"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...


"Dick Carroll;" wrote:

Floyd Davidson wrote:

"Dick Carroll;" wrote:
being made so easy? I'll say it again-the only thing preventing
wholsale change
in ham radio toward the exact same thing that happened to CB is the
code test.
When that's gone, ham radio is on a steeper part of the slippery
slope.

BTW I held CB callsign KIQ8934, c. 1970.

Well ain't that just sweet. And you are the twit that accuses
_others_ of coming from 27 MHz. You're little more than a
flaming hypocrite of the first order. A CB retreated loser.


Hey, it's Frozen Floyd!!!

One thing more, you flaming nincompoop- the ONLY reason I hang out here is
to
counter the misinformation dished out by phoney dingalings like you. For
sure there are
more fun ways to spend my retirement, but I will not allow the likes of
you to by the
only resource for the new and future hams reading here. They deserve
better- MUCH better.



Imagine that. Dick Carroll out to "save the world."
BWAHHAHHHAHHAAAHAHAHAAA

Kim W5TIT


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

"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...


Dwight Stewart wrote:


Further, to clarify another issue, my comments about excluding people
applied only to the idea of using license requirements solely in an
effort
to exclude - I didn't introduce that premise, those specifically
advocating
the exclusion of others did.

Right you are, Dwight. The FCC did - way back about 1912
(actually their predecessors)

ALL licenses exclude those who don't meet the qualifications, and include
those
who do. Why else would they exist?


You can't purr like a kitten in one thread, Dick, then turn around and lose
control in another. The premise being discouraged here is that the CW test
would be seen by some as a way to keep *unwanted* people out of ham
radio--not just people in general.

I would suspect that there are many nitwits in this newsgroup who support
the idea of CW testing being a good way to keep someone, like me for
example, out of the ARS. Their idea is a waste of time, of course because
a) I am a coded ham, and b) CW testing does nothing to keep creeps out of
the ARS. I won't mention to you how I know that.

Kim W5TIT


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

Hey Kim, I didn't get his post for some reason

Kim W5TIT wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote:

First off, I don't think I've ever said "dumbed
down". If you know I have, post the reference.


You've agreed with Brian and 'dumbed down" were his words.

Not my words! Come on, Dwight. We can discuss these things, but don't
put words in my mouth! Or my fingers or keyboard or whatever.

I do not consider the Morse Code to be *any
test of intelligence or desirability whatsoever.

What I do consider it is a method of ensuring
that the person actually wants to be in the
service. It is a measure of inclusivity, not
exclusivity. Kind of like learning to parallel
park or do a three point turn.


That ridiculous, Mike. Surely you must be joking. That premise is absurd
at its very core. It's basically saying nearly half the Hams today, those
without code skills, didn't actually want to be involved in Ham Radio -
that all their money invested in radio equipment and efforts invested in
activities were done because they didn't really want any of this. And
that,in the end, only a code test will prove they actually did want it. If I
didn't think you were serious, I'd be laughing at this point.

Gee Dwight, I can see that you are pretty good at extrapolating all
kinds of stuff. All those technicians are working at a level that they
are comfortable with. They have passed the tests they need to pass.


(snip) We do already have indications of what
the spectrum of behaviors are. Right now, those
who favor less knowledge have the upper hand.


Okay, now I'm laughing. Where are all those people who have the upper
hand(the ones who favor less knowledge)? There must be many thousands of them.

There are. They are NCI and the people who want the code test
eradicated. And it appears they have been successful. And please don't
try to differentiate between Morse Code as a skill and Morse code as
knowledge. No one sounds smart trying to make that argument.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Kim W5TIT wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote:

First off, I don't think I've ever said "dumbed
down". If you know I have, post the reference.


You've agreed with Brian and 'dumbed down" were his words.



I do not consider the Morse Code to be *any
test of intelligence or desirability whatsoever.

What I do consider it is a method of ensuring
that the person actually wants to be in the
service. It is a measure of inclusivity, not
exclusivity. Kind of like learning to parallel
park or do a three point turn.


That ridiculous, Mike. Surely you must be joking. That premise is absurd
at its very core. It's basically saying nearly half the Hams today, those
without code skills, didn't actually want to be involved in Ham Radio -

that

all their money invested in radio equipment and efforts invested in
activities were done because they didn't really want any of this. And

that,

in the end, only a code test will prove they actually did want it. If I
didn't think you were serious, I'd be laughing at this point.



