Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "N2EY" wrote in message om... "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." OK, fine, your opinion is well stated. Now consider that same logic applied to the written test. Jim ... I am not going to waste time, energy, and bandwidth debating the elimination of written tests, with you playing "devil's advocate" for elimination thereof ... I do not, and never will support the elimination or watering down of the written tests. I have stated over and over again that I personally feel they could be made better (where "better" and "more difficult" are not necessarily synonymous ...). I don't mean to come across as condescending, but your attempts to equate Morse testing's irrelevance to the written tests in an effort to support continued Morse testing is something I'm getting tired of. And I'm not going to play that game. Otherwise, 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 |