John Smith wrote:

So, your logic goes something like this, "That problem exists in other
places too--we have nothing to worry about."

I find that similar to, "Well, the neighbors paper wasn't
delivered--same as ours. And, their toilet is plugged up--just like
ours, nothing to worry about."

And, that is EXACTLY a very-good example of why I say younger minds need
to be called to play here--with more energy and willing to face up to
truths and take on these problems.

Good plan. At least your newspaper might be delivered and your toilet
might work.

Dave K8MN

John Smith wrote:


I am 55 and people even 65 are about as interesting as rocks--

To a narrow minded simpleton like you, that's probably true.

John Smith wrote:
I suppose everyone has something to say...

....and our problem is to determine whether it is worth listening.

We are experiencing a time in our history where people are living a lot
longer than they ever used to--and in better health.

This is causing a problem in how to get them moved aside so younger and
more capable minds can grab the reins.

"Younger" doesn't necessarily mean an improvement. Then you need to
define "more capable". You need to explain why younger and older can't
co-exist.

However, those grizzled old
hands hands have a death-grip while the buggy heads for the cliff...

Your agenda is given away when you use terms like "grizzled old" (maybe
you meant "grizzled, old") and "death-grip".

Finally, you'll have to establish as fact that there is a buggy and that
it is heading for a cliff.

Dave K8MN

John Smith wrote:
Jim:

I just took it for granted that everyone experienced life a lot like me.

That's a big leap.

Remember when your were 21?

Yes

And how back then 50 year old people looked
like they had one foot in the grave?

No

How 60 year old people looked as
if they were preserved in formaldehyde? And, were just about as
interesting to chat with as window drapes?

No

Now that you are old--suddenly you got blind?

I'm not quite "that" old and wasn't blind then or now.

I am 55 and people even 65 are about as interesting as rocks--there is
that kind of difference which occurred in the 60's and has been
occurring ever since...

So you've continued the same flawed views of others that you had as a
twenty-one-year-old.

Get real--the only reason some old geezer type will have a younger woman
on his arm is for the money....

You don't seem to have offered any proof of your statement.

You can extrapolate on that to figure out how it applies here at amateur
radio...

It doesn't look like a fit, given the gaping holes in your logic. You
continue to play the troll.

Dave K8MN

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2004/04/01/1/

John

Hey John!

Did you notice the * DATE * of the above referenced article........?

"April 01 2004 "

Get a clue doofus!

....amazing eh folks? They quote an April 01 article
from 2004 - THAT'S LAST YEAR! "alzheimers victims..." (?)

Better go look in da mirror bunkie! ; )

John Smith wrote:
Jim:

I just took it for granted that everyone experienced life a lot like me.

Not a valid assumption, John.

Remember when your were 21?

Yep. I remember all the way back to when I was 3 years old.

And how back then 50 year old people looked
like they had one foot in the grave? How 60 year old people looked as
if they were preserved in formaldehyde? And, were just about as
interesting to chat with as window drapes?

I don't remember older people that way at all, from when I was 21. Or
any other age.

Sure, when I was 21, someone who was 51 looked "old". That's natural -
someone who is 21 looks very young to me now.

But they did not look like they "had one foot in the grave", nor "were
preserved in formaldehyde". Just older.

A few were uninteresting old grumps. Others were *very* interesting to
chat with, talk to, learn from, spend time with.

When I was attending the University of Pennsylvania in the early-mid
1970s, there was one professor who was absolutely adored by all of us
EE students. He was Professor Cornelius Weygandt, who taught a number
of courses like Electrodynamics and Power Systems. He was at least 70
at the time and looked ancient to us.

But he had an energy that, for lack of a better word, was pure
electricity. He'd walk into class with a half-sheet of paper on which
was written a complex problem. He'd draw the problem on the board and
then proceed to show us how to solve it. No notes, no books, no
calculators, no slide rule, just his own knowledge. His explanations
were clear and precise, making complex concepts clear and
understandable to all. We would toss variations on the problems at him,
and he'd solve the variations too, with no preparation at all.

