Hey Bill,

It looks like the long battle is just about over. Congratulations are
in order, even though I still disagree, but it was probably inevitable.
A grand new experiment will soon begin.

So, I guess the big question is what is NCI going to do next?

I remember old conversations with the previous prez in which I am
pretty sure it was said that you folks were going to go away after your
successful elimination of the the Morse code test requirement.
(organizationally speaking, that is!) I do definitely remember that we
were told that the sole purpose of NCI was elimination of the test.

Is dissolution still the target?

I've always thought, and still do, that one of the hardest things for
an organization to do is go away, even when they are successful in their
original purpose.

I predict that NCI will morph into something else. I'm certainly hoping
it isn't relaxation of the other test requirements!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Michael Coslo wrote:
Hey Bill,

It looks like the long battle is just about over. Congratulations are
in order, even though I still disagree, but it was probably inevitable.
A grand new experiment will soon begin.

just about over

So, I guess the big question is what is NCI going to do next?

keep on the few remaining nations

I remember old conversations with the previous prez in which I am
pretty sure it was said that you folks were going to go away after your
successful elimination of the the Morse code test requirement.
(organizationally speaking, that is!) I do definitely remember that we
were told that the sole purpose of NCI was elimination of the test.

Is dissolution still the target?

I've always thought, and still do, that one of the hardest things for
an organization to do is go away, even when they are successful in their
original purpose.

I predict that NCI will morph into something else. I'm certainly hoping
it isn't relaxation of the other test requirements!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike,
Comments below...

"Michael Coslo" wrote in
message ...
Hey Bill (K2UNK)
It looks like the long battle is just about over. Congratulations are in
order, even though I still disagree, but it was probably inevitable. A
grand new experiment will soon begin.

So, I guess the big question is what is NCI going to do next?

In the USA short term, it still isn't over until the FCC issues an R&O.
Internationally (the I in NCI stands for International) there are still
many countries that have not dropped all code testing.

I remember old conversations with the previous prez in which I am pretty
sure it was said that you folks were going to go away after your
successful elimination of the the Morse code test requirement.
(organizationally speaking, that is!) I do definitely remember that we
were told that the sole purpose of NCI was elimination of the test.

Is dissolution still the target?

My personal viewpoint is that once the USA ends code testing,
then the role of NCI will pretty much be completed...especally
since many other countries already have done so.

I've always thought, and still do, that one of the hardest things for an
organization to do is go away, even when they are successful in their
original purpose.

I predict that NCI will morph into something else.

I doubt it myself. I'm also an ARRL member and focus
my other ham policy opinions primarily though ARRL.
But, again, I can only speak for myself.

I'm certainly hoping it isn't relaxation of the other test requirements!

I would personally oppose any such move and, I believe, I
am familiar enough with the other NCI directors to safely
say that none of them want relaxation of test requirements
for written.

Personally, I do like the idea of a broader entry/beginner
level license that allows more HF than the Tech does
now...but that's another issue and one that ARRL proposed.

Cheersm
Bill K2UNK
NCI Director
ARRL member/LGL

"Bill Sohl" wrote

I'm certainly hoping it isn't relaxation of the other test requirements!

I would personally oppose any such move and, I believe, I
am familiar enough with the other NCI directors to safely
say that none of them want relaxation of test requirements
for written.

NCI Executive Director Carl Stevenson is on record as an enthusiastic supporter
of free passes for all Novices and Tech to General, and all Advanced to Extra
without further testing. As I recall, NCI submitted official comments of this
nature to the FCC. Sure smacks of "relaxation of test requirement for written"
to me.

73, de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"Bill Sohl" wrote

I'm certainly hoping it isn't relaxation of the other test requiremen=
ts!

I would personally oppose any such move and, I believe, I
am familiar enough with the other NCI directors to safely
say that none of them want relaxation of test requirements
for written.

NCI Executive Director Carl Stevenson is on record as an enthusiastic sup=
porter
of free passes for all Novices and Tech to General, and all Advanced to E=
xtra
without further testing. As I recall, NCI submitted official comments o=
f this
nature to the FCC. Sure smacks of "relaxation of test requirement for wri=
tten"
to me.

NCI has supported simplifng the maze of licenses out there so what?
=20
73, de Hans, K0HB

an_old_friend wrote:

KØHB wrote:

"Bill Sohl" wrote


I'm certainly hoping it isn't relaxation of the other test requirements!

I would personally oppose any such move and, I believe, I
am familiar enough with the other NCI directors to safely
say that none of them want relaxation of test requirements
for written.

NCI Executive Director Carl Stevenson is on record as an enthusiastic supporter
of free passes for all Novices and Tech to General, and all Advanced to Extra
without further testing. As I recall, NCI submitted official comments of this
nature to the FCC. Sure smacks of "relaxation of test requirement for written"
to me.


NCI has supported simplifng the maze of licenses out there so what?

I believe that, to you, it is a maze of licenses.

Dave K8MN

"KØHB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Bill Sohl" wrote

I'm certainly hoping it isn't relaxation of the other test
requirements!

I would personally oppose any such move and, I believe, I
am familiar enough with the other NCI directors to safely
say that none of them want relaxation of test requirements
for written.

NCI Executive Director Carl Stevenson is on record as an enthusiastic
supporter of free passes for all Novices and Tech to General, and all
Advanced to Extra without further testing. As I recall, NCI submitted
official comments of this nature to the FCC. Sure smacks of "relaxation of
test requirement for written" to me.

