Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "N2EY" wrote: Would you accept "it's obvious" as an answer to "why a code test"? I didn't offer "it's obvious" as an answer. Instead, I wrote... "Considering the power levels, the number of frequencies and bands, the overall safety considerations, the desirability of proper operation when using the various operating modes, and the importance of the rules associated with all that, the necessity of the written exams is clearly obvious." 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? Those modes are already on equal par with voice (written with no skills test). What you haven't explained is why that shouldn't be the case with Morse. 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. Nonsense. But you're darn fool, or think I'm one, if you expect me to get into a point-by-point discussion with you about the several hundred questions in the question pool to prove otherwise. Enough said. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
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 |