"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

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message ...
"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...

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.

I absolutely did mean it within my narrow definition because the
ongoing argument has been based on a narrow definition. But I should
have been more specific in my post.

It's a very fair & appropriate question as a rhetorical response to
the NCTAs who have been claiming forever that eliminating the code
tests for HF access will result in a new influx of technically astute
engineers. Bilge. Who will put their expertise to work and come up
with "advances in the state of the art" now that they won't have to
jump thru the "code test hoops". More bilge and you know that as well
as I do.


w3rv

Kim W5TIT

w3rv

"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message
...
"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...

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.

I absolutely did mean it within my narrow definition because the
ongoing argument has been based on a narrow definition. But I should
have been more specific in my post.

It's a very fair & appropriate question as a rhetorical response to
the NCTAs who have been claiming forever that eliminating the code
tests for HF access will result in a new influx of technically astute
engineers. Bilge. Who will put their expertise to work and come up
with "advances in the state of the art" now that they won't have to
jump thru the "code test hoops". More bilge and you know that as well
as I do.


w3rv

Kim W5TIT

w3rv


Well, if you're going to use what appears to be an honest question to lash
out at whomever it is you are targeting, please forgive the confusion on my
part. I didn't realize you were being rhetorical to the NCTAs.

By the way, isn't stating that NCTAs "have been claiming forever that
eliminating the code tests for HF access. . ." rolling us all into one
"neat" little package? I don't think people who'd like to see an end to CW
testing all think alike at all. Have you ever seen me accuse you of being
like Larry or Dick? They are two PCTAs and you are a PCTA also.

We all have our own opinions about why we think something is a good idea.

Kim W5TIT

In article , "Kim W5TIT"
writes:

It's a very fair & appropriate question as a rhetorical response to
the NCTAs who have been claiming forever that eliminating the code
tests for HF access will result in a new influx of technically astute
engineers. Bilge. Who will put their expertise to work and come up
with "advances in the state of the art" now that they won't have to
jump thru the "code test hoops". More bilge and you know that as well
as I do.


w3rv

Kim W5TIT

w3rv


Well, if you're going to use what appears to be an honest question to lash
out at whomever it is you are targeting, please forgive the confusion on my
part. I didn't realize you were being rhetorical to the NCTAs.

Kim:

You were confused because, as usual, you were reading for the purpose
of finding something negative to react to, as opposed to objectively
evaluating what was said.

By the way, isn't stating that NCTAs "have been claiming forever that
eliminating the code tests for HF access. . ." rolling us all into one
"neat" little package?

No -- Brian (that's MISTER Kelly to you, little girl!) was merely stating the
facts about what the NCTA have promised what would happen when code
testing was taken "out of the way" of all the eager young geniuses who
are going to save ham radio from our present state of technical insolvency.

I don't think people who'd like to see an end to CW
testing all think alike at all.

Neither do I. I only go after the ones who whine about it.

Have you ever seen me accuse you of being
like Larry or Dick? They are two PCTAs and you are a PCTA also.

You just don't like Dick and myself because we won't pander to your
inane, childish, and illogical parroting of what other people say, or to
your callsign which Mr. Hollingsworth himself said has the potential to
take the ARS "...one step closer to extinction." IOW, you're just fine
with anyone who strokes your horrendous ego.

We all have our own opinions about why we think something is a good idea.

And unlike yours, most of those opinions are being made by people with
genuine operating experience. Sorry about the truth, Kim -- I know it
hurts you, but I'm not going to look at a pile of crap on the floor and call
it a bowl of cherries.

73 de Larry, K3LT

Larry Roll K3LT wrote:

And unlike yours, most of those opinions are being made by people with
genuine operating experience. Sorry about the truth, Kim -- I know it
hurts you, but I'm not going to look at a pile of crap on the floor and call
it a bowl of cherries.


I'm almost afraid to ask what your last meal was before your procedure,
Larry!! 8^)

Glad it went well, tho'.

- Mike KB3EIA -