Brian wrote:
Alun Palmer wrote in message . ..

Dave Heil wrote in
:


Alun Palmer wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in
:



You must be related to our friend Vipul! At least you think
alike.

- Mike KB3EIA -



Well, he's clearly Indian,

That isn't clear at all.


and I'm British, so it wouldn't surprise me if we share some views in
common and don't buy into the received wisdom of the US of A.

That wouldn't surprise me either but both of you seem to prefer feeding
at the American trough.

Dave K8MN


In this economy it's less of a trough and more of a small dish


There are alternatives. Just the other day my neighbor commented that
he was considering a move to Pakistan or India for the opportunity to
build a better life for himself and his family. ;^)

If he's a programmer, he may have to! Everyone (and I do mean everyone)
seems to be shipping all their programming to India. I got a new
computer a few days ago and needed to call tech service. Guess where it
was..... I did have a bit of trouble understanding the accents, but the
help *was* good.

- Mike KB3EIA -

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

Mike Coslo wrote in
:

Alun Palmer wrote:
"Phil Kane" wrote in
.net:


On 16 Jul 2003 14:28:18 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:


I had to read it a few times. I think the reason for poor performance
in UK engineering has nothing to do with the quality of UK engineers
and everything to do with the culture of UK companies, in which the
engineers are not in charge, but instead the accountants are.

If you don't think that that is the case "over here" too, you have
not been paying attention to how Corporate America is being run.


And this is not
because we don't study business subjects (we do), or because we don't
do English or History or 'Western Civilisation' in college (the
accountants don't either).

In other words, your "professional education" is basically trade
school programs.



So what would you call a degree in a non-vocational subject?


What a waste.


As I understand it (and I freely admit there are gaps in my knowledge
of your system), you can get a 4-year degree over here with 120 (?)
semester- hours of credit, and maybe only half of it has to be in
your major (?). When I sat down and tried to calculate it (from old
timetables, since there are no hours on my transcript, only grades)
my 3-year UK degree included about 150 semester-hours of classroom
time, of which about 120 semester hours was in engineering subjects,
the rest being things like economics, finance, mathematics, etc.

IIRC my BEE degree was more like 180 hours (4 years of 20-credit
semesters plus one summer of Surveying -- did you take that by any
chance? It came in real handy when I built my first house and when
I studied Real Estate Law in law school and when I discuss or plot
radio path and contour calculations or directional antenna patterns
with clients or even map-reading and "orienteering" with
non-technical hiking friends and relatives.

No chemistry in an engineering program? This is not the same as a
Literature or Cultural Humasnitiers course. This is basic science.

In an EE program we took a year of chemistry (class and lab), two
years of physics, one year of advanced math, and assorted courses in
non-EE engineering subjects such as thermodynamics, mechanics of
materials, atomic physics, and surveying, plus our rigorous EE power
and electronics courses.

That was 50 years ago. Now they require a lot more of "non-EE"
stuff such as environmental engineering and medical engineering
The school has acquired a reputation for application research in
those fields.

Otherwise one is not a rell-educated engineer - one is a geek with a
degree.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane


So what's so wrong eith being a geek?

Well, nothing, I guess. Too bad tho' - there is a much bigger
world
out there.



Sure, but anyone can read up on any subject they like. Nothing stops me
from pursuing whatever interests I want, regardless of not having done
western civilisation in college, or whatever.

Mike Coslo wrote in
:

Brian wrote:
Alun Palmer wrote in message
. ..

Dave Heil wrote in
:


Alun Palmer wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in
:



You must be related to our friend Vipul! At least you think
alike.

- Mike KB3EIA -



Well, he's clearly Indian,

That isn't clear at all.


and I'm British, so it wouldn't surprise me if we share some views
in common and don't buy into the received wisdom of the US of A.

That wouldn't surprise me either but both of you seem to prefer
feeding at the American trough.

Dave K8MN


In this economy it's less of a trough and more of a small dish


There are alternatives. Just the other day my neighbor commented that
he was considering a move to Pakistan or India for the opportunity to
build a better life for himself and his family. ;^)

If he's a programmer, he may have to! Everyone (and I do mean
everyone)
seems to be shipping all their programming to India. I got a new
computer a few days ago and needed to call tech service. Guess where it
was..... I did have a bit of trouble understanding the accents, but the
help *was* good.

- Mike KB3EIA -



You might even work more DX as a VU2

Alun Palmer wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in
:

Alun Palmer wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in
:

You must be related to our friend Vipul! At least you think
alike.

- Mike KB3EIA -



Well, he's clearly Indian,

That isn't clear at all.

and I'm British, so it wouldn't surprise me if we share some views in
common and don't buy into the received wisdom of the US of A.

That wouldn't surprise me either but both of you seem to prefer feeding
at the American trough.

