Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
 

Al Klein wrote:
Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics
can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no
longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize.

The Morse code exam is a test of the ability to memorize.
No knowledge of electronics required.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Eliminating CW will just give retards HF, it won't modernize the service.
 

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:05:08 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

"an_old_friend" wrote in
oups.com:

according the Govt lost the POWER to impose Morse Code test on the ARS
unless it can be justified under some other powere of the Constitution

I find it interesting that the ProCode tes crowd has such disrespect
for that document

Proof:

You actually expected him to be able to differentiate between "has the
power to" and "is forced to"?

Eliminating CW is just the lying of those afraid of change
 

Al Klein wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:05:08 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

"an_old_friend" wrote in
oups.com:

according the Govt lost the POWER to impose Morse Code test on the ARS
unless it can be justified under some other powere of the Constitution

I find it interesting that the ProCode tes crowd has such disrespect
for that document

Proof:

You actually expected him to be able to differentiate between "has the
power to" and "is forced to"?
the Govt lacks the power to test anymore if chalanced it it only had
the power while it was forced by the treaty

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:52 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once

But you don't now, and it's now now, it's not once.

proving that one has little to do with the other.

And that you have little to do with this conversation.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 01:41:29 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics
can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no
longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize.

The Morse code exam is a test of the ability to memorize.
No knowledge of electronics required.

For most people, he written test is also a test of the ability to
memorize. Just show most hams licensed in the past 10 years a
schematic and ask them to find a component by function. "Knowledge of
electronics"? It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

Al Klein wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 01:41:29 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics
can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no
longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize.

The Morse code exam is a test of the ability to memorize.
No knowledge of electronics required.

For most people, he written test is also a test of the ability to
memorize.
when did the test aquire gender
Just show most hams licensed in the past 10 years a
schematic and ask them to find a component by function.
I can even my wife who frankly does not the why ofof it can tel the
component
"Knowledge of
electronics"? It would be funny if it weren't so sad.
if you are that depressed about give it up

go fishing but please trying to killthe ARS with your bile

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
 

Al Klein wrote:
For most people, he written test is also a test of the ability to
memorize. Just show most hams licensed in the past 10 years a
schematic and ask them to find a component by function. "Knowledge of
electronics"? It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

In 1953, as a sophomore in high school, I didn't know any
electronics and was therefore forced to memorize the ARRL
License Manual in order to get my Conditional license.
People like me have been memorizing License Manuals for
more than half a century.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
For most people, he written test is also a test of the ability to
memorize. Just show most hams licensed in the past 10 years a
schematic and ask them to find a component by function. "Knowledge of
electronics"? It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

In 1953, as a sophomore in high school, I didn't know any
electronics and was therefore forced to memorize the ARRL
License Manual in order to get my Conditional license.
People like me have been memorizing License Manuals for
more than half a century.
at the risk of seeming foolish but the answer will make a point here I
think tyour license did PRECEED your becoming an EE didn't it, by some
many years
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Al Klein wrote:

Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics
can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no
longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize.


The Morse code exam is a test of the ability to memorize.
No knowledge of electronics required.


Rules and regulations are just an exercise in memorization also. They
require no knowledge of electronics either.

The CW text requirement is like the requirement for a foreign language
requirement for some college degrees, it rounds out the amateur skills.

Dave WD9BDZ

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

David G. Nagel wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Al Klein wrote:

Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics
can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no
longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize.


The Morse code exam is a test of the ability to memorize.
No knowledge of electronics required.


Rules and regulations are just an exercise in memorization also. They
require no knowledge of electronics either.

The CW text requirement is like the requirement for a foreign language
requirement for some college degrees, it rounds out the amateur skills.
an improvement over the drivel most of the procoders are posting
although the analogy streches a bit if I ask what college in the wolrd
has a requirement for one foreign lang and only one

did you submit it in your coments to the FCC?

all in all not bad

Dave WD9BDZ

OT: Outsourcing
 

an old friend wrote:
Slow Code wrote:
jawod wrote in :
slow code is lo-co


LOL, Good one jawod. Did you come up with that all by yourself
or did you have to copy & paste one of Markie's spelling mistakes.
you are loco

PKB, retard.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
 

an old freind wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
In 1953, as a sophomore in high school, I didn't know any
electronics and was therefore forced to memorize the ARRL
License Manual in order to get my Conditional license.
People like me have been memorizing License Manuals for
more than half a century.

at the risk of seeming foolish but the answer will make a point here I
think your license did PRECEED your becoming an EE didn't it, by some
many years

My amateur radio license, obtaining by memorizing the ARRL
License Manual in 1952-1953, was the catalyst that caused
me to seek and obtain a EE degree later in 1959.

The point is that an amateur radio license is a learner's
permit to exercise certain privileges during a lifetime
of learning. It is a permit, not a graduation certificate.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
 

David G. Nagel wrote:
The CW text requirement is like the requirement for a foreign language
requirement for some college degrees, ...

I carefully avoided any foreign language
requirement for my BS EE.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

OT: Outsourcing
 

wrote:
get help sicko
PKB, retard.
althought I was temted to recyve your own there just this once wismen

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On 17 Jul 2006 20:12:08 -0700, "an old feind"
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Just show most hams licensed in the past 10 years a
schematic and ask them to find a component by function.

I can even my wife who frankly does not the why ofof it can tel the
component

I said "by function". Not "locate the resistor", but "locate the
balanced modulator circuitry".

You used to have to draw a few schematics on blank paper - no hints.
Now you have to be able to identify a resistor. Big deal - that
should take all of 3 seconds to memorize. Memorizing which side of
the heart sends out the oxygenated blood doesn't make you a cardiac
surgeon.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

Al Klein wrote:
On 17 Jul 2006 20:12:08 -0700, "an old feind"
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Just show most hams licensed in the past 10 years a
schematic and ask them to find a component by function.

I can even my wife who frankly does not the why ofof it can tel the
component

I said "by function". Not "locate the resistor", but "locate the
balanced modulator circuitry".
you were vague not my fault you can't express yourself

You used to have to draw a few schematics on blank paper - no hints.
so? you used to have as purely pacitcal matter build at at least some
of your station
Now you have to be able to identify a resistor. Big deal - that
should take all of 3 seconds to memorize. Memorizing which side of
the heart sends out the oxygenated blood doesn't make you a cardiac
surgeon.
nor is a EE needed to be ham and contrube to advancing the state of the
radio art

the tests needed to cover those things THEN

THEN they more os less needed to inculde Morse code (lathough it could
have been avoided but for the treaty)

times change

adapt or die

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
David G. Nagel wrote:

The CW text requirement is like the requirement for a foreign language
requirement for some college degrees, ...


I carefully avoided any foreign language
requirement for my BS EE.


Computer program was substituted for foreign language where I went to
college.

Dave

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
 

David G. Nagel wrote:
Computer program was substituted for foreign language where I went to
college.

At Texas A&M in the late '50's, a BA in EE required a
foreign language but a BS didn't. Don't know why.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On 18 Jul 2006 15:04:01 -0700, "an old freind"
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
On 17 Jul 2006 20:12:08 -0700, "an old feind"
wrote:

Just show most hams licensed in the past 10 years a
schematic and ask them to find a component by function.

I can even my wife who frankly does not the why ofof it can tel the
component

I said "by function". Not "locate the resistor", but "locate the
balanced modulator circuitry".

you were vague

I said, "ask them to find a component by function". That's only vague
to those who don't understand simple English.

not my fault you can't express yourself

Not in what you use for language but, then, I speak English.

nor is a EE needed to be ham and contrube to advancing the state of the
radio art

No one said otherwise - but refusing to learn anything shouldn't be a
criterion, and it certainly doesn't contribute to anything but sloth.

the tests needed to cover those things THEN

THEN they more os less needed to inculde Morse code (lathough it could
have been avoided but for the treaty)

times change

adapt or die

Oh, I could pass a test on the technical aspects of communications as
it's practiced today. Could you? (Rhetorical question - I know you
couldn't.) And I don't mean could you memorize enough answers to
pass.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:21:22 -0500, "David G. Nagel"
wrote:

Computer program was substituted for foreign language where I went to
college.

Computer programming wasn't (as in, didn't exist), when I went to
college. :) Except maybe at IBM.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 03:10:39 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

At Texas A&M in the late '50's, a BA in EE required a
foreign language but a BS didn't. Don't know why.

Language is an art?

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
 

Al Klein wrote:

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 03:10:39 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:


At Texas A&M in the late '50's, a BA in EE required a
foreign language but a BS didn't. Don't know why.


Language is an art?

Back in the olden days a BA degree focused on art, humanities, language,
sociology, etc.

Back in the olden days a BS degree focused on math, more math, physics,
chemistry, biological sciences, etc.

The basic difference was M A T H ... M O R E M A T H ... then four or more
semesters of C A L C U L U S.

In fifty years I've forgotten most of that MATH and Calculus stuff, but I still
like to read about the humanities, history, sociology. That must mean
something. My degree, like Cecil's, is a BS [That does not stand for Bull S...]

