Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
K4YZ wrote: Hello One and All, Our Resident Antagonist (Lennie "I Am Not A Liar" Anderson) is a bit miffed becasue there's no thread to discuss the "Morse Code Exam Issue". Personally, I think the subject has been beaten until every last bit of life has been beaten from it, but just to prove him wrong, here's a thread, JUST for him. So...Does anyone have anything NEW to discuss about the "Morse Code Exam" issue? Does anyone care to engage Lennie in yet another "debate" on the issue? He sure is sore because we've tired of it and won't play his game any more, but his one track mind is still raring to go. Betya I can sum up a lot of his "arguments" right now and save some bandwidth: (1) He "keyed up" some Army transmitters (not Amateur Radio) as a radio repairman in the 50's without the benefit of a Morse Code exam, ergo no one should have to take any exam. (2) He spent a lifelong career as a bench technician, ergo he shouldn't have to take another written exam. Afterall, he spent 14 years in night school to get a 4 year BSEE degree, so that was ALL the work he should ever have to do again, ever! (3) He has a GROL that he claims allows him to transmit anywhere. But he keeps omitting the part where his license also requires a duly authorized Station License or authorization for the "station" he is "operating". That station license will dictate what discreet frequency he MUST use, what specific power limits he must observe, and in many cases even specifies the antenna system to be used right down to field strengths and ERP. (4) He knows a few licensed Amateurs, a couple of them Extras, ergo he can say anything mean and despicable he cares to say about Amateurs in general or Extras in particular. Even moreso if the Extra is a 20WPM era one. Double that if they are actually proficient in Morse at or above 20WPM. (5) He'll "argue" that since the physics of radio wave propagation are the same for "commercial" radio as opposed to "Amateur" radio, that there is no difference in the two. He continually tries to compare one to the other. They're not the same. Any referal to the Basis and Purpose of Part 97 will be dismissed as "administrative language" that doesn't mean what it says. (6) He'll "argue" that Amateur Radio is "just a hobby", despite the fact that the enabling regulations for Amateur Radio say nothing of the sort. Any suggestion of volunteerism, civic duty, emergency service or other educational or philanthropic use of Amateur Radio will be dismissed as "patriotic buffoonery". (7) He'll "argue" that Amateurs, especially the aforementioned Amateur Extras, are mired in 1930's era policy and practices despite the fact that every one of the regular posters of this NG has made comments to the FCC promoting significant changes to Amateur regulations, including Morse examinations and relevency. And after berating Amateurs for thier alleged stonewalling, he'll treat us all to yet another "...there I was at ADA in Japan in 1953..." war story that has absolutely no relevence to Amateur Radio policy in 2005, let alone anything to do with Morse Code at ANY time! So...my opinion on what's most likely to transpire having been stated, let's get on with a spirited debate on the Morse Code Exam issue! Remember...Morse Code Exam issues ONLY! Lennie Says So! 73 Steve, K4YZ Heck Steve, there's no debate...the Morse code exam doesn't exclude anybody. 73 de Bert WA2SI FISTS #9384 QRP ARCI #11782 |
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 |