Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#161
|
|||
|
|||
"N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , "Carl R. Stevenson" writes: "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article t, "Bill Sohl" writes: [snip] If all 83,000 Advanceds get a free upgrade to Extra, they'll have access to those choice slices and they'll probably increase the QRM level. So giving them a free upgrade *does* take something away from existing Extras. Jim, I'm willing to share the Extra sub-bands with a few others. Only a few? I'm willing to share them with as many as can pass the required tests. Particularly the *written* tests. Be careful ... your "not in my sandbox" motives are showing. You're the one willing to share with "a few".... You're squirming pretty hard and stretching pretty far with your attempt to twist my use of the words "a few others" into something you know damned well I didn't mean the way you're trying to spin it ... And I do recall someone saying they'd **NEVER** support a reduction in the **WRITTEN** test requirements. I'm not ... I'm supporting the establishment of a reasonable, viable entry level class with appropriate testing and restrictions. Yet now I see that same person supporting free upgrades that involve not even having to take *written* tests... As Ed pointed out, the difference between the Tech and General written tests is not that large - it's a one-shot deal to "make things right" in a way where nobody loses privs, and as Bill pointed out, those Techs are already authorized 1500W at frequencies that the FCC and anyone with any knowledge of RF safety knows are more "risky" than HF. Like all those Advanced are on the air now. Give me a break. If they're not on the air, there's no reason to give them upgrades, is there? They'll get upgrades, even if they're SKs whose family hasn't sent in their license for cancellation - so what? Why not upgrade all existing hams except Novices to Extra, then? Because that doesn't comport with either the FCC's or the ARRL's (or my) desire to have some reason for folks to learn more to upgrade. [snip] After careful consideration of Ed Hare's (personal, not ARRL) comments on the subject on eHam.net I'll ask again for a link to those comments. Go to eham.net (or use Google) ... I don't have the URL direct to Ed's comments handy ... I (personally, not as NCI) think it makes the best sense as a one-shot deal as a way forward to a license/priv structure that makes sense for the future. Even though it means a one-shot reduction in written test requirements for over 400,000 hams. That's almost 60% of those licensed today. Again, the differences are not that great (in content - I know you have a BIG hangup about the number of questions on the test ...) Here's another thought: Rules changes like that don't happen overnight - there's always a time delay between when a rules change is announced and the new rules take effect. So if FCC simply accepted ARRL's proposal tomorrow, they'd probably make it effective a few months hence. They could make a rules change effective 30 days from publication in the Federal Register ... So someone without a license could just take the Tech before the changes take place, and then ride the free upgrade bus to General. Give me a break ... your arguments are just plain lame and your "someone might get privs without taking a test with the same number of questions as I took" is REALLY showing. I'd really like to see a link to Ed's arguments... Go find them - you know how to google. 36-1/2 :-) Carl - wk3c |
#162
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Coslo wrote: Dave Heil wrote: "Carl R. Stevenson" wrote: "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article t, "Bill Sohl" writes: [snip] If all 83,000 Advanceds get a free upgrade to Extra, they'll have access to those choice slices and they'll probably increase the QRM level. So giving them a free upgrade *does* take something away from existing Extras. Jim, I'm willing to share the Extra sub-bands with a few others. That's awfully big of you, Carl. Be careful ... your "not in my sandbox" motives are showing. Ah, but it IS his sandbox. It is also MY sandbox and, through a lowering of the qualifications for obtaining an Extra class license, it happens to be your sandbox. Like all those Advanced are on the air now. Give me a break. If they're not on the air, there's no reason to give them upgrades, is there? They'll get upgrades, even if they're SKs whose family hasn't sent in their license for cancellation - so what? Why should anyone obtain an upgrade without testing? 83,000 advanced today who are either SK, inactive or just don't see the need to upgrade and you expect even a measurable increase in QRM because some of them may suddenly start operating in the Extra only segments. Then just leave 'em be! That would require essentially maintaining the status quo, which is unacceptable. How so and to whom? The FCC wants to simplify - Really? the ARRL wants to create a viable entry level class with meaningful HF privs and reasonable power limits. After careful consideration of Ed Hare's (personal, not ARRL) comments on the subject on eHam.net, I (personally, not as NCI) think it makes the best sense as a one-shot deal as a way forward to a license/priv structure that makes sense for the future. So a "gimme" for tens of thousands is what makes sense to you, huh? You've often written of morse tests as hoops and hazing, preventing "otherwise qualified" people from entering amateur radio. The Morse code was keeping tens of thousands of otherwise *unqualified* people out too! That was Carl's litany some years back and why I trotted it out for use in this instance. You vowed that you'd never support a watering down of written tests. Now you are supporting a freebie for these thousands of "otherwise qualified" individuals. "Otherwise qualified" must mean those people who can't pass a required examination. I'm "otherwise qualified" to be a neurosurgeon! ....and this one was pointed out to Carl and others here by me some years back. The idea of a "gimme" for tens of thousands makes no more sense than Carl's reversal on his vowed support for tougher written exams. Dave K8MN |
