John Smith wrote:

David:

Excellent argument for taking the USA to the "rest-of-the-world" and not
the opposite... if they want it, if not, let 'em ride the oxen...

It's not a matter of them "wanting it;"
that is also a U.S.- and Western-centric attitude.
People do not generally choose to ride oxen,
have high infant mortality and suffer from disease.
They do so because they do not have access to the wealth
of the West. You indicate that you think everyone can
just run right down to Wal-Mart and buy a new cell phone
anytime they like. Since they don't have the wealth to do this,
should we discard them as human beings?
These people need to communicate
just as you do, and there will be need for intelligence
operations in these communities. Morse is simple,
reliable and- despite the protests of indolent
and spoiled rich Westerners- easy to learn.
My suggestion will preserve only a small cadre' of
operators, but that will be enough.
The scorned few have always carried the fire
for the lazy many.

D.S.

David:

Then your argument must be centered on such as:

.. since parts of the world don't have out hospitals, we should abandon
them for simpler medical practices.

.. americans need more rickshaws.

.. we are going digital tv, we should abandon this, as it will be years or
decades before some of the world updates.

.... get real ... no one should design the world on the least of available
technologies. Instead, at every turn of the road, the bar needs
raised--challenging those lagging to catch up...

John


On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:44:44 +0000, David Stinson wrote:

John Smith wrote:

David:

Excellent argument for taking the USA to the "rest-of-the-world" and not
the opposite... if they want it, if not, let 'em ride the oxen...

It's not a matter of them "wanting it;"
that is also a U.S.- and Western-centric attitude.
People do not generally choose to ride oxen,
have high infant mortality and suffer from disease.
They do so because they do not have access to the wealth
of the West. You indicate that you think everyone can
just run right down to Wal-Mart and buy a new cell phone
anytime they like. Since they don't have the wealth to do this,
should we discard them as human beings?
These people need to communicate
just as you do, and there will be need for intelligence
operations in these communities. Morse is simple,
reliable and- despite the protests of indolent
and spoiled rich Westerners- easy to learn.
My suggestion will preserve only a small cadre' of
operators, but that will be enough.
The scorned few have always carried the fire
for the lazy many.

D.S.

David Stinson wrote:
John Smith wrote:

Yet, few keep horses today as a reliable means of transportation...

That is a very U.S.- centric comment.
Horses are still very much a "reliable means of transportation"
over a great deal of the world, as are oxen.
Your comments indicate you place no value on the
large segment of humanity that lacks your wealth.
There is no "web" in ItchyScratchyStan, nor
money for $250,000 portable sat downlinks

Showing your prejudges again

but gee I could get a portable self alining up link downlink for a
couple of garnd these days,and since it was made in China I suspect
that in Uzbekistan they could still get get for under 5 g

in other such places; if they have one, it stays
broken most of the time from one of dozens of
failure modes. But one can usually get
hold of a few parts to piece together a CW rig,
*if* they have been wise enough to encourage
the preservation of the skill.

The United States is not the whole world,
and it's past time we remembered that.
D.S.

David Stinson wrote:
John Smith wrote:

David:

Excellent argument for taking the USA to the "rest-of-the-world" and not
the opposite... if they want it, if not, let 'em ride the oxen...

It's not a matter of them "wanting it;"
that is also a U.S.- and Western-centric attitude.
People do not generally choose to ride oxen,
have high infant mortality and suffer from disease.
They do so because they do not have access to the wealth
of the West. You indicate that you think everyone can
just run right down to Wal-Mart and buy a new cell phone
anytime they like. Since they don't have the wealth to do this,
should we discard them as human beings?
These people need to communicate

And the US retianing morse will help them How?

just as you do, and there will be need for intelligence
operations in these communities. Morse is simple,
reliable and- despite the protests of indolent

and findable to RDF jamable

and spoiled rich Westerners- easy to learn.
My suggestion will preserve only a small cadre' of
operators, but that will be enough.
The scorned few have always carried the fire
for the lazy many.

feel free to try and prsrve the mode of your choice I doubt it will die
out. AM hasn't, I doubt Morse Coded CW will either, but at least the
rest of us will not have to be emabrashed by the horse and buggy
aproach

D.S.

an_old_friend wrote:
John Smith wrote:
Band allocation should be allocated on long term statistics generated in
regards to the modes used... (past year or two)

As CW continues its' drop, it needs less and less allocations... as
no-coders now enter CW will have to shrink to accommodate the new users
and their modes...

