John Smith wrote:
N2EY:

Well, if you are going to use cw, a code test should be administered, if
not, none need be given...

Apply that same argument to ssb...and AM...and FSK...and VHF/UHF.

Apply it to the VE rules, band edges, and almost any other regulations.

If your argument is valid for the use of code, then it's valid for the
use of almost everything else in amateur radio.

I certainly do not use cw...

So? I certainly do not use much of what I had to learn to get
my license. But I learned it just the same. Was that wrong?

and no young
guys I have helped into the hobby are going to be using it...

What if they do? What if they discover, on their own, how much
fun it is, despite your efforts otherwise?

in the future cw will go silent... that is inevitable...

In the future all modes will go silent.

It seems to me, John, that you do not answer questions nor
engage in dialogue, but simply repeat the same basic
mantras. Some could call that "cult-like behaviour".

Is there a reason for your top-posting and non-answers?

Just curious


wrote in message
oups.com...
John Smith wrote:
I think most of those groups progressive and open to change--this
alone
would make classification as a cult difficult...

Try selling the NRA on the idea that the Second Amendment should be
repealed.

Try selling NCI on the idea that *some* code testing is OK.

However, the ARRL with un-moving devotion to its "principles" and the
staunch "unwillingness" to change is what makes it more appropriate
to
such classification...

The ARRL is as "open to change" (if not more so) as any of the
organizations named.

Is devotion to principles a bad thing? Or are principles, traditions,
and
standards to be tossed aside merely because they're old?

rather bizarre really--when at its core is
technology--and a technology which is RAPIDLY changing and adapting
to
new discoveries, methods, devices, etc...

Such as?

The ARRL has been pushing for a revision of the rules to classify
signals by bandwidth rather than content, and to free up old
technical limitations. What other group has put forth such a
proposal?

While I don't agree with all the proposed revisions, the general
concept is a valid one. Why should an FSK signal of 900 Hz bandwidth
be
permitted on a frequency because it's RTTY, but an FSK signal of
500 Hz bandwidth be prohibited from the same frequency because it's
digitized voice?

US amateur radio is and has long been wide open for new discoveries,
methods, devices, etc.. Particularly on VHF/UHF, where there's lots of
bandwidth. You cannot blame the license requirements for lack of
innovation, because the requirements for full VHF/UHF privileges have
included no code test and only a minimal written test for 14+ years.

The real "cult" or "religion" to watch for is the mindset that all
change is good, new is better than old, ending is better than
mending, and similar marketing buzzphrases.

That mindset is geared to three goals:

- selling more product, regardless of whether it's really better
- attracting investment capital
- destroying the existing structure without an adequate replacement

The boom-dot-bust mess of 2000 proves the game doesn't last forever.

"new" and "remarkable" become "old" and "common" in only a matter of
months in this field...

Which field?

Radio broadcasting in the USA uses AM (developed more than a century
ago)
and FM stereo multiplex (developed a half century ago). Satellite
radio
may
cut into their market but it's a long way from replacing standard
broadcasting.

TV broadcasting is only now beginning the widespread change to HDTV,
after a half-century of NTSC.

In any technology, there is usually rapid progress when the technology
is
new, then as the technology matures, the changes become more
evolutionary
than revolutionary.

Suppose FCC just dumps Element 1 tomorrow. Will we see a techno-
revolution in ham radio? Not likely - it didn't happen after the Tech
lost its code test.



wrote in message
oups.com...
John Smith wrote:
N2Ey:

I stand corrected, ARRL is NOT a valid religion...

Nope, more of a cult actually--"Cult of the ARRL." grin

Then the following are all cults, too:

- Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts and similar organizations
- US Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard
- AMA, ANA, and similar organizations
- IEEE and similar organizations
- No-Code International and similar organizations

And many others.