In this economy it's less of a trough and more of a small dish

You must prefer it to the even smaller dish in your home country.
You've got gripes about the "received wisdom of the US of A" but both
of you stick around to reap the benefits of life here.

Enjoy your sniping. It's on us.

Dave K8MN

Dave K8MN

"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.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

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

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.

Dave K8MN

"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?

Nobody is "forced". Those who want a music degree from a particular
institution may have piano as a requirement for the degree, but they
are not "forced" to learn it unless they are also "forced" to attend
the institution and "forced" to get the degree. The requirements are
set by those who run the institutions, who probably know more about
music than the students.

OTOH, millions of young children today are "forced" to learn how to do
basic arithmetic even though inexpensive calculators have been around
for decades. Even though most professional/commercial/military
arithemtic is done by computers and calculators far faster and with
less error than any human.

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.

Would you have a problem with a "Chopsticks" requirement? Because
that's about what we have now.

For comparison, consider the old US Navy Radioman "A" level test, as
given in 1958. Required the copy of 5 symbol coded groups at 24 wpm.
On a standard Navy mill (manual typewriter). For a solid hour, with no
more than 3 errors.

I don't think so ...

Do you play any musical instruments?

--

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? 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?

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? The
movies have done it for years, although once they used live music.
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". (Celine Dion is a real human, however).

Don't shoot me, I'm not the piano player.

73 de Jim, N2EY

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.

Alun Palmer wrote in message . ..
(Brian) wrote in
m:

Alun Palmer wrote in message
. ..
Dave Heil wrote in
:

Alun Palmer wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in
:

You must be related to our friend Vipul! At least you think
alike.

- Mike KB3EIA -



Well, he's clearly Indian,

That isn't clear at all.

and I'm British, so it wouldn't surprise me if we share some views
in common and don't buy into the received wisdom of the US of A.

That wouldn't surprise me either but both of you seem to prefer
feeding at the American trough.

Dave K8MN


In this economy it's less of a trough and more of a small dish

There are alternatives. Just the other day my neighbor commented that
he was considering a move to Pakistan or India for the opportunity to
build a better life for himself and his family. ;^)


In my field I keep seeing ads for jobs in Japan

There you go. Lots of roam around space, inexpensive rents and
groceries. A code-free HF license.

"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

(N2EY) wrote in message . com...
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

You seem to spend a lot of time in the twilight zone, Jim. Say hi to
Art, and best wishes for a speedy recovery.

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

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

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

Carl:

*I* think so. When you learn the piano, you're dealing with chords virtualy
from the beginning. You learn more about key signatures, time signatures,
and the structure of harmony from learning the piano than you do with any
other instrument. Why do you think virtually all music is composed on
the piano (or modern electronic keyboards)? It is because the piano has
all the basics wrapped up in one instrument which is a bit more difficult
to learn, but does virtually as much as all the others combined. I started
with the clarinet, and quickly moved to the various types of saxophone
and the trombone. I could play the instruments well enough, but I never
had the general background in musical theory that all the piano players
had, regardless of which instrument they were playing at the time.
Therefore, I never became a Real Musician(tm) as a result. Piano is an
essential skill in music, and I firmly believe all musicians should start
on the piano and be tested in piano proficiency before being allowed to
move on to any other instrument -- which will be much easier as a result.

73 de Larry, K3LT

Kim W5TIT wrote:

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.

Read Vipul's posts. Those are about as close to printed whining as you
can get. He continues to post his ARS slurs long after they have been
proven wrong. Otherwise I agree with you that often "disagreement" is
rferred to as whining.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Kim W5TIT wrote:

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!
;)

Brian's saying that it isn't his problem does not mean that he has no
problem. In this case, it only means that he doesn't care to
acknowledge it.

Dave K8MN

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

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.

Nope.

I haven't seen any truthful answers to my questions about your alleged /T5
operations. In fact I haven't seen any answers at all, just evasions such as
"those questions are too hard".

Here they are again:

What callsign was used?
What rigs and antennas were used?
Who did the equipment belong to?
What amateur bands and modes were used?
What countries and continents were worked?
How were the QSLs delivered?

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

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.

Where? Not here on rrap.

Whether you or Jim believe me isn't my problem.

Yet you insist on being evasive rather than simply answering the questions.

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message ...

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

Kim W5TIT

Kim, he really doesn't understand, does he? I think he's still
lashing out over his Tanzania/French 6M debacle.

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


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


Carl:

*I* think so. When you learn the piano, you're dealing with chords virtualy
from the beginning. You learn more about key signatures, time signatures,
and the structure of harmony from learning the piano than you do with any
other instrument. Why do you think virtually all music is composed on
the piano (or modern electronic keyboards)?

