one's participation in the hobby for the purpose of granting operating privileges and to certify that the recipient has demonstrated entry level knowledge at the class of license thus received. It won't get you a job bagging groceries. As for the accomplishments, those come afterward when you actually start to make use of the privileges the license conveys by putting Qs in your logbook. It is not, and is not intended to be, comparable to a college degree...no matter how much some people would like it to be so. Agree again. Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in
.com: "Bill Sohl" wrote in message ... "Guessing" wrote in message news:kTWPa.1427$Bd5.928@fed1read01... "Alun Palmer" wrote in message ... "Guessing" wrote in news:bXVPa.1425$Bd5.445@fed1read01: Ask a lawyer about that one. Hey I want to be a BSEE, why do I have to take History classes ???? You don't have to take history classes in some schools to get a BSEE. Broaden the category to Socio-Humanistic electives or whatever equivalent term that your college uses and you will find that you do have to take a certain amount of them. And everyone regardless of major has to take English even though they should already be proficient at that before they get there. You have to take quite a few "unnecessary" courses in college to get a degree in any field. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I'm against that too. BTW, I got my EE degree in England, and you don't have to go through any of that wholly irrelevant stuff. No English, no social studies of any kind, no chemistry (which I understand is oftem required over here). |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Dee D. Flint wrote: If radio were invented today, no amateur radio service would even be allowed to exist. The governments would hog it all. They've already tried to take it away more than once. Mostly at Radio's early beginning. 200 Meters and Down is a must read. Yup, it's a great book. I'm just glad that the ARRL has seen fit to finally reissue it. I borrowed a copy from the club library years ago and have been looking to purchase one ever since. However, while the government is no longer trying to banish us, they still keep trying to get our frequencies. If carried to the ultimate end, this would accomplish the same thing. And the less the qualification required to become a ham, the closer they are to being fully justified to just dumping us on whatever sliver of spectrum the commercials don'te want at the moment. Until the time comes that no one with any sense would be bothered with it and at that point it's just another version of CB. From that point it becomes an academic exercise to watch it completely fade away, replaced by the internet and a few FRS style HT's. Oh, ARRL will still be there waving the flag and yelling Gung Ho! over the few dweebs remaining. |
Bill Sohl wrote: "Radio Amateur KC2HMZ" wrote An amateur radio license is a document awarded at the *beginning* of one's participation in the hobby for the purpose of granting operating privileges and to certify that the recipient has demonstrated entry level knowledge at the class of license thus received. And since the Extra class license is awarded to illiterates today, your point is at least partly valid. In past times the Extra class license wasn't issued to people whom the FCC wasn't pretty sure had the knowledge and ability to function at the top level of ham radio. The Extra class license, at its inception, was never intended to be a entry level license at all. That you "modernists" conclude otherwise serves to confirm just how far the "dumbing down" of the ARS has gone. It won't get you a job bagging groceries. And definitely that was not always the case. I've landed a couple jobs in electronics on the strength of my ham ticket, and later partially so, since by that time I also held a commercial license. But knowledgble administraters used to consider a ham to be knowledgable in electronics.; Again, that it isn't so these days speaks to just how far toward CB the ARS has slid. Youi never saw CBers beiong viewed as technically competent because of their participation in ratchetjawing. Sure looks like the same applies to today's voice-only hams! As for the accomplishments, those come afterward when you actually start to make use of the privileges the license conveys by putting Qs in your logbook. Ah, yes, technical stuff all! Sure that makes all the difference in the world, fill that log and become an "experienced" ham, for whatever good it will do you! It is not, and is not intended to be, comparable to a college degree...no matter how much some people would like it to be so. Agree again. That's no surprise |
