your request
above could only be considered factitious. Therefore, I will treat it as
such.

Ah. Denial.

Clint
KB5ZHT

Obviously you have no HF receiving capability and likely just as much
interest,
and just choose to adopt the standard NCI mantra. An even cursury tuning
across
the lower end of any low HF band any evening will show to be 180
degrees out
of phase with reality.


well, I have an HF rig, many of my local ham friends have them. We do in
fact hear CW signals on the lower parts of the HF bands; I sometimes
participate and make contacts, recieving and transmitting CW.

It's a relative comparison here that matters; and it is as follows. A
growing
percentage of the HF spectrum is being used by VOICED contacts,
and a shrinking percentage is being used for CW. That is one of the
primary reasons that the band allocations were changed recently and
some of the lower CW/data subbands were shrunk and the balance
given to the upper portions being used by voice contacts.


You do know about phase relationships don't you?

DON'T YOU??

well, he's demonstrated it. You haven't.
Or, at least not an unbiased one anyway.


Therefore, code testing is not
essential to the Amateur Radio Service.

Exactly.

Quite an opinion you have there, Dwight. Too bad it's not accurate nor
anywhere near universally shared among other hams,

Yes. I'm afraid it is.
That's why there is a growing voice and ever strengthening push, year after
year, to eliminate the CW testing requirement.

You do listen to the knews, DON'T YOU?

Clint
KB5ZHT

It's beyond obvious by now that his character is ALL flaw.


kinda like PCTA's reasoning for keeping CW testing requirements.

Clint
KB5ZHT

Where did you get your information, Dwight? According to the ARRL (the
primary ARS organization in the US) -- CW is the second most popular mode
in
the ARS -- Just behind SSB.

And that's only *half* the truth. The *REST* of the story is that this is
not
a static relationship; the use of SSB is growing while that of CW is
declining,
as each year the number of prominently morse code users either change
over, quit operating ham radio or go silent key.

Clint
KB5ZHT

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Kim"
writes:

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote ...

But, but, but!!!! Larry's obviously got or had large boobs, and has
obviously worn a bra. Right?! He *has* hasn't he? Surely, for if not
he
would not be making value judgements on my callsign.
__________________________________________________ _______________

It took a while, but I have grown accustomed to your callsign, Kim.
And
it
wasn't necessary for me to wear a bra to do it. ;-)

Arnie -
KT4ST



Uh, Arnie? If you wore a bra, the only thing you'd get from me would be,
"What ya packin' there, big fella?"

Am I the only one reminded of the Seinfeld episode where Kramer and
George's
father join forces to create a brassier for men? Kramer wanted to call it
the
"bro" and Mr. Costanza wanted to call it the "man-sierre". Or vice versa.

Classic show. Good times.

73 de Jim, N2EY

ROFLMAO!!!!!

Kim W5TIT

"Dick Carroll;" wrote:

Well, Dwight, you just showed the exctent of your
knoweldge of the subject. NONE! Obviously you
have no HF receiving capability and likely just as
much interest, and just choose to adopt the standard
NCI mantra. An even cursury tuning across the lower
end of any low HF band any evening will show to be
180 degrees out of phase with reality.


To clarify, the dispute is about how much of a role code/CW plays within
the Amateur Radio Service today and whether the FCC has an incentive to
maintain testing for this mode. To decide that, we first have to look at the
number of people using code and what it is used for. As for the numbers,
even excluding the "no-code" Techs, I think most would agree that the
majority mainly use the voice modes and only rarely use code. Add in the
"no-code" Techs and it is fairly clear that most Ham operators don't use
code.

The next question is what code is used for. Clearly, code only plays a
very small role in emergency communications today (a key component of
Amateur Radio). Likewise, code is seldom used by the agencies we serve (Red
Cross, Civil Service, and so on). In each of these (agencies served and
emergency communications), voice is the dominate mode. That leaves only
recreation as the primary use of CW/code.

With these facts, we can now go back to my primary point - does the FCC
have any incentive to maintain testing for a mode that is mainly used for
recreation and not used by the majority of todays' ham operators? I think
the answer to that is fairly obvious.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

"Bert Craig" wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" wrote:
Because so few use it, the mode now plays only a
relatively minor role within the Amateur Radio Service.

Huh???!!!

Therefore, code testing is not essential to the
Amateur Radio Service.

I disagree...because the aforementioned supporting
statement is entirely incorrect.


For clarification, read my response to Dick.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

In article k.net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

And, once again, you fail to mention who or what is
benefited by it, if not the ARS. Please provide an answer,
or quite wasting our time with this illogical statement.


Larry, I know you are not so dumb as to not know how Morse Code/CW has fit
into the history of Amateur Radio and how Amateur Radio has fit into the
other radio services throughout that history. Knowing that, your request
above could only be considered factitious. Therefore, I will treat it as
such.

Dwight:

I wasn't being facetious, I was asking a question based on a logical
premise which you yourself raised. So, you either answer it, or your
original premise is insupportable. Which is it?

(snip) And, since everything I'm discussing here is related
ONLY to the Amateur Radio Service, that's the only group
of Morse/CW users who are being considered by me in any
of my postings. (snip)

Well, that may be what you're discussing, but I'm discussing Morse Code
testing - a discussion which, by it's very nature, cannot be limited to just
Amateur Radio.

OK, fine. Now, then, precisely which OTHER radio services currently
require Morse code testing???

However, if the discussion were limited to just Amateur
Radio, your arguments would have no more weight since most ham operators
today don't use code/cw on any routine or regular basis. There is little
reason to maintain testing for a mode that is seldom used by more than a
relatively small minority.

Hmmm. Funny how that "small minority" seems to come out of the
woodwork in vast quantities during CW contests, Field Day, or
whenever some rare DX pops up on the air!

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article k.net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:


"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:

Well, I'm glad I finally got your attention directed
toward reality. If the Morse code isn't relevant to
any communications service outside the ARS, then
the fact that the commercial and military services
have stopped using it isn't relevant or responsive
to the issue of code testing withing the ARS.
Therefore, by your own admission, the NCTA's
prime argument is just so much worthless rhetoric.


But, as you well know, the code testing requirement was originally
established exactly because code was once relevant to the military,
government, and commercial services outside Amateur Radio. Since that has
now changed, it is clearly time to question the need for a unique testing
requirement for this one operating mode.

Dwight:

I hate to sound like a scratched CD, but that reply is unresponsive. If the
above were true, then the very second radio amateurs started using modes
other than CW, the code testing requirement should have been dropped,
for all the same reasons given by the NCTA today. However, it wasn't.
In fact, in the late '60's, over a half-century after the need for military and
commercial stations to be able to shoo-off "those damn hams" from
their frequencies, the Morse code testing requirement was increased
as part of the now lamented "Incentive Licensing" scheme. Incentive
Licensing was an ARRL initiative, and it was done to ensure that the
Morse/CW mode would continue to be used in spite of the increasing
popularity of SSB and digital modes. It was actually a very brilliant
plan, but was spoiled by the resentment caused by the lack of full
"grandfathering" of the existing Generals to the new Amateur Extra
class. If only that had been done, we may not be having this debate
today.

Since most ham operators today
don't use code on a regular basis, there is also little need within Amateur
Radio to maintain a testing requirement for this one operating mode.

During the last ARRL 10-Meter Contest, I worked over 160 QSO's on
10-meters, using only CW. This is on 10-meters, a band famous as a
repository for the 5 WPM Novice/Techs exercising the whole of their HF
phone privileges! During contests covering all HF bands, such as the
November Sweepstakes (CW), it is not possible to work all of the CW
stations participating. Well, at least not for me, with my minimal station
in a highly antenna-compromised apartment QTH. However, in spite
of my operating challenges, the CW mode provides endless potential
to make points. During the November SS (Phone) last year, my
club station (W3DOV) was also operating under "marginal" conditions
at the QTH of Mark, KE3UY. Using literally the same power and
antennas as I would at my home QTH, we worked a lot fewer stations
than we could have on CW. It's as simple as that. And, excluding
contests, the CW segments are very alive and full of stations all the
time, largely thanks to FISTS and the old CW-geezers chasing all
that paper.

All
that has led to the efforts now being made to eliminate the Morse Code test
requirement.

The efforts being made to eliminate the Morse code test requirement
are motivated by one thing and one thing only: laziness. The laziness
born of a lack of desire to learn and gain reasonable proficiency in a
proven, useful communications skill. And, considering the nature of
the ARS, indulging that laziness would be an abomination.

