| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
Phony's can ignore. This question doesn't apply to no-codes.
Nickle Generals and Extras: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
Yes to the Extra part. I have been trying to get to 20 wpm all my life
and I continue now. It has never made anymore sense to me than a requirement to be able to run a five minute mile. 16 wpm seems to be the fastest code I can differentiate with my ear/brain connection. If the code guys need a special chunk of the band to operate high speed code they can petition for it. My hat is off to those who have both the code skills and the technical skills to be superior to me on any subject. However, I am embarrassed as a long time Ham by those who would deny the hobby to anyone without Code skills. I believe the ARRL offers Award Certificates to those who can achieve the higher speeds. Thanks for the opportunity to speak out. Another characteristic that earns no respect from me is the matter of remaining anonymous on the Internet. I expect that your CB handle is something like "Bad boy" or "Rain Brain". If you were not a troll by choice you might be able to make a positive contribution some where. de John Ferrell W8CCW On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:21:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: Phony's can ignore. This question doesn't apply to no-codes. Nickle Generals and Extras: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? John Ferrell W8CCW |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
Yup. It'd take a bit of practice to get to 20 wpm again,
but its worth the effort IMO. Steve |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew yourlicense?
Slow Code wrote:
Phony's can ignore. This question doesn't apply to no-codes. Nickle Generals and Extras: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? Sure John AB8WH |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
"Slow Code" wrote in message k.net... Phony's can ignore. This question doesn't apply to no-codes. Nickle Generals and Extras: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? Bring it on |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
John Ferrell wrote in
: Yes to the Extra part. I have been trying to get to 20 wpm all my life and I continue now. It has never made anymore sense to me than a requirement to be able to run a five minute mile. 16 wpm seems to be the fastest code I can differentiate with my ear/brain connection. If the code guys need a special chunk of the band to operate high speed code they can petition for it. My hat is off to those who have both the code skills and the technical skills to be superior to me on any subject. However, I am embarrassed as a long time Ham by those who would deny the hobby to anyone without Code skills. I believe the ARRL offers Award Certificates to those who can achieve the higher speeds. Thanks for the opportunity to speak out. Another characteristic that earns no respect from me is the matter of remaining anonymous on the Internet. I expect that your CB handle is something like "Bad boy" or "Rain Brain". If you were not a troll by choice you might be able to make a positive contribution some where. de John Ferrell W8CCW On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:21:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote: Phony's can ignore. This question doesn't apply to no-codes. Nickle Generals and Extras: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? John Ferrell W8CCW What? I ask a friendly question as to who would re-new their license if Code speeds were increased to what they should be and I get called a troll. Well eat **** and die. I got a real Extra class license. You nickle hams are really unfriendly assholes sometimes. |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
In article et,
Slow Code wrote: What? I ask a friendly question as to who would re-new their license if Code speeds were increased to what they should be and I get called a troll. Well eat **** and die. I got a real Extra class license. You nickle hams are really unfriendly assholes sometimes. Well, Slow Code, I'll give you a straight (and I hope friendly) answer to your question. I'll then give you a straight (and I hope not- unfriendly) explanation as to why I believe people are calling you a troll. The first answer: well, I think I'd certainly *try* to renew my license. My CW is distinctly rusty - I use it only rarely, and I'm not sure I've ever managed to copy 13 WPM (let alone 20) well enough to pass the one-minute-error-free barrier, or be able to answer the necessary number of questions. So, it'd take a bunch of listening and practice to reach that level. I'm not sure I have enough time free to do it. I've got a busy life, work full-time plus a bit, and much of my ham-radio playing time goes into other areas of the service (I'm an ARES/RACES AEC for my city, a mutual-aid comms responder for the county, and I've put in a huge boatload of hours over the past couple of years helping redesign and rebuild and debug the local hospital's repeater system). Getting really serious about doing high-speed CW would consume a lot of time, which would necessarily subtract from my ability to (e.g.) spend many hours of circuit analysis and modelling and experimentation to figure out why the fancy commercial repeaters we bought had such lousy-sounding audio (turns out the designer had mis-used the discriminator IC, forcing it to "clip" the signal internally, *and* had messed up the design of the de-emphasis network.) And, I have no assurance that I'd ever reach that level. As several other people have commented, it's perfectly possible for people to work, hard and honestly, at copying CW for years, and never be able to reach the 13 WPM level. I strongly suspect that to some extent, CW-copying is tied to certain sorts of neurological organization in the ear/brain system - some people may be born with more potential ability to handle high-speed CW than others. Effort or no, some people seem unable to learn to copy CW at all, others can do so but never become very good at it, and *many* people report hitting the "13 WPM wall" and never being able to copy reliably at rates much faster than that. Now, in your previous epistles on the subject, you and your nym-clone were advocating not only requiring testing for 13 WPM (General) and 20 WPM (Extra), but also making the no-code license a one-year nonrenewable. If that proposal were accepted, there's a strong possibility that I'd end up being kicked off of the air the next time my license came due... either because I was unable to push up to 13 WPM no matter how hard I tried, or because I'd devoted my time to other aspects of ham radio and hadn't taken time to study-up. So - that's my answer. I might end up being able to renew my license (although probably not at the 20 WPM level), I might fail the CW test, or I might just decide that the "old boy's club" had made it clear that they didn't want anybody other than rabid CW operators on the air, and decide to go do something else productive with my time. Now - that being said - let's address why you were being called a troll. I think it's because it's quite clear to people reading these threads that you have a serious agenda, sir. You've made several attempts (apparently under several posting IDs - some refer to these as "sock puppets") to drum up support for your CW Uber Alles rules change proposal. You've scoffed at, or simply ignored, the many people who have pointed out that your proposed changes are 180 degrees out of phase with the international trends (i.e. the WARC rules), and with the FCC's publicly-stated feelings on the matter, and that your proposals are essentially equivalent to ones which have already been ruled out by the Powers That Be. In short, the "what if?" question you asked is entirely hypothetical. There's just no chance at all that the FCC would enact the sort of CW-centric licensing rules you have proposed. Ain't gonna happen. Your asking questions about "well, if it _did_, what would you do" is probably part of why you're being called a troll. Numerous people have responded to you, expressing their opinions that your rules would decimate the ranks of amateur radio by forcing off of the air a large percentage of today's licensed operators. Your "friendly question" seems to be intended to try to address that question, but you phrased your inquiry in somewhat-loaded terms, and in a way which almost guarantees that you won't receive an accurate and unbiased set of answers which actually represent the feelings and opinions of this newsgroup's readers. To sum it up, your way of presenting your agenda probably leads people to believe that you aren't serious about debating or discussing the issue... and that's probably another part of why you're being called a troll. I agree with you that the Amateur Radio Service (and hobby) benefits greatly from being hams to like to study, learn, advance their skills, and use what they know. That's one of the specific purposes of amateur radio here in the U.S., and I think it's great. I *disagree* with you that the ability to learn to copy CW at 13 - 20 WPM is, or should be, the "litmus test" which decides whether a person is Worthy of being a ham. Your fixation on CW is, I think, actively interfering with your ability to support ham radio by promoting *all* aspects of technical and operational learning. I believe that your attitude hurts ham radio more than it helps. That's my $0.05 worth, adjusted for inflation. Take it for what it's worth for you. [and, I'm sorry to say, based on your past postings I don't really expect you to address the meat of what I've said. I expect that you'll toss off a one- or two-liner, dismiss what I've written, and keep on as you have been. I'd be pleasantly surprised to be wrong about this!] -- 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! |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
Dave, you were wasting your time & effort on the ******s in here.