John

And yet His comments are some of the best I have seen in defense of
Code testing

Gee whillikers, Mr Wizard...Some of those very same sentiments
were uttered by other posters in this forum and you didn't hold the
same opinion for them...

He addreses the reasoning to the Public Good tries to relive the FCC of
the Burdens involved

"addresses" "relieve"

all in all a decent defense of the indefensable

"Lying" is indefensable. "Deceit" is indefensable. "Child
Pornography" and "Spousal Abuse" are "indefensable.

Seems to me he made some on-the-head comments.

Steve, K4YZ

KY4Z wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
John Smith wrote:
Band allocation should be allocated on long term statistics generated in
regards to the modes used... (past year or two)

As CW continues its' drop, it needs less and less allocations... as
no-coders now enter CW will have to shrink to accommodate the new users
and their modes...

John

And yet His comments are some of the best I have seen in defense of
Code testing

Gee whillikers, Mr Wizard...Some of those very same sentiments
were uttered by other posters in this forum and you didn't hold the
same opinion for them...

Such as whom?


He addreses the reasoning to the Public Good tries to relive the FCC of
the Burdens involved

"addresses" "relieve"

all in all a decent defense of the indefensable

"Lying" is indefensable. "Deceit" is indefensable. "Child
Pornography" and "Spousal Abuse" are "indefensable.

Your placement of lying, Kiddy porn, and Spousal abuse on the same
level shows just how sick you truly are


Seems to me he made some on-the-head comments.

it would to you

but then you omitted the bonehead idea that It realy reuires some kind
of manual code tst in order to USE Morse Code


Steve, KY4Z

10 KC? Not enough. At least 25 per HF band.

Dan/W4NTI

"David Stinson" wrote in message
...
Comments submitted to the FCC,
advocating ARRL administration of
Morse license endorsment:
-------------------

18 Aug. 2005
WT Docket 05-235,
Amateur Radio Morse Code Testing Requirement.

I respectfully submit that we can relieve
the FCC of the burden and expense of administering
Amateur Radio Element One (Morse Code),
while preserving a skill which has both
a direct bearing on our nation's security
and a "global heritage" aspect.

We should maintain some level of incentive to
preserve and develop skill in Morse Code:

* Morse Code is still in use for covert
and intelligence operations throughout the world,
and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

* Morse code transmitters and receivers
are simple to make and operate,
needing only a handful of low-tech, inexpensive parts,
making them available even in less-developed
areas of the globe, where expensive and complicated
"hi-tech" systems are unavailable and, if present,
are subject to multiple failure modes.

* The only ready and sizable reservoir of trained
Morse operators is the Amateur Radio community.
If we remove any incentive to develop Morse skill,
this valuable asset will quickly cease to exist.

There is also a global historic and "Heritage of Humanity"
aspect to this issue. Morse Code has served as a
reliable means of communications for one and a half centuries.
It has been a primary tool in life-saving and part of
the great communication web that has knit us together,
first spanning neighborhoods, then continents, and
finally the world. As a tool in the evolution of
the global community, it ranks with the sailing ship,
steam ship, railroad and telephone. We preserve early
examples of these other means of connecting with
the larger world; Morse Code surely deserves at least
a modest effort at preservation, just as we preserve
these other "touch-stones" of our progress.
Without some form of incentive,
this important skill will be lost to us.