N2EY:

I have asked the young men why they have no interest in getting a ham
license, it is because of the limitations placed on the no code
license--and the fact they are not interested in learning code to chat
with someone DX--a task which can be accomplished much easier and
reliably over the net with instant messaging, IRC chat, etc... that is
REAL. THAT is dropping the numbers of hams and putting bands in danger
of being lost... that is holding our numbers at such low levels the FCC
begins to find us more a bother than anything else...

Now we are just debating if and how we are going to save amateur radio
from the men who would require a code requirement onto the hobbies
death...

You are right, I repeat the mantra like a prayer...

John

wrote in message
oups.com...
John Smith wrote:
N2EY:

Well, if you are going to use cw, a code test should be administered,
if
not, none need be given...

Apply that same argument to ssb...and AM...and FSK...and VHF/UHF.

Apply it to the VE rules, band edges, and almost any other
regulations.

If your argument is valid for the use of code, then it's valid for the
use of almost everything else in amateur radio.

I certainly do not use cw...

So? I certainly do not use much of what I had to learn to get
my license. But I learned it just the same. Was that wrong?

and no young
guys I have helped into the hobby are going to be using it...

What if they do? What if they discover, on their own, how much
fun it is, despite your efforts otherwise?

in the future cw will go silent... that is inevitable...

In the future all modes will go silent.

It seems to me, John, that you do not answer questions nor
engage in dialogue, but simply repeat the same basic
mantras. Some could call that "cult-like behaviour".

Is there a reason for your top-posting and non-answers?

Just curious


wrote in message
oups.com...
John Smith wrote:
I think most of those groups progressive and open to change--this
alone
would make classification as a cult difficult...

Try selling the NRA on the idea that the Second Amendment should be
repealed.

Try selling NCI on the idea that *some* code testing is OK.

However, the ARRL with un-moving devotion to its "principles" and
the
staunch "unwillingness" to change is what makes it more
appropriate
to
such classification...

The ARRL is as "open to change" (if not more so) as any of the
organizations named.

Is devotion to principles a bad thing? Or are principles,
traditions,
and
standards to be tossed aside merely because they're old?

rather bizarre really--when at its core is
technology--and a technology which is RAPIDLY changing and
adapting
to
new discoveries, methods, devices, etc...

Such as?

The ARRL has been pushing for a revision of the rules to classify
signals by bandwidth rather than content, and to free up old
technical limitations. What other group has put forth such a
proposal?

While I don't agree with all the proposed revisions, the general
concept is a valid one. Why should an FSK signal of 900 Hz
bandwidth
be
permitted on a frequency because it's RTTY, but an FSK signal of
500 Hz bandwidth be prohibited from the same frequency because it's
digitized voice?

US amateur radio is and has long been wide open for new
discoveries,
methods, devices, etc.. Particularly on VHF/UHF, where there's lots
of
bandwidth. You cannot blame the license requirements for lack of
innovation, because the requirements for full VHF/UHF privileges
have
included no code test and only a minimal written test for 14+
years.

The real "cult" or "religion" to watch for is the mindset that all
change is good, new is better than old, ending is better than
mending, and similar marketing buzzphrases.

That mindset is geared to three goals:

- selling more product, regardless of whether it's really better
- attracting investment capital
- destroying the existing structure without an adequate replacement

The boom-dot-bust mess of 2000 proves the game doesn't last
forever.

"new" and "remarkable" become "old" and "common" in only a matter
of
months in this field...

Which field?

Radio broadcasting in the USA uses AM (developed more than a
century
ago)
and FM stereo multiplex (developed a half century ago). Satellite
radio
may
cut into their market but it's a long way from replacing standard
broadcasting.

TV broadcasting is only now beginning the widespread change to
HDTV,
after a half-century of NTSC.

In any technology, there is usually rapid progress when the
technology
is
new, then as the technology matures, the changes become more
evolutionary
than revolutionary.

