Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , "Kim"
writes: "Bill Sohl" wrote in message hlink.net... The issue isn't about USE it is about the lack of any rational reason to retain code testing as a license requirement now that the ITU mandatory code knowledge requirment has ended. Therein lies the problem with the whole CW test (TEST, *test*) debate. The minute one takes on the "no" CW test argument, it is generally met with an attitude that an end CW use (USE, *use*) is being favored or called for. Not that I have observed, Kim. But can you accurately say that *no one* wants to end Morse use? Until, (UNTIL, *until*) it is clearly understood that seeking the end of the CW test is not the equivalent of seeking the end of CW as a mode, this debate will never fall within the realm of "friendly" debate at all. I think it's even hazardous to use the PCTA/NCTA labels. One of the problems is that some folks aren't clear that it is only the *test* they are against. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1402 Â June 25, 2004 | General | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1402  June 25, 2004 | Dx | |||
Low reenlistment rate | Policy | |||
Some comments on the NCVEC petition | Policy | |||
NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement. | Policy |