"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message
...
Subject: K1MAN is nothing but a QRMer
From: "Dee D. Flint"
Date: 10/12/2004 10:12 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


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

As for the BARF.....the answer is simple, about 70 licensed
amateurs
joined
it. All of which were either braindead, or stupid. Perhaps
both.

Dan/W4NTI

Were the barf members CW tested?

As in front of the FCC? Most certainly. I never said being CW
tested
makes
you have any sense.

Dan/W4NTI

I haven't seen any evidence of it either. But that used to be one of
the battle-cries for the PCTA.

bb

It was never a "battle cry". Instead it was an observation of human
nature.

And it's not just Amateur Radio.

I'd like for Brain and others to name ANYthing that, by being made
"easier" to obtain, made it "better", other than healthcare and a good
meal.

An education?? A Mercedes Benz?? A seat on the board of a Fortune
500
company?

The more work that a person has put in to obtain something, the less
likely
that they will act in a manner to jeopardize it. It was not touted as a
guarantee that someone would not misbehave but that it would keep the
number
who did smaller than it would otherwise be. There is not, never has been
and never will be a panacea that will prevent all misbehavior. This too
is
human behavior. Some will flout standards and rules just to show that
they
can or because they have no sense or because they don't know any better
or
any other number of reasons.

Absolutely.

The best that we can do is to make the amount of effort to obtain a
license
reasonably high so that fewer people are willing to risk losing it.

In this I disagree, Dee...The degree of difficulty should be "high"
so as
to meet the intent of 97.1, the Basis and Purpose of the Amateur Radio
Service,
and that is to ensure technical and operational comptencies of the
licensee.

Part of 97.1 is to create a pool of self trained operators and
persons
knowldegeable in the radio arts. That license structure should be
established
in such a way that greater knowldege and skill grants ever-expanding
privildege.


Of course it must meet the requirements of Part 97 as its primary purpose
but the problem is who is to define the standards as to what constitutes
technical competency, operational competency, self trained operators, and
persons knowledgeable in the radio arts. There are already movements in
progress claiming that we do not need the standards being used today to meet
Part 97 not only in code proficiency but also in technical, operational, and
regulatory areas.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Subject: K1MAN is nothing but a QRMer
From: "Dee D. Flint"
Date: 10/13/2004 9:28 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message
...

Part of 97.1 is to create a pool of self trained operators and
persons
knowldegeable in the radio arts. That license structure should be
established
in such a way that greater knowldege and skill grants ever-expanding
privildege.


Of course it must meet the requirements of Part 97 as its primary purpose
but the problem is who is to define the standards as to what constitutes
technical competency, operational competency, self trained operators, and
persons knowledgeable in the radio arts.

The same way it's done today...The FCC would set the objective and the
VEC's would ahve to create the "questions" for thier approval. The VE's would
then be given a set of "MET/NOT MET" criteria to check off an applicant on.
(logbook entries, certificates of completion, etc...)

There are already movements in
progress claiming that we do not need the standards being used today to meet
Part 97 not only in code proficiency but also in technical, operational, and
regulatory areas.

Uh huh.

Here we go..."No Test International" rears it's ugly head. It was bound
to happen!

73

Steve, K4YZ

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ...

Of course it must meet the requirements of Part 97 as its primary purpose
but the problem is who is to define the standards

Who? Steve will handle it.

as to what constitutes
technical competency, operational competency, self trained operators, and
persons knowledgeable in the radio arts. There are already movements in
progress claiming that we do not need the standards being used today to meet
Part 97 not only in code proficiency but also in technical, operational, and
regulatory areas.

Only disgruntled PCTA have propped up that strawman.

Are you one of them?

"William" wrote in message
om...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...

Of course it must meet the requirements of Part 97 as its primary
purpose
but the problem is who is to define the standards

Who? Steve will handle it.

as to what constitutes
technical competency, operational competency, self trained operators,
and
persons knowledgeable in the radio arts. There are already movements in
progress claiming that we do not need the standards being used today to
meet
Part 97 not only in code proficiency but also in technical, operational,
and
regulatory areas.

Only disgruntled PCTA have propped up that strawman.

Are you one of them?

I am stating an observation. There have been proposals/petitions submitted
to the FCC that very clearly state proposed new requirements for written
testing that are less difficult than exists today.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE