Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message ... In article , "Kim W5TIT" writes: 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. Kim: Code testing has always been the thing which generated code use. I would assert that being forced to learn code to gain access to HF "soured" more people on code use than it encouraged ... of course, some percentage of folks decided they liked code and continued to use it, but MANY simply endured something they had no interest in to get past the test, then "threw away the key." Remember the old adage "honey is better than vinegar." In the absence of a code testing requirement, there will be progressively fewer hams who have never been exposed to learning the code as a result of the requirement. Since the requirement was the principle motivation to learn the code, code use *will* decline once code testing is abolished. Therefore, testing and use are two closely interrelated concepts. Translation: Larry and his "kindred spirits" are either unwilling to expend the effort to (or incapable of *politely*) encourage people to "give the code a try and see if you like it." And, they are apparently unwilling to take "No thanks, not interested" for an answer. Thus, they continue to seek to have the FCC mandate an arguably counter-productive "recruiting program" for them ... 73, Carl - wk3c |
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 |