The support is/was for ONE-TIME free upgrades as proposed by
the ARRL petition and one or two others. No support was
given to any permananent relaxation of written tests by NCI.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Bill Sohl" wrote


The support is/was for ONE-TIME free upgrades as proposed by
the ARRL petition and one or two others. No support was
given to any permananent relaxation of written tests by NCI.


Under this NCI-endorsed plan, 345,802 current hams (using Jim's July 15th
census) would receive a PERMANENT relaxation of the requirement to test for
General and another 75,730 would receive a PERMANENT relaxation of the
requirement to test for Extra. That's means that 421,532 individuals, or 63.4%
of the existing hams, would suddenly hold licenses for which they had not passed
the current written examination. Trying to trivialize that as a simple
"one-time" adjustment is intellectually dishonest and a cop-out. By any
reasonable measure, NCI and ARRL both officially are on record as supporting a
lowering of the qualification requirement for General and Extra.

73, de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"Bill Sohl" wrote


The support is/was for ONE-TIME free upgrades as proposed by
the ARRL petition and one or two others. No support was
given to any permananent relaxation of written tests by NCI.


Under this NCI-endorsed plan, 345,802 current hams (using Jim's July 15th
census) would receive a PERMANENT relaxation of the requirement to test f=
or
General and another 75,730 would receive a PERMANENT relaxation of the
requirement to test for Extra. That's means that 421,532 individuals, or=
63.4%
of the existing hams, would suddenly hold licenses for which they had not=
passed
the current written examination. Trying to trivialize that as a simple
"one-time" adjustment is intellectually dishonest and a cop-out. By any
reasonable measure, NCI and ARRL both officially are on record as support=
ing a
lowering of the qualification requirement for General and Extra.

by no reasonable measure

In any change in the system there is the clear poetencail for large
scale adjustment of the licensesure of those involved

something that is clearly different from changing the number of tests
or their level of diffultity

you are just trying to pick a fight it seems

=20
73, de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"Bill Sohl" wrote

The support is/was for ONE-TIME free upgrades as proposed by
the ARRL petition and one or two others. No support was
given to any permananent relaxation of written tests by NCI.

That's true on the surface. But it belies the claim of some who
said they would *NEVER* support a reduction in the written test
requirements.

Never is a very long time!

In some ways a one-time reduction is worse than a "permanent"
reduction. In a "permanent" reduction, the message is that
the older, higher requirements have been removed because they
aren't necessary.

For example, in 2000 FCC changed the written
testing for Technician from two exams (old Elements 2 and 3A)
to a single exam of about half as many questions. That action
meant FCC was satisfied that anyone who passed new Element 2
from then on out was adequately qualified to be a Technician
class licensee.

But if they had made a one-time reduction, they would be saying
that those who benefited by the reduction were somehow "special"
in that did not need to meet the requirements that were in
effect both before and after the one-time reduction.

Some might argue that "experience" or "time in grade" should
count for something. Maybe so - but if that's the case, why
not have a permanent automatic upgrade system based on time
licensed? For example, your license could be automatically
upgraded one class every time you renew, if you have a clear
record. If having a Novice for 5 years qualifies someone to
be a General, or having an Advanced for 5 years qualifies
someone to be an Extra, who could argue about 10 years? (It's
been 5 years since the last Advanceds and Novices were issued.)

There's also the case of the "last one aboard". Suppose FCC
did announce free upgrades to General for all Novice/Tech/TechPlus
hams. The announcement would of necessity precede the implementation
by a few weeks or months, during which time anyone in those classes
planning to upgrade could just wait and get the upgrade for free.
And anyone planning to become a ham could just get a Tech and wait
for the free upgrade to General.

It would be an anti-incentive plan! Why study if the upgrade is
free?

Under this NCI-endorsed plan, 345,802 current hams (using Jim's July 15th
census) would receive a PERMANENT relaxation of the requirement to test f=
or
General and another 75,730 would receive a PERMANENT relaxation of the
requirement to test for Extra. That's means that 421,532 individuals, or=
63.4%
of the existing hams, would suddenly hold licenses for which they had not=
passed
the current written examination.

Yup.

And the situation is more complex - suppose someone whose license is
expired but in the grace period renews - what license class do they
get? Maybe the offer of free
upgrades would get some of them to renew?

Trying to trivialize that as a simple
"one-time" adjustment is intellectually dishonest and a cop-out.

The worst parts of it are two:

1) In the case of General, those who had not passed the required tests
would outnumber those who had - by a 3 to 1 ratio! Extra would be a
little better, but about 40% of those who folks would not have
passed the test.

2) Those who come to ham radio after the Great Giveaway could
legitimately
claim that the written for Tech should be adequate for General, etc.


By any
reasonable measure, NCI and ARRL both officially are on record as support=
ing a
lowering of the qualification requirement for General and Extra.

Worse - permanent reduction. Here's why:

Suppose FCC did announce that they were doing free upgrades effective,
say, October 1, 2005.

Joe Newham goes to a VE session in late September and passes the Tech
written.
A few days later, even before he sees his new call in the database, he
gets a free upgrade to General.

That free upgrade would mean FCC considered the Tech test adequate for
General privileges. And when Mary Newerham shows up in November 2005,
why should she
have to pass the General written? After all, the Tech written was
adequate for
Joe Newham a few weeks earlier....

The joker in the deck is that such free upgrades would mean a lot of
admin work
for FCC. That alone may exclude them from consideration.

73 de Jim, N2EY