Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
By my review, it took 3 posts to have the slamming and insults begin. And,
DICK wins the prize: "Dick Carroll" wrote in message ... Carl R. Stevenson wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards. Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know (who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW. That would be those engineers who understood the real value of simple, effective, easily implemented baseline communications which can be used from almost anywhere with the least amount of simple equipment imaginable. Carl never did understand any of this, and of course it doesn't match his agenda, so it has no validity to him. In over 32 years as an RF engineer, I have not had the same experience. This would be no surprise, given your OBVIOUS hatred of radiotelegraphy. The most technical folks have seemed more interested in the technical side of ham radio and there have been MANY who I could not recruit into ham radio because they had no interest in and were unwilling to waste their valuable time learing Morse to a level that would get them decent HF privs. (some have capitulated and jumped through the 5 wpm hoop since "restructuring" and are now extras, but many have refused, on principal, to jump through the hoop, saying they'll wait until they don't have to waste their time on Morse) Mygawd man, no one in his right mind, having once endured that diatribe, would be eager to have to go through it all over again. You have it programmed into your psyche, if not in a keyboard macro. Naturally they avoided any act or word which would have keyed your internal macro. Who wouldn't? I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical backwater. That *might* be a bit difficult given that even Carl, their vaunted leader, is a SSB ratchjaw, not given to even putting a digital HF station on the air, much less doing any "amsteur digital design". Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years (remember, I'm a long-time ham) Ah, it MUST be pointed out here that your tenure as a longtime ham did not include close connection to *anyone* who was seriously involved in radiotelegraphy in any way. And I know that how? By your actions here! It's completely safe to say that no one would tolarate your attitude as a friend, not likely as even a casual acquaintance, given the lever of vituperation you have always shown toward CW. So what would anyone expect your experience to be?? have been more interested in the operating activity (ragchewing, contesting, paper-chasing) than the technical side. My experience has been that they have been less technically inclined than a lot of the no-code techs I've met, less inclined to participate in public service/emergency communications, and more inclined to just being "users" rather than tinkerers ... Same old, same old... Make the CW supporters appear to be Luddites-an accusation you have repeated many times here on rrap=-Go googling for the facts if anyone doubts it. The FACTS are that the CW suppoorters are far most often the users of advanced digital modes. I'd wager that Carl has never been on the air using CLOVER II. I have. |
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 |