Dave Platt wrote: In article et, Slow Code wrote: What? I ask a friendly question as to who would re-new their license if Code speeds were increased to what they should be and I get called a troll. Well eat **** and die. I got a real Extra class license. You nickle hams are really unfriendly assholes sometimes. Well, Slow Code, I'll give you a straight (and I hope friendly) answer to your question. I'll then give you a straight (and I hope not- unfriendly) explanation as to why I believe people are calling you a troll. The first answer: well, I think I'd certainly *try* to renew my license. My CW is distinctly rusty - I use it only rarely, and I'm not sure I've ever managed to copy 13 WPM (let alone 20) well enough to pass the one-minute-error-free barrier, or be able to answer the necessary number of questions. So, it'd take a bunch of listening and practice to reach that level. I'm not sure I have enough time free to do it. I've got a busy life, work full-time plus a bit, and much of my ham-radio playing time goes into other areas of the service (I'm an ARES/RACES AEC for my city, a mutual-aid comms responder for the county, and I've put in a huge boatload of hours over the past couple of years helping redesign and rebuild and debug the local hospital's repeater system). Getting really serious about doing high-speed CW would consume a lot of time, which would necessarily subtract from my ability to (e.g.) spend many hours of circuit analysis and modelling and experimentation to figure out why the fancy commercial repeaters we bought had such lousy-sounding audio (turns out the designer had mis-used the discriminator IC, forcing it to "clip" the signal internally, *and* had messed up the design of the de-emphasis network.) And, I have no assurance that I'd ever reach that level. As several other people have commented, it's perfectly possible for people to work, hard and honestly, at copying CW for years, and never be able to reach the 13 WPM level. I strongly suspect that to some extent, CW-copying is tied to certain sorts of neurological organization in the ear/brain system - some people may be born with more potential ability to handle high-speed CW than others. Effort or no, some people seem unable to learn to copy CW at all, others can do so but never become very good at it, and *many* people report hitting the "13 WPM wall" and never being able to copy reliably at rates much faster than that. Now, in your previous epistles on the subject, you and your nym-clone were advocating not only requiring testing for 13 WPM (General) and 20 WPM (Extra), but also making the no-code license a one-year nonrenewable. If that proposal were accepted, there's a strong possibility that I'd end up being kicked off of the air the next time my license came due... either because I was unable to push up to 13 WPM no matter how hard I tried, or because I'd devoted my time to other aspects of ham radio and hadn't taken time to study-up. So - that's my answer. I might end up being able to renew my license (although probably not at the 20 WPM level), I might fail the CW test, or I might just decide that the "old boy's club" had made it clear that they didn't want anybody other than rabid CW operators on the air, and decide to go do something else productive with my time. Now - that being said - let's address why you were being called a troll. I think it's because it's quite clear to people reading these threads that you have a serious agenda, sir. You've made several attempts (apparently under several posting IDs - some refer to these as "sock puppets") to drum up support for your CW Uber Alles rules change proposal. You've scoffed at, or simply ignored, the many people who have pointed out that your proposed changes are 180 degrees out of phase with the international trends (i.e. the WARC rules), and with the FCC's publicly-stated feelings on the matter, and that your proposals are essentially equivalent to ones which have already been ruled out by the Powers That Be. In short, the "what if?" question you asked is entirely hypothetical. There's just no chance at all that the FCC would enact the sort of CW-centric licensing rules you have proposed. Ain't gonna happen. Your asking questions about "well, if it _did_, what would you do" is probably part of why you're being called a troll. Numerous people have responded to you, expressing their opinions that your rules would decimate the ranks of amateur radio by forcing off of the air a large percentage of today's licensed operators. Your "friendly question" seems to be intended to try to address that question, but you phrased your inquiry in somewhat-loaded terms, and in a way which almost guarantees that you won't receive an accurate and unbiased set of answers which actually represent the feelings and opinions of this newsgroup's readers. To sum it up, your way of presenting your agenda probably leads people to believe that you aren't serious about debating or discussing the issue... and that's probably another part of why you're being called a troll. I agree with you that the Amateur Radio Service (and hobby) benefits greatly from being hams to like to study, learn, advance their skills, and use what they know. That's one of the specific purposes of amateur radio here in the U.S., and I think it's great. I *disagree* with you that the ability to learn to copy CW at 13 - 20 WPM is, or should be, the "litmus test" which decides whether a person is Worthy of being a ham. Your fixation on CW is, I think, actively interfering with your ability to support ham radio by promoting *all* aspects of technical and operational learning. I believe that your attitude hurts ham radio more than it helps. That's my $0.05 worth, adjusted for inflation. Take it for what it's worth for you. [and, I'm sorry to say, based on your past postings I don't really expect you to address the meat of what I've said. I expect that you'll toss off a one- or two-liner, dismiss what I've written, and keep on as you have been. I'd be pleasantly surprised to be wrong about this!] -- 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! |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:21:48 +0000, Slow Code wrote:
