"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...
"Bert Craig" wrote in message
v.net...
FYI, folks here are QSX when they're monitoring
the frequency. I rarely hear the annoying "I'm QRT and on the side"
anymore,
thank goodness. :-)

I was involved in trying to use CB for it's original intended purpose
in the mid-'70s in 23 channel days. Specifically for comms for a
municipal Townwatch group of 135 citizens 95% of whom had no interest
at all in hobby radio and just wanted reasonably decent local
neighborhood mobile comms.

You just can't legislate propagation. Even if all the users complied with
the 155.3 mi. limit, the QRM from legal comms in distant places makes local
work difficult, if not impossible. I've experienced a S7 noise level from
distant comms personally and the guy in Germany came in clearer than someone
across town. When the band's open, 12 Watts will work the world.

The disgusted group would have fallen apart
if I hadn't moved the operation up onto a VHF business freq to get
away from the CB crud. Cost a bundle but they're still on that freq.

Good "heads-up" move.

Every once in a blue moon when I've had absolutely nothing better to
do with my life I've gotten on 27Mhz and looked for intelligent life.
On the rare occasions when I've actually found some it lasts maybe
five minutes at most before the bozos blow it off the freq.

Sorry to hear that, Brian. Do you operate AM or SSB? I've had good luck on
channels 36 through 40 using SSB.

YMMV . . !

It sure does.

w3rv

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Jim Hampton" wrote in message ...
Bert,

I don't mean to just break in on your argument with Phil, but consider what
we are going through in Rochester, NY. Taxes are sky high, we lost over
800,000 people in New York since the mid 90s (jobs disappearing, wages going
down, taxes going up).

Many of them are moving across the state lines to NJ or PA, etc.

California has a similar problem. There is an exodus of non-immigrant
Americans from the Golden State for similar reasons. The turnaround
point was about 1995. Only massive immigration keeps CA numbers up.

Obviously, the local governments are trying to cut
budgets. Police and firemen are not being replaced as they retire or quit.
Enforcement is spotty at best. We just had a large block burn down in the
city due to arson a few months ago. People were doing oil changes in the
streets (if not stripping cars) and oil was left in the streets. Laws were
passed, but weren't favored by a lot of folks. Loud booming radios were
causing problems. Laws were passed, but ignored. Those folks that you
think believe in the American Way started pushing the envelope. There is
now a severe drug problem (heck, if I'm not hurting anyone, it isn't any of
your business). We now have the second highest murder rate in New York
outside of New York City!

WOW!

Worse than Buffalo or Albany?

The problem is that there is little enforcement,
and some folks get emboldened.

Bingo.

It starts out with little things....

Locally, they have a new tact. There are
now City of Rochester Police, Monroe County Sheriffs, and New York State
Troopers patrolling Rochester. Go ahead, spit your gum out. If you're
seen, you will get a ticket. Any violation, no matter how minor, and you
will get stopped. You may not be searched, but pray you don't have anything
visible in your car that you shouldn't (like a little bag with some white
powder in it). They are starting real enforcement and there will be a lot
of minor violators that will end up paying some stiff fines.

I understand that this "zero tolerance" approach was done in New York
City under Rudy Giuliani. Things like turnstile-jumping, graffiti,
even jaywalking were jumped on with both feet by law enforcement AND
backed up by the courts. One side effect was that a considerable
number of folks for whom there were bench warrants were brought in for
minor violations and kept. Another was that major crime dropped.

I don't see
any other way around the situation here; I also don't see things getting any
better in the radio business without some *serious* enforcement. That would
include the skip-shooting - at least until things quiet down to a dull roar.
The lack of enforcement (regardless of cause, which is invariably lack of
funds) is not only allowing things to get worse, it is actively promoting
things to get worse.

Yup. And it's a gradual thing that shows up in many ways. Similar to
when a neighborhood goes downhill. It starts with little things like
not taking care of properties and not reining in minor offenses. But
it doesn't stop there.
Pretty soon most of the people who can move out are gone.

This is not a minor problem in amateur radio. There's all sorts of
talk about young people not wanting to learn the code, yada yada yada,
but not much about how the antics of a few can turn off young people
and their parents. And if that happens, forget about recruitment.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...
"Bert Craig" wrote in message
t...
You just can't legislate propagation. Even if all the users complied
with
the 155.3 mi. limit, the QRM from legal comms in distant places makes
local
work difficult, if not impossible. I've experienced a S7 noise level
from
distant comms personally and the guy in Germany came in clearer than
someone
across town. When the band's open, 12 Watts will work the world.

I'm reasonably conversant on the topic of HF propagation, I hold
5BDXCC #142 dated April '72. Which I had before I got into working
with this TW group. This is a densly populated region (Philly) and
there were/are enough garbage mouthed CB locals to jam the TW comms
without any help from distant skip-shooters.

