N2EY wrote:

snippage

As anyone who understands formal logic knows, reductio ad absurdum is a valid
way of evaluating the validity of an assertion.

It works like this: An assertion is analyzed by logical methods, and if the
result is an absurdity, the original statement must be false.

Or absurd! I like to apply this logic to as much as possible in life.
And many ideas do not fare well!

more snippage

Yup. And the way it's being done is a little step at a time - just like other
requirements were eliminated. Like nonrenewable entry level licenses, tests
conducted by the FCC from a nonpublished test pool, experience requirements,
etc.


As you are well aware, part of the FCC's Basis and Purpose of the
Amateur Radio Service is an expectation of technical learning.


Of course. But does that mean *all* hams must be *forced* to do some, just to
get the license? Can't technical learning stand on its own merits without a
Federally mandated welfare/support program?

Part of our B&P is public service comms, but there's no requirement that hams
learn how to do them or participate in them to get or keep a license.


We are
effectively eliminating much of the "skill" reqirements,


I think you mean "all"...


so how hard a
stretch is it to see some element of society arguing to eliminate any
technical knowledge, too...?!?!


More important - how can those arguments be countered?

IMO, the only way to counter them is to attempt a consensus of just how
much "quality" and technical acumen is desired in a Ham. It's what you
and I are doing yapping about what Ham radio might become. It's what
Hans is doing. I don't like everything he proposes, but I could live
with it.

We have to bark about every attempt at reducing the knowledge or skills
needed to become a Ham. We need to also guard against trying to set the
bar too high - though I doubt that that will be much of a problem!

When a VEC group publishes what they want the ARS to become, and what
they want is a drastic reduction in knowledge, at the same time granting
priveliges for that reduction, we have to yell loud and strong.

We have to realize that when we are told to shut up, it means that our
arguments are good, and that "shut up" is the best argument the other
side has to give.


We have to realize that while we may lose this fight no matter how hard
we work at it, if we sit still and shut up, there is no doubt of the
outcome. Entropy will take over.

We have to get those that believe that Morse code testing should go
away to realize and admit that something must fill the vacuum created by
its elimination. That something could be *nothing*, which results in a
dramatic reduction in skill level. They also need to realize that there
are people out there who want even less in the way of admission
requirements. "Nobody wants licenses just given away" or the like is a
naive statement.

Why? Because I could hand my wife the checkbook, turn her loose in AES
or similar store, and after purchasing whatever the clerk reccomends,
within a week or two she could be on the air. There really is no
impediment too a person whose extent of rf knowledgfe is that you
recieve by twisting the knob, and to transmit, you push the push to talk
button. There is no technical requirement any more, at least to simply
"get on the air". We have to generate our own requirements.

- Mike KB3EIA -