JJ wrote:
Phil Kane wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 07:03:01 -0400, Spamhater wrote:


Don't
open your mouth without facts which you have yet to provide any of in
support of your lawlessness aim to sidestep a part you're apparently too
damned lazy to do.


He's an EXTRA class licensee......

The Twilight Zone.....

So we have an EXTRA class licensee encouraging illegal operation on the
ham bands. Obviously the code test wasn't a good enough filter in this case.

Most of the assertions that a code test should be required are
based on the (illogical) premise that if an idiot (the poster)
can pass the test, anyone can and everyone should.

Keith works that one to death.

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

"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ...

He's just another refugee from the never-never land above 27 mhz
who just can't wait a few more months to get his "due".

DICK, how is it possible that you could know that?

Please re-read Phil's reply again. You missed the point as to each
administration is free to do as they please. So far, the FCC has not seen
to eliminate the Morse requirement. Period.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/24/03

Phil,

So how's retirement going

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


"Phil Kane" wrote in message
.net...
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 15:10:39 -0400, Spamhater wrote:

Seems to me, the other Keith is too lazy to read the rules and
regulations
and instead wants a hand out. He needs to REALLY sit down and read the
rules
and regulations or have them read to him and get a grasp on the fact that
you can't just do as you damned well please.

Or listen to accurate interpretations by a local communications
attorney who is willing to teach him without charge (ahem).

He does the same thing on local scanner nets, too.

Ready for this one...... he is an EXTRA Class licensee. I'm not
going to "out" him further - at this stage.

Why is he jumping up and down like a monkey on a string?

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

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




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/24/03

"gw" wrote in message
om...
Dwight Stewart wrote in message
...
"Bill Sohl" wrote:

The FCC could, however, make rules changes
which are based on the new treaty because
the OLD treaty is gone, done, defunct,
over...even if the US never ratified the
new treaty. No nation is now bound by the
old treaty at all.


I asked Phil about something similar a few weeks ago, and he seemed to
think it was not possible. After further research, I tend to agree with
him.
It does look like the changes to that treaty will have to be ratified
first.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

hey look twistie .......its aaaron h voobner..........hey numbnutts i
thought you were supposed to move to europe.....


I thought I was aaaron h voobner?

On 26 Jul 2003 22:30:49 -0700, (gimmie freebie)
wrote:

Hey Keith may be you can help me. I have been diagnosed as a dyslexic
and have ADD. My disability prevents me from concentrating for more
than a few minutes so I can't take any code test or written test let
alone study for them.

I managed with both, so I figure you can, too.

May not be as easy as some folks, but it's time you studied.

snip
--
Nobody but a fool goes into a federal counterrorism operation without duct tape - Richard Preston, THE COBRA EVENT.

"C" wrote in message
...

My only gripe with the code is the testing. It is stated as a 5 word
per minute test. When I challenged the test a few weeks ago I found that
it is actually anywhere from 13 to 18 words per minute, not 5 words per
minute. The 5 words per minute is a lie....

Why not tell it like it is.... Those giving the test do not want to make
it easy for anyone who has a learning disability or not. I have never
been able to memorize anything easily when in school, and was accused of
being from lazy to stupid. My father told me that I was ignorant because
I was partly colorblind. I do not want sympathy, just after studying for
almost a year to pass the 5 word per minute test for what it is suppose
to be not what someone who is more proficient with the code wants it to
be.....

If my General CSCE expires again (this will be #2) I will never take it
again and will have lost desire in a hobby that I grew up working in for
the last 39 years.......

C.





In article ,
"Spamhater" wrote:

"Keith" wrote in message
...
On 27 Jul 2003 15:22:47 -0700, (Rich) wrote:

I know a bed ridden quad who dictated 20 wpm to his wife.He uses a
straw
cw keyer.

Can he hear? That is what we are talking about.

--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

There are cases where flashing lights are used for such a thing OR
vibrating
surfaces..... so being deaf is no excuse either. There ARE provisions.
The
main thing is, that IF the person is that handicapped, it is up to THEM
or
their family to provide any testing accessories to suit their needs, to
allow the VEs to send the text. The VEs are not required to provide
specialized equipment to cater to the handicaps needs.



Not trying to be a smart ass here...but...how do you know it was 13 if you
say you can't copy 13???. Could it be he was sending the characters fast
and making the spacing long. I.E. Farnsworth method, which is the
recomended way to conduct a test?

If you want to quit. Thats your choice. I would suggest you go to a
different test place with different folks instead.

Dan/W4NTI

On 28 Jul 2003 20:12:07 GMT, (Michael Black) wrote:

Over the 31 years since I've been licensed, my impression is that
amateur radio has increasingly disappeared from public view.

I agree with you 100%. The reason in my opinion is that the ARRL kept the
morse code requirement for HF access and that kept a lot of my teenage friends
out of ham radio way back in 1982 and through the present day.
Today kids now have instant voice communications via the Internet and cell
phones and can even send pictures and text messages with their phones. Now that
the Internet is here and advanced digital cellphone is in every middle class
kids pocket technology has passed by ham radio.
Hams are the now the old technology brushed aside by technology advances. The
ARRL just couldn't let code die and now it is too late. IMHO.

--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

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

Absolutely. To come to the conclusion that deaf people cannot learn and
use
CW is rather narrow-minded in my opnion. I bet there's a way that
ANYONE
could learn CW.

It helps if a person types in all caps too! ;^)


For goodness sake! By your example, Keith, blind people should not be
licensed because, "how in the world would they know what frequency they
are
on?"


Now that you mention it, how does a fully blind ham tell what frequency
he or she is on? I suppose that using the memory channels on an HF rig
would be one method, but does anyone here know?

- Mike KB3EIA -


I have many blind friends/hams, and the way they do it is with radios that
have speech boards on them.

Kim W5TIT


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

"Keith" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 09:04:58 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

So please don't tell those who cannot hear as well as you what they can
and cannot do.

I'm not you knuckle head. I'm saying the requirement for the hearing
disabled
to pass a morse code test is discriminatory.

--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/


Keith: You are using this excuse for YOUR benefit, not anyone else's and I
even daresay you probably don't give a damn about challenged individuals.
You're really towing a line, here, and it's full of dead fish at the end of
it.

Quit using others for your own gain.

Kim W5TIT


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