One time in Power Systems he gave us a homework problem from the book.
Looked simple but the answer made no sense no matter how we solved it.
The book had a misprint, and the numbers given could not exist in
reality. Of course the *real* lesson was to check your data. When some
students protested, he asked "Do you mean you trust everything that's
written in books without question? Next thing you'll tell me is that
you trust everything that comes out of a computer!"

Lesson learned.

Sometimes (outside of class) we could get him to tell stories of when
he was our age (he'd graduated from the same school in 1921) or his
work on the Differential Analyzer. Great stuff.

He's just one example - I have many more.

Now that you are old--suddenly you got blind?

No. But there are none so blind as those who will not see.

I am 55 and people even 65 are about as interesting as rocks

to *you*, maybe. Not to me.

--there is
that kind of difference which occurred in the 60's and has been
occurring ever since...

Consider that the problem may be *your* perception and interaction with
them. I know plenty of interesting people in their '60s, '70s, '80s,
even some in their '90s. Plus plenty of interesting younger people.
Their different perspectives are illuminating - all of them.

And if people are living longer, and staying healthy longer, then
there's no reason for them to step aside just because they're old. Ever
hear the phrase "60 is the new 40" or some such?

Get real--the only reason some old geezer type will have a younger woman
on his arm is for the money....

There's a lot more reasons than money. Sometimes a younger woman wants
a daddy figure. Sometimes she wants someone who's more experienced,
mature and stable. And yes, sometimes it's the money.

There are also men who prefer older women, for similar reasons.

I suggest you rent the film "Harold and Maude". (no, it's not
about Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore).

You can extrapolate on that to figure out how it applies here at amateur
radio...

From what I see, all ages have something to contribute - if they want
to.
And if those of other ages are willing to listen.

Take a look at the comments to the various restructuring proposals -
both the 18 current ones and the 1998 one that led to the changes of
2000. There
were fewer than 2500 comments in 1998. I'm not sure of the number of
comments to the 18 current proposals (they're all long past their
comment periods) but in total there are only a few thousand. And
support for continued Morse Code testing is in the majority!

All those people who supposedly don't accept the Morse Code test - yet
they cannot even bother to comment to FCC.


Say - if you really believe older folks should step aside, maybe *you*
should step aside for a younger guy like me!

Jim Hampton" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2004/04/01/1/

John



Hello, John

I passed my amateur extra, 1st phone, and 2nd telegraph in 1966.
After
letting all my tickets expire, I simply re-tested and passed with no
study
my amateur extra (20 wpm) in 1993 as well as my GROL (which is
considerably
simpler than the old 1st phone).

I have worked with a lot of surface mount technology, computers,
programming
languages, and still know pi to 100 places.

What amazes me is that folks think that if you have an education that
is 15
years old or more or possess a license issued more than 15 years ago,
then
you can't possibly be up-to-date.

Sounds like you've got earlyheimers disease to me )

I passed the Extra in 1970 - at age 16. Graduated with BSEE in 1976 and
MSEE in 1992.

But my education isn't 15 years old, because it's an ongoing thing.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Dave:

Ohhh, younger is much better, means you will still have hams left when
the old ones are SK (i.e., not still moving about above ground.)

.... also, it will bring a breath of fresh air to the hobby--anyone on
the bands know we suffer an overload of people older than 40 and need
some new blood...

John

"Dave Heil" wrote in message
ink.net...
John Smith wrote:
I suppose everyone has something to say...

...and our problem is to determine whether it is worth listening.

We are experiencing a time in our history where people are living a
lot longer than they ever used to--and in better health.

This is causing a problem in how to get them moved aside so younger
and more capable minds can grab the reins.

"Younger" doesn't necessarily mean an improvement. Then you need to
define "more capable". You need to explain why younger and older
can't co-exist.

