"John Smith"
wrote in message
news
Bill:
Have you ever used IRC chat and "conversed"
with a slow typist there?

Sure. No problem. It still worked.

It sucks, yes,

No, that's your opinion only.

I would allow for having one come up to speed before using
IRC chat, or hang in a newbie room until coming up-to-speed.

I don't think the FCC has domain over internet. Who'd enforce
your rule/requirement?

That same system would work well for
Morse... let'em stay off the key and on a
"newbie frequency" until they get up to
speed and have range of the whole
cw bandwidth... sounds logical to me!

Have you found the CW segments of HF heavily
populated with very slow operators? Doesn't
seem to be any problem today.

Do you expect that
to change if the code test is ended completely?

What you (John) suggest happens by default now.
While there are no "newbie frequencies"
(although the novice segments could be viewed in
that light), in reality, no one, including yourself, is
forced or required to engage with another ham
who operates code (or keboard) at a speed
that is too slow for your liking. The choice
is yours. No pretest needed.

Additionally, having passed a test in no way
guarantees continued profficiency. I passed
13 wpm over 10 years and haven't use code
in probably 8 years or so. You'd probably not want to
have a CW QSO with me now :-)

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK
---------

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 04:06:27 +0000, Bill Sohl wrote:
"John Smith" wrote in message
news
Bill:

Frankly, I think you should have to take a CW test... IF,
and I say IF, you are going to use CW, and perhaps
they can "CW certify" a person to use
code--otherwise let them only use phone and machine protocols...

Do you also think one should take a keyboard (i.e. typing) test to
certify ability to use digital modes?

How about a speed profficiency test for using phonetics
in voice mode?

Bottom line, there is no minimum code speed required
for anyone to use morse code as a ham. That is the
case now and has always been the case.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK