| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#31
February 26th 05, 08:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message .. . "Dee Flint" wrote in : "robert casey" wrote in message ink.net... Earn your priviliges. It isn't impossible. Just be sure that the things one needs to do to earn the privileges are revalent to modern ham radio. Why should ham radio be different than other activities? Most of the things we do to gain privileges in this world are not relevant to the privilege itself. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Oh, so everything else is messed up, so ham radio should be messed up too? Even if I thought it were true, that would still be the worst argument I have heard yet, ROTFLMAO! It does not mean that things are messed up. It is simply a fact that a very effective way to motivate people to do something that they don't want to do is to tie it to a privilege that they very much want. Parents do it all the time. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
|
#32
February 26th 05, 09:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: "Alun L. Palmer" on Sat, Feb 26 2005 6:48 pm
Buck wrote in : On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 04:11:18 GMT, robert casey wrote: I haven't made the proposal and if I did I suspect it would fall on deaf ears. regardless, it was/is nothing more than my opinion about something I would think is fair for Amateur Radio with incentive licensing. without incentive licensing, take one general class exam and become extra without code. I didn't file my proposal either. I did have a petition ready to go, but I wa stalked out of filing it by NCI, as they thought they could get Elemnt 1 abolished without going through this whole NPRM cycle. We all know what happened to that idea. BTW, where is Carl anyway? Carl Stevenson has been very busy working with the IEEE 802 groups on wireless standards (among other things). Please fill us in, Alun, what happened with that NPRM cycle? Last I saw, NO NPRM had been released yet concerning test element 1. The only one released was a general "housekeeping" update of amateur radio regulations. When it comes to the code/no code debate, my response has been changed. Lately when someone tries to argue it my response has been "Do away with all code,not for the good of amateur radio, but so this 25 year argument will finally come to an end. Actually it's been going on for at least 82 years that I know of, but WTH! That would be since 1913. I don't think so. In 1913 amateur radio was ALL about morse code. ARRL had its "president for life" (H.P.Maxim) set to go but wasn't fully formed yet as an actual local New England amateur radio club organization. [ARRL was incorporated in 1914, two years after the first U.S. radio regulating agency was created] The no-code-test amateur radio license advocacy began in the late 1970s. That grew until the FCC (in copying other countries' license classes) released FCC 90-53, the NPRM for creation of the no-code-test Technician class. That was in 1990 (first two digits indicate the year) and the Report & Order granting the sixth license class was released in 1991. If there's one thing that we should all be able to agree on, this is an argument that can only end in one way, and maybe not even then. As long as there's a code test there will be an argument. I agree, it needs to be over. Apparently the argument causes much pain and suffering among the already-tested-for-code-and-passed individuals. Some of those, not receiving their (intrinsic?) due of respect and admiration from others, grow livid with rage that such arguments exist today. Poor babies. The PCTA should be appeased. They've had their way since 1912 amidst noble backing from Big Brother in Newington and they demand capitulation to their wishes. Power limits can't be enforced, but they are the right way to distinguish between ability levels, and different slices of the same band aren't. The former mitigates the msitakes of the less qualified much more effectively, and most people are relatively law abiding. If you had to be an Extra to own a big linear, most people would think twice. The major reason for any sort of "incentive" licensing was to create the artificiality of some being better than others. "Upgrades" are rewarded with more status, privilege, and titles. That's very "feel good" for them, as close as we can get to nobility in this American society. The ARRL encouraged stepping up the "ladder of success" in their printed propaganda for several reasons: 1. It was something members and prospective members wanted to hear, thus encouraging membership and renewal for same; 2. League hierarchy were conservative traditionalists and they had all been morsemen long ago in their youth; feeling that they were self-righteous role models they set up and maintained morsemanship as the ultimate skill of radio amateurs; 3. League lobbying of the FCC saved individual radio amateurs from petitioning the government by themselves, a complicated process prior to opening up of the Internet to file petitions and comments within the last decades. All other "reasons" for support of the "incentive" licensing are holier-than-thou rationalizations by the PCTA. What seems to have been put aside is that amateur radio activity is basically a hobby, a personal recreation activity involving radio, something done for fun. To many, however, it is a self-righteous quest to be a "somebody," to be more "superior." By having federal regulations support their views, they fool themselves into believing they are superior. Ergo, certain "qualifications" for amateur radio licensing must remain forever (or as long as the "superior" ones live) because those "superiors" bought into the old ideas and passed those requirements. Those who have passed the "mighty" tests sometimes assume way too much authority for themselves. What must be the peak (or perhaps nadir) of that is the market appearance of radio "badges" resembling public safety officers shields but marked with amateur radio callsigns. Those who have a foolish need to show they are "somebody" can purchase one and posture that they are "official" and thus "very important." :-) This is the year 2005 and radio as a communications tool is 108+ years old. Radio has been continuously evolving in both technology and application. Governments now have plenty of radios and communications to do their tasks, outnumbering amateurs. It is high time that some olde-tyme hammes realign themselves to the cold, hard facts that amateur radio remains a hobby. Amateur radio wasn't created in the olde-tymer's visage and it should be open to all who care to enjoy it. But, the olde-tymer's don't want that...they lose their rank, status, title, and privilege if reduced to being just commoners. Olde-tymers MUST keep the argument going. They are "superior" and keep reminding everyone that only They know what is good for everyone. :-) |
|
#33
February 26th 05, 10:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It does not mean that things are messed up. It is simply a fact that a very effective way to motivate people to do something that they don't want to do is to tie it to a privilege that they very much want. Parents do it all the time. It's one thing for parents to do that sort of thing, but the FCC isn't our parents. What does the FCC get out of requiring element 1 nowadays? The treaty requirement is gone, and no other service uses Morse code anymore. Radio equipment is more reliable today than 50 years ago. Stuff that took 20 vacuum tubes to do are now on a few ICs, and usually it's the batteries that crap out before anything else goes out. The old argument that code equipment is simple and thus more reliable doesn't really mean much today as it did 50 years ago. If we want to attract younger people to ham radio, it would be counter productive to require stuff no longer relevant to get the license. There's many other activities that don't require licenses that one could do, and they could do exactly the interesting parts and ignore the parts not interesting. |
|
#34
February 27th 05, 01:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Dee Flint" wrote in
: "Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message .. . "Dee Flint" wrote in : "robert casey" wrote in message ink.net... Earn your priviliges. It isn't impossible. Just be sure that the things one needs to do to earn the privileges are revalent to modern ham radio. Why should ham radio be different than other activities? Most of the things we do to gain privileges in this world are not relevant to the privilege itself. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Oh, so everything else is messed up, so ham radio should be messed up too? Even if I thought it were true, that would still be the worst argument I have heard yet, ROTFLMAO! It does not mean that things are messed up. It is simply a fact that a very effective way to motivate people to do something that they don't want to do is to tie it to a privilege that they very much want. Parents do it all the time. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE So treat prospective hams like errant children? |
|
#36
February 27th 05, 04:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message .. . "Dee Flint" wrote in : "Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message .. . "Dee Flint" wrote in : "robert casey" wrote in message ink.net... Earn your priviliges. It isn't impossible. Just be sure that the things one needs to do to earn the privileges are revalent to modern ham radio. Why should ham radio be different than other activities? Most of the things we do to gain privileges in this world are not relevant to the privilege itself. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Oh, so everything else is messed up, so ham radio should be messed up too? Even if I thought it were true, that would still be the worst argument I have heard yet, ROTFLMAO! It does not mean that things are messed up. It is simply a fact that a very effective way to motivate people to do something that they don't want to do is to tie it to a privilege that they very much want. Parents do it all the time. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE So treat prospective hams like errant children? No not at all. Let's use a workplace example instead. Many people, even if they like their jobs, do have elements of the work they don't like. However they get a reward or privilege in the form of money for performing those elements. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
|
#37
February 27th 05, 04:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"robert casey" wrote in message ink.net... It does not mean that things are messed up. It is simply a fact that a very effective way to motivate people to do something that they don't want to do is to tie it to a privilege that they very much want. Parents do it all the time. It's one thing for parents to do that sort of thing, but the FCC isn't our parents. What does the FCC get out of requiring element 1 nowadays? The treaty requirement is gone, and no other service uses Morse code anymore. Radio equipment is more reliable today than 50 years ago. Stuff that took 20 vacuum tubes to do are now on a few ICs, and usually it's the batteries that crap out before anything else goes out. The old argument that code equipment is simple and thus more reliable doesn't really mean much today as it did 50 years ago. If we want to attract younger people to ham radio, it would be counter productive to require stuff no longer relevant to get the license. There's many other activities that don't require licenses that one could do, and they could do exactly the interesting parts and ignore the parts not interesting. Actually it appears as if it IS the code that attracts young people simply because it is different. It's the middle aged people who seem to object most strenuously. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
|
#38
February 27th 05, 04:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
From: "Alun L. Palmer" on Sat, Feb 26 2005 6:48 pm Buck wrote in : On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 04:11:18 GMT, robert casey wrote: Apparently the argument causes much pain and suffering among the already-tested-for-code-and-passed individuals. It would seem to have caused some pain and suffering in at least one non-code tested individual. After all, nobody was written more here about morse code tesing in amateur radio than you...and you aren't even involved in amateur radio. Poor baby. The major reason for any sort of "incentive" licensing was to create the artificiality of some being better than others. Incentive license was put into place by the FCC. You'll remember them as the agency responsible for amateur radio licensing and enforcement. The "some being better than others" was and is quite real. Those passing more difficult theory exams and (for some classes) higher speed morse exams were rewarded with more spectrum. Those like yourself, who never passed any amateur radio licensing exams, had access to no amateur radio spectrum. "Upgrades" are rewarded with more status, privilege, and titles. More titles? Really? That's very "feel good" for them, as close as we can get to nobility in this American society. That it chafes you cause me some mild entertainment. What seems to have been put aside is that amateur radio activity is basically a hobby, a personal recreation activity involving radio, something done for fun. To many, however, it is a self-righteous quest to be a "somebody," to be more "superior." By having federal regulations support their views, they fool themselves into believing they are superior. Ergo, certain "qualifications" for amateur radio licensing must remain forever (or as long as the "superior" ones live) because those "superiors" bought into the old ideas and passed those requirements. More "Fox and the cashews" from our resident curmudgeon? Why are you worried about who might be superior to whom in amateur radio, Leonard. You aren't part of amateur radio. Even if you were, there'd always be many, regardless of license class, whose skills exceeded your own. Those who have passed the "mighty" tests sometimes assume way too much authority for themselves. What about those who have passed none of the tests, have no amateur radio licenses and who are not FCC employees? Do they ever attempt to assume authority over amateur radio for themselves? Would you be such a fellow? What must be the peak (or perhaps nadir) of that is the market appearance of radio "badges" resembling public safety officers shields but marked with amateur radio callsigns. Those who have a foolish need to show they are "somebody" can purchase one and posture that they are "official" and thus "very important." :-) Don't worry, Len. I'm sure the manufacturers will still sell you one. You can just leave the callsign portion blank. :-) This is the year 2005 and radio as a communications tool is 108+ years old. Radio has been continuously evolving in both technology and application. Governments now have plenty of radios and communications to do their tasks, outnumbering amateurs. It is high time that some olde-tyme hammes realign themselves to the cold, hard facts that amateur radio remains a hobby. How about if you "realign" yourself to the fact that amateur radio remains a hobby in which you are not a participant. Amateur radio wasn't created in the olde-tymer's visage and it should be open to all who care to enjoy it. ....and who can pass the exams to do so. But, the olde-tymer's don't want that...they lose their rank, status, title, and privilege if reduced to being just commoners. You sound like the kind of guy who'd just open 'er up to any guy who shows any interest at all in amateur radio. No tests. No qualifications. Olde-tymers MUST keep the argument going. Actually, you are the guy who MUST keep the argument going. At present, it isn't going your way. They are "superior" and keep reminding everyone that only They know what is good for everyone. :-) That's awfully cute, Len. You aren't even involved and you keep telling us that you know what's best for amateur radio. :-) Dave |
|
#39
February 27th 05, 03:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Dee Flint" wrote in
: "Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message .. . "Dee Flint" wrote in : "Alun L. Palmer" wrote in message .. . "Dee Flint" wrote in : "robert casey" wrote in message ink.net... Earn your priviliges. It isn't impossible. Just be sure that the things one needs to do to earn the privileges are revalent to modern ham radio. Why should ham radio be different than other activities? Most of the things we do to gain privileges in this world are not relevant to the privilege itself. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Oh, so everything else is messed up, so ham radio should be messed up too? Even if I thought it were true, that would still be the worst argument I have heard yet, ROTFLMAO! It does not mean that things are messed up. It is simply a fact that a very effective way to motivate people to do something that they don't want to do is to tie it to a privilege that they very much want. Parents do it all the time. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE So treat prospective hams like errant children? No not at all. Let's use a workplace example instead. Many people, even if they like their jobs, do have elements of the work they don't like. However they get a reward or privilege in the form of money for performing those elements. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE And Morse isn't an element of my operating, but I had to take a test in it. That's like having to take a typing test and then having a secretary to do your typing. |
|
#40
February 27th 05, 03:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Dee Flint" wrote in
: "robert casey" wrote in message ink.net... It does not mean that things are messed up. It is simply a fact that a very effective way to motivate people to do something that they don't want to do is to tie it to a privilege that they very much want. Parents do it all the time. It's one thing for parents to do that sort of thing, but the FCC isn't our parents. What does the FCC get out of requiring element 1 nowadays? The treaty requirement is gone, and no other service uses Morse code anymore. Radio equipment is more reliable today than 50 years ago. Stuff that took 20 vacuum tubes to do are now on a few ICs, and usually it's the batteries that crap out before anything else goes out. The old argument that code equipment is simple and thus more reliable doesn't really mean much today as it did 50 years ago. If we want to attract younger people to ham radio, it would be counter productive to require stuff no longer relevant to get the license. There's many other activities that don't require licenses that one could do, and they could do exactly the interesting parts and ignore the parts not interesting. Actually it appears as if it IS the code that attracts young people simply because it is different. It's the middle aged people who seem to object most strenuously. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Children find the code a novelty, but that doesn't mean that they are prepared to learn it |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Morse Code: One Wonders... and Begins to Think ! [ -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . ] | Shortwave | |||
| Response to "21st Century" Part One (Code Test) | Policy | |||
| My response to Jim Wiley, KL7CC | Policy | |||
| Some comments on the NCVEC petition | Policy | |||
| NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement. | Policy | |||
Linear Mode
