Alun Palmer wrote in message . ..
(N2EY) wrote in
:

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

How do you reconcile your "plight" with the fact that many youngters
under 14 have passed 20 wpm code tests?

AND all the *written* tests.

The youngest extra I know got that license at the age of 8. That was
before restructuring, when there were 5 *written* tests.

73 de Jim, N2EY


They were better at code than I am.

Heck, they were better at code than *I* was at their age!

It doesn't correlate with age, or
intelligence.

There are many different kinds of intelligence.

I could have passed all the theory at 14.

But could you have passed all the theory at 8? I don't think I could have.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Ralph Aichinger wrote in message ...
Alun Palmer wrote:
I just did a quick recount, and 9V is the 9th country, not the 8th. They
are Switzerland, the UK, Belgium, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands,

Austria not yet.

Unfortunately there are more important issues at the moment,
see: http://tinyurl.com/lmm3 and http://tinyurl.com/nkt0
HF would be worth nothing if this is passed as an EU
directive.

Absolutely! We're fighting it to the death on our side of the pond. Go
for it and good luck.

/ralph

w3rv

In article , (Dennis
Ferguson) writes:

N2EY wrote:
In article , Dave Heil
writes:

We're talking about two countries
with a little over 1,600 radio amateurs between them.

Maybe you know the answer to this one, Dave:

How many amateurs are there in the 9 countries that have dropped code
testing?

176,685 in the year 2000 according to

http://www.iaru.org/statsum00.html

The UK and Germany are the bulk of that number.

Thanks, Dennis!

Currently there are about 685,000 US hams.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Alun Palmer
writes:

I eventually passed code in 1993, but if it weren't for the *@#%^&! code
test I could have had an HF licence in 1971.

Alun:

The problem wasn't the "*@#%^&! code test" at all. It was you and your
negative attitude toward it. The fact that you eventually passed it means
that you had that ability all along, and just couldn't actualize it due to
your negative feelings toward taking the test. I know; I've been there
myself. The difference between you and me is that once I learned the
code and began using it, I found it's value. This has served as the
most convincing proof possible that code testing is a valid licensing
requirement in the Amateur Radio Service.

73 de Larry, K3LT

(N2EY) wrote in
om:

Alun Palmer wrote in message
. ..
(N2EY) wrote in
:

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

How do you reconcile your "plight" with the fact that many youngters
under 14 have passed 20 wpm code tests?

AND all the *written* tests.

The youngest extra I know got that license at the age of 8. That was
before restructuring, when there were 5 *written* tests.

73 de Jim, N2EY


They were better at code than I am.

Heck, they were better at code than *I* was at their age!

It doesn't correlate with age, or intelligence.

There are many different kinds of intelligence.

I could have passed all the theory at 14.

But could you have passed all the theory at 8? I don't think I could
have.

73 de Jim, N2EY


It's hard to say. I didn't really develop an interest in radio until I was
13. Probably not.

ospam (Larry Roll K3LT) wrote in
:

In article , Alun Palmer
writes:

I eventually passed code in 1993, but if it weren't for the *@#%^&!
code test I could have had an HF licence in 1971.

Alun:

The problem wasn't the "*@#%^&! code test" at all. It was you and your
negative attitude toward it.

Only partly true. My negative attitude I freely admit. However, I had no
aptitude for the subject, and still don't. Who knows why I should be good
at science and languages, and yet lousy at woodwork and CW, and yet it's
so. Each of us has innate abilities in some things, balanced by innate
incompetence in others, i.e everyone is unique. I feel that this has been
ignored by the pro-code side of the debate, or rather that it is known
damn well, but none of you will admit it!

