In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

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!

Exactly.

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.

And of course there's debate as to whether the old way was better.

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.

But even that will not *prove* that the requirements for a license need to be
such-and-so. For example, we can get a consensus that it's desirable for all
hams to know Morse code, CPR, and the formula for inductance of a single-layer
solenoid coil. Does that mean Morse code, CPR, and the formula for inductance
of a single-layer solenoid coil *must* be test requirements? Of course not!

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.

I like some of the things Hans proposes and dislike other things. The biggest
problem I see in his proposals are the

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!

Some say that the bar is already too high. For example, Hans' proposal says
that it's necessary and reasonable for all hams to have to pass the Extra
written to stay on the air more than 10 years, but that it's *not* necessary or
reasonable to require any code test at all.

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.

I'd say we have to present strong, reasoned arguments.

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.

Exactly. Which is perhaps the most important point of this whole exercise. Note
how many times I've been told to shut up about this, called "poster boy for
NTI" and other names, etc. Says a lot, doesn't it?

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.

Maybe it already has.

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.

How?

Many will say that no such vacuum is created, and there's nothing to replace.
Others will say that the writtens are *harder* today than they were in the
past. Etc.

That something could be *nothing*, which results in a
dramatic reduction in skill level.

I've been repeatedly told here that there should not be *any* skills tests for
a ham license.

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.

Sure. And there's also the concept of what constitutes a giveaway. Heck, the
old 20 wpm/5 written test Extra has been passed by several children in their
pre-teen years - how hard could it have been?

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.

Some would say "That's a good thing!"

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.

And how do you *prove* they are necessary, in a modern-day environment where
even the self-proclaimed "professionals in radio" are using or will use
manufactured rigs that are virtually foolproof?

73 de Jim, N2EY