Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 Try selling the NRA on the idea that the Second Amendment should be repealed.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. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|