Subject: FCC Morse testing at 16 and 20 WPM
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 7/20/2004 1:43 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

I'll cut Len a break...(SNIP)

Funny that Robert has always addressed Lennie Anderson as "Len" and has
never, to my recollection, misaddressed or otherwise refered to Lennie as
anything OTHER than his prefered given name.

So...how does Lennie treat Robert...?!?!

Sorry, Bobbie, that got away again...

Thanks, Lennie, for once again (three times this week alone!) proving my
assertion that you are a two-faced lying scumbag.

Not that I had any doubts.

Putz.

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: FCC Morse testing at 16 and 20 WPM
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 7/20/2004 1:43 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

Won't matter. When Len hits 20 years in the amateur service, these
guys will have 50. Len will still be "wet behind the ears."

True that he won't have the 50 years experience, but even just a few
weeks of operating time on the bands will dry out behind his ears...

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!

Congratulations. You've just won the "IE" award, Bobbie.

"Dry out behind the ears?!?"

The "wet behind the ears" comment was attributable to your Padawan
scumbag, Brian Burke. Robert was expressing confidence in your abilites to be
an effective Amateur operator.

And I see you still can't being yourself to treat another person with the
same respect he's treated you with. Just have to find some shard you can use
to cut into someone without any thought as to the consequences.

In this case the "consequence" was that YOU again proved that you ARE the
lying, uncivil scumbag I have asserted you to be.

S C U M B A G. Nickle says Mrs Lennie sleeps with a smear of Ben-Gay
under her nose to let her get over the stench.

Steve, K4YZ

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

N2EY wrote:
In article et, "Bill
writes:

A different point altogether, Jim! A person will learn MUCH more by
reading good reference material.

That's the point, exactly.

Just as an example from the Question
pool vs boo larnin' thread I just started, I learned that Fessenden
received an optical interrupter made by a fellow named Brashear. Now
there is a piece of synchronicity! Brashear was a telescope maker of
great renown at that time. I didn't see that tidbit in any of the
history of telescopes.

I knew about the high speed interrupter but not the tie-in with telescopes.

But that isn't what they are trying to teach us in electronics. somone
somwhere has to decide what question to ask on the test.

That's what the Question Pool Committee (QPC) does.

This isn't a criticism of you or Mike or anyone who takes the tests today.
It's
just a point about the testing methods used. Not that they're going to
change any time soon.

I certainly didn't take it as such. Especially since I take the two as
a functional equivalent! 8^)

Once in a while I take an online practice test just for grins. Usually I
don't
use scratch paper or a calculator, just to make it more of a sporting
course. Ten minutes is about my speed, too, unless I push it.

Sure - they are kind of fun, and a good way to keep up with some of the
dryer details of regulation. The more enjoyable stuff masks the boring
stuff.

It's all good stuff.


Point is, if you pass the test but don;t have the 9000 hours you aren't an
electrician either.

True, but No similar "time in grade" applies to ham licensing.

It's not just time in grade but actual supervised work experience. Back in
the
old days of a 2 year wait for Extra, a ham could just toss the General
license
in a drawer and do nothing for 2 years, yet the "experience" would still
count.

We aren't likely to see such experience requirements reinstated either,
IMHO.

Too bad, that!

Yes, but why fret?

The reason we won't see them is that it adds to the admin workload, because
there would be no multistep upgrades. *Every* upgrade would be a VE visit and
an FCC transaction.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

I'll cut Len a break in that if he does go for testing and
fails, he doesn't have to tell anyone. But he has to
go to the next session and try again. Only when he passes
does he have to tell us. And he doesn't have to get his
extra in one sitting...

Yes I do. I HAVE to get an "extra out of the box!"

Only because you shot off your mouth in a fit of braggadocio.

Once posted in here, such a thing will hang on for the LIFE
of the sayer. It's like Posting Bans!

No, it isn't. It's like having your words come back to bite you in the
ass after you've issued a foolish boast.

I haven't taken my first amateur test yet.

No kidding!

... [took my last
commercial operator's test in front of the FCC in Chicago in
1956].

Irrelevant.

Maybe I'm not up to it?

Maybe not.

After all, it's such a Ruff and Tuff
session...

It isn't the Ruff or the Tuff. It's getting Len off of his Duff.

...and I'm told there's a wash-out rate that is high.
Will there be any blood shed? Injuries during the test? Do
the VEC have standard obstacle courses or they individual?