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 17:19:52 -0400, Dave wrote:

In fifty years I've forgotten most of that MATH and Calculus stuff, but I still
like to read about the humanities, history, sociology. That must mean
something. My degree, like Cecil's, is a BS [That does not stand for Bull S...]

It's only been 43 years for me, but I've also forgotten some of the
math and I also like to read about some of the humanities. But I
still earn my living doing the BS stuff, although being a field
anthropologist does sound interesting.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
 

Al Klein wrote:

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 17:19:52 -0400, Dave wrote:


In fifty years I've forgotten most of that MATH and Calculus stuff, but I still
like to read about the humanities, history, sociology. That must mean
something. My degree, like Cecil's, is a BS [That does not stand for Bull S...]


It's only been 43 years for me, but I've also forgotten some of the
math and I also like to read about some of the humanities. But I
still earn my living doing the BS stuff, although being a field
anthropologist does sound interesting.

I retired from the BS business in 2000.

Now I'm an ordained minister, ordained in 1988 as a Catholic Deacon, and serve
as Chaplain to the incarcerated in addition to parish responsibilities.

Us old hams have diversified interests !!

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:52 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once

But you don't now, and it's now now, it's not once.

proving that one has little to do with the other.

And that you have little to do with this conversation.

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be gone
sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys but it's
just the sign of the times.

BH

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

Brian Hill wrote:
"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:52 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once

But you don't now, and it's now now, it's not once.

proving that one has little to do with the other.

And that you have little to do with this conversation.

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be gone
sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys but it's
just the sign of the times.
Indeed I understand the points of the CW crwod but I simply reject the
ntotions that merits of CW merit the strangle hold it has

after all I can do even EME without knowing a BIT of Morse did so last
night

BH

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

"Brian Hill" wrote in :


"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:52 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once

But you don't now, and it's now now, it's not once.

proving that one has little to do with the other.

And that you have little to do with this conversation.

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be gone
sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys but
it's just the sign of the times.

BH


We have to keep trying to save Ham radio while we still can because once
it's all the way in the ****ter it will be even harder to pull back out &
clean up.

A Ham who'll stand for nothing will sit for anything. I won't accept
more dumbing down.


Help save Ham radio:


1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all
elements required for their license class every ten years.


2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%.


3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.


4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.


5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve
things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

"Slow Code" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Brian Hill" wrote in :


"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:52 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once

But you don't now, and it's now now, it's not once.

proving that one has little to do with the other.

And that you have little to do with this conversation.

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be gone
sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys but
it's just the sign of the times.

BH


We have to keep trying to save Ham radio while we still can because once
it's all the way in the ****ter it will be even harder to pull back out &
clean up.

A Ham who'll stand for nothing will sit for anything. I won't accept
more dumbing down.


Help save Ham radio:


1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all
elements required for their license class every ten years.


No reason to. This has never existed in the history of amateur radio and
there is no reason to think it would improve things.


2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%.


Might be OK.


3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.


Probably wouldn't make a real difference either way.


4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.


Probably wouldn't make any difference.


5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve
things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB.


Terrible idea. The only way to get ARRL to change is to get involved in the
politics of ARRL and work to try to effect the changes that you want.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

Dee Flint wrote:
"Slow Code" wrote in message
nk.net...


3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.


Probably wouldn't make a real difference either way.


4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.


Probably wouldn't make any difference.
certainly would but then you are into killing the ars of course


5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve
things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB.


Terrible idea. The only way to get ARRL to change is to get involved in the
politics of ARRL and work to try to effect the changes that you want.
ask Carl Stevenson about that one

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...


5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve
things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB.


Terrible idea. The only way to get ARRL to change is to get involved in
the politics of ARRL and work to try to effect the changes that you want.


You're most likely correct on getting into the "politics" of the ARRL to
"try" to get anywhere. But, good luck. It is more like a "good ole boys
club". Anytime I've ever seen any reps to the area at a hamfest - they acted
like snobs more than trying to communicate with hams of their concerns OR to
try to win those hams who weren't members - to become members. If the rep
couldn't give me the time of day, the ARRL didn't need my money either. I
stopped my membership when it was due for renewal. That was a good 15 years
ago or better. How did the rep act like a snob? He turned to his bud who was
with him behind the table and ignored others "trying" to gain his attention
and talk to him about whatever. Oh - he may look and say Hi, but god forbid
you interrupt his conversation with his buddy. So much for the "MEET YOUR
ARRL REP HERE"

lou

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 11:15:03 -0500, "Brian Hill" wrote:

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be gone
sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys but it's
just the sign of the times.