If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? Why would they have use slow down? I say raise it to 35 and 40wpm |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
"yea right" wrote in message ... On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:21:48 +0000, Slow Code wrote: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? Why would they have use slow down? I say raise it to 35 and 40wpm They have to dumb it down so there is no child left behind. |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
Noon-Air wrote: "yea right" wrote in message ... On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:21:48 +0000, Slow Code wrote: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? Why would they have use slow down? I say raise it to 35 and 40wpm They have to dumb it down so there is no child left behind. no body isin favor of dumbing down the ARS after all no one ismaking you behave as badly as you do |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
"an old freind" wrote in message oups.com... Noon-Air wrote: "yea right" wrote in message ... On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:21:48 +0000, Slow Code wrote: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? Why would they have use slow down? I say raise it to 35 and 40wpm They have to dumb it down so there is no child left behind. no body isin favor of dumbing down the ARS after all no one ismaking you behave as badly as you do Yeah, right.....welcome to my killfile |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 22:17:23 -0500, "Noon-Air"
wrote: They have to dumb it down so there is no child left behind. Except the guy who came up with that idea - he got left behind on the short bus. |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
Yup, I stopped at the Advanced and then the code requirements for Extra
were lifted. So there I stopped. Might do it anyways for the extra few KC the license grants me. "Slow Code" wrote in message k.net... Phony's can ignore. This question doesn't apply to no-codes. Nickle Generals and Extras: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
Nickle Generals and Extras:
If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? I always liked the idea of the 13/20 wpm requirements because it did push us to greater heights of achievment. Some want to be Doctors and some want to be rice pickers. That should not be taken away from us. In one country I recall, it was mandated that ALL would be rice pickers at the barrel of an AK47 by sadistic nut jobs with a grudge against achievers. Of course the result was 2 classes: The bullies and the rice pickers. Perhaps the bullies had little regard for anything but rice and violence. Mastering the code and advancing in speed requires determination and control of ones emotional state to allow the information to flow. This is very difficult for beligerant people to do, so they complain, bitch and cajole rather than just doing what needed to be done. As for the technical requirements. Not enough. Even beligerant people can learn to field strip a rifle. |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
One of the greatest mistakes people make is to try to analyze and manage
things beyond their control. The ear/brain thing people are talking about is irrelevant. The process is there if you let it happen. Designed by The Creator. Forget about concentration, forget about analysis. How many of you really think about all the connecting tissues that have to be pulled in order to just walk? Just start writing down on paper what you are hearing. Don't think about it at all. Above all find the peace to release the anxiety of missing a word or character and just continue. This is where the self-control comes in. Soon you will find the errors less and less and you will be able to fill in the missing characters and words by memory. Find the peace of Jesus and all is yours. wrote in message oups.com... Dave, you were wasting your time & effort on the ******s in here. Dave Platt wrote: In article et, Slow Code wrote: What? I ask a friendly question as to who would re-new their license if Code speeds were increased to what they should be and I get called a troll. Well eat **** and die. I got a real Extra class license. You nickle hams are really unfriendly assholes sometimes. Well, Slow Code, I'll give you a straight (and I hope friendly) answer to your question. I'll then give you a straight (and I hope not- unfriendly) explanation as to why I believe people are calling you a troll. The first answer: well, I think I'd certainly *try* to renew my license. My CW is distinctly rusty - I use it only rarely, and I'm not sure I've ever managed to copy 13 WPM (let alone 20) well enough to pass the one-minute-error-free barrier, or be able to answer the necessary number of questions. So, it'd take a bunch of listening and practice to reach that level. I'm not sure I have enough time free to do it. I've got a busy life, work full-time plus a bit, and much of my ham-radio playing time goes into other areas of the service (I'm an ARES/RACES AEC for my city, a mutual-aid comms responder for the county, and I've put in a huge boatload of hours over the past couple of years helping redesign and rebuild and debug the local hospital's repeater system). Getting really serious about doing high-speed CW would consume a lot of time, which would necessarily subtract from my ability to (e.g.) spend many hours of circuit analysis and modelling and experimentation to figure