Yaknow, Larry, I think maybe there is a new cause brewing here "No
Piano's International. We can get those stupid arbitrary requirements to
learn the piano abolished. 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Kim W5TIT wrote:

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.

Read Vipul's posts. Those are about as close to printed whining as you
can get. He continues to post his ARS slurs long after they have been
proven wrong. Otherwise I agree with you that often "disagreement" is
rferred to as whining.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Well, and this is no personal comment on Vipul(?) as I haven't paid much
attention to his posting--if someone is wrong, they are wrong. BUT, still
in all, if someone disagrees with CW testing and, therefore, chooses not to
participate in the process of testing for amateur radio, I see nothing wrong
with that and don't consider their protests whining.

In other words, if someone just plain disagrees with the testing and states
it as so and has valid responses to "the other side" then I see nothing
wrong with it. For goodness' sake, the licensed person could be considered
as a whiner, too, right?

Here's an example. Person A is the person who disagrees with the CW
licensing issue. Person B is a licensed amateur radio operator.

A: I think that CW testing should be done away with.
B: Why would CW be done away with, when it's been a basic part of the
licensing process for a long time?
A: I don't agree that testing for CW proficiency has anything to do with
being a good amateur radio operator.
B: But CW is a useful skill to have as an amateur radio operator!
A: There are many modes in ham radio. To focus on one and use it as a
testing tool is wrong, in my opinion.

That is the general stance of the CW debate. No one, above, has whined. It
is when personal disagreements get involved that it quickly degrades into a
senseless and meaningless idiot challenge.

Kim W5TIT


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

In article , Alun Palmer
writes:

"Guessing" wrote in
news:bXVPa.1425$Bd5.445@fed1read01:

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.

OK, fine. If someone doesn't like building their own equipment why on earth
should they be forced to learn all sorts of stuff about how radios work to get
access to modern, reliable manufactured transmitting equipment that has no
critical adjustments and won't go outside the allocated bands? This is a hobby
(for them).

It has nothing to do with "Antiquated technology"

I don't think CW can match PSK or TOR, so it is somewhat antiquated, IMHO

In some ways CW beats PSK-31 and the various TOR modes. And the reverse. All
depends on the measure.

73 de Jim, N2EY

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

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message
...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
y.com...
[snip] 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 respect your opinion, Dee, but don't understand it. Choosing not to
participate in something one does not agree with is part of the
democratic
process. If you don't agree with fishermen netting dolphins,
accidentally
or otherwise, refusing to eat fish is committing to a principle. It may
not
change a thing in terms of commercial fishing practices, but why would
someone be so dedicated to the idea of not wanting dolphins caught in
fishing nets; but then turn around and eat fish--supporting the action
so
to
speak?


Wanting HF privileges and refusing to take the code but waiting instead is
just like not wanting dolphins harmed but eating fish. Pariticipation or
non-participation has a different effect depending on what is being
protested.


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.


That may sound nice and packaged when speaking just to the issue of CW
testing in the ham radio licensure process. But, that same principle
applied to other areas doesn't work, so why should it for ham radio?

The principal does work for other areas. Just look at the noticeable
number
of college graduates who ended up pursuing a career in a field other than
that in which they received their degree. And it was generally based on
interest sparked by some non-degree course they had to take. People need
to
be exposed to a broad range of basics. In ham radio, that should include
at
least a minimal code test.



But, you have a personal dislike for what you perceive to be laziness,
and
you want a federal agency to support that personal dislike. I don't
think
the US Government should be in the business of supporting personal
dislikes--they are close enough to that as it is.


You have a personal dislike for code and want a federal agency to support
your personal dislike.

I do not have a dislike for laziness. If the person is happy being lazy
and
does not demand things he/she hasn't worked for, that's great. They are
probably the happiest people on earth. I will, however, always object to
the person who demands what they haven't earned regardless of the field of
endeavor.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


I respectfully misunderstand, I believe. I don't know what's wrong with
wishing or demanding something one has not worked for; it will do them no
good in this case since they cannot legally operate amateur radio without a
license. I have no problem with someone screaming from the top of the world
that they "want" something. They just can't have it until they've met
whatever demands there are to have it. If they wish to seek changes to the
way of getting something they want, and those changes are made, I have no
problem with that.

Kim W5TIT


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

In article , "Phil Kane"
writes:

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.....

In large part that's because dependence on the machine has reduced/eliminated
development of the skill. In most stores, employees are REQUIRED to go by what
the machine says.

I don't know about where others are, but in my school district the kids do
learn basic arithmetic. Most of them are good at it, and retain the skill.

But in this age of claculators and computers, why must ALL children be FORCED
to learn basic arithmetic - 'specially given that at least some don't retain
it? And it is FORCED on ALL children.

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.

Exactly. But why must piano be required if a person doesn't want to play piano?
Why must any skill be required if the person doesn't want to be a performer?

