RadioBanter - Why You Don't Like The ARRL

(N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Brian) writes:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message
...
Subject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL
From: (Brian)
Date: 12/26/03 3:01 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

How many amateur radio services do we really need? How many do you
really want?

One radio service with a TIERED license structure, Brain.

It is a "TIRED" radio structure.

Not at all!

It's a "tried and true" license structure.

When "incentive licensing" was re-established in 1968, there were about
250,000
US hams. Today there are about 680,000.

But CW testing was implemented to limit the number of amateurs, not
grow the number.

Where did you get that idea?

Morse code testing was implemented for a number of reasons, but limiting the
number of hams wasn't one of them. And in 1968, when the requirements for full
amateur privileges were increased in both the written and code tests, the
number of hams began to grow again after at least 5 years of stagnation at the
quarter-million mark.

A direct quote from the pages of QST was posted on here several years
back. It was during the Aaron Jones Morse Myths demything era. I
don't think Aaron posted it, though.

If you want Merit Badges, join the
BSA (or CAP).

License class is not a merit badge.

Not even when you puff out your chest and declare, "I'm a 20wpm
Extra!"

When have I done that?

Not necessarily you. Can you say that others don't do it?

Besides, 20 wpm isn't that fast. I can do at least 35 wpm.

Do I detect a little swelling of your shirt?

There is no need to have class distinctions between
hams artificially created by the FCC.

License class is not about class distinctions.

Are you positively sure abaout that?

Yep.

I'm not. Enough RRAPpers have abused their status to convince me
otherwise.

It's about qualification for
privileges. In order to have full privileges, the knowledge to pass the
Extra
is required. Same for the other classes. More knowledge, more privileges.

Is that like when the General licence holder had all priveleges?

1953 to 1968. Then FCC decided that it wasn't enough.

But didn't the FCC first decide that it was enough? Some would call
this era the golden years of amateur radio.

And when the Tech (General written w/o 13wpm Code) had VHF only.

This doesn't mean an Extra knows everyhting there is to know about amateur
radio because they passed the tests. It just means that said Extra has
demonstrated the *minimum* knowledge required for full privileges.

Then tell Steve about self-training.

He knows. You don't.

Apparently he doesn't. Nor do you.

Even in the scheme of incentive
licensing, the lowest and the highest licensed individuals still have
a lot to learn.

Of course! No one with any sense denies that. The license is just the
beginning.

So how is it that having only one license class denies the basis and
purpose, but in a tiered system, the top license class doesn't deny
the basis and purpose - if the Extra license is "just the beginning,"
and ""the highest licensed individuals still have a lot to learn?"

C'mon. Make some sense here.

Allow the ham to distinguish
himself or herself, based upon actual achievements.

Such as?

Cop McDonald - SSTV.

45+ years ago. I've read the original articles. That work is so old that 11
meters was a ham band.

So Cop didn't distinguish himself because he hasn't done anything
lately?

Maybe the press that ran the original articles you read is now
defunct?

Obviously you do not concur with the FCC's "Basis and Purpose" of
the
Amateur Radio Service, espeically those that establish the service as
one
of "self-training".

I do.

Then why didn't you train yourself on practical antennas for HF?

Oh, I have.

I don't think so.

Then you simply don't know.

What I haven't done is train myself on EVERY practical
antenna for HF, especially those antennas applicable to low visual
impact in a restricted neighborhood, and cannot (or rather shouldn't
be placed against) a house sheathed in aluminum siding. So I looked
outside my personal breadth of knowledge for something new, and ran
into you and Brian Kelly. What a pair.

You wanted to be spoon-fed antenna theory and practice instead of
self-training. I pointed you to several websites. It's clear you didn't even
look.

How so?

Some would call that self-training, seeking information and knowledge
outside ones own experience.

Then why didn't you find the information on your own? It became clear to me
that you hadn't even tried googling. You wanted others to do the work for you,
then you'd insult those who tried to help you out.

Kelly was abusive. And because something worked in his backyard he
knew it would work in everyone elses back yard. Even when I put the
limitations up front. He is mentally deficient and emotionally
immature.

-Espeically- "self-training." Obviously you believe that once
you obtain the "Amateur Extra" license that all learning must stop.
There is nothing more to be learned!

Nope, not at all. All it means to have passed the Extra is that said Extra
has
demonstrated the *minimum* knowledge required for full privileges.

You and Steve have a lot in common - being wrong.

How is that statement wrong? FCC set the standard. Pass the test, get the
license.

Basis and purpose, remember? One license "class" satisfies as well as
multiple license classes. Unless learning stops with Extra, which you
say doesn't.

For Steve's assertion to be true, there would have to be a license
class above Amateur Extra, and when a person achieved that, to fufill
Steve's vision "self-training" there would have to be another level
above that. And so on.

Nonsense.

Not nonsense.

I.E., a merit badge system.

More nonsense.

You just don't like it when people notice you puffing out your chest.

You couldn't be more wrong. Again.

A "single license" concept does not support that premise, Brain.

It does. Unless you believe that once you obtain Amateur Extra that
all learning stops because ther is nothing new to be learned.

See above.

See below your see above.

A tiered one does.

No more than a one license ARS.

Depends on the license.

Amateur License.

Call it that.

It should be painfully obvious.

Was that too difficult for you?

Trying hard to keep your position at the top of the hill is sooo
transparent.

Allow the ham to show the world his real achievements, not some
government supported and forced Merit Badge system of false
achievements.

Such as what? Number of antennas not erected? Number of details forgotten
about an alleged DX operation?

Again you try to make this personal.

You've personally refused to answer any questions on some alleged DX
operations.

Most of your questions have been answered. You're not really
interested in what I have to say, only interested character
assassination. Once you discredit me, you think you can discredit
what I say.

I've built HF and VHF antennas,
some from a box, some from a reel of wire and bamboo poles. And I've
operated on HF from Nebraska, ROK, Guam, Illinois, Somalia, Florida,
and Ohio, in that order.

Who is puffing out his chest now?

Not based on license class. Remember, achievements, not FCC Merit
Badges.

Many snicker at working huge pileups with a mere Technician license
while operating SSB on the "kiddie band."

But you can't seem to tell us anything about the /T5 operation.

Just don't be so jealous.

I'm not.

Of course not. Pffft.

Besides, I don't see your name behind "Invented SSTV."

Nor yours besides "invented anything".

So you need the tiered license system as a crutch for your
non-achievements in amateur radio?

So, what mode, what l/o circuit, or even soldering technique has your
name on it?

A few articles in the amateur press. Several homebrew rigs. And some other
things...

Oh? Are these amateur presses now defunct?

I don't ever recall reading about the Miccolus circuit. Clue me in.

Or other things.

Maybe you've distinguished yourself professionally?

How many JOTA stations have you hosted?

None. How many have you hosted?

Three.

How many intro-license classes have you hosted?

A few. Code and theory. Plus upgrade study groups. Plus online help to many
amateurs.

I've seen your on-line help. You and Kelly make a great tag-team.

How many have you taught?

Two. Technician. It was tough answering a lot of the theory
questions. It would have been nice if more Extra's had been
interested enough to help out.

How many VE sessions have you hosted?

A few.

How many have you done?

None.

Certainly you've done something other than DX and belittle you fellow
hams.

I'm not a DXer.

You should. You can actually earn waards based upon actual
achievements, not just FCC Merit Badges.

Where have I belittled any other hams?

Good grief!!! You just belittled my antenna knowledge again, and you
tag-teamed with Kelly on it a little more than a year ago.

Not all hams will distinguish themselves - you certainly haven't. So
let them just be hams, like 99% of all the other Extra class
licensees.

And like you?

I've done nothing out of the ordinary. I don't claim to. I've had
lots of fun being just an ordinary ham.

I don't deserve ridicule because of my license class, or because
someone else thinks that my fun could have been greater if my license
class had been higher.

You want one class of license, fine. Here's how to do it:

First, put aside the code test issue and concentrate on the writtens.

Did you snip something here?

C'mon Steve. Stop manipulating the exchange.

I said "No."

What say you?

Second, close off the Tech and General to new issues.

What? No learners permit?

Nope. You said you want one class of license, no class distinctions, no merit
badges. A learner's permit would mean a two-tiered structure.

Nope. A person expresses and interest, get a learners permit and has
access to other amateurs for mentoring. Then becomes an amateur with
the "Amateur License." No renewals.

You said one license. That means one class of license - no learner's permit.

Learners permit is fatally temporary. Does NOT create an underclass
of Amateurs.

Or were you lying about wanting one class of license?

Not lying.

Third, combine the existing Tech, General and Extra question pools into one
large question pool. Eliminate any questions that are specific to the Tech
or General license classes because they won't be issued new any more.

Such as operating priveleges?

Exactly. If there's to be one license class, it would have to be for all
operating priviliges, so there's no need to test on where the old
subbands-by-license-class used to be. But that's about all that would be
removed.

OK so far.

Fourth, a single new 120 question written exam would be generated from the
combined question pool. All new hams would have to pass this test to become
hams. All would get "Amateur Class" licenses with all privileges.

Just leave out "Class" and call it "Amateur License."

Whatever.

You wanted a one license ARS, didn't you?

Fifth, all existing hams would have their license terms automatically
extended
to 10 years beyond the date on which the new rules took effect. No
renewals.

Sixth, all existing hams would have to retest using the new "Amateur Class"
test within the next 10 years or leave the air.

You could even ask to have the pools FOUO, and/or increase the size to
12,000 questions. Just make the subject matter relavent.

What subject matter in the combined question pool that was just described is
not relevant?

Example: How many minutes it takes to send a FAX image?

That's nonsense.

At the end of 10 years we'd all have the same license class and all have
passed the same test to get it.

Why not?

Why not, Indeed?

Two reasons:

1) All newcomers would have to pass a written test about equivalent to the
Extra just to get on the air.

It was your suggestion. I just went along with it. Why did you drop
the code discussion out of the equation?

2) Existing hams would have to retest at that level or leave the air.

Basis and purpose is fufilled.

How many US hams do you think would be left in 10 years under such a system?

Only the ones who really worked hard.

Deal.

You run it up the flag

No. It's your idea.

No, its your idea.

You want it, you do the work. Self-training, remember? Learn how to write and
submit a proposal to the FCC and get an RM number assigned. Then see what the
amateur community thinks of your ideas in their comments.

I don't want such a system - I just described what would logically be the
structure of such a system. I did it to point out exactly what such a system
would require, and some of the foreseeable consequences.

Ah, you ran up a straw man that you really don't support. You've been
doing a lot of that lately, i.e., no written exams.

Welp, I guess I'll never be able to take you at your word again.

and I'll support it, perhaps with Han's caveat
of a non-renewable learner's permit, limited by power and scope, but
not mode.

No. You said one class of license. That means no learner's permits, no
easy-to-get licenses, just one class of license. Unless you support "dumbing
down", such a license would have to require roughly the equivalent written test
knowledge as an Extra. Some regulations questions could be eliminated but
that's all.

Or were you lying about wanting one class of license?

You certainly were. That would make you a what?