|
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
Bill Sohl wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: (SNIP) FCC also left 13wpm and 20wpm as requirements for many years with the lack of change/elimination of said 13/20 wpm elements supposedly waiting for a "consensus" in the amateur ranks. Perhaps. Yet anyone who could come up with a doctor's note could get a medical waiver. Such notes were never hard to get. But in the overall perspective waivers were used only by a relatively small percentage of new hams. I've heard figures as high as 10%. Perhaps, but that can't be verified easily. The FCC database does indicate if someone used a medical waiver. You have to know the codes but they're pretty easy to figure out. Ancient history now anyway, since medical waivers haven't existed for almost six years now. In the few VE sessions I assisted in I don't recall ever seeing one being used. Was the waiver process abused by some? Probably, but it wasn't a wide practice at all. Who can say what constitutes "abuse" if the person got a doctor's note? Exactly. In the end, it was the doctor's, if anyone, that would have to be assessed as signing off on a waiver that shouldn't have been issued. In spite of the lack of any consensus on code the FCC did, in fact, end 13/20wpm test elements in April 2000 based on arguments and the FCC's own conclusions at that time. Yep. FCC also reduced the written tests at the same time and closed off three license classes to new issues. I presume you mean the FCC reduced the number of written tests as opposed to the overall difficulty of the test material since the syllabus for the now three remaining test elements did not change. What FCC did was to reduce both the number of tests and the total number of questions for each class of license. Neither of which makes testing easier as long as the total syllabus of questions remains the same. I disagree! If a student is given a list of 100 spelling words to learn, it is neither easier or harder for the student to pass if the spelling test has 20 words or 10 words. In the end, the student still has to learn all the words on the list. No, the student simply has to learn enough words to get a passing grade. And the number of tests was reduced as well, so the chances of squeaking by improved! (SNIP) End result is less admin work for FCC. No more medical waivers, only three written elements instead of five, and eventual elimination of some rules. That eventual elimination, unless changes are made by the FCC, could well be upwards of 50+ years assuming there are some Advanced hams who are in their 20s. Only true if those hams continue to renew and never ever upgrade. Do you see any mass effort to upgrade by currently licensed Novice or Advanced license holders? Nope. Novice total is down to about half what it was before restructuring, Advanced is down to about three-quarters. Part of that is clearly attrition, and some is due to upgrading. In fact, there seems to be more than a handful of Advanced that say they'll never upgrade so they can be ID'd as having passed 13wpm morse. Which simply proves their ignorance! The simple possession of an Advanced is not proof of 13 wpm code testing, because: - For a decade or so, an Advanced could be had with 5 wpm code and a medical waiver - For a limited time after the 2000 restructuring, an Advanced could be had by getting a 5 wpm General and a CSCE for the Advanced written. Bottom line, every statement or opinion offered by the FCC in any NPRM and/or R&O is not cast in stone and can end up being revisited and changed at a later review. Agreed - but at the same time, getting them to do so is an uphill battle. Particularly when such an change will result in more work for FCC. On the issue of a learners license I see no additional work for FCC if there are only one or two other licenses as some (e.g. Hans) have proposed. The big admin issue with new license classes is that the database has to be re-done. In today's environment that shouldn't be a big deal at all. I know, but FCC sure seems to make a big deal about it. For example, why in the world did FCC decide to renew Tech Pluses as Techs? Why doesn't FCC renew licenses when a modification (address/name change, upgrade, etc.) is done? (see below for possible reason). The entire database could probably be imported into an Excel file and given to some college computer science majors and modified in a day or so. This stuff just isn't rocket science anymore. The problem is that since the database is official Government information, it can't just be handed out that way. And with over 700,000 entries in the amateur radio database alone, (including grace period licenses), checking for mistakes could be a major headache. The main point in trying to understand the FCC mindset is to help craft proposals that have a better-than-snowball's-chance of actually being implemented. --- There was a time when FCC would renew a license with a modification. This helped me out back in the 1970s when I moved a few times (school, job, etc.). Each move got me a new 5 year term on the license. The FCC went to 10 year license terms back in 1983-84 to reduce paperwork. But then FCC changed the rules so that renewal can only be done if the license is within 90 days of expiring, or if a vanity call is issued. The vanity call thing is to avoid pro-rating the fee, IIRC. But why not renew a ham's license whenever the amateur moves? Doing so would reduce the number of interactions each ham would have with FCC unless they didn't change anything for 10 years. One possible reason is enforcement. An enforcement tool that FCC has used recently is to not routinely renew the license of an amateur who is at odds with the Commission. (K1MAN?) The license renewal is "under review" for as long as FCC deems suitable. Obviously it helps not to be handing out renewals all the time for that tool to be effective. Another reason may be to keep the database more accurate. 73 es HNY de Jim, N2EY |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 06:08:36 GMT, "KØHB"
wrote: "Dee Flint" wrote there is a distinct feeling, IMHO, that the FCC does NOT want people to stay at the introductory level. Well that's pretty obvious, isn't it, since they closed the introductory level to new applicants at the last restructuring! Which raises the next question --- who CARES what the FCC wants. They should serve the wants of the people, not the other way around. hear they certainlt should serve the interest of the People in this case what serves the interest of all the people since the RF belong to us all includingthe example of Len aderson 73, de Hans, K0HB _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
On 31 Dec 2005 08:07:27 -0800, wrote:
Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: [snip] What you're seeing is the classic "Law of Unintended Consequences". If FCC does what they propose, eliminating the code test will also eliminate any way for Technicians to get any HF privileges except by upgrade to General. Perhaps it is not "Unintended". It may be precisely what the FCC wanted to do. It was a screwy idea anyway. Old Tech w/o HF, Old Tech with HF, Tech Plus, New Tech w/o HF, New Tech (no Plus) with HF. Good grief! Forget incentives. License people to be "Amateur Radio Operator" and be done with it. this is suposed to a license arrangement not some carrot and stick S&M sesion one class for all _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
On 31 Dec 2005 01:52:05 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman)
wrote: On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 16:22:16 GMT, "KØHB" Your proposal perpetuates the caste system currently in place which stratifies and divides hams into arbitrary ranks. That mentality absolutely needs to be destroyed. A Vietnamese proverb I include in my syllabus each semester says, "If you study you'll become what you desire; if you do not study you'll never become anything." That exactly describes what separates any particular segment of a population from another, including hams. There is no "caste system" in amateur radio, for a caste is defined being born into a particular social class and never being able to move from that class. What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. a simple lie one of the core lies told by on the side of the ProCode test issue in may case it borders on being a personal slander but that is all to comon too You sound like a socialist, Hans -- a believer in one and only one class in a society. No 73 for socialists, Jeff KH6O _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
|
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 06:08:36 GMT, KØHB wrote:
Which raises the next question --- who CARES what the FCC wants. I care what the FCC wants. Whether I think that they are on the right track or not is not the issue. We the people engage professionals to do a job, in this case, be the "Highway Patrol of the Airwaves". We frustrate that by second-guessing them at every turn, telling them that we know better, and thereby not letting them do the job that we hired them for. If the bottom line is that the folks we engage do not do a professional job, throw then out and get folks who will. This presumes that you have better professional qualifications than they do. As an employer you know that scenario very well. They should serve the wants of the people, not the other way around. No, they should provide for the NEEDS of the people. Otherwise, it's like letting the kids live on candy bars and soda rather than health-giving food. Happy New Year to y'all. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
wrote: wrote: On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 06:08:36 GMT, "KØHB" wrote: "Dee Flint" wrote there is a distinct feeling, IMHO, that the FCC does NOT want people to stay at the introductory level. Well that's pretty obvious, isn't it, since they closed the introductory level to new applicants at the last restructuring! Which raises the next question --- who CARES what the FCC wants. They should serve the wants of the people, not the other way around. hear they certainlt should serve the interest of the People in this case what serves the interest of all the people since the RF belong to us all includingthe example of Len aderson Ham Radio belongs to the people who benefit from our emergency planning and our emergency exercises. They probably don't even know who they are. Yet... absolutely len is merely one of those people there are billions of other world wide but certain people would keep this resource hostage to their own egos and need to have some paper allowing the say "I am better than you" |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
|
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
an_old_friend wrote: wrote: wrote: hear they certainlt should serve the interest of the People in this case what serves the interest of all the people since the RF belong to us all includingthe example of Len aderson Ham Radio belongs to the people who benefit from our emergency planning and our emergency exercises. They probably don't even know who they are. Yet... absolutely len is merely one of those people there are billions of other world wide but certain people would keep this resource hostage to their own egos That's like the American Red Cross saying "I need 3 operators per shift, 3 shifts per day, around the clock until further notice," and Steve Robeson/K4YZ saying, "You're gonna get no operator on the 1st shift, two on the second shift, and one on the third shift because I know what you need better than you do. Besides, leaving an operations post unmanned is what we did in the Marines." and need to have some paper allowing the say "I am better than you" "I am Extra, here me roar!" |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
Phil Kane wrote: On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 06:08:36 GMT, KØHB wrote: Which raises the next question --- who CARES what the FCC wants. I care what the FCC wants. Your income is tied to what the FCC wants. Whether I think that they are on the right track or not is not the issue. Correct for a barrister in your position. We the people engage professionals to do a job, in this case, be the "Highway Patrol of the Airwaves". We frustrate that by second-guessing them at every turn, telling them that we know better, and thereby not letting them do the job that we hired them for. That usually involved the assistance of a barrister If the bottom line is that the folks we engage do not do a professional job, throw then out and get folks who will. This presumes that you have better professional qualifications than they do. The NPRM and R/O of 98 sure didn't impress. How many of those folks retired on a fat salary? As an employer you know that scenario very well. Hans is an employer? Of what sort? They should serve the wants of the people, not the other way around. No, they should provide for the NEEDS of the people. Needs/Wants? Jim "needs" numerous license classes. As long as he can stay on top. Otherwise, it's like letting the kids live on candy bars and soda rather than health-giving food. Happy New Year to y'all. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane Phil, Happy New Year to you, too!!! |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
wrote: On 30 Dec 2005 16:21:17 -0800, wrote: Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: cut But FCC said no to all of them involving more privs for Techs, new license classes, automatic upgrades, and much more. Yet nothing in the FCC's rejection even comes close to stating their decision is absolute/final and irrevocable based on the princioples that you ascribe to the FCC. Of course not! No regulatory agency is ever going to say that any decision is final and/or irrevocable. indeed meaning most of what you have been going aboiut is meaningless cut In the few VE sessions I assisted in I don't recall ever seeing one being used. Was the waiver process abused by some? Probably, but it wasn't a wide practice at all. Who can say what constitutes "abuse" if the person got a doctor's note? accorsong the words of Stevie he is and by extention all VE's Steveve has publicaly claimed that he refused to process a (inone case that he admits to) a wiaver. likely there are other example s of VE's doing this it would be ilgeal but it has been done cu Mark, that posting needs to go to Riley. |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
|
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
wrote: wrote: On 30 Dec 2005 16:21:17 -0800, wrote: Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: cut But FCC said no to all of them involving more privs for Techs, new license classes, automatic upgrades, and much more. Yet nothing in the FCC's rejection even comes close to stating their decision is absolute/final and irrevocable based on the princioples that you ascribe to the FCC. Of course not! No regulatory agency is ever going to say that any decision is final and/or irrevocable. indeed meaning most of what you have been going aboiut is meaningless cut In the few VE sessions I assisted in I don't recall ever seeing one being used. Was the waiver process abused by some? Probably, but it wasn't a wide practice at all. Who can say what constitutes "abuse" if the person got a doctor's note? accorsong the words of Stevie he is and by extention all VE's Steveve has publicaly claimed that he refused to process a (inone case that he admits to) a wiaver. likely there are other example s of VE's doing this it would be ilgeal but it has been done cu Mark, that posting needs to go to Riley. it has gone to the FCC, the FBI, The TN BoN, the AF officers overseeing CAP, the police, and the ARRL VEC if you know how to get it Riley himself please assist me I am more than willing to try the FCC again |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
an_old_friend wrote: wrote: wrote: On 30 Dec 2005 16:21:17 -0800, wrote: Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Bill Sohl wrote: cut But FCC said no to all of them involving more privs for Techs, new license classes, automatic upgrades, and much more. Yet nothing in the FCC's rejection even comes close to stating their decision is absolute/final and irrevocable based on the princioples that you ascribe to the FCC. Of course not! No regulatory agency is ever going to say that any decision is final and/or irrevocable. indeed meaning most of what you have been going aboiut is meaningless cut In the few VE sessions I assisted in I don't recall ever seeing one being used. Was the waiver process abused by some? Probably, but it wasn't a wide practice at all. Who can say what constitutes "abuse" if the person got a doctor's note? accorsong the words of Stevie he is and by extention all VE's Steveve has publicaly claimed that he refused to process a (inone case that he admits to) a wiaver. likely there are other example s of VE's doing this it would be ilgeal but it has been done cu Mark, that posting needs to go to Riley. it has gone to the FCC, the FBI, The TN BoN, the AF officers overseeing CAP, the police, and the ARRL VEC if you know how to get it Riley himself please assist me I am more than willing to try the FCC again Unlike Steve, Riley actually goes to Dayton. You could hand it to him there. |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
Phil Kane wrote: On 31 Dec 2005 12:56:53 -0800, wrote: I care what the FCC wants. Your income is tied to what the FCC wants. My income is totally independent of what the FCC wants. The agency could be abolished tomorrow and my income will not change one bit (unless "tomorrow" is the day that the COL increase on my pension annuity and Social Security kicks in, as it will tomorrow). The FCC has no connection with that, nor with the private investments that also provide for my retirement income. I didn't realize that you were no longer practicing your craft. The NPRM and R/O of 98 sure didn't impress. How many of those folks retired on a fat salary? If you think that retiring on 50% of a salary that is 50% (or more) less than what one could get in the private sector is "fat", I have a (Weeatstone) bridge that I can sell you "real cheaply". Consider that the newer FERS states very clearly that your Social Security IS your retirement. And I had been told all of my life that it was a SUPPLEMENT to a retirement. The OF's in Federal Service are getting a much better deal than that. Do not forget that a Federal retirement annuity (prension) is not a "gift" from the taxpayers. It is an annuity that is bought by the employee with after-tax money and such purchase is not optional. Writing a sensible NPRM appears to be optional. Does the FCC trot out that kind of crap to the boradcasters? As an employer you know that scenario very well. Hans is an employer? Of what sort? Ask him. Will do. |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
On 31 Dec 2005 15:40:16 -0800, wrote:
an_old_friend wrote: wrote: wrote: On 30 Dec 2005 16:21:17 -0800, wrote: Bill Sohl wrote: wrote in message cut Who can say what constitutes "abuse" if the person got a doctor's note? accorsong the words of Stevie he is and by extention all VE's Steveve has publicaly claimed that he refused to process a (inone case that he admits to) a wiaver. likely there are other example s of VE's doing this it would be ilgeal but it has been done cu Mark, that posting needs to go to Riley. it has gone to the FCC, the FBI, The TN BoN, the AF officers overseeing CAP, the police, and the ARRL VEC if you know how to get it Riley himself please assist me I am more than willing to try the FCC again Unlike Steve, Riley actually goes to Dayton. You could hand it to him there. that is a thought I have considered going to dayton fest for years never made the trip I will mark that down _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
wrote:
On 31 Dec 2005 01:52:05 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. a simple lie one of the core lies told by on the side of the ProCode test issue in may case it borders on being a personal slander but that is all to comon too Claiming motivation or a lack of is a lie? How so? Back up your claim with facts. Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. Jeff KH6O -- Chief Petty Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Mathematics Lecturer, University of Hawaii System |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
Jeffrey Herman wrote: wrote: On 31 Dec 2005 01:52:05 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. a simple lie one of the core lies told by on the side of the ProCode test issue in may case it borders on being a personal slander but that is all to comon too Claiming motivation or a lack of is a lie? How so? Back up your claim with facts. that is of course easier when taking an extreme example which will follow telling and a person and emstraing the power tocarry out the threat if if doesn't learn to flap his arms and fly the will be killed and the wholepopulation of the killed first in front of him is plenty of motiviation to learn to fly it is still impoosible more on point you calim that the only reason I for example don't have an extra class licnse today ist that I am not motivated enough to learn code I tired for years and great effort to learn but failed utterly the reason for my lack an extra class license is not motivation but a lack of abilty Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. no it isn't or at least not entirely I am not lawyer making millions at least in parts becuase I find mthe conduct that would be required to sickening, and if some one car to say my spelling is the problem then the blame falls on the factI got a diffeent set of wetware than the rest of you you have repated the standrad lie we have seen in all politics at one time or another that all with less than another deserve their fate becuase they were lazy that John Kerry is not president of the USA is not a matter thathe wasn't motivated enough. or do you claim thats it is I thought he was going to win at one point. I beleive he lost in part for making a tactical error in dealing the swift boat ads your blanket stement that motivation equals succes is a lie plain and simple Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. a lie jeff and a dangerous one Jeff KH6O -- Chief Petty Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Mathematics Lecturer, University of Hawaii System |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
On 1 Jan 2006 02:19:56 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) wrote
in : wrote: On 31 Dec 2005 01:52:05 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. a simple lie one of the core lies told by on the side of the ProCode test issue in may case it borders on being a personal slander but that is all to comon too Claiming motivation or a lack of is a lie? How so? Back up your claim with facts. Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. The problem is that what motivates you isn't necessarily the same thing that motivates everyone else, and maybe not even a majority. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-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 =---- |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
Phil Kane wrote: On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 06:08:36 GMT, KØHB wrote: Which raises the next question --- who CARES what the FCC wants. I care what the FCC wants. Whether I think that they are on the right track or not is not the issue. Yep, that's one issue. Another is how to craft proposals that have a chance of being enacted. Knowing what the FCC wants is part of how to do that. We the people engage professionals to do a job, in this case, be the "Highway Patrol of the Airwaves". We frustrate that by second-guessing them at every turn, telling them that we know better, and thereby not letting them do the job that we hired them for. OTOH we do have to tell them what we want and don't want. Doesn't mean we'll get all of it, but not saying anything is a sure way to get things we don't want. If the bottom line is that the folks we engage do not do a professional job, throw then out and get folks who will. YES! This presumes that you have better professional qualifications than they do. Well, maybe... Consider that the President, who is Commander in Chief, isn't required to have any military experience. Or that the FCC Commissioners aren't required to have engineering experience or degrees.... As an employer you know that scenario very well. They should serve the wants of the people, not the other way around. No, they should provide for the NEEDS of the people. Yep - all the people. Otherwise, it's like letting the kids live on candy bars and soda rather than health-giving food. And stay up late whenever they want to, etc. Good analogy! Happy New Year to y'all. Happy New Year, Phil, and good to see you again. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
Frank Gilliland wrote: On 1 Jan 2006 02:19:56 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) wrote in : wrote: On 31 Dec 2005 01:52:05 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. a simple lie one of the core lies told by on the side of the ProCode test issue in may case it borders on being a personal slander but that is all to comon too Claiming motivation or a lack of is a lie? How so? Back up your claim with facts. Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. The problem is that what motivates you isn't necessarily the same thing that motivates everyone else, and maybe not even a majority. indeed a good point frank one that had escaped my attention at that point ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-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 =---- |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 1 Jan 2006 02:19:56 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) wrote On 31 Dec 2005 01:52:05 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. The problem is that what motivates you isn't necessarily the same thing that motivates everyone else, and maybe not even a majority. Why would you say that's a problem? The .policy NG was originally created to take the code debate off of ..misc, so I imagine you're on here in order to get the coveted HF access w/o having to learn the code. Hence, you share a common goal with many others (HF access). As you say, what motivates one person (maybe 20m CW DX) can surely differ from what motivates another (maybe the leisurely 40m daytime nets). Differences in motivation certainly aren't a problem. 73, Jeff KH6O -- Chief Petty Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Mathematics Lecturer, University of Hawaii System |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
On 1 Jan 2006 17:54:00 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman)
wrote: Frank Gilliland wrote: On 1 Jan 2006 02:19:56 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) wrote On 31 Dec 2005 01:52:05 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. The problem is that what motivates you isn't necessarily the same thing that motivates everyone else, and maybe not even a majority. Why would you say that's a problem? The .policy NG was originally created to take the code debate off of .misc, so I imagine you're on here in order to get the coveted HF access w/o having to learn the code. Hence, you share a common goal with many others (HF access). As you say, what motivates one person (maybe 20m CW DX) can surely differ from what motivates another (maybe the leisurely 40m daytime nets). Differences in motivation certainly aren't a problem. you haven't reading Frank very well you also seem to have overlooked geting an naswer to your question about proving motivation is every being lie 73, Jeff KH6O _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 140,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
|
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
From: Jeffrey Herman on Dec 31 2005, 6:19 pm
Dec 31 2005, 6:19 pm show options wrote: On 31 Dec 2005 01:52:05 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. a simple lie one of the core lies told by on the side of the ProCode test issue in may case it borders on being a personal slander but that is all to comon too Claiming motivation or a lack of is a lie? How so? Back up your claim with facts. Oh, my, we all have to "back up claims with facts" in order to express OPINIONS? Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Hay, coach, how's about "backing that up with FACTS?" It would have been correct if you struck out "motivation" and replaced it with abilities or aptitudes. Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. The art student with NO art aptitude can study until they are blue in the face about art, but they will NEVER be a great artist. They might know a lot about art history and what others have said is the correct technique with media. The wannabe sports hero can study their buns off on their favorite sport, but if they don't have the ability or aptitude for that sport, they will only amass a mass of facts and statistics. If one doesn't have the aptitude for "hearing" morse code as a "language," all the study in the world will NOT make them good morsemen. The word "motivation" has been terribly MIS-USED for years yet remains a favorite of managers and instructors...and the fleecers who run "motivation classes" and "motivation seminars" for money. The fleecer's "motivation" is greed. The manager who demands all workers be "motivated" doesn't know how to lead or relate to his people. The instructor who stressed "motivation" above all doesn't recognize that students a (1). Required to take certain classes for credit and otherwise don't give a damn about the subject; (2). Might be interested - anyway - in the subject and do NOT need "motivation" exhonerations/nagging. Too many use "motivation" as a buzz-word substitute for themselves being "better than others" because they met the requirements of something and thus like to talk-down to those who complain about requirements. We can all ask YOU why YOU are so "motivated" to hold fast to old requirements in the amateur radio HOBBY and not permit modernization of regulations? Amateur radio is NOT a job, NOT a craft, guild, or union. It is a HOBBY. Hobbies are for personal enjoyment, not a "contest" needing half-time "motivational" speeches by self-styled "coaches" urging their players to "win." |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
On 1 Jan 2006 17:54:00 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) wrote
in : Frank Gilliland wrote: On 1 Jan 2006 02:19:56 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) wrote On 31 Dec 2005 01:52:05 GMT, (Jeffrey Herman) What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. The problem is that what motivates you isn't necessarily the same thing that motivates everyone else, and maybe not even a majority. Why would you say that's a problem? Because it's a fact that conflicts with the premises of many of your opinions. The .policy NG was originally created to take the code debate off of .misc, so I imagine you're on here in order to get the coveted HF access w/o having to learn the code. You have a vivid imagination, Jeff. Hence, you share a common goal with many others (HF access). Now you're building a house of cards. As you say, what motivates one person (maybe 20m CW DX) can surely differ from what motivates another (maybe the leisurely 40m daytime nets). Differences in motivation certainly aren't a problem. Any motivation I have to get an Amateur license is based on my hobbies of radio, radio communication and electronics, not on any desire to play "king-of-the-hill" with a bunch of overweight has-beens who have nothing better to do than to nurture a feeling of self-importance they have because they teeter on the top step of a very short ladder. That, IMO, is a problem, because I'm an overweight has-been with -better- things to do. And BTW, I have no interest at all in HF; 160m and 6m sound interesting, as does sat-com and UHF point-to-point networking. I do plenty of CW (and CCW) on 1750m and below 9kHz, and play with Part 15 on the AM BC band (covert comm is very cool!). I was also a BC engineer for many years, and have designed, built and operated bigger HF transmitters and antenna fields than most hams will ever have a chance to touch. I even have an old AN/FRT-39B that's been sitting in a van in the parking lot of my shop for about a decade that I've been meaning to restore but just don't have the interest. So if I want an Extra ticket with full HF privileges..... hey, not a problem, and you can bet I'll be heard. The -ONLY- reason I don't is because, like I said before, I have no "motivation" to be classed with a bunch of holier-than-thou hammies who think their **** don't stink. And here's a news-flash, Jeff: Your **** stinks just like everyone else's. Now..... care to make any more assumptions? ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-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 =---- |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
|
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
Phil Kane wrote: On 31 Dec 2005 15:53:01 -0800, wrote: I didn't realize that you were no longer practicing your craft. I most certainly am still active as evidenced by my having to pay obscene Bar licensing fees every year. I still do ARRL Volunteer Counsel work, although things up here are pretty quiet, and I'm VP - Regulatory Counsel at a major player in the public safety communications engineering field. I do not take on any other clients, and for personal reasons my FCC work is pro-bono so I'm not dependent on the FCC for income. If you think that retiring on 50% of a salary that is 50% (or more) less than what one could get in the private sector is "fat", I have a (Weeatstone) bridge that I can sell you "real cheaply". Consider that the newer FERS states very clearly that your Social Security IS your retirement. I opted out of FERS when it first started and remained in the CSRS plan. Any intelligent person would My SocSec is based in the 15 years that worked in the private sector and paid into SocSec. FERS participants do, however, make mandatory contributions to a annuity plan that is separate from SocSec, 1% of gross is hardly a "retirement," thus their claim that the social security -supplement- IS your retirement. and all Federal employees are eligible to contribute to a voluntary 401-K plan that is on a par with "private" plans. There were 3 choices of investment vehicles; not thrilling. What is a 401K limited to? Do not forget that a Federal retirement annuity (prension) is not a "gift" from the taxpayers. It is an annuity that is bought by the employee with after-tax money and such purchase is not optional. Writing a sensible NPRM appears to be optional. Does the FCC trot out that kind of crap to the boradcasters? The new crop of folks try - seems like writing understandable English is becoming a lost art - but us old-timers get it fixed a lot quicker and easier than in the Amateur service because in general there's no bickering amongst the broadcast engineers when it comes to FCC regs. I serve as a chapter vice-chair in the Society of Broadcast Engineers and my firm mentioned above has a working partnership with one of the largest broadcast consulting engineering firms in the country. Anyhow, the FCC is less concerned about things technical in the broadcast field than they are in stuff like mergers and consumer affairs and schedules for transition to DTV/HDTV and HD Radio (yes, there is such a thing). On the latter score, the systems allowed and in use are total trash. That's what happens when engineers are replaced by non-engineers who don't or won't understand technical stuff or what "good regulatory practice" is. Let that be a lesson to us as we argue about the content of amateur radio operator exams and the structure of amateur licensing. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane Our question pool is no longer under the thumb of the FCC. It is entirely an amateur endeavor. The VEC may also send code at any speed they choose, as long as they string out the between word spaces. Another poster said he couldn't copy 5WPM unless it was sent at the 30WPM rate over a 5 day period. Hi! |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
|
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
From: on Jan 4, 5:21 pm
wrote: From: Jeffrey Herman on Dec 31 2005, 6:19 pm Dec 31 2005, 6:19 pm show options What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. Actually, the difference is who met the various requirements and who didn't. Actually NO. Those who PASSED the tests got theirs. The TESTS have been largely modified by amateur politics to reflect what a small, special-interest group desired. That should be glaringly obvious over the years, resulting in the Byzantine-structured SIX license classes that existed prior to Restructuring of 2000. Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Hay, coach, how's about "backing that up with FACTS?" It would have been correct if you struck out "motivation" and replaced it with abilities or aptitudes. An ability or aptitude is only one factor. Tsk, tsk, that's so PRIME that there really aren't "any other factors." :-) Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. The art student with NO art aptitude can study until they are blue in the face about art, but they will NEVER be a great artist. Maybe not. But they will be a better artist than the person with a high aptitude for art who never studies. Nonsense, Jimmie, pure unadulterated NONSENSE. [try not to get in over your head (again) into areas where you have NO expertise] ART is in the DOING. Artists "learn" media by doing. It's the ONLY way it can be done. All will tell you so. Those who aren't gifted with the art aptitude APPEAR to "not study" (to non-art people) only because you can't get into their head, feel their mind-hand-media coordination, feel their inspiration when their inner mind guides their hands through their eyes. "Studying" art consists of a lot of make-work "book learning" of artists from contemporary to the Old Masters. One absorbs a lot of facts but NO real relationship to DOING art. The wannabe sports hero can study their buns off on their favorite sport, but if they don't have the ability or aptitude for that sport, they will only amass a mass of facts and statistics. Athletic accomplishment is not developed by "study". It is developed by training, practice and competition. All the aptitude or ability will not amount to anything without training. More NONSENSE, Jimmie. You can't make a 140 pound runner into a football linebacker (college or pro level) through "study" OR "training, practice, competition." For one thing, the "training" will result in injuries (when the real linebackers smoosh then into the ground) so that they can't "practice." There won't be any "competition" because they can't survive the "training." On the same token, it is highly unlikely that the linebacker physical type will ever develop into the longer-distance runner due to the body's structure. NO "training, practice, competition" will result since their bodies aren't capable. That's just two examples of WHY there are so many kinds of physical sport. Without the ability or aptitude, a person will not become a world-class athlete. True enough. You are finally coming around to it... But a person with very little "sports ability" who trains will be a better athlete than the person with high aptitude who does not train. Did you watch Texas v. USC in the Rose Bowl Championship game? The Longhorns were NOT using long-distance runner physique types for their defensive team. If one doesn't have the aptitude for "hearing" morse code as a "language," all the study in the world will NOT make them good morsemen. There are obviously different levels of Morse Code aptitude. But the person who does not study will not learn it, regardless of aptitude. TRAINING and PRACTICE, Jimmie, NOT "study." You are disagreeing with yourself. Most people learn to understand and speak a language by the age of three years, and if the opportunity exists, to read and write by the age of seven or eight years (if not earlier). Both are much more complex cognitive tasks than learning Morse Code at 20 wpm or so. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Human languages are "learnable" because of the inate ability of humans to relate sounds...tone, pitch, duration, etc., to concepts, emotions, intellectual information, etc. "Morse code" is NOT A LANGUAGE per se. International Morse Code is a REPRESENTATION of the English language alphanumeric characters (plus most punctuation). Feel free to study all the languages of the world, be a linguistic scientist. You will NOT find any human languages which are based on monotonic bursts of sound. I suspect that Jeff's reasons are similar to *your* reasons for holding fast to old requirements in local real estate zoning and oppose modernization of those regulations. Total Troll Bull****, Jimmie. Local Zoning regulations have NOTHING to do with the subject in this thread. You've MANUFACTURED an issue which is NOT an amateur radio policy issue. Amateur radio is NOT a job, NOT a craft, guild, or union. That's true. Does that mean there should be no requirements for it? No standards? No accomplishments or skills? You seem to think so. More Trolling BS, Jimmie. I stated that amateur radio is NOT a job, NOT a craft, guild, or union. It is NOT professional by definition of the FCC...that is why the Commission defines it as AMATEUR radio. Since amateur radio is NOT a profession, there is NO need to ACT or PRETEND or falsly-raise-to-professional-standards ANYTHING that is done in amateur radio. It is basically a HOBBY and the "accomplishments" and "skills" by individual hobbyists are venerated in the media, NOT by the Commission. The FCC REQUIRES certain technical regulations to be met (or be considered illegal if not within those regulations). Doing so requires skills, accomplishments in making sure those REGULATIONS are met...or knowing enough to have others, WITH skills and accomplishments in metrology, to find out if their equipment is within regulations. We have seen what happens to a radio service like that. It's called cb. Citizens Band Radio Service has evolved since its "Class D" beginning in 1958, 48 years ago. If there is a "fault" in CB, that is due mainly to lack of enforcement in the face of unexpected growth of users through low-cost offshore imports. There was NEVER any "regulation" stating that CB users must always act like hams, use the same jargon, use the same procedures, etc., etc. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Aircraft Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Maritime Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as Private Land Mobile Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as any of the Military radio services. [ roger that! ] Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Radio Control Radio Service (Part 95). Why don't hams emulate one of the other radio services? And why do so many demand that CB users act, do, talk like they? Remember that the appelation "ham" derived long ago (about 1900) as an unkind word applied by professional radio operators towards the amateurs. Amateurs seem to have LIKED it and, ever since, have pretended to be "as good" and sometimes (in a fit of grandeur) "better than" (!) the pros. Ever since the Test-less CB Class D radio service was created 48 years ago, hams have derided it, called it names, denigrated anyone who used that "new" allocation for Citizens...for NOT being just like the hams. Hams didn't like the NEW jargon that evolved (by millions more users than existed in the ham service) or the use of "10" codes (a la some state police on radio) or much of anything else about it. Now YOU are joining in the fray. Why? What has CB done to you? Why do you hate it? You want to POLICE the CB channels? Feel free. No license required, purchase a whole set for under $100 at Wal-Mart. Get on the air on CB, "show them how it is done." Get MOTIVATED! Be da Man! :-) |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
From: on Jan 4, 5:21 pm
wrote: From: Jeffrey Herman on Dec 31 2005, 6:19 pm Dec 31 2005, 6:19 pm show options What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. Actually, the difference is who met the various requirements and who didn't. Actually NO. Those who PASSED the tests got theirs. The TESTS have been largely modified by amateur politics to reflect what a small, special-interest group desired. That should be glaringly obvious over the years, resulting in the Byzantine-structured SIX license classes that existed prior to Restructuring of 2000. Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Hay, coach, how's about "backing that up with FACTS?" It would have been correct if you struck out "motivation" and replaced it with abilities or aptitudes. An ability or aptitude is only one factor. Tsk, tsk, that's so PRIME that there really aren't "any other factors." :-) Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. The art student with NO art aptitude can study until they are blue in the face about art, but they will NEVER be a great artist. Maybe not. But they will be a better artist than the person with a high aptitude for art who never studies. Nonsense, Jimmie, pure unadulterated NONSENSE. [try not to get in over your head (again) into areas where you have NO expertise] ART is in the DOING. Artists "learn" media by doing. It's the ONLY way it can be done. All will tell you so. Those who aren't gifted with the art aptitude APPEAR to "not study" (to non-art people) only because you can't get into their head, feel their mind-hand-media coordination, feel their inspiration when their inner mind guides their hands through their eyes. "Studying" art consists of a lot of make-work "book learning" of artists from contemporary to the Old Masters. One absorbs a lot of facts but NO real relationship to DOING art. The wannabe sports hero can study their buns off on their favorite sport, but if they don't have the ability or aptitude for that sport, they will only amass a mass of facts and statistics. Athletic accomplishment is not developed by "study". It is developed by training, practice and competition. All the aptitude or ability will not amount to anything without training. More NONSENSE, Jimmie. You can't make a 140 pound runner into a football linebacker (college or pro level) through "study" OR "training, practice, competition." For one thing, the "training" will result in injuries (when the real linebackers smoosh then into the ground) so that they can't "practice." There won't be any "competition" because they can't survive the "training." On the same token, it is highly unlikely that the linebacker physical type will ever develop into the longer-distance runner due to the body's structure. NO "training, practice, competition" will result since their bodies aren't capable. That's just two examples of WHY there are so many kinds of physical sport. Without the ability or aptitude, a person will not become a world-class athlete. True enough. You are finally coming around to it... But a person with very little "sports ability" who trains will be a better athlete than the person with high aptitude who does not train. Did you watch Texas v. USC in the Rose Bowl Championship game? The Longhorns were NOT using long-distance runner physique types for their defensive team. If one doesn't have the aptitude for "hearing" morse code as a "language," all the study in the world will NOT make them good morsemen. There are obviously different levels of Morse Code aptitude. But the person who does not study will not learn it, regardless of aptitude. TRAINING and PRACTICE, Jimmie, NOT "study." You are disagreeing with yourself. Most people learn to understand and speak a language by the age of three years, and if the opportunity exists, to read and write by the age of seven or eight years (if not earlier). Both are much more complex cognitive tasks than learning Morse Code at 20 wpm or so. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Human languages are "learnable" because of the inate ability of humans to relate sounds...tone, pitch, duration, etc., to concepts, emotions, intellectual information, etc. "Morse code" is NOT A LANGUAGE per se. International Morse Code is a REPRESENTATION of the English language alphanumeric characters (plus most punctuation). Feel free to study all the languages of the world, be a linguistic scientist. You will NOT find any human languages which are based on monotonic bursts of sound. I suspect that Jeff's reasons are similar to *your* reasons for holding fast to old requirements in local real estate zoning and oppose modernization of those regulations. Total Troll Bull****, Jimmie. Local Zoning regulations have NOTHING to do with the subject in this thread. You've MANUFACTURED an issue which is NOT an amateur radio policy issue. Amateur radio is NOT a job, NOT a craft, guild, or union. That's true. Does that mean there should be no requirements for it? No standards? No accomplishments or skills? You seem to think so. More Trolling BS, Jimmie. I stated that amateur radio is NOT a job, NOT a craft, guild, or union. It is NOT professional by definition of the FCC...that is why the Commission defines it as AMATEUR radio. Since amateur radio is NOT a profession, there is NO need to ACT or PRETEND or falsly-raise-to-professional-standards ANYTHING that is done in amateur radio. It is basically a HOBBY and the "accomplishments" and "skills" by individual hobbyists are venerated in the media, NOT by the Commission. The FCC REQUIRES certain technical regulations to be met (or be considered illegal if not within those regulations). Doing so requires skills, accomplishments in making sure those REGULATIONS are met...or knowing enough to have others, WITH skills and accomplishments in metrology, to find out if their equipment is within regulations. We have seen what happens to a radio service like that. It's called cb. Citizens Band Radio Service has evolved since its "Class D" beginning in 1958, 48 years ago. If there is a "fault" in CB, that is due mainly to lack of enforcement in the face of unexpected growth of users through low-cost offshore imports. There was NEVER any "regulation" stating that CB users must always act like hams, use the same jargon, use the same procedures, etc., etc. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Aircraft Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Maritime Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as Private Land Mobile Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as any of the Military radio services. [ roger that! ] Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Radio Control Radio Service (Part 95). Why don't hams emulate one of the other radio services? And why do so many demand that CB users act, do, talk like they? Remember that the appelation "ham" derived long ago (about 1900) as an unkind word applied by professional radio operators towards the amateurs. Amateurs seem to have LIKED it and, ever since, have pretended to be "as good" and sometimes (in a fit of grandeur) "better than" (!) the pros. Ever since the Test-less CB Class D radio service was created 48 years ago, hams have derided it, called it names, denigrated anyone who used that "new" allocation for Citizens...for NOT being just like the hams. Hams didn't like the NEW jargon that evolved (by millions more users than existed in the ham service) or the use of "10" codes (a la some state police on radio) or much of anything else about it. Now YOU are joining in the fray. Why? What has CB done to you? Why do you hate it? You want to POLICE the CB channels? Feel free. No license required, purchase a whole set for under $100 at Wal-Mart. Get on the air on CB, "show them how it is done." Get MOTIVATED! Be da Man! :-) |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