All of this is just a tap dance to lead us away from your boastful
claim, right?

Will my amateur service uniform be fitted right there if I pass?
Will there be a parade ceremony for all who pass later? Can
I get a commemorative photo taken if I pass? Can my wife
attend the ceremony? Friends? Neighbors?

You're another Gregory Hines.

Is there a clergyman there at the test session for counseling
all who fail? [hope it's a good Lutheran pastor] Will there be
a weapons search before a test session? Can't have anyone
despondent failure offing themselves.

BIG EVENT! Most important day of anyone's life!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!

Sorry, Bobbie, that got away again... :-)

Always go for the diminuitive name tactic to make you appear superior,
grizzled old timer.

Open bands, old timer, wipe the back of those very wet ears...

Excuse me, Leonard. He already HAS an amateur ticket.

LHA / WMD

Gotta love that "Weapons of Mass Distraction" sig.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

Won't matter. When Len hits 20 years in the amateur service, these
guys will have 50. Len will still be "wet behind the ears."

True that he won't have the 50 years experience, but even just a few
weeks of operating time on the bands will dry out behind his ears...

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!

Congratulations. You've just won the "IE" award, Bobbie. :-)

You've certainly offered amusement to Bobbie, Davey, Jimmie, Brianie,
Stevie and others, Putzie.

"Dry out behind the ears?!?"

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!

First time I strapped on an AN/PRC-8 it wasn't raining.

What amateur call were you using?

We were out
in the field though and I recall it was humid. Running around and
practicing sojer in da woods makes one sweat a bit. While I don't
recall exactly the personal moisture condition, I'm sure that I was
a bit wet behind the ears then. In 1954. PRC-8 was a manpack
VHF radio.

Irrelevant.

Piece of cake to use. Nice handset. Can fit under the old steel
helmet. Lots of audio output so one can hear even though there
are lots of noises of an explosive sound around.

All that during hot action in 1954, huh?

Of course, I have to admit that military radio procedure isn't NEAR
the life and death, exacting protocol demands of amateur radio!

You've got it partially right. Military radio procedure isn't really
near amateur radio's.

Nosir, hardly anything as ruff and tuff as ham raddio. Must be sheer
hell during contests, ey? Lots of casualties? Must be.

You'll find out all about it after you've obtained a license, have some
experience under your belt and are dry behind your ears.

Of course it's up to him to actually go out and do it...

Riiiiiiight. :-)

Right.

What a wonderful way to get new radio amateurs. Goad them into
taking The Test. Shame them. Lash with the Whip!

All of that goading over the course of your self-declared several
decades interest in amateur radio must have taken a toll. We know,
Len. You'll nail that "Extra right out of the box" when you're good and
ready. We'll try and be patient with you.

Have you brought that to the attention of the ARRL? I'm sure they
will want good suggestions on enlarging the ham ranks.

I'm sure that adding you will really swell the ranks.

Do I get a nice medal if I take a test? I've been thinking about
using an empty shoe box to collect medals in so's I can be Ruff
and Tuff in da future. :-)

No medals, Len. You'll have to come up with alternative
motivation--like being able to wipe the egg off your face after your
"big brag".


Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

Len, just get the damm license.

Just for the purpose of settling a very few newsgrope irregulars
who are irritated by controversy? :-)

No, Len, to satisfy your several decades of self-declared interest in
amateur radio and to be able to hold your head up after your "Extra
right out of the box" boast.

Not a good reason "for the service!" :-)

It ain't that hard.

I'm aware of that. So is anyone in the public who cares to look.

:-)

Don't just read about it, Len. Experience it first hand.

Hell even 5wpm.

So, learning a useless skill is considered "important?"

If you want an HF amateur license, it is considered important. You
could always tackle a code free ticket though.

I've never had to learn or use any manual telegraphy in 51 years of
actual communicating on HF.

Then again, you've never held an amateur radio license.

Morse code skill is an anachronism.

Sure it is, Leonard. So is AM. So is SSB. So is baudot RTTY.

Only amateurs use it with any
regularity and then those are only a few amateurs, a minority.

Only a few amateurs using morse? You're as wrong about that as you were
about Fessenden.

I did it and I'm no good at sort of "motor skill" kind of thing.

Not a good reason for me to waste my time trying to re-enact
the past.

