"Len Over 21" wrote


Anything said against YOUR PLAN is worthless, illogical,
inconsequential, irresponsible, irrelevant, etc., etc., etc.


I knew you'd agree with me.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Bill Sohl" wrote:
ITU treaty is goofed up too?

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

What about that BPL thing, I know their using it in Manasass, anyone
hear how good or bad it is to HF comms?

Updates?

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
m...
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
ink.net...
"Bert Craig" wrote in message
om...
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Bert Craig" wrote in message
et...

IMHO, No-Code Int'l. has:

1. Encouraged the idea that it is preferable to lower the
requirements
through mass petition rather than encourage individuals to strive
toward
higher achievement. Some refer to it as "lowering the bar."

Call it whatever you want. I guess the states "lowered" the bar
when they stopped testing new drivers on manual gearbox autos.

Funny you should mention that, Bill. You see, I took my first driver's
license exam in Jamaica, W.I. where, if you tested in a car equipped
with an automatic transmission, your driving privileges were limited
to vehicles equipped likewise. It was not really about the
"privileges," but about safety and all understood this. (Though we ALL
bemoaned the dreaded ramp test.) So yes, I suppose you did "guess"
correctly although the analogy is not quite appropriate to the ARS.

Don't take my word for it. Ask the poor slob who got rear-ended by
that person who borrowed his/her friend's car and, in a panic stop,
mistook the clutch pedal for the brake pedal when the driver ahead of
him/her stopped short. Actually Bill, I was that poor slob about ten
years ago...so maybe you should take my word for it. I let him slide
though as the damage was minimal with no injuries. Besides, why make
us all pay via increased insurance premiums. Hmm, 1500 Watts on
VHF/UHF...perhaps it wasn't a bad analogy after all?

The reality is the Morse test is past its prime...and the entire
body
of international countries have seen fit to eliminate Morse as
an international treaty element.

The reality is that CW is the second most popular mode in the ARS
today and is a part of the big picture. Let's also not forget that
we're talking about the 5-wpm exam for upgrade within, not for entry
into, the ARS.

So how many rear-enders have no-coders had while using CW?

Oh, I don't know, Bill.let's see. Let's ask that fellow who just
passed Element 2 and just couldn't wait to get OTA. So he bought a
nifty little dual-bander, a "killer" Mirage amp, and pumped a few
hundred Watts or VHF or UHF RF into his nice long Yagi (You know, the
one marketed as a "Boomer.") pointed toward a distant repeater.right
through the second floor of his neighbor's house. Heck, he mounted it
on the mast that formerly hosted a TV antenna.that ought to be good
enough, right?

And none of this would have happened if only he had known
code? Give me a break.

Answer the question asked...The question is, for those that need
clarity: IF someone became a General or Extra with NO
code skills, and then decided to learn code on-the-air, what's
the harm, danger, etc?

After all, I'm sure that someone who is so bothered at the notion of
having to learn and be tested on a skill he deems irrelevant to how he
plans on operating, that he joins an "international" movement to
remove said offensive task.would certainly be concerned and cognizant
of any harmful RF his equipment might be radiating. Heck, he did pass
that 35 multiple-guess.er, I meant choice test that proclaimed him
"ready." I am fairly certain though that his mode of choice was not
CW. ;-)

The analogy is a joke.

Actually, I am pretty much joking around with you, Bill. (Lighten up.)
HOWEVER, the potential for physical harm is there and somewhere the
above scenario may be playing out as you read these words.and that's
no joke.

The potential for harm, physical or otherwise is NOT tied
to anyone's knowledge of code. THAT is the point.

There is ZERO element of safety involved with CW knowledge/testing.

Agreed. It's the mindset I find kinda alarming. Folks that have no
problem with putting forth the effort to advance in their endeavors
are more likely to exercise that same "work ethic" wrt conscientiously
ensuring the safe operation of their station. Conversely, folks that
would rather complain about having to put forth some effort (Let's be
honest, the effort is rather minimal re. Element 1.) to advance
themselves are perceived to be "corner-cutters." (Some might even call
them."slackers.")

The "effort" has nothing to do with code testing. The goal
of ending code testing is based solely on the lack of
any continued need for code skills to be mandated for
any HF access. There was, in the past, a rational reason
or set of reasons for code knowledge. Those days are gone.
It is that simple.