From: on Jan 4, 5:21 pm
wrote: From: Jeffrey Herman on Dec 31 2005, 6:19 pm Dec 31 2005, 6:19 pm show options What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. Actually, the difference is who met the various requirements and who didn't. Actually NO. Those who PASSED the tests got theirs. The TESTS have been largely modified by amateur politics to reflect what a small, special-interest group desired. That should be glaringly obvious over the years, resulting in the Byzantine-structured SIX license classes that existed prior to Restructuring of 2000. Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Hay, coach, how's about "backing that up with FACTS?" It would have been correct if you struck out "motivation" and replaced it with abilities or aptitudes. An ability or aptitude is only one factor. Tsk, tsk, that's so PRIME that there really aren't "any other factors." :-) Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. The art student with NO art aptitude can study until they are blue in the face about art, but they will NEVER be a great artist. Maybe not. But they will be a better artist than the person with a high aptitude for art who never studies. Nonsense, Jimmie, pure unadulterated NONSENSE. [try not to get in over your head (again) into areas where you have NO expertise] ART is in the DOING. Artists "learn" media by doing. It's the ONLY way it can be done. All will tell you so. Those who aren't gifted with the art aptitude APPEAR to "not study" (to non-art people) only because you can't get into their head, feel their mind-hand-media coordination, feel their inspiration when their inner mind guides their hands through their eyes. "Studying" art consists of a lot of make-work "book learning" of artists from contemporary to the Old Masters. One absorbs a lot of facts but NO real relationship to DOING art. The wannabe sports hero can study their buns off on their favorite sport, but if they don't have the ability or aptitude for that sport, they will only amass a mass of facts and statistics. Athletic accomplishment is not developed by "study". It is developed by training, practice and competition. All the aptitude or ability will not amount to anything without training. More NONSENSE, Jimmie. You can't make a 140 pound runner into a football linebacker (college or pro level) through "study" OR "training, practice, competition." For one thing, the "training" will result in injuries (when the real linebackers smoosh then into the ground) so that they can't "practice." There won't be any "competition" because they can't survive the "training." On the same token, it is highly unlikely that the linebacker physical type will ever develop into the longer-distance runner due to the body's structure. NO "training, practice, competition" will result since their bodies aren't capable. That's just two examples of WHY there are so many kinds of physical sport. Without the ability or aptitude, a person will not become a world-class athlete. True enough. You are finally coming around to it... But a person with very little "sports ability" who trains will be a better athlete than the person with high aptitude who does not train. Did you watch Texas v. USC in the Rose Bowl Championship game? The Longhorns were NOT using long-distance runner physique types for their defensive team. If one doesn't have the aptitude for "hearing" morse code as a "language," all the study in the world will NOT make them good morsemen. There are obviously different levels of Morse Code aptitude. But the person who does not study will not learn it, regardless of aptitude. TRAINING and PRACTICE, Jimmie, NOT "study." You are disagreeing with yourself. Most people learn to understand and speak a language by the age of three years, and if the opportunity exists, to read and write by the age of seven or eight years (if not earlier). Both are much more complex cognitive tasks than learning Morse Code at 20 wpm or so. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Human languages are "learnable" because of the inate ability of humans to relate sounds...tone, pitch, duration, etc., to concepts, emotions, intellectual information, etc. "Morse code" is NOT A LANGUAGE per se. International Morse Code is a REPRESENTATION of the English language alphanumeric characters (plus most punctuation). Feel free to study all the languages of the world, be a linguistic scientist. You will NOT find any human languages which are based on monotonic bursts of sound. I suspect that Jeff's reasons are similar to *your* reasons for holding fast to old requirements in local real estate zoning and oppose modernization of those regulations. Total Troll Bull****, Jimmie. Local Zoning regulations have NOTHING to do with the subject in this thread. You've MANUFACTURED an issue which is NOT an amateur radio policy issue. Amateur radio is NOT a job, NOT a craft, guild, or union. That's true. Does that mean there should be no requirements for it? No standards? No accomplishments or skills? You seem to think so. More Trolling BS, Jimmie. I stated that amateur radio is NOT a job, NOT a craft, guild, or union. It is NOT professional by definition of the FCC...that is why the Commission defines it as AMATEUR radio. Since amateur radio is NOT a profession, there is NO need to ACT or PRETEND or falsly-raise-to-professional-standards ANYTHING that is done in amateur radio. It is basically a HOBBY and the "accomplishments" and "skills" by individual hobbyists are venerated in the media, NOT by the Commission. The FCC REQUIRES certain technical regulations to be met (or be considered illegal if not within those regulations). Doing so requires skills, accomplishments in making sure those REGULATIONS are met...or knowing enough to have others, WITH skills and accomplishments in metrology, to find out if their equipment is within regulations. We have seen what happens to a radio service like that. It's called cb. Citizens Band Radio Service has evolved since its "Class D" beginning in 1958, 48 years ago. If there is a "fault" in CB, that is due mainly to lack of enforcement in the face of unexpected growth of users through low-cost offshore imports. There was NEVER any "regulation" stating that CB users must always act like hams, use the same jargon, use the same procedures, etc., etc. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Aircraft Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Maritime Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as Private Land Mobile Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as any of the Military radio services. [ roger that! ] Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Radio Control Radio Service (Part 95). Why don't hams emulate one of the other radio services? And why do so many demand that CB users act, do, talk like they? Remember that the appelation "ham" derived long ago (about 1900) as an unkind word applied by professional radio operators towards the amateurs. Amateurs seem to have LIKED it and, ever since, have pretended to be "as good" and sometimes (in a fit of grandeur) "better than" (!) the pros. Ever since the Test-less CB Class D radio service was created 48 years ago, hams have derided it, called it names, denigrated anyone who used that "new" allocation for Citizens...for NOT being just like the hams. Hams didn't like the NEW jargon that evolved (by millions more users than existed in the ham service) or the use of "10" codes (a la some state police on radio) or much of anything else about it. Now YOU are joining in the fray. Why? What has CB done to you? Why do you hate it? You want to POLICE the CB channels? Feel free. No license required, purchase a whole set for under $100 at Wal-Mart. Get on the air on CB, "show them how it is done." Get MOTIVATED! Be da Man! :-) |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
