"Dee D. Flint" wrote in
:


"Alun" wrote in message
...
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in
:

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for
all? From: Alun
Date: 5/9/2004 8:12 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

I applied to be a counselor for the radio merit badge in boy scouts
a couple of months ago, but haven't heard anything back yet. The
troop leader is more interested in finding someone for the computer
badge.

From what I read in the papaers, it's getting harder and harder
for the
Scouts to find leaders who want to be leaders and not molesters....

PS: The requirement for a CW QSO has been dropped from the badge,
which makes it more practical for me to do it!

Examiners have always had it at thier discretion to send
random letters
and check for character count. In the long run, I bet more folks
have passed the test because it WAS a "QSO" since they could go back
and fill in missing letters....ITS N T T AT ARD TO FI L IN
THE BL NKS ON E YOU BACK U AN LOOK AT W T YOU WR TE DO N.

73

Steve, K4YZ








I think maybe you are a bit confused, so I guess I need to explain a
little more. The radio merit badge used to require the boys to
participate in 2 CW QSOs and 1 phone QSO. Now that requirement is just
for 1 QSO in any mode. Some phone ops used to teach the badge and do
CW QSOs by computer, which had the added advantage that the boys could
see what was being said, whilst others used to get a CW op to
participate (the counselor tests the boys, but anyone can provide the
instruction/demos).

The QSO requirement is only one from a long list, and can be satisfied
by boys with a ham licence if they submit 5 QSL cards from 3 call
districts. The boys who are not hams (obviously the vast majority)
just have to sit in on a QSO instead.

One of the other requirements is to draw a frequency chart, and there
are very specific rules about what it has to show. The funny thing is,
the example in the book doesn't comply. It was done by the ARRL, but I
don't think it was created specially for the purpose. I think it was
just something that already existed that they let the boy scouts use.
One of the questions I am contemplating is whether I should give
credit for copying it, or whether they should have to do it properly?

73 de Alun, N3KIP

I'd say make them do the chart by the rules of the merit badge.
There's very little to be learned just by copying a pre-existing chart.
Of course they should be allowed to use the ARRL one (and others) as
an information resource.

In the real world of work, one frequently has to reformat information
to meet customer formatting requirements.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



That's pretty much what I was thinking. I just wanted to see if others
would agree. The league's chart in the scout merit badge book covers a
slightly wrong frequency range, and it doesn't really show the required 8
services. At least, it sort of does, but it mixes some services together
while separating some users that are part of the same service.

I was wondering if I was being too pedantic, but I tend to think that maybe
it is best to ignore that chart and show them one that is more correct. I
imagine the FCC chart is super correct There again, were the scouts really
meaning to imply the proper definition of a 'service' in their
requirements? Maybe they had something vaguer in mind?

Alun wrote in message . ..
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in
:

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Alun
Date: 5/8/2004 9:30 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

That would be me. Not just tapes, in fact I didn't find tapes to be a
good method of learning, but I've never attached a key to a rig. What
was the point of me learning 20wpm?

Uhhhhhhhhhh....passing Element 1C...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ


So let me rephrase that. Why should I have had to pass 1C to get the bottom
ends of the phone subbands?

Because that's what Steve and Jim had to do.

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message nk.net...
"William" wrote in message
om...

Dansan said: " I don't know where its from but I am hearing a lot
more phone activity in the CW bands of late. And not speaking
Spanish. English. But who knows. "

Do you know what the prefix for Canada is?

Gee, Duhhhhhhhhhh, let the think.......Uh......maybe it's a VE or a VA
or some other strange letters depending what part of a seal arse you are
celebrating that month. Sound right?

Wow. You're a quick study.

And yes I do know that Canada is allowed to operate in what the US calls the
'CW Segements'. And that has what to do with what I said?

Some citizens of Canada speak English, and some even operate phone in
our CW subband while speaking English.

I don't know how much more related it can get to what you said. Any
ideas?

"Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord " wrote in message
...
Hows that? Most of the people doing that stupitidy are multiple guess
receive only cw test takers

Do you have some proof?

Learning code does not make the quality of the operator! Look at David
Castle,
look at ex-WB2OTK, Roger Wiseman, etc.

Need I say more??


Lloyd Davies - Time Lord and Talk show host
"On the Domestic Front"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/domesticfront/

Gotta admit you got me on that one.

