RadioBanter - Cw Contest, NCI members pse ignore.

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

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

- - Cw Contest, NCI members pse ignore. (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/26875-re-cw-contest-nci-members-pse-ignore.html)

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
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.

If you firmly believe hams don't need to know theory, then
petition the FCC to end theory knowledge as a test requirement.
If you don't then your argument is just a means to divert
the issue to arguing a different subject.

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.

I repeat my comment from above.

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.

I repeat again.

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?

Ditto my last :-) :-)

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

In article , "Clint" rattlehead at
computron dot net writes:

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.

By that logic, anyone who proposes any sort of legal requirement that is
"against a person's will" makes you shudder.

For example, speed limits on highways. Or requiring children to go to school.

How about band edges? Power limitations on transmitters? Mode restrictions like
no 20 kHz wide FM voice on 20 meters?

Here's a thought for ya, Clint:

Suppose NCVEC and NCI have their way and Element 1 is just dropped. Poof, no
more code test. There's a good chance that will happen, too. Some would even
say it's a slam dunk.

Then suppose a group wants to do away with the Amateur Extra and General
licenses and their written tests. Suppose this group says the idea of requiring
more written testing against their will simply makes them shudder. Forcing all
that theory stuff on them....terrible, just terrible.

Will that make you shudder?

In article , "Clint" rattlehead at
computron dot net writes:

Tested morse code proficiency was required by the GOVERNMENT
in the early days of radio for the first US radio regulatory agency.
Back then, on-off keying codes were the ONLY way to communicate
using early primitive radio. The GOVERNMENT's main reason for the
code test was so that all radio operators in all radio services could
be
contacted in order to mitigate radio interference.

This is the year 2003, not 1912, not 1896, and not 1844 (the first year
of commercial code use on the Morse-Vail telegraph system). The
FCC stated publicly 13 years ago that the morse code test was NOT
a real requirement to determine if an amateur should be licensed. The
FCC stated that the only reason for retaining the code test in 1990 was
due to ITU-R S25.5.

Len, how DARE you point out the fact that times change and that the needs
of a public utility and hobby are to change to meet those needs. I think it
lacks understanding and sensitivity to the feelings of the PCTA gestapo
on your part to prove that with the passing of years, requirements
to meed modern demands likewise change.

Careful Clint, lest someone's ANCESTORS rise out of the ground and
smite you down for using the "G-word." :-)

I am flabbergasted; i'm taken aback. I just am overcome with such
frustration that I do not know what to say.

As the old saying goes, "Schange happens..."

LHA

Leo wrote:
Clint, that's an interesting collection of thoughts that you have
there -

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 17:48:26 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron
dot net wrote:

But, to answer your question: did you

do something illegal? Of course not. Insensitive, foolish and
intellectually bankrupt, perhaps - none of which are punishable
offences.

AH... nice dodge.... as you see, the very point of bringing up
the fact that "freedom of speech is frequently curtailed today,
such as the following examples..." would ONLY be brought
up to imply that what I did was NOT protected by the concept
of freedom of speech.

Not a dodge at all - you don't need freedom of speech to protect your
right to rant in public. I guess reading comprehension was dropped
from the curriculum in your P.S. district early on.....along with
Civics.

Did you mean civility?

I put it to you; if this is NOT the case, if there is NO insinuation
of same, then WHY bring up the fact that there are certain
extreme cases where free speech is limited or halted, when I claim
the right to do so? Just for the purpose of conversation? I think
such a claim is paper thin and WEAK at best.

Huh? Can you gve an example of when your free speech was curtailed?
And by whom? Do you hear voices? Did they do it?

As you posted earlier Leo, the claim of suppression of free speech is
alway pulled out whenever the argument is about to be lost - by some.

I suspect that the Nazi

(not the euphemistic full 'National Socialist' name that you now use
in this post) reference

the two are the same; but I digress, I am not sure what point you
are making by trying to distinguish the two

Not really - one carries more negative feeelings than the other. As
you know.

was used because it was the only card left to

play in an otherwise empty hand.

and at THAT point you are no longer discussing fact and are in
fact using opinion. The truth of the matter is that the PCTA crowd
is long out of factual support and credible reasoning to keep
the morse code testing; they abandon any further hopes now
with all sorts of dodging tactics- and if, by the way, you find
resentment to the use of nazi, I likewise, would find resentment
with the discriptions "too lazy", "dumb", "stupid", and "moron".
HOWEVER, instead of dropping to the ground and kicking
my feet and clenching my fist and screaming as a child does
when it's bottle is taken away, I am continueing the debate.

... did you read this before you hit "send" - pretty funny!

ROTFLMAO!

He probably thinks it is correct too, Leo Almmost everyone I know finds
"too lazy, Dumb, Stupid, and Moron" to be the moral equivalent of N**I!

Due to the atrocities committed

during WW II, the word "Nazi" has severely negative connotations for a
large percentage of the world's population,

okay, you get the "DUH" award of the day for that one. KEEN grasp
of the obvious.

And, therefore, you KNEW what effect this would have on people, yet
you used it anyway? Oh please....

Of course Clint knows the effects. I see the classic newsgroup "I Wanna
Fight" personality here. Come in, pick a side, then try to rip the other
side a new backside, so to speak. Dehumanize them a little, call them
names, especially the N**I name. Then wait for the outrage and complain
that they are trampling on your free speech. Then try to justify your
calling them N***S by making comparisons like "This guy called someone
stupid, so I can call him a N***, after all, it is the equivalent".

Clint doesn't play well with others, and that is just how he likes it.

reaching beyond the

Hogan's Heroes-esque usage that you recognize and reminding them of
the horrors of that regime, for many in a very personal way.

believe me, I was not reaching for a humorous or laughable reference.
My use of a "will not accept change" analogy was intended at the latter
reality of the regime, not the former comedy that you referred to.

I see....what reality was that, specifically?

however, it was your right to enter the conversation, even if you
had nothing new factual to add, and you may continue doing so.

Thanks! BTW, conversations are carried out in person, discussions
occur on newsgroups. This was the latter.

Care to point out the color of the grass and the sky now?
/reductio ad absurdum

If you mean your point, you have done a better job of reducing it to
the absurd in this reply that anyone else ever could. Thank you!

Is there a point?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Hmmm - looking back over his comments in the thread, I'm not sure!

But we did find out why he uses 'rattlehead' as his email address - I
believe that it actually does :)

73, Leo

On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 04:29:59 GMT, Mike Coslo
wrote:

/reductio ad absurdum

If you mean your point, you have done a better job of reducing it to
the absurd in this reply that anyone else ever could. Thank you!

Is there a point?

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Dee D. Flint" wrote ...

Clint wrote ...

but always remember, that is *your* opinion. I happen to think the analogy
is quite accurate.

Visit a Holocaust museum and watch the documentaries on the History channel
for a while and read the transcripts of the Nuremberg trials. See if you
think the analogy is accurate then.
__________________________________________________ _________________

I don't believe that it would do any good in Clint's case, Dee. He
obviously doesn't find anything wrong with using the word as part of his
no-code test argument.

Arnie -
KT4ST

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote ...

Clint wrote ...

but always remember, that is *your* opinion. I happen to think the
analogy
is quite accurate.

Visit a Holocaust museum and watch the documentaries on the History
channel
for a while and read the transcripts of the Nuremberg trials. See if you
think the analogy is accurate then.
__________________________________________________ _________________

I don't believe that it would do any good in Clint's case, Dee. He
obviously doesn't find anything wrong with using the word as part of his
no-code test argument.

Arnie -
KT4ST

Well he says that he has visited and studied this and it doesn't change his
point of view. So now that I've completed the discussion on the call signs,
I'm going to put him in my killfile along with Len 0ver 21.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE