"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Bert Craig" wrote in
:

"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote in
:

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
news "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
gy.com...

"Alun" wrote in message
...
It just so happens that I don't
like CW, in the sense of I have no desire to use it. That
should be OK too, but for some reason it bothers you. Why?

No it does not bother me that someone who has learned it chooses
not to use it. They have made that decision from a position of
knowledge and experience. This is radically different from a
person judging it and saying they will never use it when they do
not have that knowledge and experience to draw on.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Right on the money, Dee. Larry pointed this out earlier, but not as
eloquently as you.

73 de Bert
WA2SI



It fascinates me that you won't accept someone's plain and simple
truth that they don't like CW--even if they don't have experience
with it--because you reason that they need to have "knowledge and
experience" with it. Well, I know people who are quite well-versed
in CW who don't like it, people who haven't ever even tried it and
don't like it, and people who have taken and passed a 5wpm test and
don't like it. I also know people from those same three categories
that do like CW operation.

It's pretty much as simple as folks who do or don't like most other
things in life. Either ya like it or ya don't.

Kim W5TIT




I think that you have hit upon a very important point there, Kim. A
good analogy might be not liking an item of food that you haven't
tried, because it looks disgusting on your plate. If you eat some you
might like it, or not, but there are probably all kinds of other
things that contain the same nutrition. These guys are like a parent
telling a child that they have to eat their brocolli. But they aren't
my parents and I don't like brocolli, or CW. I take vitamins, and work
phone.

Slight difference, Alun. Nobody's forcing anybody to learn code. There
exists a no-code Technician license for those who do not wish to have
to pass the 5-wpm code exam.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

Not really true.

Very true, Alun...very true.

No HF privileges with that licence, as we all know.

As with most things in life, increased *privileges* requires increased
effort. The ARS is but a microsm or society as a whole. Despite the efforts
of some to reduce it to "just a hobby" status, the values and principles we
learn in our "avocations" will likely carry over into the other aspects of
our lives. Many here were first licensed as children or young adults, that's
no accident.

The kids of today are referred to as the Nintendo generation, kinda hard to
compete with. However, in our quest to gain quantity, we appear to be
courting a slightly older prospective ham...products of the newer "I want it
now" society. So what can we do, villify the "speed bump" of our licensing
structure in an effort to remove any "barriers." I kinda liken it to kids
that are graduating HS with a 5th, 6th, or 7th grade reading level. Gee,
how'd they get through? Check out the recent regents debacle. Not enough
kids pass, it must be to hard...so we'll throw 'em a curve. See the cycle
there. Had someone had the courage to NOT throw some of these kids their
earlier curves in the first place, their Regents scores would be higher.

What does this have to do with amateur radio? Human nature. What we learn to
do as we practice our avocation early in life, we tend to apply to other
aspects later in life. Still believe this is about a 5-wpm Morse code test?

Why must we reduce our beloved hobby/service to the lowest commen
denominator?

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Bert Craig" wrote in
t:

"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Bert Craig" wrote in
:

"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote in
:

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
news "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
gy.com...

"Alun" wrote in message
...
It just so happens that I don't
like CW, in the sense of I have no desire to use it. That
should be OK too, but for some reason it bothers you. Why?

No it does not bother me that someone who has learned it
chooses not to use it. They have made that decision from a
position of knowledge and experience. This is radically
different from a person judging it and saying they will never
use it when they do not have that knowledge and experience to
draw on.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Right on the money, Dee. Larry pointed this out earlier, but not
as eloquently as you.

73 de Bert
WA2SI



It fascinates me that you won't accept someone's plain and simple
truth that they don't like CW--even if they don't have experience
with it--because you reason that they need to have "knowledge and
experience" with it. Well, I know people who are quite
well-versed in CW who don't like it, people who haven't ever even
tried it and don't like it, and people who have taken and passed
a 5wpm test and don't like it. I also know people from those
same three categories that do like CW operation.

It's pretty much as simple as folks who do or don't like most
other things in life. Either ya like it or ya don't.

Kim W5TIT




I think that you have hit upon a very important point there, Kim. A
good analogy might be not liking an item of food that you haven't
tried, because it looks disgusting on your plate. If you eat some
you might like it, or not, but there are probably all kinds of
other things that contain the same nutrition. These guys are like a
parent telling a child that they have to eat their brocolli. But
they aren't my parents and I don't like brocolli, or CW. I take
vitamins, and work phone.

Slight difference, Alun. Nobody's forcing anybody to learn code.
There exists a no-code Technician license for those who do not wish
to have to pass the 5-wpm code exam.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

Not really true.

Very true, Alun...very true.

No HF privileges with that licence, as we all know.

As with most things in life, increased *privileges* requires increased
effort. The ARS is but a microsm or society as a whole. Despite the
efforts of some to reduce it to "just a hobby" status, the values and
principles we learn in our "avocations" will likely carry over into the
other aspects of our lives. Many here were first licensed as children
or young adults, that's no accident.

The kids of today are referred to as the Nintendo generation, kinda
hard to compete with. However, in our quest to gain quantity, we appear
to be courting a slightly older prospective ham...products of the newer
"I want it now" society. So what can we do, villify the "speed bump" of
our licensing structure in an effort to remove any "barriers."

If you admit that you view the code test as a "speed bump", then you are
admitting it's not relevant, but just there to slow down the traffic. You
view that as desirable, and I don't, which is one of the differences
between us.

I kinda
liken it to kids that are graduating HS with a 5th, 6th, or 7th grade
reading level. Gee, how'd they get through? Check out the recent
regents debacle. Not enough kids pass, it must be to hard...so we'll
throw 'em a curve. See the cycle there. Had someone had the courage to
NOT throw some of these kids their earlier curves in the first place,
their Regents scores would be higher.

What does this have to do with amateur radio?

Very little. It's like saying that allowing people to get a licence
without a code test will affect their knowledge of RF.

Human nature. What we
learn to do as we practice our avocation early in life, we tend to
apply to other aspects later in life. Still believe this is about a
5-wpm Morse code test?


Yes. No hidden agenda here.

Why must we reduce our beloved hobby/service to the lowest commen
denominator?

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Bert Craig" wrote in
t:

"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Bert Craig" wrote in
:

"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote in
:

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
news "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
gy.com...

"Alun" wrote in message
...
It just so happens that I don't
like CW, in the sense of I have no desire to use it. That
should be OK too, but for some reason it bothers you. Why?

No it does not bother me that someone who has learned it
chooses not to use it. They have made that decision from a
position of knowledge and experience. This is radically
different from a person judging it and saying they will never
use it when they do not have that knowledge and experience to
draw on.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Right on the money, Dee. Larry pointed this out earlier, but not
as eloquently as you.

73 de Bert
WA2SI



It fascinates me that you won't accept someone's plain and simple
truth that they don't like CW--even if they don't have experience
with it--because you reason that they need to have "knowledge and
experience" with it. Well, I know people who are quite
well-versed in CW who don't like it, people who haven't ever even
tried it and don't like it, and people who have taken and passed
a 5wpm test and don't like it. I also know people from those
same three categories that do like CW operation.

It's pretty much as simple as folks who do or don't like most
other things in life. Either ya like it or ya don't.

Kim W5TIT




I think that you have hit upon a very important point there, Kim. A
good analogy might be not liking an item of food that you haven't
tried, because it looks disgusting on your plate. If you eat some
you might like it, or not, but there are probably all kinds of
other things that contain the same nutrition. These guys are like a
parent telling a child that they have to eat their brocolli. But
they aren't my parents and I don't like brocolli, or CW. I take
vitamins, and work phone.

Slight difference, Alun. Nobody's forcing anybody to learn code.
There exists a no-code Technician license for those who do not wish
to have to pass the 5-wpm code exam.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

Not really true.

Very true, Alun...very true.

No HF privileges with that licence, as we all know.

As with most things in life, increased *privileges* requires increased
effort. The ARS is but a microsm or society as a whole. Despite the
efforts of some to reduce it to "just a hobby" status, the values and
principles we learn in our "avocations" will likely carry over into the
other aspects of our lives. Many here were first licensed as children
or young adults, that's no accident.

The kids of today are referred to as the Nintendo generation, kinda
hard to compete with. However, in our quest to gain quantity, we appear
to be courting a slightly older prospective ham...products of the newer
"I want it now" society. So what can we do, villify the "speed bump" of
our licensing structure in an effort to remove any "barriers."

If you admit that you view the code test as a "speed bump", then you are
admitting it's not relevant, but just there to slow down the traffic. You
view that as desirable, and I don't, which is one of the differences
between us.

