On 27 Aug 2005 15:30:42 -0700, "
wrote in
.com:

snip
Dave is a Pro-Code-Test Advocate. Dudly is more-or-less a PCTA.
Dave wants to fiercely attack ANY No-Code-Test Advocate (NCTA).

Frank, you've come out as an NCTA and thus are on Dave's ****list.


Then Dave is barking up the wrong tree. I'm not a ham but I do see the
value of keeping the code as a requirement. Not only is it one of the
most efficient and universal forms of radio communication, learning
the skill demonstrates both a willingness and dedication to the hobby
and it's history. Besides, 5wpm isn't so hard that it leads to chronic
insomnia or constipation, but some of these no-coders whine about as
much as Dudly does when he's asked for proof of his military service!
Code isn't that big of a deal. Learn it, pass the test, then either
use it or don't use it but at least you'll have a skill you didn't
have before. IMO.


Dave thinks you've "sided" with me. I'm on Dave's ****list from
years ago. :-)


Well, that's between you and Dave. Apparently he can't make that
distinction.








----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

From: Frank Gilliland on Aug 27, 7:08 pm

On 27 Aug 2005 15:30:42 -0700, "
wrote in
s.com?:


snip

Dave is a Pro-Code-Test Advocate. Dudly is more-or-less a PCTA.
Dave wants to fiercely attack ANY No-Code-Test Advocate (NCTA).

Frank, you've come out as an NCTA and thus are on Dave's ****list.

Then Dave is barking up the wrong tree. I'm not a ham but I do see the
value of keeping the code as a requirement.

Okay, I stand corrected. No problem to me.

However, under the ROE (Rules of Engagement) in here, if you
agree with me in the slightest on anything, that puts you in
"aligned with me" and in Dave's ****list. :-)

Not only is it one of the
most efficient and universal forms of radio communication, learning
the skill demonstrates both a willingness and dedication to the hobby
and it's history. Besides, 5wpm isn't so hard that it leads to chronic
insomnia or constipation, but some of these no-coders whine about as
much as Dudly does when he's asked for proof of his military service!
Code isn't that big of a deal. Learn it, pass the test, then either
use it or don't use it but at least you'll have a skill you didn't
have before. IMO.

Opinion noted. I have a surfeit of acquired skills already,
don't need any old ones. :-)

I don't need to demonstrate how to hand-crank-start a car to
the state motor vehicle department. I've done that anyway.

I don't need to learn musketry skills, of hand-loading a lead
ball, to shoot well. I've shot well with modern firearms. No
personal firearms license in my locality requires demonstration
of shooting skills.

I don't need to "sit" a horse in order to convey myself a large
distance. I've never done that nor do I expect to. All the
"horsepower" I need is in our new Chevy. The state motor
vehicle department does not recognize horsemanship.

I don't need to learn blacksmithing in order to shape iron or
most other metals. I've already shaped metal to what I want
and none of it was for horseshoes. :-)

I don't need to learn to grow all my food, either in ground
or that walking upon it. Food markets serve me and wife well.
I've learned enough to survive on the land in emergencies and
that is, in my opinion, sufficient.

Since 1952 I've learned old-fashioned vacuum tube radio
communications techniques and never had to demonstrate any
morsemanship nor to use it in any transmission mode then...or
afterwards. That afterwards included transmitting on many
more parts of the EM spectrum than is allowed to U.S. radio
amateurs.

One thing I have learned in the last half century is that our
government CAN and DOES accept cogent arguments on changing
existing regulations to better suit all citizens. At the
same time I also learned that there is a large body of citizenry
that absolutely forbids any thought of changing "their" beloved
standards and practices in legislated law! :-)


Dave thinks you've "sided" with me. I'm on Dave's ****list from
years ago. :-)

Well, that's between you and Dave. Apparently he can't make that
distinction.

He sure can't. :-)

Len:

Just answer me one thing. Is it just me who sees "them" constructing
control-freak rules which work at 180 degrees opposite anything conductive
to experimentation and research in new protocols, equip, methods, etc?