The Morse/CW mode remains as a valuable, basic
communications tool within the ARS, and the code
testing requirement is current and essential to the
continued use of this mode. End of story. (snip)

But, as much as you'd like it to be, that is not the end of the story,
Larry. Because so few use it, the mode now plays only a relatively minor
role within the Amateur Radio Service.

That has been disproved over and over again…most recently, in my
last paragraph, above.

Therefore, code testing is not
essential to the Amateur Radio Service.

It most certainly is, if the ARS wishes to continue to develop radio
operators capable of exploiting the many benefits and advantages
of the Morse/CW mode.

Further, without outside factors
(the needs of the other services) to consider, the FCC itself has no
significant interest today in maintaining the "continued use of this mode"
within the Amateur Radio Service.

The FCC has stated repeatedly that whether or not it will have an
interesting in the "continued use of this mode" depends upon a
consensus of the amateur radio community itself. Therefore,
unfortunately, we will be at the mercy of the majority. Us PCTA's
may not like the outcome, but that is the risk one takes when living
in a democracy.

As far as the FCC is concerned, it is now
just one more operating mode among the many used within the Amateur Radio
Service. There is no sufficient argument to support the continued existence
of a code testing requirement. As such, the code testing requirement should
be eliminated.

As already stated by N2EY, this particular logic could then be applied to
testing for knowledge of any of the requirements for technical knowledge,
since radio amateurs no longer have the ability to design, build, and repair
state-of-the art communications gear unless they possess professional-
grade technical knowledge, skills, and facilities. And, since this is the
AMATEUR Radio Service, that is an unreasonable expectation. Therefore,
if code testing *is* eliminated, then we may as well also go to a simple
license application process, with, at most, an open-book test on rules and
regulations. That would then serve the needs of the dumbed-down
licensing process you would seem to prefer.

73 de Larry, K3LT

**** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****

On 22 Sep 2003 03:03:59 GMT, ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)
wrote:


Unfortunately, there is more evidence to support my "feeling" than there
is to support yours. With the exception of hams who were trained in
Morse code by the military or maritime/commercial radio services, I have
yet to meet an avid and active CW user who got that way except through
the code testing requirement. And, for what should have been 14 of the
best years of my ham radio career, I was one of the "objectors."

In my opinion, Larry, you aren't accounting for the fact that the
personality traits of various people differ widely. You yourself chose
to dump your objections. I chose to find another hobby instead, and so
for almost 30 years remained a radio hobbyist active in other
interests but was not part of amateur radio - I thoroughly enjoyed
SWL'ing, scanning, AM broadcast DX'ing, and didn't feel as if I was
missing out on anything by not having a ham ticket.

I also immersed myself in computers as a hobby. That led me eventually
to the Internet which, strangely enough, is what led me back to ham
radio. Vicious circle, that...but fodder for a discussion on an
entirely different topic.

What I'm trying to say here is, for every person who, like you,
decided to compromise your objections, there are who knows how many
others who felt that as a matter of principle they were not about to
waste their precious time learning what they felt was an anachronism,
and moved on to something else instead...a process which continues
today. Each such person represents a potential ham chased away from
the hobby by a wholly unnecessary licensing requirement. This is why
many view it as a hazing ritual. How many licensed drivers would be on
the road today if you had to buy a horse, learn to ride it, and be
tested on your equestrian skills in order to get behind the wheel of
the family bus? Probably very few, and in many cases the reasoning is
probably the same in both cases - i.e., they don't want to deal with a
lot of horse****.

So, as
you say, we can't prove anything now, but I'm not willing to bet that there
will be some sort of "epiphany" among former no-coders to go ahead
and learn the code and become CW operators when the testing
requirement is gone. It just ain't gonna happen!

Probably not, because they already have had the experience of having
been forced to learn the code in order to pass the test, and having
done so, are glad it's over with and don't care if they ever use it
again. They've passed the only code test they'll ever have to take as
long as they keep their licenses current, and are glad to have the
whole ordeal over with, permanently.

Again, no way to prove anything now one way or the other...but we'll
find out if and when the code test vanishes, and we see how many
people licensed without a code test learn the code voluntarily on
account of its merits as an operating mode, absent any lingering
resentment over the licensing requirement or the prospect of prolonged
beatings with the Wouff Hong hanging over their heads like the Sword
Of Damocles when they begin their participation in the hobby.

73 DE John, KC2HMZ
Tonawanda, New York


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! ***
http://www.usenet.com
Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=