I kinda
liken it to kids that are graduating HS with a 5th, 6th, or 7th grade
reading level. Gee, how'd they get through? Check out the recent
regents debacle. Not enough kids pass, it must be to hard...so we'll
throw 'em a curve. See the cycle there. Had someone had the courage to
NOT throw some of these kids their earlier curves in the first place,
their Regents scores would be higher.

What does this have to do with amateur radio?

Very little. It's like saying that allowing people to get a licence
without a code test will affect their knowledge of RF.

It's not about the code Alun, it's about the effort.

Human nature. What we
learn to do as we practice our avocation early in life, we tend to
apply to other aspects later in life. Still believe this is about a
5-wpm Morse code test?


Yes. No hidden agenda here.

No, there's no hidden agenda. If you take away the passion and whining from
BOTH sides of the equation, it becomes obvious that the code test is really
not the issue. It's the effort. If the writtens were made more difficult and
the published Q&A pools eliminated, the whining would then continue. The
common denominator...the effort involved.

Why must we reduce our beloved hobby/service to the lowest commen
denominator?

Oops, my bad. That should read "common." Gotta pay more attention. hihi

73 de Bert
WA2SI

Like I said before, Alun. It's ok to just agree to disagree. Take care.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Bert Craig" wrote in
et:

"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Bert Craig" wrote in
t:

"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Bert Craig" wrote in
:

"Alun" wrote in message
...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote in
:

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
news "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
gy.com...

"Alun" wrote in message
...
It just so happens that I don't
like CW, in the sense of I have no desire to use it. That
should be OK too, but for some reason it bothers you.
Why?

No it does not bother me that someone who has learned it
chooses not to use it. They have made that decision from a
position of knowledge and experience. This is radically
different from a person judging it and saying they will
never use it when they do not have that knowledge and
experience to draw on.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Right on the money, Dee. Larry pointed this out earlier, but
not as eloquently as you.

73 de Bert
WA2SI



It fascinates me that you won't accept someone's plain and
simple truth that they don't like CW--even if they don't have
experience with it--because you reason that they need to have
"knowledge and experience" with it. Well, I know people who
are quite well-versed in CW who don't like it, people who
haven't ever even tried it and don't like it, and people who
have taken and passed a 5wpm test and don't like it. I also
know people from those same three categories that do like CW
operation.

It's pretty much as simple as folks who do or don't like most
other things in life. Either ya like it or ya don't.

Kim W5TIT




I think that you have hit upon a very important point there,
Kim. A good analogy might be not liking an item of food that you
haven't tried, because it looks disgusting on your plate. If
you eat some you might like it, or not, but there are probably
all kinds of other things that contain the same nutrition. These
guys are like a parent telling a child that they have to eat
their brocolli. But they aren't my parents and I don't like
brocolli, or CW. I take vitamins, and work phone.

Slight difference, Alun. Nobody's forcing anybody to learn code.
There exists a no-code Technician license for those who do not
wish to have to pass the 5-wpm code exam.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

Not really true.

Very true, Alun...very true.

No HF privileges with that licence, as we all know.

As with most things in life, increased *privileges* requires
increased effort. The ARS is but a microsm or society as a whole.
Despite the efforts of some to reduce it to "just a hobby" status,
the values and principles we learn in our "avocations" will likely
carry over into the other aspects of our lives. Many here were first
licensed as children or young adults, that's no accident.

The kids of today are referred to as the Nintendo generation, kinda
hard to compete with. However, in our quest to gain quantity, we
appear to be courting a slightly older prospective ham...products of
the newer "I want it now" society. So what can we do, villify the
"speed bump" of our licensing structure in an effort to remove any
"barriers."

If you admit that you view the code test as a "speed bump", then you
are admitting it's not relevant, but just there to slow down the
traffic. You view that as desirable, and I don't, which is one of the
differences between us.

I kinda
liken it to kids that are graduating HS with a 5th, 6th, or 7th
grade reading level. Gee, how'd they get through? Check out the
recent regents debacle. Not enough kids pass, it must be to
hard...so we'll throw 'em a curve. See the cycle there. Had someone
had the courage to NOT throw some of these kids their earlier curves
in the first place, their Regents scores would be higher.

What does this have to do with amateur radio?