I mean these rules are beginning to look a bit like a religious cults',
and deal with the proper form, how to conduct yourself, the status quo,
the "amateur class system", proper worship of "Radio Gods", belief
systems, etc....

If so, I might try a few of those lotus-blossoms myself! This chit gets a
bit old fast!

John

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:55:12 -0700, wrote:

From: Frank Gilliland on Aug 27, 7:08 pm

On 27 Aug 2005 15:30:42 -0700, "
wrote in
ps.com?:


snip

Dave is a Pro-Code-Test Advocate. Dudly is more-or-less a PCTA.
Dave wants to fiercely attack ANY No-Code-Test Advocate (NCTA).

Frank, you've come out as an NCTA and thus are on Dave's ****list.

Then Dave is barking up the wrong tree. I'm not a ham but I do see the
value of keeping the code as a requirement.

Okay, I stand corrected. No problem to me.

However, under the ROE (Rules of Engagement) in here, if you
agree with me in the slightest on anything, that puts you in
"aligned with me" and in Dave's ****list. :-)

Not only is it one of the
most efficient and universal forms of radio communication, learning
the skill demonstrates both a willingness and dedication to the hobby
and it's history. Besides, 5wpm isn't so hard that it leads to chronic
insomnia or constipation, but some of these no-coders whine about as
much as Dudly does when he's asked for proof of his military service!
Code isn't that big of a deal. Learn it, pass the test, then either
use it or don't use it but at least you'll have a skill you didn't
have before. IMO.

Opinion noted. I have a surfeit of acquired skills already,
don't need any old ones. :-)

I don't need to demonstrate how to hand-crank-start a car to
the state motor vehicle department. I've done that anyway.

I don't need to learn musketry skills, of hand-loading a lead
ball, to shoot well. I've shot well with modern firearms. No
personal firearms license in my locality requires demonstration
of shooting skills.

I don't need to "sit" a horse in order to convey myself a large
distance. I've never done that nor do I expect to. All the
"horsepower" I need is in our new Chevy. The state motor
vehicle department does not recognize horsemanship.

I don't need to learn blacksmithing in order to shape iron or
most other metals. I've already shaped metal to what I want
and none of it was for horseshoes. :-)

I don't need to learn to grow all my food, either in ground
or that walking upon it. Food markets serve me and wife well.
I've learned enough to survive on the land in emergencies and
that is, in my opinion, sufficient.

Since 1952 I've learned old-fashioned vacuum tube radio
communications techniques and never had to demonstrate any
morsemanship nor to use it in any transmission mode then...or
afterwards. That afterwards included transmitting on many
more parts of the EM spectrum than is allowed to U.S. radio
amateurs.

One thing I have learned in the last half century is that our
government CAN and DOES accept cogent arguments on changing
existing regulations to better suit all citizens. At the
same time I also learned that there is a large body of citizenry
that absolutely forbids any thought of changing "their" beloved
standards and practices in legislated law! :-)


Dave thinks you've "sided" with me. I'm on Dave's ****list from
years ago. :-)

Well, that's between you and Dave. Apparently he can't make that
distinction.

He sure can't. :-)

John Smith wrote:
Len:

Just answer me one thing. Is it just me who sees "them" constructing
control-freak rules which work at 180 degrees opposite anything conductive
to experimentation and research in new protocols, equip, methods, etc?

I mean these rules are beginning to look a bit like a religious cults',
and deal with the proper form, how to conduct yourself, the status quo,
the "amateur class system", proper worship of "Radio Gods", belief
systems, etc....

If so, I might try a few of those lotus-blossoms myself! This chit gets a
bit old fast!

John

John, for some here (and elsewhere), CW Morse is a Faith-Based Mode.
It transcends rationality. For example, it overcomes all propagation
problems, all equipment malfunctions, and is the world's best language
translator. Just ask them.

bb

From: John Smith on Sat 27 Aug 2005 22:29

Len:

Just answer me one thing. Is it just me who sees "them" constructing
control-freak rules which work at 180 degrees opposite anything conductive
to experimentation and research in new protocols, equip, methods, etc?

Not just you, John, but thousands are realizing it. They are
speaking up on it in regards to WT Docket 05-235. They began
seeing all the wool pulled over their eyes back in the 1980s
when the no-code-test movement began in earnest among amateurs.

