"Dave Heil" wrote:

There was nothing disingenuous about
anything and there was nothing in your
earlier statements to indicate that you
were discussing government policy. If
I wanted to make it clear that I was
speaking of policy, I might have written
something like, "I don't have a
background in NASA policy or child birth
policy". Child birth policy doesn't seem
to make much sense does it?


Your inability to comprehend seems to increase whenever your argument
grows weak, Dave. You stated that one must have experience to make an
informed decision - not knowledge, experience. I pointed to child birth, as
one example, to prove that wasn't true. But, since you can't seem to
understand that, I'll spell it out for you. One does not have to have a
child ("child birth") to make an informed decision about abortion laws
("government policy"). And, before you object to that, the act of abortion
is a medical procedure, but the laws governing abortion are government
policy.


That isn't what your words say. Look at 'em
and see if you can find any words about
morse *use*. If you can't find them, perhaps
I can provide a quote.


You were talking about an entirely different "use" than I was. You were
talking about Amateur radio operators "using" code while I was talking about
the "use" of Morse code by other radio services as that relates to code
testing. Apples and oranges, Dave. This discussion isn't about the "use" of
code by Amateur radio operators - ending code testing will not stop you from
using Morse code.


I strongly disagree that a five word per minute
morse test indicates emphasis. (snip)


Again, it is "emphasis" compared to the other operating modes, and
compared to where this country needs expertise (see FCC statements in
previous messages).


(snip) Additionally, nothing precludes anyone
from developing expertise though "where this
country needs expertise" hasn't been defined.
(snip)


Morse code certainly isn't "where this country needs expertise" today.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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