(snip) We do already have indications of what
the spectrum of behaviors are. Right now, those
who favor less knowledge have the upper hand.


Okay, now I'm laughing. Where are all those people who have the upper

hand

(the ones who favor less knowledge)? There must be many thousands of them

if

they have the upper hand. I've been involved with Ham Radio for a number

of

years now and I have yet to hear all those people advocating less

knowledge

about Ham Radio. I haven't seen any web sites stating that goal. I've

never

talked to a person on the radio who has stated that goal. If these people
actually exist, they must be the most secret group in America.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/



That's because you won't hear it anywhere but here--as whining, Dwight.
With the exception of a few on this newsgroup, the participants in this
newsgroup are very out of touch with ham radio...

I know many hams who are bothered by this, Kim. They don't participate
in this newsgroup, but they still are concerned. And it really is pretty
hard to argue that complete removal of a test element is not a reduction
in the amount of knowledge needed to pass a test.


- Mike KB3EIA -

"Floyd Davidson" wrote in message
...
"Dick Carroll;" wrote:
"Dick Carroll;" wrote:

Floyd Davidson wrote:

"Dick Carroll;" wrote:
being made so easy? I'll say it again-the only thing preventing
wholsale change
in ham radio toward the exact same thing that happened to CB is the
code test.
When that's gone, ham radio is on a steeper part of the slippery
slope.

BTW I held CB callsign KIQ8934, c. 1970.

Well ain't that just sweet. And you are the twit that accuses
_others_ of coming from 27 MHz. You're little more than a
flaming hypocrite of the first order. A CB retreated loser.


Hey, it's Frozen Floyd!!!

One thing more, you flaming nincompoop- the ONLY reason I hang out here
is to
counter the misinformation dished out by phoney dingalings like you. For
sure there are
more fun ways to spend my retirement, but I will not allow the likes of
you to by the
only resource for the new and future hams reading here. They deserve
better- MUCH better.

You hang out here because you're a hypocrite.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)


Well, Floyd, it sounds like you may know Dick personally. I don't know that
for a fact, but it sounds that way. Regardless, I do agree with your
comment that he's a hypocrite.

Kim W5TIT


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

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
...
"Dick Carroll;" wrote:

(snip) ALL licenses exclude those who don't
meet the qualifications, and include those
who do. Why else would they exist?

There is a huge difference in requirements necessary to meet a certain
goal or purpose and requirements designed to exclude those we doesn't
like,
Dick. I'm sure you know that. And I'm equally sure you know this
discussion
is about the latter.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

Exactly my point. The 5-wpm test does NOT exclude anyone who puts forth a
minimal effort, the 20-wpm does.

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

On 2 Aug 2003 04:31:13 -0700, Brian Kelly wrote:

BTW - Arnold declined to run.

Supposedly his XYL put the nix on it because she doesn't want to be
anywhere near the BS.

Isn't he married to Maria Shriver, marriage-related to the Kennedys?

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

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

Kim W5TIT wrote:

That's because you won't hear it anywhere but
here--as whining, Dwight. With the exception
of a few on this newsgroup, the participants
in this newsgroup are very out of touch with
ham radio...


You right about that, Kim. If all those outside these newsgroups were like
those here, everyone would have probably killed each other by now.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Mike Coslo" wrote:
Kim is having some trouble with her newsreader, so
I'm forwarding this reply post with her permission.

(snip)

I appreciate and respect the tradition of CW as a
part of ham radio. I appreciate and respect most
(excluding some here in this newsgroup only) CW
operators and operation. I can't tell you how many
times I've felt quite privileged to watch a CW
operator at Field Day. I will defend to the end of
ham radio that CW is wonderful, a skill that only
few will learn and use, and that it has a rich
tradition and history in ham radio. But I will not
defend saying that having it as a testing
requirement proves a dawgoned thing, because it
just plain doesn't.


Well-written comments, Kim. So well written, there is nothing else to add.
So I'll wait to see how the responses fall. And thanks for posting Kim's
message, Mike.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Phil Kane" wrote in message t.net...
On 2 Aug 2003 04:31:13 -0700, Brian Kelly wrote:

BTW - Arnold declined to run.

Supposedly his XYL put the nix on it because she doesn't want to be
anywhere near the BS.

Isn't he married to Maria Shriver, marriage-related to the Kennedys?

I think she's blood, one of Robert K's daughters, niece of the
President of the Chapaquiddick Diving Team.