Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:00:50 -0400, "Gerry"
wrote: world. I am not sure the FCC should be requiring it while not testing for the various digital modes or message handling - seems inconsistent It's consistent with dropping requirements all around. Broadcast stations no longer need licensed personnel on duty (that's been the case for a few decades now), you can repair two-way radios without being licensed and you can operate on the ham bands without having to really pass any test. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote:
till you can explain what value knowing the name has you can begin to convince me that you went a through a test as realavant as mine The licensing hierarchy (and the morse code debate) isn't about value, it's about status. It's about having a chip on your shoulder that says "I'm better than you". |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
This code argument really gets old. I passed the General 13WPM code. Bidg
deal. Yeah, I like to use CW, but do I think people need to be tested on CW? Heck NO! Let's end this antiquated test. It's a modern era. If you want to learn it -fine, but don't push your old and outdated beliefs on anyone else. JDB wrote: On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:37:42 -0500, Glen Overby wrote: wrote: till you can explain what value knowing the name has you can begin to convince me that you went a through a test as realavant as mine The licensing hierarchy (and the morse code debate) isn't about value, it's about status. It's about having a chip on your shoulder that says "I'm better than you". well the procoders like to rpetend it is about value http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|