Sorry OM, I didn't mean to "lecture" re. HF propagation. Just relating my
own personal experiences. Sorry to hear about the garbage mouthed locals.
The only real problem I've experienced up here is the "splatter" from the
really high powered (Multi-kW) guys running AM on ch. 6. An additional IF
filter to increase the ACR of the rig solved that problem.

Sorry to hear that, Brian. Do you operate AM or SSB? I've had good luck
on
channels 36 through 40 using SSB.

SSB. Any channel which seems to have intelligent life. Maybe I'll take
another look in a couple years.

Hope you have better luck. :-)

W3RV/KLK1937

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ...
JJ wrote:



Brian Kelly wrote:


Every once in a blue moon when I've had absolutely nothing better to
do with my life I've gotten on 27Mhz and looked for intelligent life.
On the rare occasions when I've actually found some it lasts maybe
five minutes at most before the bozos blow it off the freq.

YMMV . . !
w3rv


So as to the subject "Do Hams get 11 Meters Back", I ask, "why in the
world would hams want 11 meters back?" Eleven meters is the perfect
example of what happens when rules are thrown out the window, total
chaos. The cber's have managed to make it the sewer pit of the radio
spectrum and the sad part is they can't even keep it in their own
territory, they have to spew their garbage to other frequencies as well.
The fact that hams in general follow the rules, and expect other
operators to do the same is what keeps many cber's from getting a
license. I say, "good riddance, we don't need those types in ham radio."

There's another angle to this "losing 11M" topic. The band was
essentially ignored by hams, we didn't lose anything in that sense.
Part of the reason was the high level of RF crud (shades of BPL . .!)
tossed out by high-powered unlicensed industrial and medical
equipment. The junk was all over the band particularly in urban areas.
A second and a big reason the band was grossly underutilized was that
there was little or no DX on 11M. Third, the neighboring 10M band at
1.7 Mhz wide had, and still has more than enough bandwidth to
accomodate anybody who wants to operate on the band without the
crowded condx on the rest of our HF bands.


It WILL be interesting to see how many of them leap on a code-free HF
license though, won't it?

Prolly great heaps of 'em will do it. What the hell, they'll be almost
free. But then the show will be pretty much over. There will be
noticable shifts in the volumes of Techs vs. new Generals and Extras.
And maybe, just maybe a few non-hams will jump in. So we'll see a
short, small blip in the growth numbers a la 1991-92 then it'll drop
back to bizness as usual.

I'm more interested in what the new-wave codeless wonders will
actually do with their new privs. Will they pop the bucks for the
expensive HF gear then put the work into the antennas? Some will of
course but only a fraction of 'em. The question in my mind is whether
that fraction will be large enough to have any noticeable impact at
all on the HF bands. I very seriously doubt it, my bet is that most of
'em won't bother, they'll stay on the machines and the only obvious
results of the whole regulatory lurch will be in the nut-and-shell
games in the FCC database.

w3rv

Good post, Jim

I do agree with you about the antics of a few. A few Yahoo groups have
started - at least one of them with the premise of no flames and everyone is
welcome. I can't believe how rapidly it has grown (nor can I believe how
many new licenses have been obtained). Unbelievable what can be
accomplished when you get rid of the finger pointing (and the new folks,
both those without tickets and those who have just obtained them are asking
questions about operating procedures, antennas, coax - all the kinds of
questions that so many other groups could cover if they just got past the
finger pointing and flames).


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 8/4/03

"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...


JJ wrote:



Brian Kelly wrote:


Every once in a blue moon when I've had absolutely nothing better to
do with my life I've gotten on 27Mhz and looked for intelligent life.
On the rare occasions when I've actually found some it lasts maybe
five minutes at most before the bozos blow it off the freq.

YMMV . . !
w3rv


So as to the subject "Do Hams get 11 Meters Back", I ask, "why in the
world would hams want 11 meters back?" Eleven meters is the perfect
example of what happens when rules are thrown out the window, total
chaos. The cber's have managed to make it the sewer pit of the radio
spectrum and the sad part is they can't even keep it in their own
territory, they have to spew their garbage to other frequencies as well.
The fact that hams in general follow the rules, and expect other
operators to do the same is what keeps many cber's from getting a
license. I say, "good riddance, we don't need those types in ham radio."



It WILL be interesting to see how many of them leap on a code-free HF
license though, won't it?


It will be OUR FAULT if we allow that type of operation. Get ready for the
fight.

Dan/W4NTI

"Dan/W4NTI" wrote:
"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...


JJ wrote:



Brian Kelly wrote:


Every once in a blue moon when I've had absolutely nothing better to
do with my life I've gotten on 27Mhz and looked for intelligent
life. On the rare occasions when I've actually found some it lasts
maybe five minutes at most before the bozos blow it off the freq.

YMMV . . !
w3rv


So as to the subject "Do Hams get 11 Meters Back", I ask, "why in the
world would hams want 11 meters back?" Eleven meters is the perfect
example of what happens when rules are thrown out the window, total
chaos. The cber's have managed to make it the sewer pit of the radio
spectrum and the sad part is they can't even keep it in their own
territory, they have to spew their garbage to other frequencies as
well. The fact that hams in general follow the rules, and expect
other operators to do the same is what keeps many cber's from getting
a license. I say, "good riddance, we don't need those types in ham
radio."