Suppose FCC just dumps Element 1 tomorrow. Will we see a techno-
revolution in ham radio? Not likely - it didn't happen after the
Tech
lost its code test.



wrote in message
oups.com...
John Smith wrote:
N2Ey:

I stand corrected, ARRL is NOT a valid religion...

Nope, more of a cult actually--"Cult of the ARRL." grin

Then the following are all cults, too:

- Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts and similar organizations
- US Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard
- AMA, ANA, and similar organizations
- IEEE and similar organizations
- No-Code International and similar organizations

And many others.

John Smith wrote:
that is holding our numbers at such low levels the FCC
begins to find us more a bother than anything else...


And you have something to back up that statement that the FCC finds ham
radio a bother.

.... logic would be any sane mans guide... we are the smallest minority
on the planet, we don't generate any real revenue for the gov't or
benefit of society, our fellow citizens are paying for the enforcement
of the rules and regulations so we can "hobby around"--kinda like "radio
welfare."

I don't think much more of an argument would need to be posed to make a
lot start asking questions on why all this is being done so some old men
can pass gas and rag chew!

John

"Cmd Buzz Corey" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
that is holding our numbers at such low levels the FCC begins to find
us more a bother than anything else...


And you have something to back up that statement that the FCC finds
ham radio a bother.

John Smith wrote:
... logic would be any sane mans guide... we are the smallest minority
on the planet, we don't generate any real revenue for the gov't or
benefit of society, our fellow citizens are paying for the enforcement
of the rules and regulations so we can "hobby around"--kinda like "radio
welfare."

I don't think much more of an argument would need to be posed to make a
lot start asking questions on why all this is being done so some old men
can pass gas and rag chew!

Just as I thought, you have absolutely nothing to indicate that the FCC
finds ham radio a bother.

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
N2EY:

I have asked the young men why they have no interest in getting a ham
license, it is because of the limitations placed on the no code
license--and the fact they are not interested in learning code to chat
with someone DX--a task which can be accomplished much easier and reliably
over the net with instant messaging, IRC chat, etc... that is REAL. THAT
is dropping the numbers of hams and putting bands in danger of being
lost... that is holding our numbers at such low levels the FCC begins to
find us more a bother than anything else...


This does NOT make sense when our numbers are near their all time high.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
N2EY:

I have asked the young men why they have no interest in getting a ham
license, it is because of the limitations placed on the no code
license--and the fact they are not interested in learning code to chat
with someone DX--a task which can be accomplished much easier and
reliably over the net with instant messaging, IRC chat, etc... that is
REAL. THAT is dropping the numbers of hams and putting bands in danger
of being lost... that is holding our numbers at such low levels the FCC
begins to find us more a bother than anything else...


This does NOT make sense when our numbers are near their all time high.


It's just another one of those guys who thinks that Ham Radio is only
relevant in as much as it resembles the Internet. - In other words, the guy
has no clue about the hobby but wants to run it down because it is not the
Internet.

I use this attitude as a handy intelligence test for amateurs... If they
cannot differentiate between Amateur Radio and the Internet, or if they
cannot see why there should and would be differences between the two - then
I know that they are brain-damaged ( or even worse ) - associated with TAPR
or the ARRL's HSMM group.

In any case the attitude indicates a clueless state in relation to the
amateur radio hobby.

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org
Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com
Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php

Charles:

You are correct. And ham radio has really become irrelevant...

The millions or billions even who are on the internet give it meaning,
purpose and a self-sustaining argument for its existence...

.... all the things which ham radio DOES NOT have...

John

"Charles Brabham" wrote in message
. ..

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
N2EY:

I have asked the young men why they have no interest in getting a
ham license, it is because of the limitations placed on the no code
license--and the fact they are not interested in learning code to
chat with someone DX--a task which can be accomplished much easier
and reliably over the net with instant messaging, IRC chat, etc...
that is REAL. THAT is dropping the numbers of hams and putting
bands in danger of being lost... that is holding our numbers at
such low levels the FCC begins to find us more a bother than
anything else...