out why the fancy commercial repeaters we bought had such lousy-sounding audio (turns out the designer had mis-used the discriminator IC, forcing it to "clip" the signal internally, *and* had messed up the design of the de-emphasis network.) And, I have no assurance that I'd ever reach that level. As several other people have commented, it's perfectly possible for people to work, hard and honestly, at copying CW for years, and never be able to reach the 13 WPM level. I strongly suspect that to some extent, CW-copying is tied to certain sorts of neurological organization in the ear/brain system - some people may be born with more potential ability to handle high-speed CW than others. Effort or no, some people seem unable to learn to copy CW at all, others can do so but never become very good at it, and *many* people report hitting the "13 WPM wall" and never being able to copy reliably at rates much faster than that. Now, in your previous epistles on the subject, you and your nym-clone were advocating not only requiring testing for 13 WPM (General) and 20 WPM (Extra), but also making the no-code license a one-year nonrenewable. If that proposal were accepted, there's a strong possibility that I'd end up being kicked off of the air the next time my license came due... either because I was unable to push up to 13 WPM no matter how hard I tried, or because I'd devoted my time to other aspects of ham radio and hadn't taken time to study-up. So - that's my answer. I might end up being able to renew my license (although probably not at the 20 WPM level), I might fail the CW test, or I might just decide that the "old boy's club" had made it clear that they didn't want anybody other than rabid CW operators on the air, and decide to go do something else productive with my time. Now - that being said - let's address why you were being called a troll. I think it's because it's quite clear to people reading these threads that you have a serious agenda, sir. You've made several attempts (apparently under several posting IDs - some refer to these as "sock puppets") to drum up support for your CW Uber Alles rules change proposal. You've scoffed at, or simply ignored, the many people who have pointed out that your proposed changes are 180 degrees out of phase with the international trends (i.e. the WARC rules), and with the FCC's publicly-stated feelings on the matter, and that your proposals are essentially equivalent to ones which have already been ruled out by the Powers That Be. In short, the "what if?" question you asked is entirely hypothetical. There's just no chance at all that the FCC would enact the sort of CW-centric licensing rules you have proposed. Ain't gonna happen. Your asking questions about "well, if it _did_, what would you do" is probably part of why you're being called a troll. Numerous people have responded to you, expressing their opinions that your rules would decimate the ranks of amateur radio by forcing off of the air a large percentage of today's licensed operators. Your "friendly question" seems to be intended to try to address that question, but you phrased your inquiry in somewhat-loaded terms, and in a way which almost guarantees that you won't receive an accurate and unbiased set of answers which actually represent the feelings and opinions of this newsgroup's readers. To sum it up, your way of presenting your agenda probably leads people to believe that you aren't serious about debating or discussing the issue... and that's probably another part of why you're being called a troll. I agree with you that the Amateur Radio Service (and hobby) benefits greatly from being hams to like to study, learn, advance their skills, and use what they know. That's one of the specific purposes of amateur radio here in the U.S., and I think it's great. I *disagree* with you that the ability to learn to copy CW at 13 - 20 WPM is, or should be, the "litmus test" which decides whether a person is Worthy of being a ham. Your fixation on CW is, I think, actively interfering with your ability to support ham radio by promoting *all* aspects of technical and operational learning. I believe that your attitude hurts ham radio more than it helps. That's my $0.05 worth, adjusted for inflation. Take it for what it's worth for you. [and, I'm sorry to say, based on your past postings I don't really expect you to address the meat of what I've said. I expect that you'll toss off a one- or two-liner, dismiss what I've written, and keep on as you have been. I'd be pleasantly surprised to be wrong about this!] -- 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! |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
"clfe" wrote in
: "L. M. Rappaport" wrote in message ... On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:21:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote (with possible editing): Phony's can ignore. This question doesn't apply to no-codes. Nickle Generals and Extras: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? Yes, I would. I admit it would take a bit of practice to get back to 20 wpm, but I would do it. -- 73, Larry W1HJF rapp at lmr dot com Ya know what they say, if ya don't use it - ya lose it. We seem to lose track of more than code. Many lose track of some of the theory, formulas and so on they've learned to get their license. There are times you don't seem to need it, but just when you do - you stumble for it. It is best to "try" to stay as active as you can in some aspect of radio. It is a shame to study, test, get your license only to let it all be for naught. Even by going through the news groups and reading the "tech" aspects of repairing and so on, you can at least keep that part of it alive. Just my 2 cents. Lou - KA3FLU That is why I have always proposed that licenses shouldn't be automatically renewable. When a license expires or is just about to expire the ham must retake and pass all exam elements required for that license class before it can be renewed again. 99% of the hams on usenet hate my proposal. They think you shouldn't have to be proficient at anything to have a ham radio license. I think the reason all this came about was after ham radio was dumbed down by restructuring alot of CB'ers were able to get licensed and oppose anything that might required you work to be proficient and valuable asset to the service. SC |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
"JB" wrote in :
Nickle Generals and Extras: If the 13 and 20 wpm CW exams came back and you had to pass the proper code exam for your class to renew, 13 wpm for general, 20 wpm for extra, would you renew your license? I always liked the idea of the 13/20 wpm requirements because it did push us to greater heights of achievment. Some want to be Doctors and some want to be rice pickers. That should not be taken away from us. In one country I recall, it was mandated that ALL would be rice pickers at the barrel of an AK47 by sadistic nut jobs with a grudge against achievers. Of course the result was 2 classes: The bullies and the rice pickers. Perhaps the bullies had little regard for anything but rice and violence. Mastering the code and advancing in speed requires determination and control of ones emotional state to allow the information to flow. This is very difficult for beligerant people to do, so they complain, bitch and cajole rather than just doing what needed to be done. As for the technical requirements. Not enough. Even beligerant people can learn to field strip a rifle. Did rice production increase? sc |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
" wrote in
oups.com: Dave, you were wasting your time & effort on the ******s in here. Dave Platt wrote: In article et, Slow Code wrote: What? I ask a friendly question as to who would re-new their license if Code speeds were increased to what they should be and I get called a troll. Well eat **** and die. I got a real Extra class license. You nickle hams are really unfriendly assholes sometimes. Well, Slow Code, I'll give you a straight (and I hope friendly) answer to your question. I'll then give you a straight (and I hope not- unfriendly) explanation as to why I believe people are calling you a troll. The first answer: well, I think I'd certainly *try* to renew my license. My CW is distinctly rusty - I use it only rarely, and I'm not sure I've ever managed to copy 13 WPM (let alone 20) well enough to pass the one-minute-error-free barrier, or be able to answer the necessary number of questions. So, it'd take a bunch of listening and practice to reach that level. I'm not sure I have enough time free to do it. I've got a busy life, work full-time plus a bit, and much of my ham-radio playing time goes into other areas of the service (I'm an ARES/RACES AEC for my city, a mutual-aid comms responder for the county, and I've put in a huge boatload of hours over the past couple of years helping redesign and rebuild and debug the local hospital's repeater system). Getting really serious about doing high-speed CW would consume a lot of time, which would necessarily subtract from my ability to (e.g.) spend many hours of circuit analysis and modelling and experimentation to figure out why the fancy commercial repeaters we bought had such lousy-sounding audio (turns out the designer had mis-used the discriminator IC, forcing it to "clip" the signal internally, *and* had messed up the design of the de-emphasis network.) And, I have no assurance that I'd ever reach that level. As several other people have commented, it's perfectly possible for people to work, hard and honestly, at copying CW for years, and never be able to reach the 13 WPM level. I strongly suspect that to some extent, CW-copying is tied to certain sorts of neurological organization in the ear/brain system - some people may be born with more potential ability to handle high-speed CW than others. Effort or no, some people seem unable to learn to copy CW at all, others can do so but never become very good at it, and *many* people report hitting the "13 WPM wall" and never being able to copy reliably at rates much faster than that. Now, in your previous epistles on the subject, you and your nym-clone were advocating not only requiring testing for 13 WPM (General) and 20 WPM (Extra), but also making the no-code license a one-year nonrenewable. If that proposal were accepted, there's a strong possibility that I'd end up being kicked off of the air the next time my license came due... either because I was unable to push up to 13 WPM no matter how hard I tried, or because I'd devoted my time to other aspects of ham radio and hadn't taken time to study-up. So - that's my answer. I might end up being able to renew my license (although probably not at the 20 WPM level), I might fail the CW test, or I might just decide that the "old boy's club" had made it clear that they didn't want anybody other than rabid CW operators on the air, and decide to go do something else productive with my time. Now - that being said - let's address why you were being called a troll. I think it's because it's quite clear to people reading these threads that you have a serious agenda, sir. You've made several attempts (apparently under several posting IDs - some refer to these as "sock puppets") to drum up support for your CW Uber Alles rules change proposal. You've scoffed at, or simply ignored, the many people who have pointed out that your proposed changes are 180 degrees out of phase with the international trends (i.e. the WARC rules), and with the FCC's publicly-stated feelings on the matter, and that your proposals are essentially equivalent to ones which have already been ruled out by the Powers That Be. In short, the "what if?" question