RadioBanter

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)
-   Scanner (https://www.radiobanter.com/scanner/)
-   -   Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams. (https://www.radiobanter.com/scanner/102003-dumbing-down-licensing-will-just-let-people-really-dont-want-hams.html)

Slow Code August 20th 06 11:50 PM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

So why do it?

SC

Bakb0ne August 21st 06 03:35 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

Slow Code wrote:
So why do it?

SC


Just wondering...

Do you really think what you post on a newsgroup is going to make ANY
difference in the real world...

Just because you bitch and moan on here, isnt going to make them revise
the licensing rules..

Get over it and move on...


Douche Bag August 21st 06 04:06 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 
Because Ham radio is dying. If you make it easier, you can attract more
losers who may have joined earlier. Shortwave and Ham radio is dead. If
you ask the man on the street what AM or FM is? They can answer you
,it"s what the hear on their car radio. The difference is the buttons
on the radio. If you ask them what shortwave is? They would not have a
****ing clue. It's DEAD. Get a life.
Slow Code wrote:
So why do it?

SC



an old friend August 21st 06 06:55 AM

cease and desist
 

Slow Code wrote:
So why do it?

but nobody is proposing to do that

SC



EchoBlip August 21st 06 03:34 PM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 
Because Ham radio is dying.

E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S

I also hear the buggy whip industry is doing pretty lousy except in
Lancaster, PA.




"Douche Bag" wrote in message
ups.com...
Because Ham radio is dying. If you make it easier, you can attract more
losers who may have joined earlier. Shortwave and Ham radio is dead. If
you ask the man on the street what AM or FM is? They can answer you
,it"s what the hear on their car radio. The difference is the buttons
on the radio. If you ask them what shortwave is? They would not have a
****ing clue. It's DEAD. Get a life.
Slow Code wrote:
So why do it?

SC





MnMikew August 21st 06 09:04 PM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

"Bakb0ne" wrote in message
oups.com...

Slow Code wrote:
So why do it?

SC


Just wondering...

Do you really think what you post on a newsgroup is going to make ANY
difference in the real world...

Just because you bitch and moan on here, isnt going to make them revise
the licensing rules..

Get over it and move on...

They don't call him slowcode for nothing.



Slow Code August 22nd 06 12:44 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 
"EchoBlip" wrote in
t:

Because Ham radio is dying.


E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S

I also hear the buggy whip industry is doing pretty lousy except in
Lancaster, PA.




"Douche Bag" wrote in message
ups.com...
Because Ham radio is dying. If you make it easier, you can attract more
losers who may have joined earlier. Shortwave and Ham radio is dead. If
you ask the man on the street what AM or FM is? They can answer you
,it"s what the hear on their car radio. The difference is the buttons
on the radio. If you ask them what shortwave is? They would not have a
****ing clue. It's DEAD. Get a life.
Slow Code wrote:
So why do it?

SC








Why do we want to let in people that don't want to be hams?

SC

mikeFNB August 22nd 06 12:55 AM

why not deal with the eal issue
 
all sounds a bit fishy to me
eal issue
red herring

mike

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:44:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

"EchoBlip" wrote in
. net:

Because Ham radio is dying.

E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S







Why do we want to let in people that don't want to be hams?

red herring

why are we exclding people able to be ham nd that want to for no
reason at all

SC

http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com




Douche Bag August 22nd 06 02:01 AM

why not deal with the eal issue
 
IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod?


ikeFNB wrote:
all sounds a bit fishy to me
eal issue
red herring

mike

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:44:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

"EchoBlip" wrote in
. net:

Because Ham radio is dying.

E V E R Y T H I N G D I E S







Why do we want to let in people that don't want to be hams?

red herring

why are we exclding people able to be ham nd that want to for no
reason at all

SC

http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



an old friend August 22nd 06 02:04 AM

why not deal with the eal issue
 

Douche Bag wrote:
IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod?

wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive
dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it


Bakb0ne August 22nd 06 03:19 AM

why not deal with the eal issue
 

an old friend wrote:
Douche Bag wrote:
IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod?

wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive
dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it


Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything...

They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be
saying that
you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves...

Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh
right)


an old friend August 22nd 06 03:56 AM

why not deal with the real issue
 

Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Douche Bag wrote:
IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod?

wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive
dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it


Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything...

They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be
saying that
you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves...

Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh
right)

well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the
code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now


Bakb0ne August 22nd 06 04:22 AM

why not deal with the real issue
 

an old friend wrote:
Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Douche Bag wrote:
IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod?
wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive
dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it


Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything...

They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be
saying that
you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves...

Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh
right)

well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the
code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now


What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter?

The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/£40 charge or just the
general way of applying for it?

Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant..


an old friend August 22nd 06 04:26 AM

why not deal with the real issue
 

Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Douche Bag wrote:
IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod?
wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive
dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it

Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything...

They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be
saying that
you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves...

Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh
right)

well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the
code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now


What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter?

The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/£40 charge or just the
general way of applying for it?

Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant..

having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those
with bad attiudes than a code test

not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the
license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free
(the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks
any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so
this might escape you I should have been clearer

nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the
flamers and trolls had driven them off


Bakb0ne August 23rd 06 03:34 AM

why not deal with the real issue
 

an old friend wrote:
Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Douche Bag wrote:
IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod?
wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive
dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it

Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything....

They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be
saying that
you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves...

Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh
right)
well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the
code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now


What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter?

The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/£40 charge or just the
general way of applying for it?

Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant..

having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those
with bad attiudes than a code test

not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the
license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free
(the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks
any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so
this might escape you I should have been clearer

nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the
flamers and trolls had driven them off


Yep, im british.

I can see your point about the FCC complaints, lack of funding is the
usual reason for them not to bother to go after ham violators. If they
charged users then they would be able to use that money to go after the
retards who clog todays airwaves...

And the flamers/trolls havent driven us all off, we just go into hiding
until we see something of interest, and just ignore the rest...


an Old friend August 23rd 06 03:40 AM

why not deal with the real issue
 

Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Douche Bag wrote:
IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod?
wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive
dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it

Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything...

They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be
saying that
you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves...

Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh
right)
well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the
code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now

What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter?

The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/£40 charge or just the
general way of applying for it?

Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant..

having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those
with bad attiudes than a code test

not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the
license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free
(the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks
any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so
this might escape you I should have been clearer

nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the
flamers and trolls had driven them off


Yep, im british.

I can see your point about the FCC complaints, lack of funding is the
usual reason for them not to bother to go after ham violators. If they
charged users then they would be able to use that money to go after the
retards who clog todays airwaves...

And the flamers/trolls havent driven us all off, we just go into hiding
until we see something of interest, and just ignore the rest...

indeed but you can't discuss any changes as I suspect you have ntoiced

and for that matter I have never seen why we have to have all of us
geting our license by the same path

indeed I have always liked an idea with some folks talking a rule and
safety test (and being confined to built equipment) and pay a fee while
others would takerigourous test and no fees


Bakb0ne August 23rd 06 03:46 AM

why not deal with the real issue
 

an Old friend wrote:
Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Bakb0ne wrote:
an old friend wrote:
Douche Bag wrote:
IT'S DEAD. Get a life. You learned code for nothing. Where's my iPod?
wel you got that part aprt Code being dead but the ARS is still alive
dispite the efforts of Sloaw code Robeson and others to kill it

Isnt that the main point tho.... they have no power to do anything...

They are just sad ppl with nothing better to do. Next they will be
saying that
you should have to pay a monthly fee to use the airwaves...

Maybe have a subscription fee, that would stop most of the scum (yeh
right)
well a GMRS like license would surely do better asa filter than the
code test look at the code tested ham we have on the air now

What part of the GMRS license would be a better filter?

The 5 year duration between renewals, the $75/£40 charge or just the
general way of applying for it?

Im not saying i disagree, just wondering what you meant..
having to pay to use the ARS freqs might be more of a deterant to those
with bad attiudes than a code test

not to say it would be a good filter but fee for license with the
license fee used for enforcement here in the state the license is free
(the tests cost something) and the FCC is always complaining it laks
any funding to go after ham violators I suspect you are a brit and so
this might escape you I should have been clearer

nice to see someone serious paying attention here I had assume the
flamers and trolls had driven them off


Yep, im british.

I can see your point about the FCC complaints, lack of funding is the
usual reason for them not to bother to go after ham violators. If they
charged users then they would be able to use that money to go after the
retards who clog todays airwaves...

And the flamers/trolls havent driven us all off, we just go into hiding
until we see something of interest, and just ignore the rest...

indeed but you can't discuss any changes as I suspect you have ntoiced

and for that matter I have never seen why we have to have all of us
geting our license by the same path

indeed I have always liked an idea with some folks talking a rule and
safety test (and being confined to built equipment) and pay a fee while
others would takerigourous test and no fees


So basically ur saying that you should be able to either

1. Pay for your license and Take a beginner test (to prove your
competent)
or
2. Take a Intermediate Test and get free license after passing

If this is what you mean, then i can see your logic and i would fully
support a system like this...

Only problem is that just like Slow Code and the other trolls who try
to change the Ham world, we wouldnt be able to do anything either, its
down to the corporations, not us little people...


[email protected] August 23rd 06 08:17 PM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 
I have been into Shortwave and Police communications since the days of
putting crystals into my 8 channel regency scanner from Montgomery
Wards.

I am 41, college educated, and technically savy. Today I am going to
go and take my license to be a certified Technician no code ham. So
far every test I have taken online I have achieved a passing score
without doing any studying other that the knowledge I have accumulated
over the past 30 years of being a shortwave, military comm, and police
comm listener.

I hope that others in the hobby do not have the same attitude that you
possess and are favorable to me being new to the hobby (I am a bit shy
out the gate but warm up quickly).

The fact that the fcc has made this test so much more attainable is a
good thing because it invites those (like myself) who decide to join
this hobby as a result of the test being passable with a basic
understanding of the radio spectrum and laws of using the spectrum for
which you are licensed to use.

More people available to be a part of the hobby is a good thing. So
why would you want to try to weed them out?? Almost sounds like you
are being a bit of a radio snob.

Just my 2 pennies worth.

Keith


On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 22:50:37 GMT, Slow Code wrote:


So why do it?

SC


Dee Flint August 23rd 06 11:10 PM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

wrote in message
...
I have been into Shortwave and Police communications since the days of
putting crystals into my 8 channel regency scanner from Montgomery
Wards.

I am 41, college educated, and technically savy. Today I am going to
go and take my license to be a certified Technician no code ham. So
far every test I have taken online I have achieved a passing score
without doing any studying other that the knowledge I have accumulated
over the past 30 years of being a shortwave, military comm, and police
comm listener.

I hope that others in the hobby do not have the same attitude that you
possess and are favorable to me being new to the hobby (I am a bit shy
out the gate but warm up quickly).

The fact that the fcc has made this test so much more attainable is a
good thing because it invites those (like myself) who decide to join
this hobby as a result of the test being passable with a basic
understanding of the radio spectrum and laws of using the spectrum for
which you are licensed to use.

More people available to be a part of the hobby is a good thing. So
why would you want to try to weed them out?? Almost sounds like you
are being a bit of a radio snob.

Just my 2 pennies worth.

Keith


It sounds like you want to be a ham so you will be welcome.

The point that some people are trying to make is that attracting people who
do not want to be hams is rather pointless. They'll be talked into getting
a license by some overzealous person telling them how easy it is and then
will end up not participating because they don't have an interest in it.

Dee, N8UZE



an old freind August 23rd 06 11:26 PM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
...
I have been into Shortwave and Police communications since the days of


Just my 2 pennies worth.

Keith


It sounds like you want to be a ham so you will be welcome.

not by you most likely if he expresses an opinion you don't like

The point that some people are trying to make is that attracting people who
do not want to be hams is rather pointless.

is that the point?
then you are worng

It far from pointless although it is less valueble than atracting and
retaining those that realy want to be hams

They'll be talked into getting
a license by some overzealous person telling them how easy it is and then
will end up not participating because they don't have an interest in it.


Thus pseaks Dee Flint Like Robeson a supreme judge of other people

as I have an elitist bitch

to the original poster you find these number they can not be escaped
but they are not the majority

Dee, N8UZE



Truth August 24th 06 12:05 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

"an old freind" wrote in message
ups.com...
I have an elitist bitch

Your she-male wife. Sober up before you post, you drunken fool.



an old freind August 24th 06 12:11 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

Truth wrote:


Your she-male wife. Sober up before you post, you drunken fool.

no wismen I don't have a she male wife

inded she male are by and large the sole pruview and scared wannabe
gays that lack the guts to just come out and have sex with another man

to sober up I would have to get druk first
that is the facts

deal with it or shove you monitor up your ass and plug it in


Truth August 24th 06 12:16 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

"an old freind" wrote in message
oups.com...