You have to get out more. Thousands and thousands of radio amateurs use
morse in the present.

Then get on the air some.

Been there, done that, from LF on up to microwaves.

Not as a radio amateur, you haven't.

Did it earlier this year using an SGC SG-2020 on HF. :-)
[also late last year, same rig...both times very legal!]

:-) :-) :-)

Then you can speak with some creditability
here and other forums on ham radio.

Impossible! "Those without an amateur license have zero-point-
zero experience, don't know nuthin, etc., etc., etc., etc." :-)

My friend Jack has a license and experience. You don't know Jack.

Ham radio works by different principles than all other radios.
That's what I'm told. I don't believe them, but lots of hams do.

Operating principles are not the sum total of amateur radio.

As far as morseodism is concerned, I'm an atheist. I don't
worship at the Church of St. Hiram. Put away your collection
plate and Him books.

I get it. Because you don't find anything in which to believe, the rest
of us aren't supposed to take part for fear of offending you. How very
PC.

Dave K8MN

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , (Stevie
Stalker, Exxtra Ethnic Cleanser, swallowed his Fleet Kit and barfed
up the following shortie) :

Subject: FCC Morse testing at 16 and 20 WPM
From: (William)
Date: 7/19/2004 6:04 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Won't matter. When Len hits 20 years in the amateur service, these
guys will have 50. Len will still be "wet behind the ears." The
license just doesn't matter with these guys - it's merely their excuse
to act like idiots.

More excuses.

Yes, more excuses for the olde-tyme hamme raddio licensees
to vent their personal frustrations by finding faults (that done exist)
in others who have far more experience than they do in radio.

Not just "more experience" but "far more experience".

Right now I've got 51 years of HF radio "experience." That's longer
than you or many others have existed. shrug

And when you were in your twenties, thirties, forties and fifties there
existed on the planet those with far more HF radio experience than
you. After your passing from this mortal plane, others will catch up
with your experience or surpass it. Your experience will have stopped
cold and theirs will go on. Most of those folks will exist after you
have ceased to exist. That's just the way life works.

Apparently, to the hamateur lifestylers, that "doesn't count." It wasn't
done with the Blessed and Sacred Amateur License, under "official"
league rules, done with absolutely right and proper protocol, all
marching in the ranks carrying the Newingtonian banner held high.

You've gotten all tangled up. There's no Blessed and Sacred or any of
those other things. There are those with amateur radio licenses and
there are those without. You've declared an interest. You've posted
here for about nine years. You've not taken a single step toward
obtaining an amateur radio license.

U.S. amateur radio is propagandized as a fun activity. From the way
some insist on turning it into an Armed Militia or corps-thinking
cannon fodder, that's not a good picture to paint. But, it IS a nice
paint-by-numbers kit, all designed for easy painting by others...which
they dive into, thinking they come up with a finished product equivalent
to the Old Masters. :-)

Well, Old Master, the cannon fodder, Armed Militia, paint-by-numbers
stuff just marks you as a crackpot non-participant in amateur radio with
a newsgroup fetish.

Dave K8MN

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

By whom?

What "whom?"

You-m ;-)

Living in the past again, I see....

No.

Yes.

For tomorrow. Been in the past.

The past is all you talk about, Len.

Then he shouldn't be making the rules for it...right?

RIGHT! :-)

Then neither should *you* be making the rules for amateur radio - right? ;-)
;-)

What did you do back then, Len?

Already told you.

No, you told us where you were, not what you did.

How is it wrong?

Anything said against your opinions is automatically WRONG.

No, it isn't. You're wrong about that! ;-) ;-) ;-)

MOS 281.6 - Microwave Radio Relay Operations and Service
Supervisor plus brevet MOSs of Fixed Station Transmitter
Operations and Service, Carrier Systems Operations and
Service. [the "point-6" in that old MOS numbering is the
indicator of supervisory duties which I had as an E-5 S/Sgt]
1953 to 1956. "Three up and one down" after just 2 1/2
years. Earned.

So? That was your *job*, wasn't it, Len?

Assignment. [get with military nomenclature...]

Job.

What's interesting is that you don;t mention that there were more than 700
*other* people at ADA when you were there...

Yes, at Transmitters (Camp Tomlinson), Receivers (Camp Owada),
Control, Tape Relay at Chuo Kogyo (later inside North Camp Drake).

700 people is a lot of people.

Eugene Rosenbaum was one of the Transmitters assignees. I've
mentioned him before, also SFC Don Ross (Maintenance NCO,
had all commercial and top ham licenses of that time), Capt William
P. Boss, OIC (Officer In Charge) of Transmitters (ham license).
Gene has a ham license, lives in Long Island, NY, he and wife just
got back from a European tour.

I don't know any of those people. You mention them once or twice, and your
exploits at ADA about once a day on average.

I don't mention the photographic
detachment either (for about two decades later the photo people
were also categorized as part of Signal Corps). Photo wasn't
involved in radio communications.

700 people is a lot of people.

So...did you work at all those places or just talk about them?

Yes, I worked IN and AT all those things.

And how does that make you more qualified than others to determine amateur
radio policy?

Are you the new
security chief of the personnel department? Feel free to write all
those companies and check up. Here's a bird...I flip it to you...

Nice *professional* behavior.....

Were you in sole charge, or part of a much larger team?

I never worked in a shoe company, "in charge of soles."

Pbthbthbth...

Very grown-up of you, Len.

What company does Rev. Jim work for?

Who is "Rev. Jim"?

With over 700 people, when you were there. Yet you don't mention the team,
just yourself. Interesting, very interesting.

About 700 in the Batalion at four different sites and with three different
billets. I've RE-mentioned the people I mentioned before; see above.
I've also mentioned Jim Brendage, a civilian engineer (DAC) whom I've
been in contact with much later (retired, lives in CA) plus some USAF
people. USAF took over responsibility of the ADA facilities in 1963 as
part of Army downsizing in Central Honshu. I could mention lots of
others but they don't have the beloved ham license yet continued to
operate and maintain facilities without it or any need for morsemanship.

How is that in any way significant to amateur radio policy in 2004?

I find it supremely interesting that you don't know a damn thing about
HF communications other than ham radio and what you are spoon-
fed by QST and the league.

You're simply wrong about that, Len. I know quite a bit about HF radio
communications - and the ARRL is just one information source.

I recall many exchanges between you and K8MN (a career State Department
employee) in which you did not accept his explanation of Morse Code use in
State Department radio communications. He was there, you weren't, yet you don't
accept his statements simply because they proved you wrong on some minor point
or other. As if you knew more than he about State Department HF communications.
Riiight!

Then there's the infamous "sphincter post" of yours, where you ranted over a
true story by a USCG (that's a branch of the US military) radio operator who
was *assigned* to operate Morse Code from a shore station. Not in the 1930s but
many decades later. It really, reallly bothered you that somebody in
"professional" "big-time" radio actually had true stories to tell about Morse
Code on the air.

Now you'll probably dismiss all this as "living in the past" and such, but you
don't get a clean slate today after such behavior. You've never disowned any of
those rants and insults.

How is that relevant to amateur radio?

Nothing amateurish about it.

Then it's not relevant, and you're just spouting off because you don't have any
relevant qualifications.

You're not the FCC, Len.

You are not the FCC either. So?

So don't act like you know better than others what amateur radio policy and
regulations should be.

Actually, there are a few hams at FCC, making the rules and recommendations
about those rules.

Not required in their Statement of Work. Didn't you read yours?

My what? ;-)

More importantly, those folks are professional regulatory people. You're
not.

You sure as hell aren't a "professional regulator!" You're just a
wanna-be regulator.

That's not me, Len. I'm just a radio amateur. You're not.

Riiiiiight...keep the beepers in charge of hum raddio...those mighty
macho morsemen keeping the airwaves pristine with the musick of
morse as they did in the old, old days. Archaic Radio Service, the
ARS of yeasteryear! [all rise...]

Sounds like you are jealous, Len.

Sounds like you've got NO sense of humor when you be tweaked.

I was right - you're jealous. Obviously very jealous.

Poor baby. A wanna-be regulator and can't control your steam.

I'm not the one calling people names or telling them to shut up. You are.

Just a spectator.

No. One of a team, several teams. Doing work. Making things
happen. Making a bit of money, too.

Is that your only criteria - money? If I have more money than you, or am paid
more money, does that mean I'm right and you're wrong?

Just another groundpounder. Heck, even I can use the lingo. But you keep
reliving the past, leaving out the important details.

"Groundpounder?" That's a military term. You never served.

So? You're not a radio amateur.

Try not to be a wanna-be sojer too. Not nice.

I'm not a wanna-be. You are ;-)

Let's see...a fella who doesn't know squat about military comms
comes in here all filthy-languaged with sexual inuendo and tells
all "I never did what I said I did."

That's not me.

I then describe (again) what I did
and where, both in military work and civilian work and he still calls
it wrong.

That's not me either.

Now you come in here thinking "you speak the lingo" and
say it was all no good, "living in the past."

You tell others they are living in the past, and then you do the same thing to
a much greater degree.

Are there words and phrases which I must not use because I was never in the
military, Len? Words like "groundpounder"? SNAFU? FUBAR? "Augered-in"? "Six
turning and four burning"?

Will you now tell me to

"Shut the hell up, you little USMC feldwebel"

(direct quote of you!)

?

And you don't explain how some experiences of 50 odd years ago somehow make you
qualified to determine policy in a radio service that you have never been part
of.

Odd, very odd. Also illogical.

You don't know squat
about aerospace,

Yes, I do. I really do, Len. Not at a professional level, but I do have a bit
of knowledge. More than you have about amateur radio. Thosde facts seem to
bother you no end.

It is. But you're just a spectator there, too.

Yes. So?

So?

You seem to have lost touch with the issue in here...

No, I haven't.

the creation
reason issue being the retention or elimination of the code test for
an amateur radio license.

Really? ;-)

You keep trying to misdirect these non-discussions into some
weird "desire" for a ham ticket I'm supposed to have.

You said you were going for an Extra right out of the box 54 months ago
yesterday. Hasn't happened yet. You haven't even tried. That kinda messes up
your credibility.

Such as:

What really burns your bacon is that even with all your alleged professional
experience, the FCC won't act on your recommendations and those of us who
actually *are* radio amateurs won't bow down to you.

INCORRECT. WRONG.

No, it's quite correct, quite right, as evidenced by your diatribes here and in
ECFS.

I know the process of legislation and rule-making and accept that.

oooooooooo ;-)

Everyone gets a chance to comment at the FCC and the FCC has
the near-final regulatory say on U.S. civil radio (courts can rule on
that later but that does not happen often).

Civics 101. 9th grade stuff ;-)

All must live with the
decisions on civil radio matters, even if they are not individually
acceptible.

Then live with the code test, Len.

That's how it is in a democratic-principle government.

I know.

Here's another democratic-principle thing: Majority opinion counts for
something. And when the issue is discussed, the majority of those bothering to
express an opinion support a Morse code test for at least some classes of ham
license in the USA. Even without a treaty requirement.

Back when the issue was discussed in FCC comments, (1998), the majority of
those who commented not only wanted code tests but wanted at least two code
test speeds. Not the majority of comments - the majority of *people*. That fact
was revealed by someone in "No-Code International", so you cannot claim the
data gathering was biased for the result.

You can spam the ECFS but you're still just one person, and a nonparticipant at
that. You can call your opponents names but that doesn't change anyone's mind
on the issue.

Your allegation of some kind of weird "personal vendetta" is just
that, a weird thing.

It *is* a weird thing that you are so fixated on a single issue in a radio
service where you play no part and have no place.

It *is* a weird thing that you spend so much time calling people names, making
fun of their jobs, education, ethnicity, military service, background, gender,
and many other attributes when all they have done is to disagree with you, or
show that your statements are incorrect.

It *is* a weird thing that you support an age requirement of up to 14 years for
an amateur radio license even though you cannot name a *single instance* where
the youth of an amateur radio licensee has caused on-air problems. (The USA has
never had an age requirementfor any class of amateur radio license).

You can't abide the thought of losing the
morse code test

Sure I can. It was lost for the Technician license back in 1991. That wasn't a
good idea, but I learned to live with it.

Heck, way back in 1998 or so, and many times since then, I discussed license
structures that would allow individual amateurs to choose which tests they
would take. No Morse code if they didn't want it.

So you're wrong - again!

so, therefore, you think that all those trying to
eliminate it are abnormal in some regard. Not so.

All anyone has to do is observe your behavior, Len.

What IS abnormal is the stridency of the PCTA in the maintenance
of a code test for a ham license without any regard to the changing
times or the fact that morse code manual telegraphy is going down
the tubes in all of radio communications except amateurism.

Why is that "abnormal"?

What *is* abnormal is lumping together all people who happen to share a common
opinion on one issue of regulation and treating them as if they have all
insulted you in the same way. That's what you do here.