BIG BIG DISCLAIMER: I am quite aware that this is not true for all
no-code Technicians and/or NCI members, HOWEVER, all it takes is one
poor soul getting a cranial soaking from some dunderhead who wants to
bombard that repeater to validate the concern. Lest the repeater folks
feel offended, there is a club here on LI devoted to simplex operation
who support VHF/UHF operation with a tad more than the few hundred
Watts mentioned above.

Again, this dialog isn't about the validity or not of
current writtens. My point(s) here are focused only on
code testing. PERIOD!

Had there been any relevant safety
aspect to justify CW testing the FCC would have acknowledged it.

You slay me, Bill. Is this the same FCC that's ready to administer the
BPL suppository to AR? "Who's yer daddy now?!"

Sorry to burst your bubble, but its the only
FCC we have. Indeed, had the FCC seriously
errored in their past decion(s) regarding need
or non-need for code skills testing, then I'm
amazed you and others haven't filed court action to
stop the FCC.

2. Made the notion of more privileges via higher achievement
appear as
if
it's fundamentally wrong. If one wishes to upgrade, then meet the
requirements necessary to achieve that upgrade. (Not just the
requirements
we *want* to meet.)

I see it as fundamentally wrong when the added privileges
have no rational link to the added/higher achievement attained.

Second most popular mode in use today...particularly on HF?!

So how come a no-code tech isn't banned from using CW
on the only two all-CW only bands.

That nice slow-code practice you speak of below. Learn to drive in a
safe environment before venturing onto the highway.

If new ham goes OnTheAir to learn code, does that trouble you?
What part of amateur spectrum is considered highway vs
non-highway?

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

Steveo ) wrote:
Hey Dee D. you see how he operates he is a troll and not only that
he
is an illegal freebander and HF bootlegger. Ask him about his
Collins
S-Line he operates without a license and why it is set up to
transmit
all over the spectrum he will go quiet real fast.

Wrong again, do you need it beat in to you with a clue by four?

You see Dee D. how Steveo gets violent he has a real problem with
anger first thing you know he is threatening to beat someone LOL. But
the part about his bootleg Collins HF station is true he brags about
it many times on rec.radio.cb ask him you know you hear about these
pirating radio spectrum outlaws in the FCC reports but I bet you never
met one well here he is his name is Steve Parks.

(No No Not George) wrote:
Steveo ) wrote:
Hey Dee D. you see how he operates he is a troll and not only that
he
is an illegal freebander and HF bootlegger. Ask him about his
Collins
S-Line he operates without a license and why it is set up to
transmit
all over the spectrum he will go quiet real fast.

Wrong again, do you need it beat in to you with a clue by four?

You see Dee D. how Steveo gets violent?

A clue by four is violent? Leave Dee alone already, leghumper.

Steveo ) wrote:
Wrong again, do you need it beat in to you with a clue by four?

You see Dee D. how Steveo gets violent?

A clue by four is violent? Leave Dee alone already, leghumper.

Look at the thread you busted in on her so you started it dickwad.

(No No Not George) wrote:
Steveo ) wrote:
Wrong again, do you need it beat in to you with a clue by four?

You see Dee D. how Steveo gets violent?

A clue by four is violent? Leave Dee alone already, leghumper.

Look at the thread you busted in on her so you started it dickwad.

No, I've replied to Dee before, without your moderation. What
made you decide to chime in with your worthless tripe this time?

Steveo ) wrote:
You see Dee D. how Steveo gets violent?

A clue by four is violent? Leave Dee alone already, leghumper.

Look at the thread you busted in on her so you started it dickwad.

No, I've replied to Dee before, without your moderation. What
made you decide to chime in with your worthless tripe this time?

Because your a TROLLLLLL Steveo and Dee D. needs to know it she was
clearly puzzled by you throwing N8WWMs name into the mix for no good
reason other than to cause trouble and lets face it you need to be
moderated, asslick.

(No No Not George) wrote:
lets face it you need to be
moderated, asslick.

Asslick? I'll re-direct you to a pretty good ass binarie group,

alt.binaries.great.ass.paulina . Thank me later, loser.

(don't use up your whole 1 gb at once)

No No Not George wrote:
met one well here he is his name is Steve Parks.

Youv'e been bamboozled, Sparky.
http://www.steve-park.com/

Bamboozled by a NA$CAR fan. That can't be good!
--
___________________________
Truckers get the best $20 whores