Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:
"Dwight writes: 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). (snip) I see. Then perhaps you can tell us how it "benefits" photography, cooking, stamp collecting, or any other activity which isn't Amateur Radio? (snip) 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. (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. 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. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
How does a 6146B fail? | Boatanchors |