Dwight Stewart wrote in message ...
"N2EY" wrote:

Who is being excluded? The requirements are what
the FCC says they are. Meet those requirements
and the license is granted.


Jim, please read the thread before replying.

I did.

Brian is arguing for stiffer
written tests and/or code to exclude those he doesn't like.

That's not how I read it. It's about what every ham should know and be
tested on.

My comments
addressed the concept of using excess requirements to exclude others.

But who decides what requirements are excess? It all comes down to
opinion.

For example, I think every ham should at least know Ohm's Law for DC
circuits. Basic stuff like E = IR, resistors in series and parallel,
how many amps a 50 watt rig draws from a 12 volt source if its overall
efficiency is 50%, etc. Others would say that stuff is "too
technical", particularly for "entry level" licenses. And there are
plenty of hams who don't know that stuff. Is requiring Ohm's Law
knowledge exclusionary? Is it an excess requirement?

Note that reducing the license requirements has
NOT brought on significantly more growth nor
attracted the "rocket scientists".

I didn't say it did, Jim. The 'rocket scientists' point was made to
address Brian's argument for stiffer requirements to keep "dumb-downed"
people out. My comments about growth had to do with what I suspect would
happen if Brian were successful in his efforts to exclude others with
changes in the requirements.

Nobody know what would really happen because for the past 25+ years
the direction has been towards easing the test requirements. Dick Bash
started it.
None of the changes along the way was very big but the end result has
been dramatic. Particularly for the top license classes.

(snip) The purpose of tests is not to exclude
but to guarantee a certain minimum level of
knowledge. (snip)

Again, I didn't say the purpose was to exclude. Again, my comments had to
do with the changes Brian is seeking, not the existing requirements.

What bad things would happen if the tests were "beefed up",
particularly the written tests for the General and Extra?

Perhaps the idea of dropping the code test would get a lot more
acceptance if it were coupled to better written testing. But it's not
- in fact, the written testing keeps getting trimmed.

73 de Jim, N2EY