It WILL be interesting to see how many of them leap on a code-free HF
license though, won't it?


It will be OUR FAULT if we allow that type of operation. Get ready for
the fight.

Dan/W4NTI

Get ready for a wooshing sound, that will be the stampede of no codes
and outlaws flooding your hallowed ground, little man. You brought
it all on..

--
GO# 40

"Cool Breeze" spade#abc.com wrote:
wrote in message
...
Get ready for a wooshing sound, that will be the stampede of no codes
and outlaws flooding your hallowed ground, little man. You brought
it all on..

--
GO# 40

Are you a Ham ??? What are you doing in this
NG???????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????
??? ????

I enjoy watching assholes like you and dan squirm.

--
GO# 40

On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 10:23:46 -0400, "Cool Breeze" spade#abc.com
wrote:


wrote in message
...
Get ready for a wooshing sound, that will be the stampede of no codes
and outlaws flooding your hallowed ground, little man. You brought
it all on..

--
GO# 40

Are you a Ham ??? What are you doing in this
NG??????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????
????


To answer your queries in order:

1. Probably not.

2. Trolling.

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

On 09 Aug 2003 15:12:31 GMT, wrote:

I enjoy watching assholes like you and dan squirm.

Kinda like you when you take a code test, eh?

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2003 10:23:46 -0400, "Cool Breeze" spade#abc.com
wrote:


wrote in message
...
Get ready for a wooshing sound, that will be the stampede of no codes
and outlaws flooding your hallowed ground, little man. You brought
it all on..

--
GO# 40

Are you a Ham ??? What are you doing in this
NG??????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????
???? ????


To answer your queries in order:

1. Probably not.

2. Trolling.

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

Hey john, if you only knew the irony of what you posted.

--
GO# 40

"Jim Hampton" wrote in message
...
Good post, Jim

Which Jim?

I do agree with you about the antics of a few.

'Tis a shame indeed.

A few Yahoo groups have
started - at least one of them with the premise of no flames and everyone
is
welcome. I can't believe how rapidly it has grown (nor can I believe how
many new licenses have been obtained). Unbelievable what can be
accomplished when you get rid of the finger pointing (and the new folks,
both those without tickets and those who have just obtained them are
asking
questions about operating procedures, antennas, coax - all the kinds of
questions that so many other groups could cover if they just got past the
finger pointing and flames).

Agreed. I personally find that the following approach works pretty well. CB
QSO's on SSB generally have something in common with AR QSO's, "what kind of
gear are you running?" The minute I tell them I'm using a 40m dipole through
a tuner, I usually get one of two responses. "Are you an amateur?" usually
comes from those wha are also ARO's. "What's that and how does it work?"
comes from those who are genuinely interested. I'm all too happy to oblige
them. Funny thing is the 40m doublet actually shows a 1.4:1 SWR on 27.3850
MHz (Ch. 38) with the tuner offline, go figure.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

On 10 Aug 2003 00:51:07 GMT, wrote:

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote:
On 09 Aug 2003 15:12:31 GMT, wrote:

I enjoy watching assholes like you and dan squirm.

Kinda like you when you take a code test, eh?

Dunno, never took it. Looks like cw is gonna be history,
just like your attitude toward no coders. Fate is a strange
animal, all you stuffy blowhards lose after-all.

Welcome to RRAP. Get a few years in the group and maybe you'll get to
know what my attitude toward no-coders IS. Right now, you obviously
have no clue as to what my opinion of code testing is, instead jumping
to a conclusion based on one sentence from just one of hundreds of
posts I've made in this NG over the years since I got my ham ticket.

What I *do* have an attitude about - and it's not a good one - is when
people hide behind posting anonymously, demonstrating that they don't
even take their *own* opinions seriously enough to attach a name and
call to what they post, then whine when nobody else takes their posts
seriously. Fit anybody you know?

You should of elmered the hobby, instead of ridiculing
any newbie who showed interest. Too late now.

Putting aside the fact that you're a borderline illiterate ("should
of" instead of "should have"? C'mon, I knew better than that before I
finished second grade...what year did you drop out?), I for one
wouldn't be very interested in elmering anybody who demonstrates
callous disregard for the regulations, like certain trolls in this NG
for example. Beyond that, I think my track record shows that you lack
sufficient knowledge of the truth on which to base an intelligent
opinion regarding my elmering activities, so instead, you posted a
singularly unintelligent one instead. You really shouldn't post when
you're smoking crack. :-)

"No Code, No Ham" wrote:
(WA8ULX) wrote in
:

Do Hams get 11 Meters Back, as soon as all the CBers upgrade to there
Free Handout Ham Licenses?


There has been a free ham license ever since the codeless tech was
introduced a few years back. The 5 wpm code requirement has further
moved things in that direction. Idiots on the ham bands.

