"Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" wrote:

Actually, once code testing is gone, the pro-testing crowd
is not going to have much to say.

Do you honestly think so?


Hey, I can hope, can't I? No, I don't honestly think the pro-code testing
crowd will have nothing more to say. That's why I wrote the rest of that
paragraph (the part you didn't include in the quote above).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

Except that what Larry does is far from debate. Larry whines.


No, Larry nags. Hes' like a nagging mother trying to convince an adult
child to do what she says, just "because I say so."


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

"Arnie Macy" wrote:

Oh Really? I brought up a very factual survey along
with two other facts concerning CW and you refused
to respond (other than to say you wouldn't respond)
I asked you in another thread to explain a little bit about
some of the new technology that you say you know so
well (and we CW'ers don't). I'm *still* waiting for an
answer on that one. (snip)


Let's turn that around at little, Arnie. I haven't seen Clint going around
claiming to be superior. Instead, it is those in your circle claiming to be
the superior hams. Other than code, what skills or knowledge of technology
can be found in the pro-code crowd that cannot be found among the no-code
crowd? From what I've seen, there are just as many highly skilled
individuals in the no-code crowd as there are in the pro-code crowd, working
in just as many professional careers. So, if there is no real difference
between the two, why do those like yourself continue to support, or at least
nor object to, the superior ham position of some in this newsgroup and
elsewhere? The only possible answer I can see is that you also consider
those like yourself to be superior hams.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

"Hans K0HB" wrote:

"Kim W5TIT" wrote
One: no one should be kept out of the ARS--let
them get their license and stand or fail on their merit.

You can't really mean that! I do not support continuation
of the Morse test, but to suggest that we should just hand
out licenses to anyone regardless of demonstrated
qualification and let them "stand or fail on their merit" is
the silliest notion I have seen here yet. (snip)


I imagine she said that within the context of this discussion, Hans (the
removal of the code test, with the written tests intact). In that regard,
"let them get their license and stand or fail on their merit." I happen to
agree with her. We shouldn't be trying to exclude anyone just because of who
or what they are (CB'ers or whatever). If they can pass the written tests
and meet the citizenship laws, they should be allowed to participate. If
they screw up later, that is the time to force them out.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

"Dick Carroll" wrote:

And that post made my case.


Your "case" is that I was doing something others don't. Of course, since
that is not really true, you haven't made any case whatsoever. Instead,
you've given me an opportunity to show that I'm more honest about it then
perhaps even you are since you've said nothing about your writing style in
this newsgroup.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Arnie Macy" wrote:

Oh Really? I brought up a very factual survey along
with two other facts concerning CW and you refused
to respond (other than to say you wouldn't respond)
I asked you in another thread to explain a little bit about
some of the new technology that you say you know so
well (and we CW'ers don't). I'm *still* waiting for an
answer on that one. (snip)


Let's turn that around at little, Arnie. I haven't seen Clint going
around
claiming to be superior. Instead, it is those in your circle claiming to
be
the superior hams. Other than code, what skills or knowledge of technology
can be found in the pro-code crowd that cannot be found among the no-code
crowd? From what I've seen, there are just as many highly skilled
individuals in the no-code crowd as there are in the pro-code crowd,
working
in just as many professional careers. So, if there is no real difference
between the two, why do those like yourself continue to support, or at
least
nor object to, the superior ham position of some in this newsgroup and
elsewhere? The only possible answer I can see is that you also consider
those like yourself to be superior hams.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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



Perhaps you think those that know/use Morse are superior to you. I don't
ever recall seeing anyone that advocates Morse saying they felt superior.

I know I don't feel that way. However I do feel those that don't play on CW
are missing a major part of the enjoyment they could get from having a
amateur license. But thats their loss not mine.

If you thank that is imparting a superior attitude, I say Dwight that you
have the problem, not us.

Dan/W4NTI

"Hans K0HB" wrote in message
om...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote

One: no one should be kept out of the ARS--let
them get their license and stand or fail on their merit.

You can't really mean that! I do not support continuation of
the Morse test, but to suggest that we should just hand out
licenses to anyone regardless of demonstrated qualification
and let them "stand or fail on their merit" is the silliest
notion I have seen here yet.

That's like saying "let anyone get their drivers license
and stand or fail on their driving record" without having
passed a test.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Now you know why I call her the Texas TWIT.

Dan/W4NTI

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Hans K0HB" wrote:

"Kim W5TIT" wrote
One: no one should be kept out of the ARS--let
them get their license and stand or fail on their merit.

You can't really mean that! I do not support continuation
of the Morse test, but to suggest that we should just hand
out licenses to anyone regardless of demonstrated
qualification and let them "stand or fail on their merit" is
the silliest notion I have seen here yet. (snip)


I imagine she said that within the context of this discussion, Hans (the
removal of the code test, with the written tests intact). In that regard,
"let them get their license and stand or fail on their merit." I happen to
agree with her. We shouldn't be trying to exclude anyone just because of
who
or what they are (CB'ers or whatever). If they can pass the written tests
and meet the citizenship laws, they should be allowed to participate. If
they screw up later, that is the time to force them out.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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



You and your ilk 'may have' had a point with the cw set at 20 and possibly
even at 13. But 5 wpm, a multiple guess, given by volunteer examiners
without all the strain and stress of a FCC session, can not be serious now.

All it comes across is as; Im just too lazy to take 2 weeks of ten minutes
a day to memorize the Morse characters. Good grief at 5 wpm you could copy
every third word and guess the test to completion.

Give it a rest.

Dan/W4NTI

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Arnie Macy" wrote:

Oh Really? I brought up a very factual survey along
with two other facts concerning CW and you refused
to respond (other than to say you wouldn't respond)
I asked you in another thread to explain a little bit about
some of the new technology that you say you know so
well (and we CW'ers don't). I'm *still* waiting for an
answer on that one. (snip)


Let's turn that around at little, Arnie. I haven't seen Clint going
around
claiming to be superior. Instead, it is those in your circle claiming to
be
the superior hams. Other than code, what skills or knowledge of
technology
can be found in the pro-code crowd that cannot be found among the
no-code
crowd? From what I've seen, there are just as many highly skilled
individuals in the no-code crowd as there are in the pro-code crowd,
working
in just as many professional careers. So, if there is no real difference
between the two, why do those like yourself continue to support, or at
least
nor object to, the superior ham position of some in this newsgroup and
elsewhere? The only possible answer I can see is that you also consider
those like yourself to be superior hams.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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



Perhaps you think those that know/use Morse are superior to you. I don't
ever recall seeing anyone that advocates Morse saying they felt superior.


I believe that making references and using analogies that you guys are the
adults and new, entry level hams are children pretty much describes
a superior if not condescending attitude.

Clint
KB5ZHT

--

--

Get in touch with your soul: www.glennbeck.com
OR, if you're a liberal, maybe you can FIND one


--

"Hans K0HB" wrote in message
om...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote

One: no one should be kept out of the ARS--let
them get their license and stand or fail on their merit.

You can't really mean that! I do not support continuation of
the Morse test, but to suggest that we should just hand out
licenses to anyone regardless of demonstrated qualification
and let them "stand or fail on their merit" is the silliest
notion I have seen here yet.


Hans, what part of "let them get their license" did you NOT understand?
And, your rhetorical, "well that's the silliest thing..." is really old and
boring.


That's like saying "let anyone get their drivers license
and stand or fail on their driving record" without having
passed a test.

73, de Hans, K0HB


Yeah. What you suggest would be like saying that. But that was not
suggested and your attempt to stretch it to that is rather unlike you...

Kim W5TIT