We can accomplish this while removing the burden
and expense from the FCC.
I respectfully suggest the following steps be adopted:

1. Drop the Element One (Morse Code) testing requirement
from Amateur Radio regulations. The FCC would
no longer be responsible for, or need to allocate
resources to, this task.

2. Reallocate the bottom 10 kiloHertz of each Amateur Radio
spectrum allocation to exclusive Morse Code use.
This is a small window, but is easily sufficient bandwidth
for skilled Morse operators.
It provides an "historic preserve," protected from
new and wider-bandwidth modes and will have
no impact on the development and use of new techniques.

3. Authorize the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) to
administer and issue, through the Volunteer Examiner
program, a license endorsement, attachable to any class
of Amateur Radio license, awarded for demonstration
of Morse skill at 5 WPM or better. Only those Amateur
operators with the endorsement could operate their stations
in the 10 kHz "historic preserves." The ARRL could
establish premiums for contesting and skill certifications
earned within the "preserves."
Continue to allow Morse Code use throughout
the remaining Amateur spectrum, subject to present rules
and/or future reallocations.

These modest steps will preserve this valuable and historic skill,
while removing the administrative burden from the FCC.
I respectfully submit them for your consideration.

Kind Regards,
David L. Stinson AB5S
Field Engineer
Wylie, Texas

I actually agree with you on this one. Even today....well actually for
many years....the 80 meter band is a classic example of wasted space.
Mostly dead air in the "CW" allocations. In particular from 3.5 to 3.6.
Lots of open space from 3.6 to 3.750 if you want to be open minded on this
subject.

40 is another case and it is gonna be real tough to put that mess straight..
hi.

20/15/10 could all use some "CW Trimming" today.

I still like my suggestion......bottom 25 of ALL HF bands....CW ONLY. No
digital, etc. That way those that want can.

Those that don't.....won't.

Dan/W4NTI

"John Smith" wrote in message
...

Band allocation should be allocated on long term statistics generated in
regards to the modes used... (past year or two)

As CW continues its' drop, it needs less and less allocations... as
no-coders now enter CW will have to shrink to accommodate the new users
and their modes...

John

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:09:49 -0700, an_old_friend wrote:

Just why would there need to be a test in order to use this specturm
set aside

One can either USE Morse Code or not

But still the plea that Morse Code needs welfare in order to endure

David Stinson wrote:
Comments submitted to the FCC,
advocating ARRL administration of
Morse license endorsment:
-------------------

18 Aug. 2005
WT Docket 05-235,
Amateur Radio Morse Code Testing Requirement.

cuting to save BW

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
10 KC? Not enough. At least 25 per HF band.

Why so little? Should be at least this much:

Morse Code Only Subbands:

1800-1830
3500-3575
7000-7050
10100-10115
14000-14050
18068-18083
21000-21075
24890-24905
28000-28100

Why not?

73 de Jim, N2EY

I think it is an excellent solution (except for the 10KHZ only part) to the
situation.

Knowing the FCC, if it takes it off their hands they will jump on it. If
they have time to write up the NPRM that is.

Dan/W4NTI

"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

John Smith wrote:
Band allocation should be allocated on long term statistics generated in
regards to the modes used... (past year or two)

As CW continues its' drop, it needs less and less allocations... as
no-coders now enter CW will have to shrink to accommodate the new users
and their modes...

John

And yet His comments are some of the best I have seen in defense of
Code testing

He addreses the reasoning to the Public Good tries to relive the FCC of
the Burdens involved

all in all a decent defense of the indefensable

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:09:49 -0700, an_old_friend wrote:

Just why would there need to be a test in order to use this specturm
set aside

One can either USE Morse Code or not

But still the plea that Morse Code needs welfare in order to endure

David Stinson wrote:
Comments submitted to the FCC,
advocating ARRL administration of
Morse license endorsment:
-------------------

18 Aug. 2005
WT Docket 05-235,
Amateur Radio Morse Code Testing Requirement.

cuting to save BW