However, those grizzled old hands hands have a death-grip while the
buggy heads for the cliff...

Your agenda is given away when you use terms like "grizzled old"
(maybe you meant "grizzled, old") and "death-grip".

Finally, you'll have to establish as fact that there is a buggy and
that it is heading for a cliff.

Dave K8MN

Dave:

It is quite obvious, anyone who does not agree with you is a
troll--well, in you interpretation of the word...

I stand behind those words you have fault with. I think they are right
on and the truth. I know some think that simply denying them for a
sufficient length of time will cause them to go away...

.... all we have to do now is watch declining numbers, take tally on the
oldsters about and lack of youngsters and the truth is quite obvious.

Really, no argument is needed. What the future looks like has already
been stated. Now the proof which is hidden in the pudding only needs to
be given a sufficient length of time to come out.

As long as we are watching and able to argue for changes to improve and
save the hobby, I have faith in the younger people coming along--they
will eventually make the right decisions when they come into power...

John

"Dave Heil" wrote in message
ink.net...
John Smith wrote:
Jim:

I just took it for granted that everyone experienced life a lot like
me.

That's a big leap.

Remember when your were 21?

Yes

And how back then 50 year old people looked like they had one foot in
the grave?

No

How 60 year old people looked as if they were preserved in
formaldehyde? And, were just about as interesting to chat with as
window drapes?

No

Now that you are old--suddenly you got blind?

I'm not quite "that" old and wasn't blind then or now.

I am 55 and people even 65 are about as interesting as rocks--there
is that kind of difference which occurred in the 60's and has been
occurring ever since...

So you've continued the same flawed views of others that you had as a
twenty-one-year-old.

Get real--the only reason some old geezer type will have a younger
woman on his arm is for the money....

You don't seem to have offered any proof of your statement.

You can extrapolate on that to figure out how it applies here at
amateur radio...

It doesn't look like a fit, given the gaping holes in your logic. You
continue to play the troll.

Dave K8MN

N2EY:

Well, it is quite obvious it is NOT as it was when I was younger--you
are correct--back then there were real men/women who knew how to
interact with youngsters and improve the hobby--and give a welcome and
"hand-up" to the newbie's.

Now, today, you see an example of the problem right here. The older
generation has not learned how to gain the caliber, stature and wisdom
of those who gave them a hand up. This new bunch is a "good ole boys"
club with a closed door policy. They are a self-serving bunch of
self-centered "small men/women." Long as they can rag chew and rant
their personal issues, likes, wants, etc they will go to their doom--it
is just up to thinking minds to make sure they don't carry the hobby to
doom with them...

They lack sorely when gauged against the those of yesteryear...
hopefully those who will now take the reins will learn from these
lessons and be able to correct this blight which has descended on this
once great hobby...

John

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

I just took it for granted that everyone experienced life a lot like
me.

Not a valid assumption, John.

Remember when your were 21?

Yep. I remember all the way back to when I was 3 years old.

And how back then 50 year old people looked
like they had one foot in the grave? How 60 year old people looked
as
if they were preserved in formaldehyde? And, were just about as
interesting to chat with as window drapes?

I don't remember older people that way at all, from when I was 21. Or
any other age.

Sure, when I was 21, someone who was 51 looked "old". That's natural -
someone who is 21 looks very young to me now.

But they did not look like they "had one foot in the grave", nor "were
preserved in formaldehyde". Just older.

A few were uninteresting old grumps. Others were *very* interesting to
chat with, talk to, learn from, spend time with.

When I was attending the University of Pennsylvania in the early-mid
1970s, there was one professor who was absolutely adored by all of us
EE students. He was Professor Cornelius Weygandt, who taught a number
of courses like Electrodynamics and Power Systems. He was at least 70
at the time and looked ancient to us.