11 meters has come to the ham bands. I listen to the bands and it's
certainly not the way things were in the 1980's when I got licenced. I
might as well just listen to CB channel 19, it all sounds the same now.

-snippage-
Take that cross posted stink bait outta' here, chump.

--
GO# 40

Sounds like you old pro-coders are getting upset! I worked and had to
pay to get my no-code ticket. Now that Im a coded tech, I still say,
rid the code test. You may say it dumbs it down, to me it makes for
more conversation and more to converse with. Who wants to talk on a
piece of equipment that cost $1000 + but no-one to hear you? Why not
let these CB'rs get there license so they can learn the principals of
ham radio instead of bootlegging. I realise that you guys are all
stuck in 1950, but WAKE UP!!!!!! This is 2003!!!!! This reminds me,
Wasnt it quite a few years ago that a bunch of HAMS like yourselves
were complaining about solid-state over tube? Oh my god! There dumbing
down radio with RF transistors!!!! What is next!!!!! Quit whining and
get involved in making the radio better for all. All you pro-coders
are just wasting your breath. They still make tubes, but you have a
choice if you want to use tube or transistor equipment. Isnt that
nice, To have a choice? I chose to advance in my hobby by going to
Extra soon, and I dont need a code holding me back. Do you actually
think that the bad CB'rs are going to go get a license so they can JAM
and CUSS at you? NO!!! The good ones will! So where is the FREE at?

Cya, wouldnt want to be ya.

73
KF6FOZ


On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 22:44:19 -0000, "No Code, No Ham"
wrote:

(WA8ULX) wrote in
:

Do Hams get 11 Meters Back, as soon as all the CBers upgrade to there
Free Handout Ham Licenses?


There has been a free ham license ever since the codeless tech was
introduced a few years back. The 5 wpm code requirement has further
moved things in that direction. Idiots on the ham bands.

11 meters has come to the ham bands. I listen to the bands and it's
certainly not the way things were in the 1980's when I got licenced. I
might as well just listen to CB channel 19, it all sounds the same now.

ARRL plan back fired on them. They worked to dumb things done in order
to produce more licensee's who might join the organization and fill the
corporate bank accounts, but instead, they got a bunch of idiots who
don't care bacause getting a license is easy now and when you don't have
to work to get the benefits, the benefits you get don't mean a whole lot.

All real hams out there who remember how the bands used to be, send the
ARRL a nasty-gram and cancel your League memberships. They screwed us
over big time by not protecting the integrity of the Amateur radio
Service.



No Code.... No Ham!

West Coast Radio wrote:
Sounds like you old pro-coders are getting upset! I worked and had to
pay to get my no-code ticket.

You paid someone to help you get through a dumbed down IQ test?

--
GO# 40

No, Mopar, the VEs charge. It used to be free at the FCC, but, for me at
least, that meant a 60 mile trip (120 miles round trip) to the FCC in
Buffalo, NY, and one minute of perfect copy at 20 words per minute. When I
had dropped my tickets and decided to retest in 1993, I believe it was under
$6.00 for the session. That was 20 words per minute, but multiple guess.
Now it is 5 words per minute, but the testing charge is considerably higher
(don't ask me, I don't know. I simply showed up for the tests in '93. You
don't have to score 100%). So, while someone may pay for the exam, that 120
mile round trip savings is worth something. Don't worry too much though. I
hear the FCC is going to try to package the licenses in boxes of Cracker
Jax. :)

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim

wrote in message
...
wrote:
West Coast Radio wrote:
Sounds like you old pro-coders are getting upset! I worked and had to
pay to get my no-code ticket.

You paid someone to help you get through a dumbed down IQ test?

Heads up. This guy is your next extra class. dit dat..

--
GO# 40


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 8/4/03

"Jim Hampton" wrote:
No, Mopar, the VEs charge. It used to be free at the FCC, but, for me at
least, that meant a 60 mile trip (120 miles round trip) to the FCC in
Buffalo, NY, and one minute of perfect copy at 20 words per minute. When
I had dropped my tickets and decided to retest in 1993, I believe it was
under $6.00 for the session. That was 20 words per minute, but multiple
guess. Now it is 5 words per minute, but the testing charge is
considerably higher (don't ask me, I don't know. I simply showed up for
the tests in '93. You don't have to score 100%). So, while someone may
pay for the exam, that 120 mile round trip savings is worth something.
Don't worry too much though. I hear the FCC is going to try to package
the licenses in boxes of Cracker Jax. :)

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim

wrote in message
...
wrote:
West Coast Radio wrote:
Sounds like you old pro-coders are getting upset! I worked and had
to pay to get my no-code ticket.

You paid someone to help you get through a dumbed down IQ test?

Heads up. This guy is your next extra class. dit dat..

They don't have me worried yet, Jim. Note to self: buy some
Cracker Jax stock.

Or they will come with the radio, you take the te$t and mail
it back with a check.

--
GO# 40

On 12 Aug 2003 23:40:34 GMT, wrote:

I'm really not interested in rrap, or you, thanks anyway.

Then why are you posting here?

I don't mean to include all ham radio operators, and afterall, it's
only my friggin opinion anyway.

Well, that's what rrap is all about, expressing our opinions. However,
there are a lot of people who will respect an opinion - even one they
disagree with - if the person expressing it feels strongly enough
about what they're saying to let others know who is saying it, which
by extension means it's a legitimate expression of an opinion rather
than some anonymous troll trying to stir up the hornets' nest. There
are exceptions, of course - some people just don't have enough pride
in themselves to care how much of an imbecile they look like in front
of the rest of the world - but generally this has shown to be the
case. As for not meaning to include all ham operators, that's good,
but your comments about the code test were directed to *me* in that
you posted them in a reply to a message that I posted...and if you
trouble yourself to check, you'll see that I've been posting in favor
of doing away with the code test for, oh, about six years now.

I've used the same NSP and ISP for years and years, my email is
valid too (remove nospam) So in your opinion, don't trust anyone
on Usenet, without a callsign?

See the above.

What troubles me is this: You claimed to be a "coded Tech" and yet
here you are griping about code testing. To me, this doesn't add up.
If you've already passed the code test, then as long as you hold onto
the CSCE and keep your license current, you no longer have to worry
about it. The next step for you is to pass Element 3 and upgrade to
General. Your tone suggests to me that you haven't passed a code test.
Now, if you had posted your call like many (most) of us here do, I
could have checked on QRZ and removed any such suspicions. As things
stand, I and the rest of us here in rrap have to wonder, under the
circumstances, if you even have a license at all. No license is
required for posting here, but if you are indeed a ham - regardless of
your license class - then be proud of that fact ande have the courtesy
to let the rest of us know who we're talking to, that's all.

The first sign of a blow hard, spelling and grammer corrections.

You fit right in here.

Well, you asked for this now, so: The first sign of a functional
illiterate, spelling and grammar errors. You fit right in on
rec.radio.cb.

So, when you realize you haven't made a point yet, you accuse me
of smoking crack?

That was giving you the benefit of the doubt, actually.

Sorry, you sound like an N8WWM type person. I hope you're not. :)

No, I'm a KC2HMZ type person...whatever that means. Bottom line,
though, is that if you want to retain any credibility here (which I'm
not sure you care to do) you might consider following the thread and
noticing who's on which side of an issue before you go spraying folks
who happen to agree with you (like me) with shots intended for folks
who disagree (like you did to me the day before yesterday). Or are you
just trolling rather than trying to make a point here?

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Jim Hampton"
writes:

No, Mopar, the VEs charge. It used to be free at the FCC, but, for me at
least, that meant a 60 mile trip (120 miles round trip) to the FCC in
Buffalo, NY, and one minute of perfect copy at 20 words per minute.

It was free at the FCC until 1963 or 1964, when they began charging for
exams
(except Novice). That continued into the mid 1970s. The fee for an exam
started
out at $4 and went up to $9.

Now $9 doesn't sound like a lot today but back circa 1970 it was a lot of
lawns
cut or papers delivered if you were a kid. Even if you were an adult it
could
be a few hours' net pay. $10,000/yr was a good income back then, which
works
out to about $5/hour. Adjust that for inflation and today's VE fees are
cheap.

As AA2QA points out, though, the big expense and effort for many hams
wasn't
the exam itself but getting there. A kid in school had to wait for summer
and
working folk had to take at least a half day off 'cause the exams were on
weekday mornings. No do-overs or CSCEs, either, if you failed by even one
question, or were one letter short of the required copy, you could not
retest
for 30 days.

I was lucky; Upper Darby to the Philly Custom House was just a subway ride
with
a short walk at each end. For a kid in Harrisburg, Scranton or South
Jersey it
was a big deal just to get there.

The end result, though, was that most hams went to the exams extremely
overprepared. Wasn't worth taking a chance on failing.

73 de Jim, N2EY


But you know Jim even if they did prepare, A LOT FAILED, it was really an
exercise in who could overcome the nerves.

I had to take a 90 mile train ride to and from to take my test. I was 13 at
the time, and my mother came along. We spent the night at my aunt and
uncles.

Years later I realized it was the 'original incentive licensing'. He stern
words were " You better pass this thing the first time, we ain't doing this
again". I nicknamed her 'Old Sarge'...but never to her face.. hi. Sure do
miss her.

Dan/W4NTI

=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"John" =3D=3D Radio Amateur KC2HMZ writes:

[...]

John What troubles me is this: You claimed to be a "coded Tech" and
John yet here you are griping about code testing. To me, this doesn't
John add up. If you've already passed the code test, then as long as
John you hold onto the CSCE and keep your license current, you no
John longer have to worry about it. The next step for you is to pass
John Element 3 and upgrade to General. Your tone suggests to me that
John you haven't passed a code test. Now, if you had posted your
John call like many (most) of us here do, I could have checked on QRZ
John and removed any such suspicions. As things stand, I and the rest
John of us here in rrap have to wonder, under the circumstances, if
John you even have a license at all. No license is required for
John posting here, but if you are indeed a ham - regardless of your
John license class - then be proud of that fact ande have the
John courtesy to let the rest of us know who we're talking to, that's
John all.

