"N2EY" wrote in message
...
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?


Of course not. But I can accurately say that there is no need to roll
everyone who wants to see an end to the test element, into the "no CW use"
minority (note I said minority), either.


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


Anyone, *anyone* who allows theirself (bad English) to get all in a huff
about CW use going away or being legislated out of ham radio is being
foolish. There are a few who have been proponents of seeing the end of CW;
and when I see those posts, I yawn and go on. There will never be an end to
CW use, and it would never be banned from use in the ham bands...it just
wouldn't. I think it would be unrealistic to think it would. And, if it
was based off a majority of users of the bands, I rest assured knowing that
most would not support an end to CW use. I think those who are in the
minority are there mostly for the shock value of it.

Kim W5TIT