In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

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

Carl:

Yeah, you *would* assert that, all right. However, I am singularly
unconcerned with those who may have been "soured" on code by
being "forced" to learn it.

... 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."

Let's say that as many as 80% of hams who were "forced" to learn the
code subsequently "threw away the key." That leaves 20% (I believe
my figures are close to reality, anyway, I believe in Pareto's Principle)
of hams who subsequently became active CW operators with
increasing levels of proficiency as they gained OTA experience. I
find that to be quite acceptable.

Remember the old adage "honey is better than vinegar."

Well, even those who "threw away the key" got the "honey" in the
form of increased HF operating privileges. No harm, no foul.

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."

Carl, I have, on many occasions, very patiently, politely, and
enthusiastically explained all of the fun and operating satisfaction that
I and other hams have derived from using CW. I have offered all the
encouragement I can to anyone willing to give it a try. The one thing
that I can't do is learn it for them. That they have to do for themselves,
if they *want* to do so. In the past, the thing that made them want to
learn the code was to gain HF operating privileges. Now, it would seem
that even that incentive will be given away, and soon. If the use of CW
declines in the ECTA, it will not be my fault, as much as you would
like it to be.

And, they are apparently unwilling to
take "No thanks, not interested" for an answer.

I've always been willing to take this answer, for it is they who had to
bear the consequences of no HF privileges. Now, that will no longer
be the case...and phone users like yourself will have a lot more
company on the phone bands in the near future. I just hope it's the
kind of company you appreciate.

Thus, they continue to
seek to have the FCC mandate an arguably counter-productive "recruiting
program" for them ...

I see nothing "counter-productive" in the requirement to learn and gain
greater proficiency in a useful communications skill. What I don't
understand is why you apparently do.

73 de Larry, K3LT