you asked is entirely hypothetical. There's just no chance at all that the FCC would enact the sort of CW-centric licensing rules you have proposed. Ain't gonna happen. Your asking questions about "well, if it _did_, what would you do" is probably part of why you're being called a troll. Numerous people have responded to you, expressing their opinions that your rules would decimate the ranks of amateur radio by forcing off of the air a large percentage of today's licensed operators. Your "friendly question" seems to be intended to try to address that question, but you phrased your inquiry in somewhat-loaded terms, and in a way which almost guarantees that you won't receive an accurate and unbiased set of answers which actually represent the feelings and opinions of this newsgroup's readers. To sum it up, your way of presenting your agenda probably leads people to believe that you aren't serious about debating or discussing the issue... and that's probably another part of why you're being called a troll. I agree with you that the Amateur Radio Service (and hobby) benefits greatly from being hams to like to study, learn, advance their skills, and use what they know. That's one of the specific purposes of amateur radio here in the U.S., and I think it's great. I *disagree* with you that the ability to learn to copy CW at 13 - 20 WPM is, or should be, the "litmus test" which decides whether a person is Worthy of being a ham. Your fixation on CW is, I think, actively interfering with your ability to support ham radio by promoting *all* aspects of technical and operational learning. I believe that your attitude hurts ham radio more than it helps. That's my $0.05 worth, adjusted for inflation. Take it for what it's worth for you. I know you're right. Hams just want to be appliance operators these days and they don't want license exams that will interfere with them getting to those appliances even though it means being less worthy. I don't see anyone modernizing like everyone says is happening. They just get their licenses and grab a microphone. What percentage of hams have a computer connected to a radio? Probably less than 30%. Hams don't want to modernize. Guess we just have live with inferior operators on the bands from here on out. Then again, maybe hams shouldn't be required to be knowledgable or have skills. Requiring skill and knowledge is too old skool. Everything must be outcome based these days, even licensing. It ain't like we have to help out in emergencies or anything. Thanks Dave, I hadn't thought about it like that before. 73'SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS sc |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
Slow Code wrote: "clfe" wrote in : That is why I have always proposed that licenses shouldn't be automatically renewable. When a license expires or is just about to expire the ham must retake and pass all exam elements required for that license class before it can be renewed again. not that bad an idea it is just the rest of your **** that would kill off the ars |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
In article ,
Slow Code wrote: 99% of the hams on usenet hate my proposal. I can well believe that. 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. -- 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! |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 19:00:06 GMT, Slow Code wrote:
Hams just want to be appliance operators these days and they don't want license exams that will interfere with them getting to those appliances even though it means being less worthy. I don't see anyone modernizing like everyone says is happening. They just get their licenses and grab a microphone. What percentage of hams have a computer connected to a radio? Probably less than 30%. Hams don't want to modernize. Guess we just have live with inferior operators on the bands from here on out. Get on PSK. Most people on most digital modes still roll their own, at least a little. |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
Dave Platt wrote: In article , Slow Code wrote: 99% of the hams on usenet hate my proposal. I can well believe that. 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. at least he he is giving the truth more than 2 line brush off -- 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! |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
i think i would be a great head job extra
"an_old_friend" wrote in message oups.com... |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
an old friend wrote: get help sicko forger |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
|
Why does slow code hate the ARS I asuume it is becuase one of his other names is hey stupid
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 |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
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! |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
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! |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
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! |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
an old friend wrote: SC you are a great soldier. more forgery whyd o you do it |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
please stop forging me. the gte help desk is open but i think you won't seek
hlp. "an old freind" wrote in message ups.com... an old friend wrote: SC you are a great soldier. more forgery whyd o you do it |
Why does slow code hate the ARS I asuume it is becuase one of his other names is hey stupid
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. |
Why does slow code hate the ARS I asuume it is becuase one of his other names is hey stupid
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. |
A question for nickle Generals and Extras. Would you renew your license?
