(Dave Platt) wrote in
:

They think you shouldn't have
to be proficient at anything to have a ham radio license.

Nonsense. That's an illogical conclusion on your part, and _not_
something which has been stated, or can reasonably be inferred from
the postings that I have seen in these threads.



OK then, Since we all want to be proficient, how about this:


Step 1: No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all
elements required for their license class.

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

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

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

Slow Code wrote:
(Dave Platt) wrote in
:

They think you shouldn't have
to be proficient at anything to have a ham radio license.

Nonsense. That's an illogical conclusion on your part, and _not_
something which has been stated, or can reasonably be inferred from
the postings that I have seen in these threads.



OK then, Since we all want to be proficient, how about this:
I am reading


Step 1: No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all
elements required for their license class.
not the worst idea but unlikely to be put in place

Step 2: The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%.
why? again not the worst idea but why bother

Step 3: Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.
and why is it that you hate the ARS?

Step 4: Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.
since this wold kill the ars within a single renwal cycle

your proposal would kill off the ARS n 10 years or less

why do you hate the ARS SC

an old freind wrote:
: your proposal would kill off the ARS n 10 years or less
Why would his proposal kill off the hobby? We've all passed these
tests once already, so why not again? Or, are you saying that
YOU could not pass the various elements again?

--
73 Chris Cox, N0UK, G4JEC

Come and join us here in Bloomington, Minnesota, home of the Mall of
America, July 27 & 28, 2006 for the 40th annual Central States VHF
Society Conference which will be hosted once again by the NLRS.

wrote:
an old freind wrote:
: your proposal would kill off the ARS n 10 years or less
Why would his proposal kill off the hobby?
by eleimating half the ham currently licensed in one year
We've all passed these
tests once already, so why not again?
no you did not pass these test and many of you could not very likely
Or, are you saying that
YOU could not pass the various elements again?
I having never been able to passa code test am one of the folks that SC
wants to throw off the bands with in a year

--
73 Chris Cox, N0UK, G4JEC

Come and join us here in Bloomington, Minnesota, home of the Mall of
America, July 27 & 28, 2006 for the 40th annual Central States VHF
Society Conference which will be hosted once again by the NLRS.

"an old friend" wrote in
ups.com:


I having never been able to passa code test am one of the folks that SC
wants to throw off the bands with in a year


Markie,

I'm not throwing you off the bands. You're throwing yourself off. You
have to pass a test for the privileges. If you can't pass the test like
Techs used to have to pass, you get no privileges to operate and have to
go back to CB with everyone else that can't pass a test and acts retarded.
You earn privileges, licenses aren't totally free handouts from the FCC
yet, as much as you people wish they were. No one is throwing you off the
bands. You being a lazy ass that can't spell and don't want to learn gets
you thrown off the bands. The no-code license was a bad idea to begin
with anyway. You couldn't have got licensed under the old system. You
and Sal M. Onella would still be talking yourselves on CB and ****ing off
truck drivers.

sc

Slow Code wrote:
"an old friend" wrote in
ups.com:


I having never been able to passa code test am one of the folks that SC
wants to throw off the bands with in a year


Markie,

I'm not throwing you off the bands.
no you are merely proposing to
You're throwing yourself off.
nope you are propsing to have the FCC do so
You
have to pass a test for the privileges. If you can't pass the test like
Techs used to have to pass, you get no privileges to operate and have to
go back to CB with everyone else that can't pass a test and acts retarded.
You earn privileges, licenses aren't totally free handouts from the FCC
yet, as much as you people wish they were.
I already earned those prevlidges you want to propose that they be
revoked for no valid reason

fortunately the FCC will NEVER go for it
No one is throwing you off the
bands. You being a lazy ass that can't spell and don't want to learn gets
you thrown off the bands.
now you are just lying
The no-code license was a bad idea to begin
with anyway.
perhaps it was (I don't agree it was but I will grant it might be)
but it is 20 years too late for that discussion
You couldn't have got licensed under the old system.
Acualy I could have gotten one

by simply accepting the offer of those testing to lie and say that I
tooked the recieve I passed one and tranmtiing test I took a month
later and passed (while failig n that day ) and claim they taken and
passed the same day

I certainly could gotten a license I was merely too honest
You
and Sal M. Onella would still be talking yourselves on CB and ****ing off
truck drivers.
I still use CB when it serves my needs as I also use mMURS and FRS when
they suit

but you clearly hate what the ARS is

and you would enact a sytem that would kill they ARS as it is if you
had the power

that makes you one real sicko

sc

On 10 Jul 2006 14:52:20 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

Slow Code wrote:

You
have to pass a test for the privileges. If you can't pass the test like
Techs used to have to pass, you get no privileges to operate and have to
go back to CB with everyone else that can't pass a test and acts retarded.
You earn privileges, licenses aren't totally free handouts from the FCC
yet, as much as you people wish they were.

I already earned those prevlidges

Earned? By what? Filling out an application? Memorizing enough
answers to just pass the written exam?

The no-code license was a bad idea to begin
with anyway.

perhaps it was (I don't agree it was but I will grant it might be)
but it is 20 years too late for that discussion

It's never too late to correct a mistake.

You couldn't have got licensed under the old system.

Acualy I could have gotten one

It was you who said, "I having never been able to passa code test", so
you couldn't have.

by simply accepting the offer of those testing to lie and say that I
tooked the recieve I passed one and tranmtiing test I took a month
later and passed (while failig n that day ) and claim they taken and
passed the same day

That's not passing, that's cheating. If you're old enough to go to
school you're old enough to know the difference.

but you clearly hate what the ARS is

If he hated it he wouldn't care what it's become. He cares because he
DOESN'T hate it.

and you would enact a sytem that would kill they ARS as it is if you
had the power

There were plenty of hams when 13 wpm was the entry level. A 5 wpm
code test and a *real* written test wouldn't kill it, it would just
separate those who are willing to do what it takes to be hams from
those who just want the license without the work.

In article . net,
Slow Code wrote:

They think you shouldn't have
to be proficient at anything to have a ham radio license.

Nonsense. That's an illogical conclusion on your part, and _not_
something which has been stated, or can reasonably be inferred from
the postings that I have seen in these threads.

OK then, Since we all want to be proficient, how about this:

snip exactly the same proposals SC has made before, concerning which
he's stated that "99%" of the people on USENET "hate", and which
contain positions even more radical than those which have already been
rejected by the FCC.

Trolling again, SC? Pity. If you were actually willing to engage in
a productive discussion you might actually do some good, but I don't
see any evidence of that.

PLONK.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

Dave Platt wrote:
In article . net,
Slow Code wrote:


Trolling again, SC? Pity. If you were actually willing to engage in
a productive discussion you might actually do some good, but I don't
see any evidence of that.
in point of fact SC does some good by making the ProCode looks sillier
than tthan most of them are

PLONK.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

SC you are a great soldier.
"an old freind" wrote in message
ups.com...

Dave Platt wrote:
In article . net,
Slow Code wrote:


Trolling again, SC? Pity. If you were actually willing to engage in
a productive discussion you might actually do some good, but I don't
see any evidence of that.
in point of fact SC does some good by making the ProCode looks sillier
than tthan most of them are

PLONK.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!