Truth wrote:


Your she-male wife. Sober up before you post, you drunken fool.


inded she male

All that booze in your rotten skull is finally make you tell the truth this
one time. Check yourself into a dry out clinic you pathetic lush.

"an old freind" wrote in message
oups.com...

inded she male




an old freind August 24th 06 12:22 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

not Truth wrote:

All that booze in your rotten skull is finally make you tell the truth this
one time. Check yourself into a dry out clinic you pathetic lush.

no booze is there or my system at al
I said she males you preview of scared men like yourself

I don't don't have a shemale wife, shemale are fun but they are by and
large pretty ****ed up mentaly rather like you wismen

If I want a cock I go for a man if I want pussy I go fo r a fmeale
simple as that


Slow Code August 24th 06 12:25 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 
wrote in :


The fact that the fcc has made this test so much more attainable is a
good thing because it invites those (like myself) who decide to join
this hobby as a result of the test being passable with a basic
understanding of the radio spectrum and laws of using the spectrum for
which you are licensed to use.




If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?


SC

Slow Code August 24th 06 01:52 PM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 
Markie, Just ignore them.

They only tease you because of the stupid things you say when you
follow up. Just ignore them and they'll give up.

Stop giving them reasons to tease you. It only makes you look
more stupid.

"an old freind" wrote in message
ps.com...

not Truth wrote:

All that booze in your rotten skull is finally make you tell the truth
this
one time. Check yourself into a dry out clinic you pathetic lush.

no booze is there or my system at al
I said she males you preview of scared men like yourself

I don't don't have a shemale wife, shemale are fun but they are by and
large pretty ****ed up mentaly rather like you wismen

If I want a cock I go for a man if I want pussy I go fo r a fmeale
simple as that




[censored] August 27th 06 05:26 PM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 
Slow Code wrote:
So why do it?

SC


You got in...are YOU worried?


an_old_friend August 27th 06 05:47 PM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

[censored] wrote:
Slow Code wrote:
So why do it?

SC


You got in...are YOU worried?

having gotten his he wants to blow up the feild so nobody else can have
it


Woody August 27th 06 11:56 PM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 
Ok, what if you were stranded on a desert island, and had to use code to
save someone's life?
Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code?
And if you could build the radio out of coconuts, why not just build one
with a mic and speak
the miracle of life into being?

rb


wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 23:25:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

wrote in :


The fact that the fcc has made this test so much more attainable is a
good thing because it invites those (like myself) who decide to join
this hobby as a result of the test being passable with a basic
understanding of the radio spectrum and laws of using the spectrum for
which you are licensed to use.




If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?

no they would not

I can use CW well enough to save someone life with if that should
occour


SC

http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com




Jack Ricci August 28th 06 12:23 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 
Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code?
"Woody" wrote in message
news:qqpIg.7318$Xl5.4731@trnddc06...

....Remember the smoke signals...remember the smoke signals...remember the
smoke signals...

Jack



Ok, what if you were stranded on a desert island, and had to use code to
save someone's life?
Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code?
And if you could build the radio out of coconuts, why not just build one
with a mic and speak
the miracle of life into being?

rb


wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 23:25:48 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

wrote in :


The fact that the fcc has made this test so much more attainable is a
good thing because it invites those (like myself) who decide to join
this hobby as a result of the test being passable with a basic
understanding of the radio spectrum and laws of using the spectrum for
which you are licensed to use.



If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?

no they would not

I can use CW well enough to save someone life with if that should
occour


SC

http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com






Slow Code August 28th 06 02:22 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 
"Woody" wrote in news:qqpIg.7318$Xl5.4731@trnddc06:

Ok, what if you were stranded on a desert island, and had to use code to
save someone's life?
Could you use the coconuts to build a radio in order to send said code?
And if you could build the radio out of coconuts, why not just build one
with a mic and speak
the miracle of life into being?

rb



Markie could. He learned out to do it watching Gilligans Island.

SC

an old freind August 28th 06 02:41 AM

Dumbing down licensing will just let in people that really don't want to be hams.
 

Slow Code wrote:



Markie could. He learned out to do it watching Gilligans Island.


why don't you just admit it you care about people safety or the public
just your own petty staus



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com