From: on Jan 4, 5:21 pm
wrote: From: Jeffrey Herman on Dec 31 2005, 6:19 pm Dec 31 2005, 6:19 pm show options What separates an Extra from an Tech is not a "caste system" but rather who had the motivation to study versus who didn't. Actually, the difference is who met the various requirements and who didn't. Actually NO. Those who PASSED the tests got theirs. The TESTS have been largely modified by amateur politics to reflect what a small, special-interest group desired. That should be glaringly obvious over the years, resulting in the Byzantine-structured SIX license classes that existed prior to Restructuring of 2000. Motivation versus a lack of motivation *is* exactly why we have a population of citizens with various educational, vocational, and wealth differences. Hay, coach, how's about "backing that up with FACTS?" It would have been correct if you struck out "motivation" and replaced it with abilities or aptitudes. An ability or aptitude is only one factor. Tsk, tsk, that's so PRIME that there really aren't "any other factors." :-) Motivation is the key to everything. Study and you'll become what you wish; if you do not study you'll never become anything. The art student with NO art aptitude can study until they are blue in the face about art, but they will NEVER be a great artist. Maybe not. But they will be a better artist than the person with a high aptitude for art who never studies. Nonsense, Jimmie, pure unadulterated NONSENSE. [try not to get in over your head (again) into areas where you have NO expertise] ART is in the DOING. Artists "learn" media by doing. It's the ONLY way it can be done. All will tell you so. Those who aren't gifted with the art aptitude APPEAR to "not study" (to non-art people) only because you can't get into their head, feel their mind-hand-media coordination, feel their inspiration when their inner mind guides their hands through their eyes. "Studying" art consists of a lot of make-work "book learning" of artists from contemporary to the Old Masters. One absorbs a lot of facts but NO real relationship to DOING art. The wannabe sports hero can study their buns off on their favorite sport, but if they don't have the ability or aptitude for that sport, they will only amass a mass of facts and statistics. Athletic accomplishment is not developed by "study". It is developed by training, practice and competition. All the aptitude or ability will not amount to anything without training. More NONSENSE, Jimmie. You can't make a 140 pound runner into a football linebacker (college or pro level) through "study" OR "training, practice, competition." For one thing, the "training" will result in injuries (when the real linebackers smoosh then into the ground) so that they can't "practice." There won't be any "competition" because they can't survive the "training." On the same token, it is highly unlikely that the linebacker physical type will ever develop into the longer-distance runner due to the body's structure. NO "training, practice, competition" will result since their bodies aren't capable. That's just two examples of WHY there are so many kinds of physical sport. Without the ability or aptitude, a person will not become a world-class athlete. True enough. You are finally coming around to it... But a person with very little "sports ability" who trains will be a better athlete than the person with high aptitude who does not train. Did you watch Texas v. USC in the Rose Bowl Championship game? The Longhorns were NOT using long-distance runner physique types for their defensive team. If one doesn't have the aptitude for "hearing" morse code as a "language," all the study in the world will NOT make them good morsemen. There are obviously different levels of Morse Code aptitude. But the person who does not study will not learn it, regardless of aptitude. TRAINING and PRACTICE, Jimmie, NOT "study." You are disagreeing with yourself. Most people learn to understand and speak a language by the age of three years, and if the opportunity exists, to read and write by the age of seven or eight years (if not earlier). Both are much more complex cognitive tasks than learning Morse Code at 20 wpm or so. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Human languages are "learnable" because of the inate ability of humans to relate sounds...tone, pitch, duration, etc., to concepts, emotions, intellectual information, etc. "Morse code" is NOT A LANGUAGE per se. International Morse Code is a REPRESENTATION of the English language alphanumeric characters (plus most punctuation). Feel free to study all the languages of the world, be a linguistic scientist. You will NOT find any human languages which are based on monotonic bursts of sound. I suspect that Jeff's reasons are similar to *your* reasons for holding fast to old requirements in local real estate zoning and oppose modernization of those regulations. Total Troll Bull****, Jimmie. Local Zoning regulations have NOTHING to do with the subject in this thread. You've MANUFACTURED an issue which is NOT an amateur radio policy issue. Amateur radio is NOT a job, NOT a craft, guild, or union. That's true. Does that mean there should be no requirements for it? No standards? No accomplishments or skills? You seem to think so. More Trolling BS, Jimmie. I stated that amateur radio is NOT a job, NOT a craft, guild, or union. It is NOT professional by definition of the FCC...that is why the Commission defines it as AMATEUR radio. Since amateur radio is NOT a profession, there is NO need to ACT or PRETEND or falsly-raise-to-professional-standards ANYTHING that is done in amateur radio. It is basically a HOBBY and the "accomplishments" and "skills" by individual hobbyists are venerated in the media, NOT by the Commission. The FCC REQUIRES certain technical regulations to be met (or be considered illegal if not within those regulations). Doing so requires skills, accomplishments in making sure those REGULATIONS are met...or knowing enough to have others, WITH skills and accomplishments in metrology, to find out if their equipment is within regulations. We have seen what happens to a radio service like that. It's called cb. Citizens Band Radio Service has evolved since its "Class D" beginning in 1958, 48 years ago. If there is a "fault" in CB, that is due mainly to lack of enforcement in the face of unexpected growth of users through low-cost offshore imports. There was NEVER any "regulation" stating that CB users must always act like hams, use the same jargon, use the same procedures, etc., etc. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Aircraft Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Maritime Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as Private Land Mobile Radio Service. Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as any of the Military radio services. [ roger that! ] Radio amateurs do NOT use the same jargon, procedures, etc., as the Radio Control Radio Service (Part 95). Why don't hams emulate one of the other radio services? And why do so many demand that CB users act, do, talk like they? Remember that the appelation "ham" derived long ago (about 1900) as an unkind word applied by professional radio operators towards the amateurs. Amateurs seem to have LIKED it and, ever since, have pretended to be "as good" and sometimes (in a fit of grandeur) "better than" (!) the pros. Ever since the Test-less CB Class D radio service was created 48 years ago, hams have derided it, called it names, denigrated anyone who used that "new" allocation for Citizens...for NOT being just like the hams. Hams didn't like the NEW jargon that evolved (by millions more users than existed in the ham service) or the use of "10" codes (a la some state police on radio) or much of anything else about it. Now YOU are joining in the fray. Why? What has CB done to you? Why do you hate it? You want to POLICE the CB channels? Feel free. No license required, purchase a whole set for under $100 at Wal-Mart. Get on the air on CB, "show them how it is done." Get MOTIVATED! Be da Man! :-) |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:37 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com