This does NOT make sense when our numbers are near their all time
high.


It's just another one of those guys who thinks that Ham Radio is only
relevant in as much as it resembles the Internet. - In other words,
the guy has no clue about the hobby but wants to run it down because
it is not the Internet.

I use this attitude as a handy intelligence test for amateurs... If
they cannot differentiate between Amateur Radio and the Internet, or
if they cannot see why there should and would be differences between
the two - then I know that they are brain-damaged ( or even worse ) -
associated with TAPR or the ARRL's HSMM group.

In any case the attitude indicates a clueless state in relation to the
amateur radio hobby.

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org
Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com
Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php

Charles Brabham wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
N2EY:

I have asked the young men why they have no interest in getting a ham
license, it is because of the limitations placed on the no code
license--and the fact they are not interested in learning code to chat
with someone DX--a task which can be accomplished much easier and
reliably over the net with instant messaging, IRC chat, etc... that is
REAL. THAT is dropping the numbers of hams and putting bands in danger
of being lost... that is holding our numbers at such low levels the FCC
begins to find us more a bother than anything else...


This does NOT make sense when our numbers are near their all time high.

Yes - both in total numbers of US hams, and the ratio of hams to the
total US population.

In recent years the totals have begun to go down, and the percentage of
the
population as well. Reducing the license test requirements in 2000 has
not brought growth, yet some folks insist that more and more reductions
in test requirements are the only solution.

It's just another one of those guys who thinks that Ham Radio is only
relevant in as much as it resembles the Internet. - In other words, the guy
has no clue about the hobby but wants to run it down because it is not the
Internet.

BINGO!

Yet it is exactly the fact that amateur radio *is not* the internet
that is
the draw!

I use this attitude as a handy intelligence test for amateurs... If they
cannot differentiate between Amateur Radio and the Internet, or if they
cannot see why there should and would be differences between the two - then
I know that they are brain-damaged ( or even worse ) - associated with TAPR
or the ARRL's HSMM group.

In any case the attitude indicates a clueless state in relation to the
amateur radio hobby.

Makes sense to me!

73 de Jim, N2EY

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org
Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com
Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php

N2EY:

One point you got right, ham radio HAS TO compete with a superior form
of communication--the internet!

And, the only way it can is drop the code...

John

wrote in message
ups.com...
Charles Brabham wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
N2EY:

I have asked the young men why they have no interest in getting a
ham
license, it is because of the limitations placed on the no code
license--and the fact they are not interested in learning code to
chat
with someone DX--a task which can be accomplished much easier and
reliably over the net with instant messaging, IRC chat, etc...
that is
REAL. THAT is dropping the numbers of hams and putting bands in
danger
of being lost... that is holding our numbers at such low levels
the FCC
begins to find us more a bother than anything else...


This does NOT make sense when our numbers are near their all time
high.

Yes - both in total numbers of US hams, and the ratio of hams to the
total US population.

In recent years the totals have begun to go down, and the percentage
of
the
population as well. Reducing the license test requirements in 2000 has
not brought growth, yet some folks insist that more and more
reductions
in test requirements are the only solution.

It's just another one of those guys who thinks that Ham Radio is only
relevant in as much as it resembles the Internet. - In other words,
the guy
has no clue about the hobby but wants to run it down because it is
not the
Internet.

BINGO!

Yet it is exactly the fact that amateur radio *is not* the internet
that is
the draw!

I use this attitude as a handy intelligence test for amateurs... If
they
cannot differentiate between Amateur Radio and the Internet, or if
they
cannot see why there should and would be differences between the
two - then
I know that they are brain-damaged ( or even worse ) - associated
with TAPR
or the ARRL's HSMM group.

In any case the attitude indicates a clueless state in relation to
the
amateur radio hobby.

Makes sense to me!

73 de Jim, N2EY

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org
Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com
Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php