An amateur license is for amateur radio, not other radio services. Amateur
radio is a unique service, as are all the other radio services, with its own
rules, goals, basis and purpose. (If it wasn't unique, it would have no reason
to exist as a separate service).

Amateurs use Morse code extensively. So it makes sense to require some basic
skill in its use.

And that's what the 5 wpm test is - basic skill.

You cannot justify modern-day rules based on antiquated reasons
which no longer apply.

That's true. However, there are modern reasons which do apply.

But, you met those antiquated rules and now
insist that all newcomers meet those rules.

Which antiquated rules?

Why?

A Morse code test for an amateur radio license is a good idea. It's not
antiquated. That's why.

I don't know why
you are still so adamant about it, can only speculate.

I simply think it's a good idea. Hams use Morse, it's a big part of amateur
radio *today*, therefore it should be tested.

Why you are so obsessed over a simple test in a radio service where you are
just a spectator is the mystery.

And despite all your
verbiage, you can't get some of us to respond in kind to your name calling
and other word games.

TS. Someone wants to play nasty with me, I play nastier. No problem.

No, you play nasty even with those who are civil with you. Like me.

Been there, done that, lots of times.

By requiring a simple one-time 5 wpm code test?

By requiring ANY rate code test.

Learn to live with it.

You can NO longer justify its existance by "treaty."

Don't have to.

You can NO longer justify its usefulness by anything but tired,
trite, old phrases that ceased being applicable decades ago.

Ad hominem attack rather than facts.

All you or your PCTA ilk can "justify" is all the denigration and
name-calling and general negative inuendo you put on those that
want to eliminate the code test.

Where have I called anyone a name, Len? Where's the "negative innuendo"? That's
what *you* do.

Not nice.

No, you're not. ;-)

But, you "justify" it
by all kinds of tricks and message subject misdirections, by
calling yourself "superior" to others because you met old
standards.

Where have I called myself superior? C'mon, show the post. Or are you afraid of
Google, because of what else is archived there?

No sweat to me. If the code test stays, then I hang in there
trying to get rid of it. If the code test is eliminated, then I be
satisfied.

Why? You're not a radio amateur, have never been one, and obviously have no
intention of being one. You play no part in amatuer radio, yet you seem to
think that some ancient non-amateur experience somehow qualifies you to tell
others how amateur radio should be regulated. And to endlessly insult them for
daring to disagree with you.

And you are obsessed with this code test thing as if it were some sort of moral
crusade in which you are the standard-bearer against some imagined injustice.
Why?

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article et, "Bill
Sohl"
writes:

When I was preparing for the old Extra test (pre-April 2000) all I did
was
keep retaking the QRZ.COM practice tests until I consistently got 90%
or better. I actually started getting concictently at 100%.

You "studied the test" - literally! Which is certainly effective, and
legal.
(SNIP)
Given the subject material at the time and my lack of any specific
use of much of that material since, I'm not sure how I'd do. Answers to
questions
on space operations (FCC notification intervals), licensing and VE
testing
rules, etc. don't stay with most people unless they have reason to
need that knowledge.

I think that depends on the person. Some folks can, others can't, etc.

Additionally, rules and regs can and do change
as we all know...so band edges, especially mode restrictions within a
specific band (e.g. novice sub-bands) change over time.

Yes - and that's one reason to take online practice tests.

Personally, keeping an up-to-date frequency/mode chart in the shack
makes more practical sense to me.

In fact, it could be argued that having a published Q&A and online
practice
tests makes it *easier* for *already licensed* hams to keep up with the
changes.

Except the question pools are only updated every 3 or 4 years, not
immediately when a change in rules happens. The only thing that
immediately happens is a question that is nolonger valid as
written gets deleted if rules change makes the question wrong.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
N2EY wrote:
It's not just time in grade but actual supervised work experience. Back
in the
old days of a 2 year wait for Extra, a ham could just toss the General
license
in a drawer and do nothing for 2 years, yet the "experience" would still
count.

We aren't likely to see such experience requirements reinstated either,
IMHO.

Too bad, that!

My personal view is that I would have no problem with a "time-in-grade"
requirement to go from General to Extra. Odds are that if someone gets
a General and stays then two years later goes for Extra, they were
probably at least active as a ham and getting real experience based on
their interests in operating at whatever mode/band they like.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK