"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ...
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

The power limits make sense.

Do you support not teaching newcomers about RF safety? I believe they
should be, and as long as they know the fundamentals, they should have
the same power privileges as the rest of us.

I'll say right out that not teaching new people the fundamentals of RF
and electrical safety is not very responsible.

The power limit is about RF exposure and the need to do the evaluations.
This is something that I think can reasonably be considered beyond the
"beginner" level, as it requires a foundation in a number of areas.

We can't expect the newcomer to learn EVERYTHING before then
can get on the air ... compare the Novice tests of years past with their
small number of questions and study guides with a dozen or less pages
to "Now You're Talking," which contains 200-some pages and it's clear
that "the bar" for entry has increased greatly from the entry level tests
that
I and many others took those many years ago ... the proposal is not a
"dumbing down" for the entry level ... it's an attempt to rationalize
beginner level tests and beginner level privileges, while providing an
incentive
(gee, I hate to use that word, since the incentive used to be keyed to Morse
proficiency more than anything else) to learn and advance.

[snipped the rest where we seem to be in fundamental agreement]

73,
Carl - wk3c

I agree with making priveleges granted keyed to tested knowledge.
Arbitrary requirements were always an embarassment to try to justify.
I felt so sorry for all the feeble attempts of the PCTA to try to do
so.

bb