It is possible to learn something that one is no good at in order to pass
a test, although unlikely that practical fluency in the skill would ever
be acheived. It is even possible to learn something that one is both no
good at and has no interest in, although much harder, and then the level
of difficulty becomes crushingly hard. This is true of any skill, and
interest is, if anything, maybe more important than ability, but any
schoolteacher will tell you that when neither are present in even the
snallest degree the chance of success is slim to none. So it was with me
and Morse code. I did it eventually, with a huge amount of outside help,
without which I would never have succeeded on my own. The reason I didn't
succeed earlier is straightforward - I didn't get help before.

So there it is. I have a negative attitude, coupled with zero aptitude,
and have never heard any convincing argument in these last 32 years as to
why I should have had to have done it in the first place. Sure, I've heard
lots of lame excuses as to why there should be a CW test, but nothing even
approaching anything beleivable. No doubt CW is very useful, but I am no
bloody good at it, and I prefer to actually _talk_ on the radio in the
first place. That's all. No PSK31, no SSTV, no RTTY, etc. Boring and
limited to some, but if you prefer CW or PSK, or WHY, then you're welcome
to use them.

The fact that you eventually passed it
means that you had that ability all along, and just couldn't actualize
it due to your negative feelings toward taking the test. I know; I've
been there myself. The difference between you and me is that once I
learned the code and began using it, I found it's value. This has
served as the most convincing proof possible that code testing is a
valid licensing requirement in the Amateur Radio Service.

73 de Larry, K3LT



73 de Alun, N3KIP

Dave Heil wrote in message ...

Wow! That's quite a policy statement from a country with a little more
than 120 radio amateurs and it comes hot on the heels of the big move by
Ireland with its slightly more than 1,500 hams.

Dave K8MN

Wow! You've stated that you've operated from countries where you were
the only active amateur.

Somehow that was significant then, but 120 or 1,500 native amateurs
aren't?

There's that famous Heil smugness again.

Brian wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...

Wow! That's quite a policy statement from a country with a little more
than 120 radio amateurs and it comes hot on the heels of the big move by
Ireland with its slightly more than 1,500 hams.

Dave K8MN

Wow! You've stated that you've operated from countries where you were
the only active amateur.

I don't recall making a statement about attempting to influence a
foreign country's policy on amateur radio.

Somehow that was significant then, but 120 or 1,500 native amateurs
aren't?

Yes, it is significant that a country has only one radio amateur.
No, I made no comparison to my being in a unique situation and a country
having a small population of radio amateurs deciding to abolish morse
testing.

There's that famous Heil smugness again.

Not really, my little electrolyte. It is simply you attempting once
again to tie two unrelated events together.

Dave K8MN

In article , Alun Palmer
writes:

I eventually passed code in 1993, but if it weren't for the *@#%^&!
code test I could have had an HF licence in 1971.

Alun:

The problem wasn't the "*@#%^&! code test" at all. It was you and your
negative attitude toward it.

Only partly true. My negative attitude I freely admit.

Alun:

Stop right there. Your negative attitude was the whole problem.

However, I had no
aptitude for the subject, and still don't.

Incorrect. By your own admission, you eventually did pass the code
test, which shows that you could, indeed, demonstrate some aptitude.
However, it was your negative attitude toward it which truly got in
your way.

Who knows why I should be good
at science and languages, and yet lousy at woodwork and CW, and yet it's
so.

It's still all about attitude. I'll bet that if, given the time and proximity
which
would allow some personal mentoring, I could totally change your attitude,
and therefore your aptitude, toward both CW and woodworking. Whether
you realize it or not, you have that potential within you. You just don't want
to tap into it -- and that's attitude.

Each of us has innate abilities in some things, balanced by innate
incompetence in others, i.e everyone is unique. I feel that this has been
ignored by the pro-code side of the debate, or rather that it is known
damn well, but none of you will admit it!

