"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message ...

That's about the extent of the mental capacity of the no-coder, Mike.
They have too little vision to
be able to see value in radiotelegraphy, so all they can see is that
anyone who has that capacity must be on the far opposite end of the scale.

One must ponder their IQ. For the most part it's down with the whale
offal.

Dick, have you not heard one word we've said to you over the past
decade?

If you want to use code, FINE!

If you want to build code into your personal Emergency Operations
Plan, FINE!

If you want to create an organization, call it FISTS, and dedicate it
to the use of Morse Code, FINE!

If you want to participate (or not) in CW Contests, FINE!

If you want to risk your life trying to cobble together a CW
transmitter during an emergency, FINE!

But the days of requiring otherwise qualified people to have to learn
your favorite mode just to participate in HF are over. Get used to
it. Adjust. Adapt. Overcome.

Your approach to getting other people to learn your favorite mode has
to change, because you can't say, "Just learn it because I had to."

That just doesn't wash anymore. People don't accept "Just because,"
anymore.

You've got work to do, and it isn't getting done by being crappy to
people who don't share your views. You think vinegar is going to
attract new Morse enthusiasts? It isn't. You think wasting your time
arguing with people like me is going to convert us? It isn't. I
think code is just one of many modes authorized by the FCC. I haven't
used SSTV, so why aren't you complaining about that?

Get on with it, and quit complaining to me about it.

73, Brian

In article ilgate.org, "Hans
K0HB" writes:

"N2EY" wrote


Then answer this question: Why should people who are not interested in
building or fixing their radios have to learn all that theory stuff
for the written tests? Why are all hams tested on all sorts of stuff
they are not interested in?

Because the terms of their license make them responsible for the quality
of their radiated signal(s).

Maybe. But a ham is not required to actually know how his/her equipment works,
nor to be able to work on it. Just for the result.

I'm not required to know how my cars work, just how to use them safely. I am
"responsible", however, to see that they meet all applicable DMV requirements,
including pollution and safety equipment. I can do the work myself or have it
done by others. The same is true for ham equipment.

The FCC thinks that Technicians are adequately tested on that, for all
authorized modes and technologies. There are no modes or technologies
authorized for amateur HF/MF that are not also authorized for amateur VHF/UHF.
So there is no absolute need for any of the General or Extra written tests
*except* perhaps a few regulatory and propagation questions.

Without demonstrating some familiarity with the basic underlying
science, it would be irresponsible of the regulators to allow an
applicant to establish a radio transmitting station on the public
airways.

See above about Technicians.

And here's another point: There's almost nothing in the tests about some
technologies that hams are allowed to use. For example, vacuum tubes - not very
much in the tests about them! Yet FCC *trusts* hams who want to use vacuum tube
technology to learn what they need to know about it and operate their equipment
responsibly. So why all the tests?

Familiarize yourself with the concept "tragedy of the
commons".

You got a handy reference?

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
.com...

"Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote in message
...
(4) The public at large (ham radio operators) should NOT
be BURDENED with having to make choices; they
should not have the freedom to choose how to use
thier skills to the ends that they see fit; such is an
IMPOSITION upon them.


By eliminating the testing requirement for Morse code, we are seriously
undermining people's freedom of choice.

Oh, that is such dreadful stretch it literally IS laughable. Be reducing or
eliminating a requirement we are LIMITING freedom? just what
backwards, reverse logic came up with THAT?

or, if this is it....

Keeping the test means that individuals will have a
better knowledge base upon which to choose whether or not to pursue Morse
code to proficient level.

THAT is where the very basic logic that the PCTA crowd has is incorrect!
You are refusing to diffuse the two subjects of "testing" and "use on the
bands".
Morse code, as well as ssb, fm, fax, and every other mode of operation
exists totaly independant of testing for it... for the very simple reason
that the
testing process is NOT the one and only available means for learning about
it.
Reference books, history, word of mouth, the internet, and every other
method
available for exchanging ideas in society will continuously make it and
every
other legal form of communication readily available to anybody who has,
AND THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART, an basic natural desire to do so.
If this desire doesn't exist, over a thousand years of human history tells
us
that FORCEING people to do something they do not want to do naturally
compels them to resist it. I honestly believe this is one of the basic
reasons
you DO see such a resentment for the code today.

