Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message ... In article , (Brian) writes: I probably did most of my phone operating as an Advanced, because it was during that time that I had a mobile HF station in my '78 Plymouth Horizon. However, I also did a LOT of mobile CW as well. I also operated phone from Germany (two two-year tours) as an Extra, with a German reciprocal license. But then again, CW operation outweighed phone by at least 10 to 1. Phone is just too boring. When I'm copying CW, I'm actively doing something besides listening to the same old crapola over and over again -- even though what I'm copying IS the same old crapola! Larry, if it's "the same old (boring) crapola," why don't you sell your gear, let your license lapse (or surrender it for cancellation) and find an avocation that's not boring? [someone else asked the following question ... it reallly doesn't matter who] What will it take to get people to use Morse? I don't know. What would it take to get YOU to use it? For me, it took a code testing requirement, which caused me to learn and use the code in order to meet the requirement. Larry ... you admit that you wouldn't have learned Morse if you had not been (effectively) forced to ... you happened to decide that you liked it afterwards. Many folks that have followed the same path NEVER liked Morse and put the key in the drawer (or sold it, or gave it away) after passing the Morse test to get the privs they REALLY wanted, never to use Morse again. You don't believe in the requirement, so obviously, your mileage varies quite a bit. So tell us -- what would it take to make you a regular CW operator with 20 WPM proficiency -- something that I have no doubt you are capable of? As you well know, I also don't believe in the requirement. I know that many PCTAs here doubt my claim, but early on while constrained to CW on the novice bands, I actually got to the point where I could carry on a QSO (more or less in my head for std. QSO stuff, writing down details for the log) at something close to 20 wpm. Once I upgraded to Tech and got involved in VHF/UHF repeaters, packet, etc. I lost interest and never went back to Morse. Could *I* become proficient at 20 wpm ... certainly, with enough use and practice. Do I *care* to? The answer is obviously "No." There is essentially nothing that could make me interested in becoming "a regular CW operator with 20 wpm proficiency." Does this make me a "lesser/2nd class ham?" I certainly don't believe so, Larry, any more than I believe that the fact that I have every reason to believe that I am more technically competent than you makes me "superior in all respects" to you. You, however, believe that your Morse ability makes you "superior to all no-code hams." (You've said that over and over here, along with all sorts of disparaging remarks about no-code hams.) Why don't you try treating hams who have gotten their licenses (or upgraded) under the new rules with the same respect that you'd like to be treated with? (I promise you, it won't kill you. :-) Carl - wk3c |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes: Larry ... you admit that you wouldn't have learned Morse if you had not been (effectively) forced to ... you happened to decide that you liked it afterwards. Many folks that have followed the same path NEVER liked Morse and put the key in the drawer (or sold it, or gave it away) after passing the Morse test to get the privs they REALLY wanted, never to use Morse again. Carl: That's right. They did. And a lot of them kept the key on the top of the operating table and continued to use it. Now, in the absence of a code testing requirement as part of the licensing procedure, how many new hams will even bother to own a telegraph key? You don't believe in the requirement, so obviously, your mileage varies quite a bit. So tell us -- what would it take to make you a regular CW operator with 20 WPM proficiency -- something that I have no doubt you are capable of? As you well know, I also don't believe in the requirement. I know that many PCTAs here doubt my claim, but early on while constrained to CW on the novice bands, I actually got to the point where I could carry on a QSO (more or less in my head for std. QSO stuff, writing down details for the log) at something close to 20 wpm. Once I upgraded to Tech and got involved in VHF/UHF repeaters, packet, etc. I lost interest and never went back to Morse. Well, it was getting on VHF/UHF repeaters that actually spurred my interest in CW, since the hams I talked to were always talking about their adventures on HF, particularly in the CW mode, and I enjoyed being able to join in on the conversation, telling them about the "new one" I had just worked. Could *I* become proficient at 20 wpm ... certainly, with enough use and practice. Do I *care* to? The answer is obviously "No." Well, at least you were exposed to the code and learned it well enough to make that choice from a vantage point of actual personal experience. In the future, a lot of hams who may have decided to become active CW users will no longer get that opportunity, due to the elimination of the code testing requirement. There is essentially nothing that could make me interested in becoming "a regular CW operator with 20 wpm proficiency." Does this make me a "lesser/2nd class ham?" Since you tried it and gave it a fair evaluation, I'd have to say that it does not. Again, future hams will not have had your experience. That is the difference. Not having "been there, done that" disqualifies them from making any judgment on the "code" issue whatsoever. I certainly don't believe so, Larry, any more than I believe that the fact that I have every reason to believe that I am more technically competent than you makes me "superior in all respects" to you. I have never denied the "superior" technical competence of you or any other ham who has it. There is nothing I enjoy more than being around hams who really know what they are doing, technically, and can impart some of that knowledge to myself and others. However, in my own experience, some of the most technically competent hams I've known have also been proficient CW operators. I cannot say the same for the "no-coders" I've known, with few notable exceptions. You, however, believe that your Morse ability makes you "superior to all no-code hams." (You've said that over and over here, along with all sorts of disparaging remarks about no-code hams.) It does give me "superior" operational capability, and I won't mince any words about that. Moreover, my code proficiency had a direct impact on my gaining increased technical knowledge, although I'd never classify that as anything other than "amateur" level. Why don't you try treating hams who have gotten their licenses (or upgraded) under the new rules with the same respect that you'd like to be treated with? (I promise you, it won't kill you. :-) I can, and I do -- as long as they don't make a point of whining that the (former) code testing requirement was causing technical ignorance within the ARS -- as has been their traditional claim. It just isn't so. 73 de Larry, K3LT |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message ... In article , "Carl R. Stevenson" writes: Larry ... you admit that you wouldn't have learned Morse if you had not been (effectively) forced to ... you happened to decide that you liked it afterwards. Many folks that have followed the same path NEVER liked Morse and put the key in the drawer (or sold it, or gave it away) after passing the Morse test to get the privs they REALLY wanted, never to use Morse again. Carl: That's right. They did. And a lot of them kept the key on the top of the operating table and continued to use it. Now, in the absence of a code testing requirement as part of the licensing procedure, how many new hams will even bother to own a telegraph key? Frankly, I don't care one iota ... I see that as a totally unimportant issue in the grand scheme of things ... it is up to Morse enthusiasts to recruit new Morse ops ... and talking down to those who are not interested will not help that cause. Could *I* become proficient at 20 wpm ... certainly, with enough use and practice. Do I *care* to? The answer is obviously "No." Well, at least you were exposed to the code and learned it well enough to make that choice from a vantage point of actual personal experience. In the future, a lot of hams who may have decided to become active CW users will no longer get that opportunity, due to the elimination of the code testing requirement. Again, it's up to the current crop of Morse enthusiasts to do any recruiting. There is essentially nothing that could make me interested in becoming "a regular CW operator with 20 wpm proficiency." Does this make me a "lesser/2nd class ham?" Since you tried it and gave it a fair evaluation, I'd have to say that it does not. Again, future hams will not have had your experience. That is the difference. Not having "been there, done that" disqualifies them from making any judgment on the "code" issue whatsoever. I don't buy that argument ... folks can be intelligent enough that, with a modest exposure to Morse through personal contact with other hams, seeing others using the mode, etc., they can make a choice as to whether they are interested in purusing the mode or not. Carl - wk3c |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|