I, for one, must disagree because I have lived on both sides of this
particular fence. From the time I originally became aware of Amateur
Radio, at age 14, until I finally became licensed at age 28, I had a very
negative attitude toward learning the Morse code, and therefore, I failed
at every attempt to do so. It wasn't until I, through more mature
judgment and some soul-searching, became aware of my negative
attitude toward the code and it's effect on my so-called "aptitude" for
it, that I was able to make the change. I believe this was the value of
the code testing requirement for me, since my desire to be a licensed
radio amateur was stronger than my objection to learning the code.
At the end of the day, I made a turnabout in my attitude toward the
code, and from then on, it came quite easily for me. My experience
led me to become convinced that the code testing requirement is of
great value in getting prospective radio amateurs involved in this mode.

It is possible to learn something that one is no good at in order to pass
a test, although unlikely that practical fluency in the skill would ever
be acheived.

Yet another example of a negative attitude. I overcame this by making
a personal shift in my attitude, and deciding that I would, indeed, become
a proficient CW operator. Once that change was made, CW came
quite easily for me, and even became fun -- to the point where it is now
one of my preferred modes to use OTA.

It is even possible to learn something that one is both no
good at and has no interest in, although much harder, and then the level
of difficulty becomes crushingly hard. This is true of any skill, and
interest is, if anything, maybe more important than ability, but any
schoolteacher will tell you that when neither are present in even the
snallest degree the chance of success is slim to none. So it was with me
and Morse code. I did it eventually, with a huge amount of outside help,
without which I would never have succeeded on my own. The reason I didn't
succeed earlier is straightforward - I didn't get help before.

All of the above makes my point about attutude.

So there it is. I have a negative attitude, coupled with zero aptitude,
and have never heard any convincing argument in these last 32 years as to
why I should have had to have done it in the first place. Sure, I've heard
lots of lame excuses as to why there should be a CW test, but nothing even
approaching anything beleivable.

Obviously, your negative attitude toward the code is deeply ingrained,
but it can still be overcome. However, in the absence of any requirement
for you to overcome it, you will not likely change.

No doubt CW is very useful, but I am no
bloody good at it, and I prefer to actually _talk_ on the radio in the
first place. That's all. No PSK31, no SSTV, no RTTY, etc. Boring and
limited to some, but if you prefer CW or PSK, or WHY, then you're welcome
to use them.

I, for one, found just "talking" on the radio to be quite unfulfilling. Each
QSO became just more of the same old tedious re-hashing of the same
old boring topics -- mainly the weather, the relative health of the operator
on the other end, station equipment, etc. I always tried to make it more
interesting by raising questions about unrealted topics, but it always went
the same way. This, followed by the tendency of phone operators to
make lengthy monologues which made it almost impossible to even
remember what they were talking about, came to convince me that phone
is generally a waste of time. I now use it only in contests and local
VHF/FM contacts, mainly from my car.

I'd say that your experience is pretty typical of most NCTA's. Your
main problem is that nothing happened to change your attitude. Now,
in the future, with the lack of a code testing requirement, there will
no longer be anything there to create the kind of epiphany which
I experienced in learning the code. This will truly be a great loss to
the amateur radio community.

73 de Larry, K3LT

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Brian wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...

Wow! That's quite a policy statement from a country with a little more
than 120 radio amateurs and it comes hot on the heels of the big move by
Ireland with its slightly more than 1,500 hams.

Dave K8MN

Wow! You've stated that you've operated from countries where you were
the only active amateur.

I don't recall making a statement about attempting to influence a
foreign country's policy on amateur radio.

I don't recall saying that.

Somehow that was significant then, but 120 or 1,500 native amateurs
aren't?

Yes, it is significant that a country has only one radio amateur.

In what way?

No, I made no comparison to my being in a unique situation and a country
having a small population of radio amateurs deciding to abolish morse
testing.

But these countries which have a native population of amateurs should
be allowed self-rule? Why are 120 or 1,500 native amateurs not
significant?

There's that famous Heil smugness again.

Not really, my little electrolyte. It is simply you attempting once
again to tie two unrelated events together.

And you attempting to discount countries with low native amateur
populations.