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.

The exact same is true of about 99% of amateur radio operation.

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.

I am still amazed that the new contract got through.

I think the musicians would understand what I was trying to say.

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.

Now you know why Carl's "strawman" scheme will not be accepted.

(You do know that I have been trained as a cantor.)

I surmised as much.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Dee D. Flint wrote:

I do not have a dislike for laziness. If the person is happy being lazy and
does not demand things he/she hasn't worked for, that's great. They are
probably the happiest people on earth. I will, however, always object to
the person who demands what they haven't earned regardless of the field of
endeavor.


Those who are lazy always have a negative impact on those around them.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Kim W5TIT wrote:

"Dave Heil" wrote in message
...
Kim W5TIT wrote:

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!
;)

Brian's saying that it isn't his problem does not mean that he has no
problem. In this case, it only means that he doesn't care to
acknowledge it.

Dave K8MN


If someone does not acknowledge/accept something as a problem to them, it is
generally a moot point from their perspective.

Fine. That does not mean that the person has no problem. It only means
that the individual chooses to ignore it.


But, you don't understand
such things, Dave.... You have a book to live by.

It is precisely because I have a book to live by that I understand such
things. I understand, for example, that this is simply another time
that you've attempted to inject yourself into an issue when you really
have nothing to say.

Dave K8MN

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

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

No, that's not true.

An amateur license, driver's license and a "certificate of graduation" (usually
called a diploma) indicate that the holder has met the minimum requirements, as
determined by the agency in charge. Doesn't mean the holder is an expert, fully
qualified, or that the learning is done. Just that the person is considered
permanently qualified to do certain things.

A learner's permit is a temporary, limited license, issued to allow the holder
to learn, under the immediate supervision of an experienced person, skills
which cannot be learned from a book or class. The holder of a learner's permit
is not supposed to stay at that level, but to "graduate" to a permanent
license.

Of course learning is a lifelong process, and no radio amateur knows all there
is to know about radio or even amateur radio. But a ham license is not a
"learner's permit" by any stretch of imagination. In the days when the Novice
was extremely limited (distinctive call, xtal control, tiny parts of a few
bands, very few modes) and nonrenewable, it might have been considered a
learner's permit. But those days are long gone.

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

Ahem.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message gy.com...
"Alun Palmer" wrote in message
...
The thing is Dee, a CW test is a very odd way to 'earn' HF. I'm not atall
sure that a person has not earned HF just beacause they haven't learnt CW.
Sure, Part 97 might agree with that rather peculiar proposition for the
time being, but it won't much longer.

The thing is that happens to be the current requirement regardless of our
individual opinions on whether it is peculiar or not. and I know people who
have been whining for 10 years waiting for the code requirement to go away.
It's rather peculiar that a person would wait that long and miss out on all
the operating that they profess to wanting to do.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Ditto buying a house. With interest rates at 40 year lows, now people
can afford to move out of crappy neighborhoods.

Different people have different reasons. I don't know why they didn't
move out of the crappy neighborhoods 10 years ago, but...

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

I haven't seen any truthful answers to my questions about your alleged /T5
operations.

You're amazing. You didn't believe me then, but somehow you'll believe me
now.

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

There isn't any. Reverend Jim spends most of his free time in here,
not on the air. He is living each and every thread and must emerge
the winner in every newsgroup dispute. :-)

I'm beginning to wonder if he works for a living...not just at the UNNAMED
place he is supposed to be doing electrical engineering. :-)

LHA

Dee D. Flint wrote:
"Alun Palmer" wrote in message
...

The thing is Dee, a CW test is a very odd way to 'earn' HF. I'm not atall
sure that a person has not earned HF just beacause they haven't learnt CW.
Sure, Part 97 might agree with that rather peculiar proposition for the
time being, but it won't much longer.


The thing is that happens to be the current requirement regardless of our
individual opinions on whether it is peculiar or not. and I know people who
have been whining for 10 years waiting for the code requirement to go away.
It's rather peculiar that a person would wait that long and miss out on all
the operating that they profess to wanting to do.

They don't do it because they are more interested in ham radio than the
people who just learned the requirments. ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

I haven't seen any truthful answers to my questions about your alleged /T5
operations.

You're amazing. You didn't believe me then, but somehow you'll believe me
now.

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

There isn't any. Reverend Jim spends most of his free time in here,
not on the air. He is living each and every thread and must emerge
the winner in every newsgroup dispute. :-)

Get it straight, Len. That's YOUR role here. You are the one not "on
the air" and who gets his jollies haunting an amateur radio newsgroup.

I'm beginning to wonder if he works for a living...not just at the UNNAMED
place he is supposed to be doing electrical engineering. :-)

It eats at you that he has no intention of telling you where he works
:-)

Dave K8MN