But he had an energy that, for lack of a better word, was pure
electricity. He'd walk into class with a half-sheet of paper on which
was written a complex problem. He'd draw the problem on the board and
then proceed to show us how to solve it. No notes, no books, no
calculators, no slide rule, just his own knowledge. His explanations
were clear and precise, making complex concepts clear and
understandable to all. We would toss variations on the problems at
him,
and he'd solve the variations too, with no preparation at all.

One time in Power Systems he gave us a homework problem from the book.
Looked simple but the answer made no sense no matter how we solved it.
The book had a misprint, and the numbers given could not exist in
reality. Of course the *real* lesson was to check your data. When some
students protested, he asked "Do you mean you trust everything that's
written in books without question? Next thing you'll tell me is that
you trust everything that comes out of a computer!"

Lesson learned.

Sometimes (outside of class) we could get him to tell stories of when
he was our age (he'd graduated from the same school in 1921) or his
work on the Differential Analyzer. Great stuff.

He's just one example - I have many more.

Now that you are old--suddenly you got blind?

No. But there are none so blind as those who will not see.

I am 55 and people even 65 are about as interesting as rocks

to *you*, maybe. Not to me.

--there is
that kind of difference which occurred in the 60's and has been
occurring ever since...

Consider that the problem may be *your* perception and interaction
with
them. I know plenty of interesting people in their '60s, '70s, '80s,
even some in their '90s. Plus plenty of interesting younger people.
Their different perspectives are illuminating - all of them.

And if people are living longer, and staying healthy longer, then
there's no reason for them to step aside just because they're old.
Ever
hear the phrase "60 is the new 40" or some such?

Get real--the only reason some old geezer type will have a younger
woman
on his arm is for the money....

There's a lot more reasons than money. Sometimes a younger woman wants
a daddy figure. Sometimes she wants someone who's more experienced,
mature and stable. And yes, sometimes it's the money.

There are also men who prefer older women, for similar reasons.

I suggest you rent the film "Harold and Maude". (no, it's not
about Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore).

You can extrapolate on that to figure out how it applies here at
amateur
radio...

From what I see, all ages have something to contribute - if they want
to.
And if those of other ages are willing to listen.

Take a look at the comments to the various restructuring proposals -
both the 18 current ones and the 1998 one that led to the changes of
2000. There
were fewer than 2500 comments in 1998. I'm not sure of the number of
comments to the 18 current proposals (they're all long past their
comment periods) but in total there are only a few thousand. And
support for continued Morse Code testing is in the majority!

All those people who supposedly don't accept the Morse Code test - yet
they cannot even bother to comment to FCC.


Say - if you really believe older folks should step aside, maybe *you*
should step aside for a younger guy like me!

Jim Hampton" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2004/04/01/1/

John



Hello, John

I passed my amateur extra, 1st phone, and 2nd telegraph in 1966.
After
letting all my tickets expire, I simply re-tested and passed with
no
study
my amateur extra (20 wpm) in 1993 as well as my GROL (which is
considerably
simpler than the old 1st phone).

I have worked with a lot of surface mount technology, computers,
programming
languages, and still know pi to 100 places.

What amazes me is that folks think that if you have an education
that
is 15
years old or more or possess a license issued more than 15 years
ago,
then
you can't possibly be up-to-date.

Sounds like you've got earlyheimers disease to me )

I passed the Extra in 1970 - at age 16. Graduated with BSEE in 1976
and
MSEE in 1992.

But my education isn't 15 years old, because it's an ongoing thing.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Hey Doofus:

The same problems exist which existed a year ago--NO PROGRESS! Get a
clue...

That is as accurate today as the day it was written--that IS my
point--some here are stuck in the twilight zone--no improvements...

John

"Maritime Wheeeeee" wrote in message
roups.com...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2004/04/01/1/

John

Hey John!

Did you notice the * DATE * of the above referenced article........?

"April 01 2004 "

Get a clue doofus!

...amazing eh folks? They quote an April 01 article
from 2004 - THAT'S LAST YEAR! "alzheimers victims..." (?)

Better go look in da mirror bunkie! ; )