Free of exterior pressures, allowing a free society to evolve naturally and
pursue it's natural course, just like in economics and politics, is the best
policy you can use.

Let me give you another example; 8-track tapes. They were available
before cassettes and compact disks were. It is illogical to make a law
REQUIREING people to learn about 8-track tapes, "just so they
can have the knowledge base necissary to make an informed
decision". This comes naturally; 8-track tapes need not and SHOULD
not have been subsidized by the federal government in any way.
The free market chose what they did for such a multitude of reasons,
each on of which are necessary to enumerate here but the ultimate
reason is the same. Seriously; what logic would there be if you
went to hastings, or discount music, walmart, or whatever retailer
you can name and wanted to buy a compact disk, and the salesman
there said "i'm sorry sir, first you are going to have to present your
license proving that you have been schooled in the history and
use of 8-track tapes."

Clint
KB5ZHT

Talking heads... I think CNN first made this popular.
It was the darndest thing I ever saw; well-groomed
adults sitting there in each of thier little windows, and
once the "ringmaster" fielded the question, all
nuiances of a mature environment went right out the
window and the high-dollar, well paid, pampered
"experts" just started screaming at each other.

You were lucky to understand any real comments,
whether or not you agreed with what was being
said sometimes couldn't even come up to your
attention. It would end with the "ringmaster"
saying "well, I thank you all for joining us,
always a pleasure to have you."

and I thought to myself, "boy, THIS will never
catch on. THAT was insanity!"

oh, but just look at what has happened.

Clint
KB5ZHT

"if you want......
"if you want....
"if you want....

.....then all that is FINE, but..."

isn't even getting through to those people. They're not hearing it.
read back a few threads and you'll see one of them actually
tell me that "removing the testing requirement limits people's
choices". I'll just let that one sink in with you and please accept
my remark as being accurate, you can go back and read it.

They will not seperate the two issues of "testing" and "use".
It's "you WILL learn it!" (followed by the unspoken but
agreed upon reasoning, "because I had to").

I think the basic problem is that they have a few preconceived
notions that are wrong. They seem to feel that people will
enjoy doing something if forced to do it, if they otherwise wouldn't,
which human psychology doesn't support this at ALL, nor does
the history of economics. They feel that somehow, if not required
to be tested on it, people will forget about it and not want to
do it.

I never took a profeciency test for ssb, fm or AM and I enjoy using
those modes, managed to look up reference material on them and
learn about them without having to have a test to make me do so,
and furthermore, what I did have to know was covered on a
knowledge test. Hey, there's an idea. How about just incorporating
CW into the knowledge test as part of the database? asking
what random characters are? what the definition of the farnsworth
rate is, and how a code key works? What does "full break in"
ability mean on linear amplifiers?

Oh, no, this will never do. even though the reasons given were that
a person needs to learn about it in order to make informed decisions,
and this would have him learn about it, it comes back down to
the old tried and true SPEED OF RECEPTION test;

I had to do it. Read: We were once subjects of the british
king
So should you. Read: YOU, therefore, are a subject of the king.

Shut up and do it. Read: Shut up with your ideas of revolution.
Do what the redcoats TELL you to do.

Oops, i'm sorry, now did I offend somebody to referring to the redcoats,
the way I did previously with the brownshirts? Lord knows in today's
society we need to avoid everything that offends anybody.

but I digress.

Clint

Arnie,

Unfortunately we have too many people in this country who think freedom of
speech takes precedence over common decency. They don't realize or don't
care that by being inconsiderate in their choice of words or analogies
that
people will discount what they say. It is more important to them to do it
their way rather than in a way that will get the audience on their side.


I happen to also know what a society would devolve down to if you
omitted EVERYTHING and ANYTHING that offended some person,
somewhere. If you first cleansed all your speech, writings, thoughts,
and every other form of expressing yourself simply because one person
somewhere would get mad about it, what do you have left?

Oh, that's right. A socialist utopia.
That's not "my" america.

"just shut up and buy 8-track tapes when the redcoats
point thier muskets at you and TELL you to."

Clint
KB5ZHT

"Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote in message
...


