"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

"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


Poor no code goofballs. They still haven't figured it out. We don't want a
bunch of unqualified, ten four screaming, under educated, individuals
poluting up the spectrum.

We were doing just fine when we had 250K licensed. In fact the QRM is just
as bad on HF as it was then. The only difference is the folks on the air
actually KNEW SOMETHING.

Dan/W4NTI