What troubles *me* is this:

1. Posters here see inconsistency where it doesn't exist.

There is no reason for a 20wpm Extra or a 5wpm Extra to support
code testing just because they passed it. I am a 5wpm Extra, and
I feel that the treaty was the only reason to maintain the test.
I wanted the license bad enough to pass the test, so I passed.
That doesn't mean I think that everyone else should. Trying to
read whether or not someone has passed the code test by their tone
is foolish, and wrapping the entire newsgroup under your "have to
wonder" umbrella is just foolish, which leads me to...

2. Posters here look down on those who post without callsigns.

Your comment that hams should "be proud" of their license is
foolish, but not as foolish as your justification for callsign
posting expectations -- "have the courtesy to let the rest of us
know who we're talking to". This thing we're using is called
"Usenet". It's been around for a long time, and the primary
technical form of identification for posters is something called
an "email address". It is also traditional to include one's real
name or a pseudonym, often in something called a "signature" which
is appended to their posts. I am using Dr. Evil quotes to make a
point. If you haven't figured it out yet, here it is again from
another direction. If I were calling CQ on 80 meters and using my
email address, you'd be unimpressed. Someone out there could
easily Google my email address to find out my name and other
information and then search the FCC database to find my callsign
and license class, but that's not an acceptable defense for not
using the proper and traditional identification methods. My
callsign shows up in approximately seven Usenet posts across three
newsgroups, none of which include this group. When I speak here,
I address myself as I wish to be addressed, which is by those
forms of identifications, formal and traditional, that are
appropriate to this media. The headers of my posts even include
suggested attributions for replies to my posts. The lack of a
callsign in my posts doesn't negate the value of what I type. It
frankly isn't relevant to any posts -- my license class is
relevant to some posts, but not many -- so I don't see any need to
include that information.

These comments aren't solely directed at you. You just wrote a post
that pushed two of my buttons. You should only take it personally if
those two items are things you really personally believe.
=20=20=20=20
Jack.
=2D --=20
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/OsPbGPFSfAB/ezgRArY9AKCskgctJLmecnj+wg8uLHGcqF2H4QCg7oE7
oNqMdjKL8kXAsp59D/WO5Kc=3D
=3DXk87
=2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 16:03:48 -0700, Jack Twilley
wrote:

1. Posters here see inconsistency where it doesn't exist.

There is no reason for a 20wpm Extra or a 5wpm Extra to support
code testing just because they passed it. I am a 5wpm Extra, and
I feel that the treaty was the only reason to maintain the test.
I wanted the license bad enough to pass the test, so I passed.
That doesn't mean I think that everyone else should. Trying to
read whether or not someone has passed the code test by their tone
is foolish, and wrapping the entire newsgroup under your "have to
wonder" umbrella is just foolish, which leads me to...

Well, Jack...I dunno how long you've been reading this NG, but I've
been here long enough to have noticed some patterns in other people's
posts. One of them is that trolls from rec.radio.cb who come here to
whine about code testing never post a callsign, frequently post
anonymously using a phony e-mail address, and post messages with a
tone that makes their agenda obvious to even the most casual of
observers. If you think that such reading between the lines is
foolish, you're entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that, rather
than foolish, I find it a useful tool for determining which posters
are interested in a serious discussion of an issue and which are
merely trolls that aren't worth wasting the time to reply to.

2. Posters here look down on those who post without callsigns.

Your comment that hams should "be proud" of their license is
foolish, but not as foolish as your justification for callsign
posting expectations -- "have the courtesy to let the rest of us
know who we're talking to". This thing we're using is called
"Usenet". It's been around for a long time, and the primary
technical form of identification for posters is something called
an "email address". It is also traditional to include one's real
name or a pseudonym, often in something called a "signature" which
is appended to their posts. I am using Dr. Evil quotes to make a
point. If you haven't figured it out yet, here it is again from
another direction. If I were calling CQ on 80 meters and using my
email address, you'd be unimpressed. Someone out there could
easily Google my email address to find out my name and other
information and then search the FCC database to find my callsign
and license class, but that's not an acceptable defense for not
using the proper and traditional identification methods. My
callsign shows up in approximately seven Usenet posts across three
newsgroups, none of which include this group. When I speak here,
I address myself as I wish to be addressed, which is by those
forms of identifications, formal and traditional, that are
appropriate to this media. The headers of my posts even include
suggested attributions for replies to my posts. The lack of a
callsign in my posts doesn't negate the value of what I type. It
frankly isn't relevant to any posts -- my license class is
relevant to some posts, but not many -- so I don't see any need to
include that information.