#163
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:58:14 -0000, "Carl R. Stevenson"
wrote: snip .... twist my use of the words "a few others" into something you know damned well I didn't mean the way you're trying to spin it ... Hmmm - I think I've had that done to a few of my posts a time or two as well! The best defense is still a good offense, I guess...... snip 36-1/2 :-) Carl - wk3c 73, Leo |
#164
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Helmut"
writes: How does the number of new hams since the changes compare to an equal period of time before the changes? Jim, it is not the difference in numbers, it is just the fact, that it happend. Give yourself the cream upon the cake and think positive about the new situation. Showing anger and agressiv language against those beeing a "victim" of the restructuring process doesn't bring any good to the ham family. Not in your country, and not around the world. And where we cannot do anything against it, it's not worth to argue about it. It is NOT negotiable. Helmut, what you say is true but the verbose regulars in this newsgroup are adamant "America-firsters," that is, what the Americans do is "best" and therefore that is good for the rest of the world. The IARU came out with the opinion years ago that morse code testing should be eliminated from an ITU requirement. The ARRL, a supposed leader of American amateur radio (with membership less than 25% of all American amateur licensees) was against it. They aren't really for eliminating any of it and remain in a middle position, neither for nor against it. ARRL tries to please too many, therefore there is no real consensus possible. It reduces to a simple phrasing for American radio amateurs: All must do as was done in the old days by the old- timers...because the old-timers imagine they are "the best." It is a sad situation for the entire world in my estimation, a stubborn opinion that belongs better in times of two centuries ago. As an American who loves his country and has done so longer than most other Americans in here, I am ashamed of their "radio-backwoodsman" attitudes. Such reflects poorly on us, yet so many remain stubbornly resolute in an America-first belief, a parochial attitude centering around themselves with little regard to this nation or the world. Fortunately for the rest of the radio world (much larger than amateurism) the USA's negotiations on that rest of the radio world activity is better and more liberal, willing to listen to other points of view. In here there is NO other view allowed if it displeases the old-time regulars. LHA / WMD |
#165
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes: "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , "Carl R. Stevenson" writes: "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article t, "Bill Sohl" writes: [snip] If all 83,000 Advanceds get a free upgrade to Extra, they'll have access to those choice slices and they'll probably increase the QRM level. So giving them a free upgrade *does* take something away from existing Extras. Jim, I'm willing to share the Extra sub-bands with a few others. Only a few? I'm willing to share them with as many as can pass the required tests. Particularly the *written* tests. Be careful ... your "not in my sandbox" motives are showing. You're the one willing to share with "a few".... You're squirming pretty hard and stretching pretty far with your attempt to twist my use of the words "a few others" into something you know [expletive deleted] well I didn't mean the way you're trying to spin it ... I'm not squirming or stretching, Carl. Just pointing out some facts. And I don't know what you intended to mean - I just know what you actually wrote. Frankly, I was very surprised that you support free upgrades without *written* testing for over 400,000 US hams And I do recall someone saying they'd **NEVER** support a reduction in the **WRITTEN** test requirements. I'm not ... Let's get this clear right now. ARRL proposes that all current Techs and Tech Pluses get a free upgrade to General with no additional testing. They also propose that all current Advanceds get a free upgrade to Extra with no additional testing. Do you support those free upgrades or not? If you support them, then by definition you are supoorting a reduction in the written test requirements for those licenses. Now you might argue that it's only a temporary or one-time reduction, but it's still a reduction. And since it affects over 400,000 hams, it's not a small matter. I'm supporting the establishment of a reasonable, viable entry level class with appropriate testing and restrictions. That's a completely different issue. And I support the "NewNovice" concept as well. In fact I proposed it here more than two years ago. Yet now I see that same person supporting free upgrades that involve not even having to take *written* tests... As Ed pointed out, the difference between the Tech and General written tests is not that large - it's a one-shot deal to "make things right" in a way where nobody loses privs, and as Bill pointed out, those Techs are already authorized 1500W at frequencies that the FCC and anyone with any knowledge of RF safety knows are more "risky" than HF. Then why should *anyone* have to take the General test? If the Tech written is adequate for General HF privs for some, why not for all? Why not simply dump the General question pools into the Extra, and use the current Tech pool for General? Like all those Advanced are on the air now. Give me a break. If they're not on the air, there's no reason to give them upgrades, is there? They'll get upgrades, even if they're SKs whose family hasn't sent in their license for cancellation - so what? Why not upgrade all existing hams except Novices to Extra, then? Because that doesn't comport with either the FCC's or the ARRL's (or my) desire to have some reason for folks to learn more to upgrade. How do you know what FCC wants? [snip] After careful consideration of Ed Hare's (personal, not ARRL) comments on the subject on eHam.net I'll ask again for a link to those comments. Go to eham.net (or use Google) .. I did. No luck. I don't have the URL direct to Ed's comments handy ... So there's a wonderful set of arguments out there, but you can't/won't point us to them.....That's not how you sell something, Carl. I (personally, not as NCI) think it makes the best sense as a one-shot deal as a way forward to a license/priv structure that makes sense for the future. Even though it means a one-shot reduction in written test requirements for over 400,000 hams. That's almost 60% of those licensed today. Again, the differences are not that great (in content - I know you have a BIG hangup about the number of questions on the test ...) I don;t have any hangups about the tests. I'm all for them. If the difference isn't so great, why require the General test at all? Here's another thought: Rules changes like that don't happen overnight - there's always a time delay between when a rules change is announced and the new rules take effect. So if FCC simply accepted ARRL's proposal tomorrow, they'd probably make it effective a few months hence. They could make a rules change effective 30 days from publication in the Federal Register ... Sure - but they don't. Look at the 2000 restructuring - announced in late December 1999, made effective April 15, 2000. More than 3-1/2 months - over 100 days - of prep time. So someone without a license could just take the Tech before the changes take place, and then ride the free upgrade bus to General. Give me a break ... What do you mean? That's exactly what a lot of people will do. Those with no license or an existing Novice will have an incentive to get a Tech before the rules change and ride the free upgrade bus to General. Those with Tech will have a *disincentive* to actually take (or study for) the General. Same for Advanceds and the Extra. your arguments are just plain lame How? Do you think people won't do this? and your "someone might get privs without taking a test with the same number of questions as I took" is REALLY showing. Nobody today can even take the tests I took. You couldn't pass the tests I took, Carl. The tests I took are not the issue. Free upgrades and reduction in written test requirements are the issue. I'd really like to see a link to Ed's arguments... Go find them - you know how to google. I'll look again but it's quite telling that you are being very unhelpful when asked for assistance 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#166
|
|||
|
|||
Len and the group,
reading here since a few weeks, i do agree with the sight of view from your standpoint. "Len Over 21" schrieb im Newsbeitrag ... In article , "Helmut" writes: How does the number of new hams since the changes compare to an equal period of time before the changes? Jim, it is not the difference in numbers, it is just the fact, that it happend. Give yourself the cream upon the cake and think positive about the new situation. Showing anger and agressiv language against those beeing a "victim" of the restructuring process doesn't bring any good to the ham family. Not in your country, and not around the world. And where we cannot do anything against it, it's not worth to argue about it. It is NOT negotiable. Helmut, what you say is true but the verbose regulars in this newsgroup are adamant "America-firsters," that is, what the Americans do is "best" and therefore that is good for the rest of the world. There is nothing wrong to be patriotic. But beeing patriotic does not mean, whats good for my countrie must be good for any other one. Amateur Radio is a global "institution". The rules for AR are set by an international entity. The IARU came out with the opinion years ago that morse code testing should be eliminated from an ITU requirement. The ARRL, a supposed leader of American amateur radio (with membership less than 25% of all American amateur licensees) was against it. They aren't really for eliminating any of it and remain in a middle position, neither for nor against it. ARRL tries to please too many, therefore there is no real consensus possible. It reduces to a simple phrasing for American radio amateurs: All must do as was done in the old days by the old- timers...because the old-timers imagine they are "the best." Are this oldtime-hams still use spark gap TX? Thats what they should do when argueing this way. The Americans never would have reached the moon, thinking this "old days" way. It is a sad situation for the entire world in my estimation, a stubborn opinion that belongs better in times of two centuries ago. As an American who loves his country and has done so longer than most other Americans in here, I am ashamed of their "radio-backwoodsman" attitudes. Such reflects poorly on us, yet so many remain stubbornly resolute in an America-first belief, a parochial attitude centering around themselves with little regard to this nation or the world. Fortunately for the rest of the radio world (much larger than amateurism) the USA's negotiations on that rest of the radio world activity is better and more liberal, willing to listen to other points of view. In here there is NO other view allowed if it displeases the old-time regulars. What makes me frightened is, theat there is no will to change ones way of thinking into a global range. The kind of "this is my fence, I dont care whats outside" mentality is not a hams mentality. It reminds me of the mentality of the ancient "southstates and yankee" disputes in the OLD US. It must be the genes, keeping fellow hams from going the right, the ham way. 73 de OE8SOQ Helmut LHA / WMD |
