RadioBanter - Whaddya think folks?

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)

- Policy (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/)

- - Whaddya think folks? (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/26858-re-whaddya-think-folks.html)

"WA8ULX" wrote:

Of course you dont, you want a FREE HANDOUT License.

Bruce, I've having a hard time even believing you have a license. Based
on your poorly written messages in this newsgroup and others, I don't see
how you were literate enough to even understand the license exams? Clearly,
you're one of those who had to memorize the question pool instead of
understanding the content. Now that you have a license, you still don't seem
to understand the concepts behind ham radio - the concept of "goodwill"
obviously went right over your head.

Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

"Brian" wrote:

No, no, no. Bruce didn't memorize anything. He took
the exam on a lark, w/o studying, and scored 100%.
Furthermore, he did it in under 8 minutes, and collected
$250 from a couple of "CB Plussers" who bet he
couldn't do it.

Well, if true, I'm certainly impressed. But, of course, I have serious
doubts about that claim. In fact, I would consider it almost impossible (and
Bruce certainly doesn't seem like the type of person who could go around
doing the impossible). Heck, it would take almost eight minutes for even the
fastest reader to read over the the exam questions. And, considering some of
the questions in the pool (band limits, etc), I doubt one could pass without
at least some study (even if the study is nothing more than experience).

Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

Same here as well, but the basic would get full privileges except power,
limited to 200 watts (who needs much more than that anyways) on only 2
bands, one HF and one VHF/UHF band. At least I remember I had some thought
like that.....

--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...

I like it Jim. I suggested to FCC years ago to go with a 3 tier license
structure. My major difference was to make the diverse modes a 'add on'
to
the license. Instead of power restrictions.

Would be a lot easier to regulate that way. Having to test for a 'add on
endorsement' would still maintain the technical aspects of the ARS. And
provide a way of continued learning.

Just a thought.

Dan/W4NTI

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote:

Some time back, I took a *practice* Extra test online. No
preparation. To make it more of a sporting course I did all
the math in my head - no calculator, no scratch paper. Took
me about 7-1/2 minutes start to finish, (snip)

Yep, but the online tests are easier. With most of them, all you have to
do click an answer directly under the question, not shade a small block on
an answer card with a pencil. All that (reading the questions, answers, and
filling in the answer card) couldn't likely be done in eight minutes. Of
course, anything is possible, so I won't say it isn't (which is why I said
it was "almost" impossible). But I suspect you would agree such an
accomplishment would certainly be very rare.

Did it ever occur to you that his persona here could be an act?

Nope. It's too consistent across many newsgroups over a relatively long
period of time. If it's an act, he should be in Hollywood.

Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

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

Some time back, I took a *practice* Extra test online. No
preparation. To make it more of a sporting course I did all
the math in my head - no calculator, no scratch paper. Took
me about 7-1/2 minutes start to finish, (snip)

Yep, but the online tests are easier.

Same question pools, though.

With most of them, all you have to
do click an answer directly under the question, not shade a small block on
an answer card with a pencil.

Same difference to me.

All that (reading the questions, answers, and
filling in the answer card) couldn't likely be done in eight minutes.

I could do it. And I'm no expert.

Of
course, anything is possible, so I won't say it isn't (which is why I said
it was "almost" impossible).

Go down that road far enough and you will invent the Infinite
Improbability Generator.

But I suspect you would agree such an
accomplishment would certainly be very rare.

I dunno. I know I could do it. Maybe I wouldn't get every single
question right when going full speed like that, but I could pass.

Did it ever occur to you that his persona here could be an act?

Nope. It's too consistent across many newsgroups over a relatively long
period of time. If it's an act, he should be in Hollywood.

I think it's an act, invented for the purpose. But even if it's not an
act, the written tests are not spelling or grammar tests.
"Intelligence" isn't a single-dimension quality. A person can be
brilliant in one area and have serious developmental problems in
others.

In fact, if you deny that someone who writes like Bruce could ace the
Extra written in eight minuites, then, by the same logic, you have to
deny the claim that someone could be brilliant in electronics but have
a difficult time with 5 wpm Morse Code.

but i think its all a act He puts on

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...
Mike Coslo wrote in message
...
If I had turn the clock back and "do" ham radio like we
had in those days my ticket would have landed in the dumpster three
decades ago.

'Twas the Medieval Age of radio, a one notch improvement beyond the
Dark Age of radio.

- Mike KB3EIA -

w3rv

Now, now, it wasn't all THAT bad! I take advantage of
whatever ham radio offers me NOW, and remember what it was like back in
1967. Yes, we had tube trans-
mitters and a trunkload of cables, relays, dynamotors, and back breaking
sets that I couldn't even heft now, but
it was still fun. That's because we didn't KNOW any better. Had you told
me in '68 that we would have radios
the likes of the 706, I'd have chortled "no way". There were none of the
Analyzers and we used grid dip meters,
amp meters (to measure antenna current), and even florescent light bulbs for
"instruments". We still had fun!
I was a CAP member in those days, not a ham yet. Ever
since I was a kid, I listened to my Dad's 1940s Philco
shortwave set--Mom used to say it made a great babysitter because I would
sit for hours and try to tune
in those "Donald Duck" sounds, and not understanding why I could not tune it
in. I didn't know what a BFO was, but I was still fascinated with it. I
got the crap
shocked out of me with capacitors and plate current and
dynamotors (and survived), And I had fun. The license
was not quite convenient when in high school because my
family tended to live out in the boonies and Dad had no interest in taking
me to a Field Office to take the test. There were no hams around in the
middle of nowhere where we lived. Still, I learned, made mistakes, and
and had fun. Got a lot of "education" with CAP, and
eventually got my ticket in '89 after I was grown and married. I had a lot
of good elmers in later life and learned also how NOT to shock the stuffings
outta me. And I
am still having fun! The goofballs I encounter I just ignore
and don't get dragged into cuss fights and infantile behav-
ior. Because I was trained as a CAP radio operator before I got into ham
radio (I was very aware of it, BTW), I tend to operate in a more structured
manner. I can have a ball chatting with friends and experimenting with
projects. Suffering a fool with a radio that gets his
jollies kerchunking repeaters and QRMing HF QSOs is
not for me!

I just enjoy what I have now, marvel at the tech advantages that seemed
impossible in the '60s and remember fondly those old glow-in-the-dark rigs
that seemed so "right" way back when........ But it wasn't THAT bad! LOL!

73

Jerry
K4KWH

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

I think it's an act, invented for the purpose. But even if it's not an
act, the written tests are not spelling or grammar tests.
"Intelligence" isn't a single-dimension quality. A person can be
brilliant in one area and have serious developmental problems in
others.

Have you read his messages (not just the ones in this newsgroup)?

Yes - too many of 'em!

I
haven't see any sign of brilliance in anything he's written, on any subject.

Nor have I. But he's doing pretty well for 305 years old, dontcha
think? ;-)

I'm not saying he's dirt dumb, just not the typical "rocket scientist" type.

It doesn't take a lot of brilliance to pass the Extra written. Just
enough right answers.

Again, if is's an act, it's a darn good one (and that's the only good thing
about it).

Of course. Bruce embarrasses the procodetest side, just like some
folks embarrass the nocodetest side.

In fact, that may be his entire game.

73 de Jim, N2EY