Very little. It's like saying that allowing people to get a licence
without a code test will affect their knowledge of RF.

It's not about the code Alun, it's about the effort.

I think the effort would be better placed doing something else.


Human nature. What we
learn to do as we practice our avocation early in life, we tend to
apply to other aspects later in life. Still believe this is about a
5-wpm Morse code test?


Yes. No hidden agenda here.

No, there's no hidden agenda. If you take away the passion and whining
from BOTH sides of the equation, it becomes obvious that the code test
is really not the issue. It's the effort.

It's the misplaced effort

If the writtens were made
more difficult and the published Q&A pools eliminated, the whining
would then continue. The common denominator...the effort involved.


You can chose to beleive that it's about the effort, but it isn't

Why must we reduce our beloved hobby/service to the lowest commen
denominator?

Oops, my bad. That should read "common." Gotta pay more attention.
hihi

73 de Bert
WA2SI

Like I said before, Alun. It's ok to just agree to disagree. Take care.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Bert Craig" wrote:

(snip) I kinda liken it to kids that are graduating
HS with a 5th, 6th, or 7th grade reading level.
Gee, how'd they get through? Check out the
recent regents debacle. Not enough kids pass,
it must be to hard...so we'll throw 'em a curve.
See the cycle there. Had someone had the
courage to NOT throw some of these kids their
earlier curves in the first place, their Regents
scores would be higher.

What does this have to do with amateur radio?
Human nature. What we learn to do as we
practice our avocation early in life, we tend to
apply to other aspects later in life. (snip)


It is not Amateur Radio's job or mandate to correct society's ills, Bert.
Indeed, the current members of this avocation are not different enough from
society overall to even have the moral high ground to attempt to do so.
We're not gods or priests - we're simply radio operators. By the way, the
word "too," as in "too hard," has more than one "o."


Why must we reduce our beloved hobby/service
to the lowest commen denominator?


There is nothing in code testing that insures the highest common
denominator, or anything more than a lowest common denominator.
Incidentally, one would reasonably expect no spelling mistakes in a message
written by a person bold enough to point out the limited educational skills
of others. The word "common" is spelled with an "o," not an "e."


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

In article k.net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"Bert Craig" wrote:

(snip) I kinda liken it to kids that are graduating
HS with a 5th, 6th, or 7th grade reading level.
Gee, how'd they get through? Check out the
recent regents debacle. Not enough kids pass,
it must be to hard...so we'll throw 'em a curve.
See the cycle there. Had someone had the
courage to NOT throw some of these kids their
earlier curves in the first place, their Regents
scores would be higher.

What does this have to do with amateur radio?
Human nature. What we learn to do as we
practice our avocation early in life, we tend to
apply to other aspects later in life. (snip)

It is not Amateur Radio's job or mandate to correct society's ills, Bert.
Indeed, the current members of this avocation are not different enough from
society overall to even have the moral high ground to attempt to do so.
We're not gods or priests - we're simply radio operators. By the way, the
word "too," as in "too hard," has more than one "o."

Dwight, you cannot argue with Believers.

Their self-righteousness knows no bounds.

They are correct by their own definitions.

They KNOW what is best for amateur radio...and that is a maintenance
of morse code proficiency forever and ever.

A morse code test for amateur radio licensing has "always" been in
the regulations (91 years) and it must always be there.

Why must we reduce our beloved hobby/service
to the lowest commen denominator?

There is nothing in code testing that insures the highest common
denominator, or anything more than a lowest common denominator.
Incidentally, one would reasonably expect no spelling mistakes in a message
written by a person bold enough to point out the limited educational skills
of others. The word "common" is spelled with an "o," not an "e."

Messaging sometimes goes down to the "lowest common
denominator" in writing... :-)

LHA

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...

They KNOW what is best for amateur radio...and that is a maintenance
of morse code proficiency forever and ever.

A morse code test for amateur radio licensing has "always" been in
the regulations (91 years) and it must always be there.

You are once again making assinine assertions unsubstantiated by
facts, Lennie.

Why do you keep doing this in the face of facts to the contrary?

Is looking like an idiot in public your intent?

If so, carry on. You are succeeding. Superbly, even.

Messaging sometimes goes down to the "lowest common
denominator" in writing...

The lowest common LennieFactor would seem to be "swing at
everything, you'll hit something"

Putz.

Steve, K4YZ