#167
|
|||
|
|||
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
"N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , "Carl R. Stevenson" writes: "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article t, "Bill Sohl" writes: [snip] If all 83,000 Advanceds get a free upgrade to Extra, they'll have access to those choice slices and they'll probably increase the QRM level. So giving them a free upgrade *does* take something away from existing Extras. Jim, I'm willing to share the Extra sub-bands with a few others. Only a few? I'm willing to share them with as many as can pass the required tests. Particularly the *written* tests. Be careful ... your "not in my sandbox" motives are showing. You're the one willing to share with "a few".... You're squirming pretty hard and stretching pretty far with your attempt to twist my use of the words "a few others" into something you know damned well I didn't mean the way you're trying to spin it ... And I do recall someone saying they'd **NEVER** support a reduction in the **WRITTEN** test requirements. I'm not ... I'm supporting the establishment of a reasonable, viable entry level class with appropriate testing and restrictions. Speaking of spin! Yet now I see that same person supporting free upgrades that involve not even having to take *written* tests... As Ed pointed out, the difference between the Tech and General written tests is not that large - it's a one-shot deal to "make things right" in a way where nobody loses privs, and as Bill pointed out, those Techs are already authorized 1500W at frequencies that the FCC and anyone with any knowledge of RF safety knows are more "risky" than HF. More spin. Mistake number one is that this doesn't "make things right". Mistake number two is assuming that this will be a one shot deal. What is the rationale for the return to more stringent requirements after the mass upgrade? That will be looked at as a clear disincentive to adding new hams after the "upgrade" process. Like all those Advanced are on the air now. Give me a break. If they're not on the air, there's no reason to give them upgrades, is there? They'll get upgrades, even if they're SKs whose family hasn't sent in their license for cancellation - so what? Why not upgrade all existing hams except Novices to Extra, then? Because that doesn't comport with either the FCC's or the ARRL's (or my) desire to have some reason for folks to learn more to upgrade. How are you going to counter the argument that the requirements are suddenly increased after "making things right"? If a person that that takes the Technician test today is qualified to be on HF, then they are equally as qualified the day after things are "made right". The only way that this can even remotely be "fair" would be to make the post restructuring test requirements for the entry level license much easier. But you'll never support that will you? After careful consideration of Ed Hare's (personal, not ARRL) comments on the subject on eHam.net I'll ask again for a link to those comments. Go to eham.net (or use Google) ... I don't have the URL direct to Ed's comments handy ... I've used both, and haven't found the comments. I (personally, not as NCI) think it makes the best sense as a one-shot deal as a way forward to a license/priv structure that makes sense for the future. Even though it means a one-shot reduction in written test requirements for over 400,000 hams. That's almost 60% of those licensed today. Again, the differences are not that great (in content - I know you have a BIG hangup about the number of questions on the test ...) Here's another thought: Rules changes like that don't happen overnight - there's always a time delay between when a rules change is announced and the new rules take effect. So if FCC simply accepted ARRL's proposal tomorrow, they'd probably make it effective a few months hence. They could make a rules change effective 30 days from publication in the Federal Register ... So someone without a license could just take the Tech before the changes take place, and then ride the free upgrade bus to General. Give me a break ... your arguments are just plain lame and your "someone might get privs without taking a test with the same number of questions as I took" is REALLY showing. Sorry, Carl! The arguments aren't lame. I'd really like to see a link to Ed's arguments... Go find them - you know how to google. Give us a break here Carl! Both of us have tried, and they seem to be hidden in there. Perhaps they were removed? - Mike KB3EIA - |
#170
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote: "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , "Carl R. Stevenson" writes: "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article t, "Bill Sohl" writes: [snip] If all 83,000 Advanceds get a free upgrade to Extra, they'll have access to those choice slices and they'll probably increase the QRM level. So giving them a free upgrade *does* take something away from existing Extras. Jim, I'm willing to share the Extra sub-bands with a few others. Only a few? I'm willing to share them with as many as can pass the required tests. Particularly the *written* tests. Be careful ... your "not in my sandbox" motives are showing. You're the one willing to share with "a few".... You're squirming pretty hard and stretching pretty far with your attempt to twist my use of the words "a few others" into something you know damned well I didn't mean the way you're trying to spin it ... And I do recall someone saying they'd **NEVER** support a reduction in the **WRITTEN** test requirements. I'm not ... I'm supporting the establishment of a reasonable, viable entry level class with appropriate testing and restrictions. Speaking of spin! By whom? ;-) As I see it, the ARRL proposal has five distinct parts: 1) A revised entry level license (I call it the "NewNovice" to differentiate it from existing license classes). This new class would have different requirements *and* different privileges than the current entry-level license (Technician). It would essentially be a reworking of the old Novice license and would require a new question pool. 2) Putting most of the Tech test stuff into a new revised General test (because there won't be any more Tech test). 3) Removal of the code test requirement from all but the Extra. 4) Upgrading all existing Techs and Tech Pluses to General 5) Upgrading all existing Advanceds to Extra. I think 1) and 2) are a very good ideas Yet now I see that same person supporting free upgrades that involve not even having to take *written* tests... As Ed pointed out, the difference between the Tech and General written tests is not that large - it's a one-shot deal to "make things right" in a way where nobody loses privs, and as Bill pointed out, those Techs are already authorized 1500W at frequencies that the FCC and anyone with any knowledge of RF safety knows are more "risky" than HF. More spin. Mistake number one is that this doesn't "make things right". Mistake number two is assuming that this will be a one shot deal. It will be, because after it's done there won't be any more Techs or Tech Pluses. Or Advanceds. They'll all be Generals or Extras. No new ones to be issued. What is the rationale for the return to more stringent requirements after the mass upgrade? Bingo! Ham A got his General by passing the Tech and riding the free upgrade bus. Ham B has to pass the "NewNovice" (which is easier than the Tech) but also the revised General (which is harder than the existing General). Explain to Ham B why she has to meet higher requirements than Ham A for the same privileges. (I wanna be there when that is explained!) That will be looked at as a clear disincentive to adding new hams after the "upgrade" process. Exactly. Like all those Advanced are on the air now. Give me a break. If they're not on the air, there's no reason to give them upgrades, is there? They'll get upgrades, even if they're SKs whose family hasn't sent in their license for cancellation - so what? Why not upgrade all existing hams except Novices to Extra, then? Because that doesn't comport with either the FCC's or the ARRL's (or my) desire to have some reason for folks to learn more to upgrade. How are you going to counter the argument that the requirements are suddenly increased after "making things right"? bwaahaahaa If a person that that takes the Technician test today is qualified to be on HF, then they are equally as qualified the day after things are "made right". No more Tech tests will be offered after the Great Giveaway. The only way that this can even remotely be "fair" would be to make the post restructuring test requirements for the entry level license much easier. That's part of the plan. But you'll never support that will you? The privileges of the entry level license will be changed to match the reduced written exam requirements. After careful consideration of Ed Hare's (personal, not ARRL) comments on the subject on eHam.net I'll ask again for a link to those comments. Go to eham.net (or use Google) ... I don't have the URL direct to Ed's comments handy ... I've used both, and haven't found the comments. Nor I. So I emailed W1RFI and got a nice reply. I don't agree with his logic but it was good to hear from him. No, I won't repost private email here. I (personally, not as NCI) think it makes the best sense as a one-shot deal as a way forward to a license/priv structure that makes sense for the future. Even though it means a one-shot reduction in written test requirements for over 400,000 hams. That's almost 60% of those licensed today. Again, the differences are not that great (in content - I know you have a BIG hangup about the number of questions on the test ...) More spin... Here's another thought: Rules changes like that don't happen overnight - there's always a time delay between when a rules change is announced and the new rules take effect. So if FCC simply accepted ARRL's proposal tomorrow, they'd probably make it effective a few months hence. They could make a rules change effective 30 days from publication in the Federal Register ... So someone without a license could just take the Tech before the changes take place, and then ride the free upgrade bus to General. Give me a break ... your arguments are just plain lame and your "someone might get privs without taking a test with the same number of questions as I took" is REALLY showing. Sorry, Carl! The arguments aren't lame. Exactly. I'd really like to see a link to Ed's arguments... Go find them - you know how to google. Give us a break here Carl! Both of us have tried, and they seem to be hidden in there. Perhaps they were removed? I doubt they were removed, but perhaps I will paraphrase them in a future post. But as of now, Carl has not made a convincing case for free upgrades. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions | Dx | |||
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions | General | |||
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions | Dx | |||
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1412 Â September 3, 2004 | General | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1412  September 3, 2004 | Dx |