I mean these rules are beginning to look a bit like a religious cults',
and deal with the proper form, how to conduct yourself, the status quo,
the "amateur class system", proper worship of "Radio Gods", belief
systems, etc....

I've tried to show that years ago, only to be met with extreme
resistance by the Believers, the acolytes serving the Church of
St. Hiram, the self-styled self-propelled Heroes of the Hams.

THEY claim territorial imperative. THEY are da boyz in da hood
ready to gang-bang anyone intruding on their sacred turf and
changing it.

If so, I might try a few of those lotus-blossoms myself! This chit gets a
bit old fast!

Believers can't be turned off by logic or reasoning.

The only answer is prolonged deprogramming to remove the last
vestige of their brain-washing suds.

On 27 Aug 2005 21:55:12 -0700, "
wrote in
.com:

From: Frank Gilliland on Aug 27, 7:08 pm

On 27 Aug 2005 15:30:42 -0700, "
wrote in
ps.com?:


snip

Dave is a Pro-Code-Test Advocate. Dudly is more-or-less a PCTA.
Dave wants to fiercely attack ANY No-Code-Test Advocate (NCTA).

Frank, you've come out as an NCTA and thus are on Dave's ****list.

Then Dave is barking up the wrong tree. I'm not a ham but I do see the
value of keeping the code as a requirement.

Okay, I stand corrected. No problem to me.

However, under the ROE (Rules of Engagement) in here, if you
agree with me in the slightest on anything, that puts you in
"aligned with me" and in Dave's ****list. :-)


Typical partisan politics: you have to be on one side or the other, no
independent thinking allowed.


Not only is it one of the
most efficient and universal forms of radio communication, learning
the skill demonstrates both a willingness and dedication to the hobby
and it's history. Besides, 5wpm isn't so hard that it leads to chronic
insomnia or constipation, but some of these no-coders whine about as
much as Dudly does when he's asked for proof of his military service!
Code isn't that big of a deal. Learn it, pass the test, then either
use it or don't use it but at least you'll have a skill you didn't
have before. IMO.

Opinion noted. I have a surfeit of acquired skills already,
don't need any old ones. :-)

I don't need to demonstrate how to hand-crank-start a car to
the state motor vehicle department. I've done that anyway.

I don't need to learn musketry skills......
snip for brevity


The difference between our opinions seems to be in our perceptions of
the service. My own perception is that the ARS, while intended to be
used for various reasons, is primarily a hobby. And obsolete or not,
CW is still a significant part of the hobby as a whole. I think it
should be dropped when the mode has been abandoned by the -hams-, not
just the ITU.

You can apply this argument to your analogies for dropping the code:
For example, you don't need to pass a horsemanship test for your
driver's license because horses have been almost completely abandoned
for traveling on the roads. On the contrary, CW is still widely used
in the ARS. So in this respect I don't think it's very fair to equate
horsemanship with code.

And again, since it's just a hobby, the requirement of 5wpm just isn't
any big deal. I learned Morse at an age when things like that are easy
to learn, but I can understand how trying to learn it at a later age
might cause a little anxiety. However, there is a huge assortment of
anti-anxiety drugs available these days (and plenty of doctors who
hand them out like candy). No, that's not a legitimate reason to keep
the code requirement, but it -is- a reason not to make such a big deal
about it.

What I think -is- a big deal is the dumbing-down of the written test.
Giving out the question pool to memorize before the test is a complete
and utter joke. It's nothing more than a memory test, -not- a test of
knowledge and skills. Who's bright idea was that, anyway?


One thing I have learned in the last half century is that our
government CAN and DOES accept cogent arguments on changing
existing regulations to better suit all citizens. At the
same time I also learned that there is a large body of citizenry
that absolutely forbids any thought of changing "their" beloved
standards and practices in legislated law! :-)


The requirement will eventually be dropped. That much is inevitable.
The question is really about -when- it should be dropped. Either way,
I still have no intentions of getting a ham license -- that is, not
unless ARRL of Borg decides to assimilate the 1750m band.








----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----