Alun Palmer wrote: Mike Coslo wrote in : Dee D. Flint wrote: "Bill Sohl" wrote in message ... "Guessing" wrote in message news:kTWPa.1427$Bd5.928@fed1read01... "Alun Palmer" wrote in message . 4... "Guessing" wrote in news:bXVPa.1425$Bd5.445@fed1read01: Ask a lawyer about that one. Hey I want to be a BSEE, why do I have to take History classes ???? You don't have to take history classes in some schools to get a BSEE. Broaden the category to Socio-Humanistic electives or whatever equivalent term that your college uses and you will find that you do have to take a certain amount of them. And everyone regardless of major has to take English even though they should already be proficient at that before they get there. You have to take quite a few "unnecessary" courses in college to get a degree in any field. Unless you are a "non-traditional student" at old PSU, you have to take Physical Education classes. My son is taking Karate this semester, as a required course. It has no bearing on his eventual carreer, yet he may elect to not take it, and not graduate. He has to take some history, to and there are plenty of other classes that have a questionable relevence to his eventual carreer. Even the Electrical engineers have to take these classes. The idea is actually sound, as it helps produce a more well rounded individual. It also takes into account that a person may not have the same "core competencies" their entire career. A narrowly focused education may prepare a person for a carreer that eventually dissapears. - Mike KB3EIA - I might have known that you would think it was a good idea - I don't When my son-in-law(a ham) was deciding which engineering discipline to major in (he later graduated cum laude in civil engineering) he discussed it with my daughter who suggested that transportation was a industry that isn't going away, so he became a highway engineer, working on interstate and tollway projects. He has been steadily employed with a large stable national company, and does very well. On the other hand, I read a number of electrical and digital engineers lamenting the shipping of their work to offshore areas like India and the middle east (I read that Microsoft is doing that - I wonder who they plan to sell their wares to when all the good jobs here are gone?) where such engineering can be done at far less expense than in the US. Meanwhile, it's difficult to engineer a road project from the other side of the planet! |
Dick Carroll wrote: Bill Sohl wrote: "Radio Amateur KC2HMZ" wrote An amateur radio license is a document awarded at the *beginning* of one's participation in the hobby for the purpose of granting operating privileges and to certify that the recipient has demonstrated entry level knowledge at the class of license thus received. And since the Extra class license is awarded to illiterates today, your point is at least partly valid. In past times the Extra class license wasn't issued to people whom the FCC wasn't pretty sure had the knowledge and ability to function at the top level of ham radio. The Extra class license, at its inception, was never intended to be a entry level license at all. That you "modernists" conclude otherwise serves to confirm just how far the "dumbing down" of the ARS has gone. It won't get you a job bagging groceries. And definitely that was not always the case. I've landed a couple jobs in electronics on the strength of my ham ticket, and later partially so, since by that time I also held a commercial license. But knowledgble administraters used to consider a ham to be knowledgable in electronics.; Again, that it isn't so these days speaks to just how far toward CB the ARS has slid. Youi never saw CBers beiong viewed as technically competent because of their participation in ratchetjawing. Sure looks like the same applies to today's voice-only hams! So are you suggesting that the ham tests should be upgraded to include chip design and surface mount technology? Those are the technical skills required today. |
JJ wrote: Dick Carroll wrote: JJ it's just another minor rrap irritant that you're another dip**** who spouts off without having a hint of a clue. No problem,we've had plenty of them here on rrap to date. You and Kim fit really well together. Now I know I am getting under your skin when you resort to the childish vulgar name calling. Good! Oh, don't think just because you try to be anonymous that no one can find out who you are. That's been tried here before. If I was interested at all I'd already know. I'm not, but some others will probably be. So who am I? I will give you a clue, my Novice station was featured in one of the early 1960's edition of Popular Electronics under the "Novice Station Of the Month" column. |
In article , Radio Amateur KC2HMZ
writes: If I were Larry Roll, I'd lament that I've seen so many people with college degrees that still couldn't fill out a job application properly, that the requirements for a college degree must have been seriously dumbed down over the past thirty years, but I'm not, so I won't. John: Well, if you won't, then allow me. I received my B.S. degree late in life, having graduated in 1999. During the three years I went to college at night and worked a full-time, 7-day-a-week job, I obtained a 3.88 GPA, stayed on the Dean's List the full time, and graduated Summa. Many times my professors complimented me on my work, saying that the papers I submitted to them were of higher quality than even those they had seen from graduate students. In fact, they told horror stories of grad students submitting papers that were barely written in recognizable English -- to the point where in one particular class several Master's degree candidates were dismissed from the program and an investigation started as to how they were granted Bachelor's degrees and subsequently accepted into the Master's degree program. Apparently, if an honest and objective evaluation of our colleges and universities were made, we would, indeed, find alarming evidence of the "dumbing down" of our educational system. Nevertheless, I have worked with people who held engineering degrees yet could not compose a coherent memo for circulation in their own department. I experienced the same situation all throughout my Air Force career. I had only an Associate's degree at the time, but frequently found myself having to do most of the reading, writing, reasearch, and ultimately decision-making for my allegedly college-educated officers. An amateur radio license is a document awarded at the *beginning* of one's participation in the hobby for the purpose of granting operating privileges and to certify that the recipient has demonstrated entry level knowledge at the class of license thus received. It won't get you a job bagging groceries. As for the accomplishments, those come afterward when you actually start to make use of the privileges the license conveys by putting Qs in your logbook. It is not, and is not intended to be, comparable to a college degree...no matter how much some people would like it to be so. I don't recall anyone here ever attempting to make such a comparison. A ham radio license is merely a document conferring operating privileges. It is a license to learn and grow. Unfortunately, it doesn't always produce that outcome. 73 de Larry, K3LT |
"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
... JJ wrote: Dick Carroll wrote: JJ you're about as dippy as they're made these days. One of us says he beleives that it's important for hams to learn to do morse code because it's a good, really simple and viable communications mode for hams, and suddenly you've got us all packaged up as ogres. You haven't a single clue, and you'r so far off that you have no clue that you have no clue. Probably a good thing, dipschitz like you, if intelligent, might be something of an annoyance. As it is you come in somewhere below a gnat. I haven't packaged anyone who supports CW mode as an ogre, just those who choose to use derogatory terms to describe fellow hams who choose not to learn or use CW or put the importance on it you do, you know, like those dumbed-down lowly, not "real hams" good-for-nothing, no-techical knowledge, no-coders. I must really get under your skin Dickie. JJ it's just another minor rrap irritant that you're another dip**** who spouts off without having a hint of a clue. No problem,we've had plenty of them here on rrap to date. You and Kim fit really well together. Yeah, ROFLMAO...you notice Dick won't even try to respond to any of my posts, at least directly. It's 'cause he knows I make good points--one he cannot answer to. Oh, don't think just because you try to be anonymous that no one can find out who you are. That's been tried here before. If I was interested at all I'd already know. I'm not, but some others will probably be. And, so once you "find out" who JJ is, Dick, what would you be doing with that? You're making veiled threats now, are you? Kim W5TIT --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net Complaints to |
|
Dwight Stewart wrote: "N2EY" wrote: "Knowledge" in this context really means anything that can be learned and known consciously by a person. There are at least three different kinds of knowledge - facts, concepts and skills. Is there significant knowledge in using a hammer skillfully? Dwight your ignorance is showing again--OF COURSE there is! Facts are concrete pieces of information, and are learned by pure memorization. "1 plus 1 equals 2 in base 10" is an arithmetic fact. A person can know all sorts of facts with no understanding of what they mean. Concepts are understandings of how things work and what they mean. Such as the concept of addition, which requires understanding. Of course without facts, very little can be done with pure concepts. (snip) Most of what is on the written test is facts. The Morse test is almost pure skill. Concepts get the short end. I'm not sure I can fully agree with that since the written tests do require at least rudimentary understanding of scientific concepts like radio waves, RF exposure, atmospheric affects on radio waves, and so on (all found in even college level science textbooks, including Ohm's Law). That would true be if one bothered to actually learn the background information on the questions that are in the pool. Most don't, since the objective is to pass the test and get the license. Learning is not a requirement. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com