The sign reads, "Instant Gratification". Buy the equipment and be
able to put it on the air immediately.

It wouldn't surprise me if, in the not too distant future, one will be
able to buy a ham transceiver, create call letters out of one's
initials or something and legally be on the air while waiting for the
real "ask for it and you get it for a fee" license.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

somebody wrote ...

Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.

Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.

.... and new aircraft pilot license requirement: Demonstrate an engine start
by spinning the prop -- by hand. Even if you intend to fly only jets, some
old "prop-job" might be the only thing that can get through in an emergency.

I wonder: Did the radio amateur community go through anything like this for
the transition away from spark?

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On 24 Jul 2006 16:42:15 -0700, "
wrote:

after all I can do even EME

I sincerely doubt that. You probably couldn't even figure the loss on
an EME path.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:37:53 -0400, "clfe"
wrote:

ago or better. How did the rep act like a snob? He turned to his bud who was
with him behind the table and ignored others "trying" to gain his attention
and talk to him about whatever. Oh - he may look and say Hi, but god forbid
you interrupt his conversation with his buddy. So much for the "MEET YOUR
ARRL REP HERE"

Instead of canceling your membership you should have complained to
Newington. I've known a lot of League reps - some are great, some are
so-so and some are terrible. About the same mix as any large group of
human beings. Canceling your membership didn't make the situation any
better.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:36:13 +0900, "Brenda Ann"
wrote:


"Al Klein" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 11:15:03 -0500, "Brian Hill" wrote:

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be gone
sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys but it's
just the sign of the times.

The sign reads, "Instant Gratification". Buy the equipment and be
able to put it on the air immediately.

It wouldn't surprise me if, in the not too distant future, one will be
able to buy a ham transceiver, create call letters out of one's
initials or something and legally be on the air while waiting for the
real "ask for it and you get it for a fee" license.

Ahh.. the 1977 solution.. first, middle and last initials followed by your 5
digit zip code....

And remember how that "improved" things? :)

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

Al Klein wrote:
On 24 Jul 2006 16:42:15 -0700, "
wrote:

after all I can do even EME

I sincerely doubt that. You probably couldn't even figure the loss on
an EME path.
doubt it all you like

figure the path with any precison no, but I am can use the various
charts to know know I need to contact various types of stations


theseday 100w a 13b2 a preamp and you are able to pick up the larger
stations, and they can hear you

why do Ineed to be figure the path loss when I can determine the
parameters for sucess.

I honestly don't care how much of the signal islost along the way

I care wether a readble signal reach the otherside

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
 

Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:37:53 -0400, "clfe"
wrote:


ago or better. How did the rep act like a snob? He turned to his bud who was
with him behind the table and ignored others "trying" to gain his attention
and talk to him about whatever. Oh - he may look and say Hi, but god forbid
you interrupt his conversation with his buddy. So much for the "MEET YOUR
ARRL REP HERE"


Instead of canceling your membership you should have complained to
Newington. I've known a lot of League reps - some are great, some are
so-so and some are terrible. About the same mix as any large group of
human beings. Canceling your membership didn't make the situation any
better.


Remember also that most reps are elected by the few who bother to vote
for them. Most are unopposed. Sort of like politicians.

Dave WD9BDZ

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

David G. Nagel wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:37:53 -0400, "clfe"
wrote:


ago or better. How did the rep act like a snob? He turned to his bud who was
with him behind the table and ignored others "trying" to gain his attention
and talk to him about whatever. Oh - he may look and say Hi, but god forbid
you interrupt his conversation with his buddy. So much for the "MEET YOUR
ARRL REP HERE"


Instead of canceling your membership you should have complained to
Newington. I've known a lot of League reps - some are great, some are
so-so and some are terrible. About the same mix as any large group of
human beings. Canceling your membership didn't make the situation any
better.


Remember also that most reps are elected by the few who bother to vote
for them. Most are unopposed. Sort of like politicians.

Dave WD9BDZ
anyone that thinks you jion the ARRL and stand for office should
inquire of Carl Stevenson

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:05:27 -0500, "David G. Nagel"
wrote:

Remember also that most reps are elected by the few who bother to vote
for them. Most are unopposed. Sort of like politicians.

And, like politics, those who don't vote deserve the representatives
they get.

Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
 

On 25 Jul 2006 09:31:14 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

anyone that thinks you jion the ARRL and stand for office should
inquire of Carl Stevenson

Or Steve Mendelson?