Arnie,

Unfortunately we have too many people in this country who think freedom
of
speech takes precedence over common decency. They don't realize or don't
care that by being inconsiderate in their choice of words or analogies
that
people will discount what they say. It is more important to them to do
it
their way rather than in a way that will get the audience on their side.


I happen to also know what a society would devolve down to if you
omitted EVERYTHING and ANYTHING that offended some person,
somewhere. If you first cleansed all your speech, writings, thoughts,
and every other form of expressing yourself simply because one person
somewhere would get mad about it, what do you have left?

Oh, that's right. A socialist utopia.
That's not "my" america.

"just shut up and buy 8-track tapes when the redcoats
point thier muskets at you and TELL you to."

Clint
KB5ZHT

As you obviously don't know, the message gets through a lot better when you
speak in terms appropriate to the audience. Any public speaker knows this
or if he doesn't, he learns it quite quickly. If you don't present your
ideas using terms that the audience understands and likes, they will tune
you out. Your message is wasted. and so is your time if you've just got to
"let it all hang out."

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Hey, wanna talk SHUDDER?

this is what makes ME shudder... the thought that you are invoking
the priviledges of free speech and rights of society just like I am,
but also advocating that an idea, concept or practice be forced
upon a person against thier will.

And you're doing that with a straight face.

Clint
KB5ZHT

Those folk can't be bothered to learn facts Dee, their minds are cast
in stone. No amount of
rational persuasion is competent to educate or enlighten them.
Meanwhile they rant about the
backward state of code supporters, of whom far more are involved and
knowledgable on late digital modes than any serious number of them!

Such ignorance would be amazing, even laughable, if it didn't portend
the future.


Name the first fact that I am refusing to learn.

I am more than willing to learn about the history of morse code, and it's
use, and it's applications (no matter how dwindling and disappearing today);
I have no problem with other people doing the same, if they SO CHOOSE.

I have a problem with people like yourself claiming how nice freedom is
and then saying "but you should learn THIS regardless of whether or
not you want to!"

"shut up and buy the 8-track tapes when the redcoats TELL you to.
we don't care if you listen to it later or not, but you WILL do what
you're told and buy it."

Clint
KB5ZHT

As you obviously don't know, the message gets through a lot better when
you
speak in terms appropriate to the audience. Any public speaker knows this
or if he doesn't, he learns it quite quickly. If you don't present your
ideas using terms that the audience understands and likes, they will tune
you out. Your message is wasted. and so is your time if you've just got
to
"let it all hang out."

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



all true, accepted as submitted.
However, if the premise of your argument is that my approach offended
everybody
so it reached no one, you are incorrect. In fact, i'll hazard a guess that
it offended
1, mabye 2 people; the remainder that have jumped onto the bandwagon with
this
person were disingenuously doing so, only doing so since it helped thier
private
little war and pet cause...

I will also hazard the guess, and free of much apprehension in doing so,
that the
vast majority of people that read it (who I WAS likewise posting to, for
reading)
didn't drop to the ground in gut-wrenching revulsion to the point that the
point
was lost. I don't think it was lost on anywhere NEAR the people you would
have me believe. On the contrary, what I DID in fact do was help to remove
some of the window dressing of your (read: PCTA crowd) arguments, strip
away the pretty, "happy fuzzy bunny" covers that are often used to hide
the REAL core of the argument.

And, as you've read in this thread as well as newsgroups, others have
recieved
it wide and clear- albeit, to YOUR chagrin, but so be it, such is the way of
socratic dialogue... and that is this-

"I had to do it, so should you."

Furthermore, there is the DISTINCT possiblity that the following is true,
but
i'm not pushing this point as it is moot and would achieve nothing- the
unspoken
total truth may lie somewhere in,

"I had to do it, those of my peerage and common interests likewise didn't
have
enough spine and nerve to speak our minds on the issue, so we feel that by
doing so yourselves you are QUITE insensitive to the interest of protecting
our feelings and reputations, so we kindly request you to lay down the
banners
of your cause, surrender, and just do what you are told as well. We don't
want
anybody offended."

Quite a thing to be proud of, indeed.

Just let us who are willing to carry the banner and lead the charge do so;
just
sit back and relax; the willing and able bodied among us will take care of
everything.

Clint
KB5ZHT