In the case of morphoholic, the issue isn't what his license class is,
but whether or not he even HAS one. He claimed to. Anyone can claim to
have a license. That doesn't mean that he or she does actually have
one. This is a ham radio related newsgroup. Hams know one another by
our calls, not our e-mail addresses or x-trace info or other server
junk that goes into the headers on a usenet message. Most of us here
like to know who we're talking to...and, being hams, we do that by
callsign. I think you'll find plenty of regulars here who will agree
with that.

These comments aren't solely directed at you. You just wrote a post
that pushed two of my buttons. You should only take it personally if
those two items are things you really personally believe.

No, I don't think I'm taking it personally; however, as I said, I
think you'll find that many of the regulars here will agree that, this
being a ham NG, there's a certain courtesy with posting your call to
let others know who they are dealing with. If you choose not to do so,
well, okay...you're not posting messages that border on trollism. If
you were, I wouldn't be wasting my time with a reply. ;-)

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

wrote:
"No Code, No Ham" wrote:

(WA8ULX) wrote in
:


Do Hams get 11 Meters Back, as soon as all the CBers upgrade to there
Free Handout Ham Licenses?


There has been a free ham license ever since the codeless tech was
introduced a few years back. The 5 wpm code requirement has further
moved things in that direction. Idiots on the ham bands.

11 meters has come to the ham bands. I listen to the bands and it's
certainly not the way things were in the 1980's when I got licenced. I
might as well just listen to CB channel 19, it all sounds the same now.


-snippage-
Take that cross posted stink bait outta' here, chump.

hey mopar did ya get to see the new audioslave video on mtv showing
challengers and coronets? brings back memories of the old mans '70
coronet 440 with a 383....first car i broke a 100 in....

jim wrote:
wrote:
"No Code, No Ham" wrote:

(WA8ULX) wrote in
:


Do Hams get 11 Meters Back, as soon as all the CBers upgrade to there
Free Handout Ham Licenses?


There has been a free ham license ever since the codeless tech was
introduced a few years back. The 5 wpm code requirement has further
moved things in that direction. Idiots on the ham bands.

11 meters has come to the ham bands. I listen to the bands and it's
certainly not the way things were in the 1980's when I got licenced. I
might as well just listen to CB channel 19, it all sounds the same now.


-snippage-
Take that cross posted stink bait outta' here, chump.

hey mopar did ya get to see the new audioslave video on mtv showing
challengers and coronets? brings back memories of the old mans '70
coronet 440 with a 383....first car i broke a 100 in....

No I didn't Jim, I usually scan right past mtv. What is it a
music video from a band called audioslave?

--
GO# 40

In article , "Dan/W4NTI"
writes:

But you know Jim even if they did prepare, A LOT FAILED, it was really an
exercise in who could overcome the nerves.

My sources tell me that the pass rate has been about 2/3 for years and years. I
don't know how true that is. I do know that it's a good thing the exam sessions
are more accessible than in those times.

I recall that one of the major complaints some hams had about incentive
licensing was the travel expense and time. Something like 1/6 of the ham
population back then were Conditionals. Something like 1/3 of the hams of the
'60s had never been to an FCC office exam (Novice, Tech and Conditional were
all by mail). None of the IL proposals included making the Advanced or Extra
available by mail.

For my money, the *best* system was that of the late '70s and very early '80s.
FCC examiners did all the testing and exam preparing, and there were office
sessions. BUT, if a ham group could guarantee a certain number of folks wanting
tests (I think the quororm/minyan was 10) then FCC would send out an examiner.
Most big hamfests had the FCC "traveling road show" giving exams.

Reagan's budget cuts ended all that.

I had to take a 90 mile train ride to and from to take my test. I was 13 at
the time, and my mother came along. We spent the night at my aunt and
uncles.

That's why I said I was lucky. At 13 it was a mile walk to K3NYT's house for
the Novice, and at 14 a subway ride. Nobody went with me, but those were
different times.

And since we were school kids, we were used to taking tests.

Years later I realized it was the 'original incentive licensing'. He stern
words were " You better pass this thing the first time, we ain't doing this
again". I nicknamed her 'Old Sarge'...but never to her face.. hi. Sure do
miss her.

I hear ya!

I recall that the Philly office gave exams on Monday thru Wednesday, and I
think there were no code tests on Wednesday. There was no way a kid would be
allowed to miss school for a ham exam back then. So all testing had to be done
in the summer, or over Xmas break if the holiday didn't fall on the wrong day.
With the 30 day retest rule and school getting out in mid-June, there were at
most three chances per summer or four chances per year - tops.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ...
"N2EY" wrote in message

The end result, though, was that most hams went to the exams extremely
overprepared. Wasn't worth taking a chance on failing.

73 de Jim, N2EY


But you know Jim even if they did prepare, A LOT FAILED, it was really an
exercise in who could overcome the nerves.

Absolute fact!

I had to take a 90 mile train ride to and from to take my test. I was 13 at
the time, and my mother came along. We spent the night at my aunt and
uncles.

Years later I realized it was the 'original incentive licensing'. He stern
words were " You better pass this thing the first time, we ain't doing this
again". I nicknamed her 'Old Sarge'...but never to her face.. hi. Sure do
miss her.

Hee! I was brought up in the same area where Jim lived, the FCC office
was only a trolley & an elevated ride away so neither of us had to
walk ten miles uphill both ways in blizzards to take the exams.

My Mom was brought up under well-heeled circumstances and had an older
brother whom she often referred to as a "ham radio operator". I never
met him because he passed away young around 1922 long before I was
born. He had a whole room full of radio gear and had, as she explained
it, the "first radio tubes in town". I suspected for a long time that
he was an SWL type, not a ham.

Time marched on and it got to be time for me to take my Novice exam, I
was 15-16 and roamed the rails at will by then. I told Mom I was going
downtown to take the gummint test to become a ham radio operator.
"That's nice dear, I don't remember Joseph taking a test though. Be
home for dinner" and that was the end of my folk's involvement to that
point. Until I actually got on the air and tore up every TV set on the
block. Then it became "Joseph didn't do that, turn that thing off!"
Oops. Thus it was that I became the "80M Midnite Stalker", I only got
on the air after midnite when the TV stations were broadcasting test
patterns and/or shut down.

We have a nickname for our Mom too. She has four sets of X-Ray eyes,
can hear whispers six blocks away and has radar the Navy would kill
for. We got away with *NOTHING*. The best way to get any of her ten
grandchildren back in line was to threaten to call Spooky Old Alice
and have her swoop in on her broom and deal with them. OhYeah it
worked! So for decades now she's been known universally as The Spook,
or just "Spook" or "Spooky". Her e-mail address was .
She'll be 90 in a couple weeks. She spends a lot of time in what we
call "Alice's World" these days but she's still kickin'.

Dan/W4NTI

w3rv

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote:
In the case of morphoholic, the issue isn't what his license class is,
but whether or not he even HAS one. He claimed to. Anyone can claim to
have a license.

Please show me one post where I claimed anything of the sort. Stop
making **** up to fit your agenda, or STFU.

--
GO# 40

Those of us who did not spend summers at the shore had even more
opportunities. Of course there was the 30 day retest wait....


Did anyone ever get caught showing up say a week early for retest?
Today you'd
have computers that could spot it, but back in the old days did they
bother to check?

On 14 Aug 2003 16:29:31 GMT, wrote:

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote:
In the case of morphoholic, the issue isn't what his license class is,
but whether or not he even HAS one. He claimed to. Anyone can claim to
have a license.

Please show me one post where I claimed anything of the sort. Stop
making **** up to fit your agenda, or STFU.

Okay, fine, that's better yet - if you're now saying you do not have a
license, that makes you a worthless CB troll, which is what I
suspected all along.

Funny how every time guys like you open their mouths, it's to change
which foot is in there.

You might as well go back to rec.radio.cb now - where you belong.

(sarcasm mode on)

But gee, dontcha know the arrl is blameless? Of course they only take
credit for good news/stuff.

(sarcasm mode off)



--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...
All real hams out there who remember how the bands used to be, send the
ARRL a nasty-gram and cancel your League memberships. They screwed us
over big time by not protecting the integrity of the Amateur radio
Service.



No Code.... No Ham!

W hy in hell would they want it back??????????

"OOTMAN" wrote in message
...
W hy in hell would they want it back??????????


Better utilization of HF spectrum, and more spectrum for hams. All the
non-ham stuff should be VHF or UHF, for the obvious reason.

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

charlesb wrote:

"OOTMAN" wrote in message
...


W hy in hell would they want it back??????????




Better utilization of HF spectrum, and more spectrum for hams. All the
non-ham stuff should be VHF or UHF, for the obvious reason.

Charles Brabham, N5PVL




But 10 meters is rarely crowded, getting 11 back, though nice, isn't
that critical.
More bandwidth on 20 or 40 I would prefer.

charlesb wrote:

"OOTMAN" wrote in message
...

W hy in hell would they want it back??????????



Better utilization of HF spectrum, and more spectrum for hams. All the
non-ham stuff should be VHF or UHF, for the obvious reason.

Charles Brabham, N5PVL


The hams hardly used 11 meters when they had it, what makes you think
they would use it now if they got it back? Besides, the cbers have made
such a mess of it, it would take years to clean the filth out.

JJ wrote:
charlesb wrote:

"OOTMAN" wrote in message
...

W hy in hell would they want it back??????????



Better utilization of HF spectrum, and more spectrum for hams. All the
non-ham stuff should be VHF or UHF, for the obvious reason.

Charles Brabham, N5PVL


The hams hardly used 11 meters when they had it, what makes you think
they would use it now if they got it back? Besides, the cbers have made
such a mess of it, it would take years to clean the filth out.


equating cb'ers and filth eh? in your limited world hams dont freeband?
guess you havn't heard the cw contests on 11 meters. so much for your
post...