Dan/W4NTI

Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Alun
Date: 5/9/2004 8:12 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


I applied to be a counselor for the radio merit badge in boy scouts a
couple of months ago, but haven't heard anything back yet. The troop leader
is more interested in finding someone for the computer badge.


From what I read in the papaers, it's getting harder and harder for the
Scouts to find leaders who want to be leaders and not molesters....

It's an unfortunate situation. I've worked with kids before, and have
gone through the pertinent background checks. In most respects, it's no
big deal.

It is getting harder to find people that will voluntarily go through
such things anymore though.

Think of it. You could be a perfectly normal person, but one dumb
clerical error could not only keep you from coaching your kid or being a
merit badge counselor, but ruin your entire life! Its not likely to
happen, but.....


It's harder to get people to help period!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 5/9/2004 9:21 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:

From what I read in the papaers, it's getting harder and harder for
the
Scouts to find leaders who want to be leaders and not molesters....

It's an unfortunate situation. I've worked with kids before, and have
gone through the pertinent background checks. In most respects, it's no
big deal.

Yep.

CAP instituted it's background check program over 15 years ago and it's
worked well.

It is getting harder to find people that will voluntarily go through
such things anymore though.

All they have to do for us is go to the local SO or PD and get the prints
done. Here in Franklin County, TN, the local SO will do it for free.

Think of it. You could be a perfectly normal person, but one dumb
clerical error could not only keep you from coaching your kid or being a
merit badge counselor, but ruin your entire life! Its not likely to
happen, but.....

My concern is what people today call "child abuse"...

We see "abuse" in the ER all the time that is nothing of the sort...It's
estranged parents arguing over who's the better parent or trying to use Junior
as a pawn in thier on-going domestic disputes...Most of the time the "charges"
are on the person who thought to bring charges second...

The BIG problem is getting that crap cleared off...Even if no actual
charges are substantiated, there's always a record of "allegations" that are
out there...The "innocent until proven guilty" thing sounds good as the
disclaimer on an episode of "COPS", but unfortunately is not necessarrily a
fact of life.

It's harder to get people to help period!

Yep. "Everybody" wants "Somebody" to "do it", but "Nobody" has the time to
do it.

73

Steve, K4YZ

On 9 May 2004 13:03:29 GMT, Alun wrote:

Firstly, I think the reason they didn't go for a memorandum report and
order is more mundane. They don't care about any catfight because they
don't care about amateur radio, period.

The "they" is really one individual, the specialist who has to
start the ball rolling by drafting the new rules and the discussion
and justification therefor, and AFAIK the current incumbent in that
slot is an active amateur. After that, his job is to sell it up the
ladder, where ham radio is on the bottom of the totem pole, and he
may see that there is a barrier upstream of him and may be doing
nothing because of that. Were it me, I'd have the rules and the
text all ready to go in my wordprocessor files by now.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

"Welcome To The Monkey House" ...




So how many bananas will this require? :-)

"Phil Kane" wrote in
et:

On 9 May 2004 13:03:29 GMT, Alun wrote:

Firstly, I think the reason they didn't go for a memorandum report and
order is more mundane. They don't care about any catfight because they
don't care about amateur radio, period.

The "they" is really one individual, the specialist who has to
start the ball rolling by drafting the new rules and the discussion
and justification therefor, and AFAIK the current incumbent in that
slot is an active amateur. After that, his job is to sell it up the
ladder, where ham radio is on the bottom of the totem pole, and he
may see that there is a barrier upstream of him and may be doing
nothing because of that. Were it me, I'd have the rules and the
text all ready to go in my wordprocessor files by now.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane




I knew it was one person, but didn't know he was a ham. I still don't think
the FCC as a whole gives a fig for ham radio.

(Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord ) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord ) writes:

It is already headed that way. Ummmm K1MAN? 14.313? 75 meters?

What mode are those folks using for their alleged violations? It isn't
Morse Code!


Yes man I know that, but does'nt that blow a hole for those folks who
code to
stay as a filter?

Not really.

No test can be a perfect filter that somehow guarantees perfect
behavior by everyone who passes it. That doesn't mean we don't need
testing.

Consider this plain, simple fact: All of those violators mentioned
above allegedly passed *written* tests which covered the rules,
regulations and operating practices. In fact most of them passed
several written tests. Yet those tests have not prevented them from
running afoul of the regulations. Thus, the written exams are not a
"filter" either, even though they deal directly with the rules and
regs.

So, should we just dump the written tests because they're not a
perfect filter?

73 de Jim, N2EY