Bill Sohl wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Bill Sohl wrote:


"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...


William wrote:


We've recently seen NCI criticized for commenting on restructuring
proposals not directly related to the Morse and Farnsworth Exam issue.

My concerns are not the NCI has an official position. It is that we
have been told that their *only* agenda was the elimination of the Morse
code test.


THE agenda of NCI is elimination of code testing.
NCI has recently received member input asking
NCI to take a role in the ARRL petition and as a
result, NCI conducted a member survey. Subsequent to
that initial survey, NCVEC petition became known and
NCI conducted another survey on the ARRL vs NCVEC
differences.

I don't doubt that, Bill. But it is a change from what we've been told
here.


Nevertheless, it is a change driven by membership, not Board
of Director fiat.

Better get on that constitution, pronto!


Of course, you could argue that the petitions are related to the
elimination of the code test, because it is one of the things being
eliminated. But all the rest is tretching the purpose IMO.

Another thing is that So Many Times, we have been told about the
difference between NCI policy and private opinion.

Whatever the "official" NCI position will be,
it will not be "private" opinion.

+ 50 cents and I'll have a down paymenty on a cup of coffee.


In addition, some prominent members are on record that they would never
support reduction in the written qualifications, and now they do.

Neither ARRL nor NCVEC proposes any lowering of written
qualifications for General or Extra from what I have seen.

Explain in a manner that I won't bust a gut laughing how the upgrade of
most amateurs from Technician to General is not a lowering of the
written requirements.


You are free to bust a gut or whatever...but the reality still is
that a "one-time' upgrade is NOT an overall or permant
licensing requirement change.

Your reality is much different than mine.


You can certainly argue that the General test is not in itself reduced.
But that won't matter, because at that time MOST General level hams will
not have taken the General test.


And just what will that end up meaning to the future?

Nothing stands still, Bill. The idea of the technically adroit Amateur
radio crowd has been taking a beating lately, and the winners are pretty
full of themselves at the moment. We've gone from "simply" eliminating
the Morse code test to giving the majority of hams an untested-for
upgrade. This is plenty uncomfortable for people like me, that happen to
like the lost idea of technically savvy hams.


You can call it an adjustement. The adjustment is a lowering of the
level required to become a General.

A significant suspension of disbelief is required here.


Such is life.

Not for me it isn't. Is this an admission that you have reconciled the
non-tested upgrade via the suspension of disbelief route?

If they were to have said "We are in favor of elimination of Element
one and a reduction of qualifications for the licenses", I would have
disagreed, but I can respect the position.

I don't understand the "reduction in qualifications" argument
you claim.

Bill, I know you are a smart guy. Obtuseness doesn't suit you.


Your inability to understand the difference between a "one-time"
upgrade and a permanent change can also be considered obtuse.

Perhaps. I can respect the idea that an adjustment might be warranted
by circumstances. I can respect the idea that the General test is too
hard. (note that I would disagree) But the idea that it is not a free
upgrade for most hams and that since it is a supposed "one time" thing,
it *isn't* a lowering of standards is doublethink.

- Mike KB3EIA -