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

"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:

How many CW contacts have you made in your
ham "career?" I'm into the multiple thousands. If
you have less than 500, then you're not even close
to being qualified to render a judgment against
code testing.

And exactly how does the number of CW contacts made qualify one to make a
judgement about the value of code testing as a license requirement?

Dwight:

Simply by serving as an indication of your level of experience in that
particular mode.

Again,
code testing is not, and never has been, solely for the benefit of Amateur
Radio (or solely to benefit CW operations on those bands).

I see. Then perhaps you can tell us how it "benefits" photography, cooking,
stamp collecting, or any other activity which isn't Amateur Radio?

Code use is declining here and around the world.

Not really. In fact, the only place where it has "declined" is within the
military
and commercial communications arenas, where there were relatively few
Morse/CW operators compared to the Amateur Radio Service. 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.

Looking solely at Amateur Radio, even
the majority of those operators don't use code/cw on any routine or regular
basis. Because of these facts, the need for a code testing requirement has
vanished.

The total number of hams who don't use Morse code is relatively high, but
only due to the fact that there are many other modes for radio amateurs
to employ. I've never demonstrated any confusion on that point, therefore,
you are raising an irrelevant and invalid argument here.

Twenty-two plus years of OTA HF experience as a
radio amateur, which has been about 80 percent CW,
19 percent RTTY and other digital modes, and 1
percent phone. What's your breakdown?

I believe the question was what experience you have that makes you
UNIQUELY qualified to judge the value of a specific TESTING REQUIREMENT. I
don't see anything above that would make you uniquely qualified in this
subject.

Obviously, since you are in disagreement. That doesn't make you right when
you say I'm not a qualified judge of the code testing requirement -- it just
means
you have an axe to grind which makes it necessary for you to attempt to
discredit me.

Again, code testing is not, and never has been, solely for the
benefit of Amateur Radio (or operations in those bands).

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.

Therefore, the FCC
is not going to judge the value of code testing based solely on Amateur
Radio.

Then WHAT besides the ARS are they going to judge it by? The ARS
is the only communications service currently using the Morse/CW mode
to any extent which would require the regulatory attention of the FCC.
Therefore, the Coast Guard, MARS, the Maritime service, etc. etc. are
all entirely irrelevant and unresponsive to this issue.

You have to look at the larger picture, Larry. At this point, you're
still too narrowly focused.

I am focused on the Amateur Radio Service, Dwight. I realize you're
thinking about all the other radio services which, for purely economic
reasons, have dropped the use of Morse/CW and therefore the
necessity to undergo the expensive process of recruiting, training,
and providing pay and benefits to Morse/CW operators. This has no
impact in the ARS -- but you, in true NCTA fashion, fail to grasp this
very simple concept. The plain fact is that the ARS has no personnel-
based "cost" at all. Therefore, your argument is irrelevant and
unresponsive.

73 de Larry, K3LT