| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message thlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote: "Dwight Stewart" writes: Considering the power levels, the number of frequencies and bands, the overall safety considerations, (snip) You're avoiding my question, Dwight. No, you just don't like the answer given. Would you accept "it's obvious" as an answer to "why a code test"? Didn't think so. If anything, I'm ignoring a fanciful, long-winded, exchange that cannot add anything of real substance to the discussion about Morse code testing (see below). Since you keep asking this, do you have a point to make, Jim? Yes. The point is that some folks apply a double standard when deciding which tests to keep and which to get rid of. The only double standard that exists is not having the same testing for all operating modes. Unless there is a justification to do otherwise, either have skill testing for all modes or no skill testing for any mode. I disagree. Would you have skill testing for modes that few hams use, like EME or TV, on an equal par with those that are widely used, like voice and Morse? There is no longer any justification today for a unique test solely for Morse code. I disagree. YMMV. In the end, it's simply an opinion question. That opinion is consistent with recent FCC published statements. Does that mean FCC is always right? Was FCC right when they required 20 wpm for full privs and no waivers? As such, the unique Morse code test should be eliminated. And perhaps it will be - someday. Not willing to accept that, you ignore the obvious double standard and instead try conjure up an imaginary double standard relating to the written tests. Nope. I simply point out that the same arguments used against the code test can be used against most of the written tests. But most people support the written tests as they are for opinion reasons, nothing more. No such double standard exists. Those written tests, and their contents, serve a valid purpose today. What valid purpose do the General and Extra written tests serve? Why is *all* of their content necessary to operate HF beyond the small sample of privileges granted to Novices and Tech Pluses? None here, including you, have said otherwise. I've simply used the same arguments against them as are used against the code test. The same cannot be said about the Morse code test. Sure it can. I've done it. With all that in mind, I have no desire to engage in a fanciful discussion about the contents of the written tests, especially when that discussion cannot possibly lead to a valid point - no conflict or double standard exists concerning the written tests. As such, I've ignored the rest of your message and have instead addressed the specific point you've acknowledged trying to make. You choose to ignore it because you don't have a definitive counterargument. You cannot prove that most of the content of the writtens, particularly the General and Extra writtens, are *necessary*. IOW, you know that if the same criteria of "is it necessary?" were applied to most of the written questions, the answer would be the same as you get for the code test. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| The 14 Petitions | Policy | |||
| Responses to 14 Petitions on Code Testing | Policy | |||
| Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | Policy | |||
| Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | General | |||
| Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | Dx | |||