|
Why does slow code hate the ARS I asuume it is becuase one of his other names is hey stupid
"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 |
Why does slow code hate the ARS I asuume it is becuase one of his other names is hey stupid
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 |
Why does slow code hate the ARS I asuume it is becuase one of his other names is hey stupid
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. |
Why does slow code hate the ARS I asuume it is becuase one of his other names is hey stupid
Al Klein wrote: 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? exactly the same way you did by passing the tests required at the time 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. if it were a mistake the only bigger mistake would be to elimate half of the curent numbers of licensees but in any case the FCC will never take my prevledges thay have made that clear accordingly you need to learn to deal with what is instaned of trying to overturn history 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. you spoke too soon 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. so it is cheating it still is obtaining a license but you clearly hate what the ARS is If he hated it he wouldn't care what it's become. he hates the ARS today his manner makes that plain He cares because he DOESN'T hate it. no he thinks or igmagine he can hijack 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. maybe nut the current entry rates sugest otherwise and He does not propose 5wpm and writeen test he prososes 13 wpm and a total lack of an effective entry class and elimiating half the current licees and likely a lot more than that and any "paln" that involves dumping 300,000 hams right of the bat is pretty going to finish off the ARS |
Why does slow code hate the ARS I asuume it is becuase one of his other names is hey stupid
On 10 Jul 2006 18:48:09 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote: Al Klein wrote: On 10 Jul 2006 14:52:20 -0700, "an old friend" wrote: I already earned those prevlidges Earned? By what? Filling out an application? Memorizing enough answers to just pass the written exam? exactly the same way you did by passing the tests required at the time There's a difference between earning and being able to get with no effort. 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. if it were a mistake the only bigger mistake would be to elimate half of the curent numbers of licensees That you have an opinion doesn't make the opinion something that should be government policy. Who do you think you are, Bush? (Oh, forget that - his opinion isn't worth as much as yours.) but in any case the FCC will never take my prevledges thay have made that clear Right - the government NEVER changes anything. Are you really that naive? accordingly you need to learn to deal with what is instaned of trying to overturn history I have nothing to deal with - I'm licensed, and could keep my license if they made 20 wpm, or digital mode testing, a yearly requirement. The biggest problem would be freeing up a day to get to wherever the test was being given. 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. you spoke too soon No, you could have stolen a license - you couldn't have been licensed. There's a difference. Robbing a bank isn't earning a salary. That's not passing, that's cheating. If you're old enough to go to school you're old enough to know the difference. so it is cheating it still is obtaining a license That's about what it's come to these days, isn't it? We can't hurt people's feelings by telling them that they're just not qualified to do what they want to do. The kid fails all his tests and never turns in homework? Hey, he's still a high school graduate. Let his boss suffer. For many years, my CCNY degree was worthless, because anyone could get one. Whether they could pass the tests, or not even sign their name, mad no difference. That little escapade has changed. Maybe some day a ham ticket will mean something again too. Right now all it means is that you took the time to apply for it. but you clearly hate what the ARS is If he hated it he wouldn't care what it's become. he hates the ARS today his manner makes that plain He cares because he DOESN'T hate it. no he thinks or igmagine he can hijack it It's BEEN hijacked - he's trying to get it back. 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. maybe nut the current entry rates sugest otherwise Correlation isn't cause. Who needs ham radio with cell phones and the internet? (I spent a lot of my ham effort maintaining an HT so that I had communications when I was out and about. A cell phone's so much easier.) and He does not propose 5wpm and writeen test he prososes 13 wpm and a total lack of an effective entry class and elimiating half the current licees and likely a lot more than that Oh, you mean the way it used to be, when there were plenty of hams. and any "paln" that involves dumping 300,000 hams right of the bat is pretty going to finish off the ARS Seems to me we had a pretty good ARS when we only has 100,000 hams. If dumping 300,000 means losing half, it means having 3 times the number we used to have. How is tripling "finishing off"? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:07 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com