CW wrote:
This whole argument is pointless. The code requirement will be eliminated. No thinking person would dispute that. You would think so, wouldn't you? Yet this thread proves that people are either not thinking, or their way of thinking makes no ****ing sense. (Since the FCC says you can now use the word "****ing" on radio and TV, then we can now use it on newsgroups too.) The only reason we still have it now is international agreement. And that finally is now gone. So the real reason we have it now in the US when other countries got their act in gear and already eliminated it, is that in the US government moves really slow unless it is something unimportant like renaming french fries to freedom fries, that they can move really fast on legislating. I firmly believe that if people feel that a code requirement is necessary, that they should go ahead and require it. Right, those that want to learn the code should by all means learn it. Those that want to use microphones and don't like to use code, don't have to learn it. But what about affirmative action? Since people who didn't want to use code had to learn it all this time, perhaps now the government should make those that want to use code to learn something else they don't like before they can get licenses now. You know, just like the reverse discrimination and racism of affirmative action to make up for the past mistakes. I say if you want to use morse code on HF, you have to learn and be tested on Egyptian Hieroglyphics. |
Jeff Renkin wrote: CW wrote: This whole argument is pointless. The code requirement will be eliminated. No thinking person would dispute that. You would think so, wouldn't you? Yet this thread proves that people are either not thinking, or their way of thinking makes no ****ing sense. (Since the FCC says you can now use the word "****ing" on radio and TV, then we can now use it on newsgroups too.) The only reason we still have it now is international agreement. And that finally is now gone. So the real reason we have it now in the US when other countries got their act in gear and already eliminated it, is that in the US government moves really slow unless it is something unimportant like renaming french fries to freedom fries, that they can move really fast on legislating. I firmly believe that if people feel that a code requirement is necessary, that they should go ahead and require it. Right, those that want to learn the code should by all means learn it. Those that want to use microphones and don't like to use code, don't have to learn it. But what about affirmative action? Since people who didn't want to use code had to learn it all this time, perhaps now the government should make those that want to use code to learn something else they don't like before they can get licenses now. You know, just like the reverse discrimination and racism of affirmative action to make up for the past mistakes. I say if you want to use morse code on HF, you have to learn and be tested on Egyptian Hieroglyphics. You are truely an idiot. |
The point just keeps flying over your head. What if someone kept
saying to you, if you want a driver's license, you have to learn Egyptian Hieroglyphics first? Actually Jeff, you don't get the point. Crap, why the hell can't any of you just concentrate and deal with that point before you avoid it and jump to something else??? When you get the license for HF amateur operation, you get privileges that include code. No, you have the privileges to use code on VHF and UHF if you want to and don't ever have to pass a code test. In case you are not aware, parts of those bands are set aside for code as well. Code proficiency is part of the requirement. It was part of the requirement to get a technician's class license too, wasn't it? But that was dropped, right? It would have been dropped all across the board for every class of license, but the international agreement between countries was the ONLY reason it had to stay with the HF licenses. Now that the world finally got to vote on this, they did away with the requirement. The requirement is NO LONGER. Other countries were quick to remove the requirement from their local laws, the US is just very slow at changing laws. It will happen, it just takes a government like ours months of boring useless discussion to come to an obvious conclusion. Have you ever watched C-span? Then you would know how ****ed up our government is. Code does happen to represent a significant part of HF operation. So does voice. It has to do with demonstrating you know what you are doing in areas that are pertinent to the license. "Knowing what you are doing" is a technical reasoning since you are dealing with equipment that can cause interference and even death if not used properly. Not knowing how to send morse code properly is not going to interfere with any other licensed services or cause anyone to die. Now, try to answer this without avoiding it.... What if to get a driver's license, you had to learn Egyptian Hieroglyphics first? |
Jeff Renkin wrote: The point just keeps flying over your head. What if someone kept saying to you, if you want a driver's license, you have to learn Egyptian Hieroglyphics first? Actually Jeff, you don't get the point. Crap, why the hell can't any of you just concentrate and deal with that point before you avoid it and jump to something else??? When you get the license for HF amateur operation, you get privileges that include code. No, you have the privileges to use code on VHF and UHF if you want to and don't ever have to pass a code test. In case you are not aware, parts of those bands are set aside for code as well. Code proficiency is part of the requirement. It was part of the requirement to get a technician's class license too, wasn't it? But that was dropped, right? It would have been dropped all across the board for every class of license, but the international agreement between countries was the ONLY reason it had to stay with the HF licenses. Now that the world finally got to vote on this, they did away with the requirement. The requirement is NO LONGER. Other countries were quick to remove the requirement from their local laws, the US is just very slow at changing laws. It will happen, it just takes a government like ours months of boring useless discussion to come to an obvious conclusion. Have you ever watched C-span? Then you would know how ****ed up our government is. Code does happen to represent a significant part of HF operation. So does voice. It has to do with demonstrating you know what you are doing in areas that are pertinent to the license. "Knowing what you are doing" is a technical reasoning since you are dealing with equipment that can cause interference and even death if not used properly. Not knowing how to send morse code properly is not going to interfere with any other licensed services or cause anyone to die. Now, try to answer this without avoiding it.... What if to get a driver's license, you had to learn Egyptian Hieroglyphics first? What if to learn Morse code, you finally had to pull your head out of your ass Jeff? The sound would probably equal that of Krakatoa erupting! Steve Holland, MI Proficient in Morse code. |
Bottom line, it's too bad the trend is toward dropping the requirement.
Until now, the morse code requirement served the dual purpose as a de facto "intelligence test" to get in to ham radio, and it also required some committment (which in turn gets hams to respect the medium). What I think worries everyone is that without this requirement, the bar will be lowered to the extent of becoming glorified Citizens Band radio. And that would be a shame. -- Stinger "N8KDV" wrote in message ... Jeff Renkin wrote: The point just keeps flying over your head. What if someone kept saying to you, if you want a driver's license, you have to learn Egyptian Hieroglyphics first? Actually Jeff, you don't get the point. Crap, why the hell can't any of you just concentrate and deal with that point before you avoid it and jump to something else??? When you get the license for HF amateur operation, you get privileges that include code. No, you have the privileges to use code on VHF and UHF if you want to and don't ever have to pass a code test. In case you are not aware, parts of those bands are set aside for code as well. Code proficiency is part of the requirement. It was part of the requirement to get a technician's class license too, wasn't it? But that was dropped, right? It would have been dropped all across the board for every class of license, but the international agreement between countries was the ONLY reason it had to stay with the HF licenses. Now that the world finally got to vote on this, they did away with the requirement. The requirement is NO LONGER. Other countries were quick to remove the requirement from their local laws, the US is just very slow at changing laws. It will happen, it just takes a government like ours months of boring useless discussion to come to an obvious conclusion. Have you ever watched C-span? Then you would know how ****ed up our government is. Code does happen to represent a significant part of HF operation. So does voice. It has to do with demonstrating you know what you are doing in areas that are pertinent to the license. "Knowing what you are doing" is a technical reasoning since you are dealing with equipment that can cause interference and even death if not used properly. Not knowing how to send morse code properly is not going to interfere with any other licensed services or cause anyone to die. Now, try to answer this without avoiding it.... What if to get a driver's license, you had to learn Egyptian Hieroglyphics first? What if to learn Morse code, you finally had to pull your head out of your ass Jeff? The sound would probably equal that of Krakatoa erupting! Steve Holland, MI Proficient in Morse code. |
Jeff Renkin wrote in message
Actually the lowering of the speed has NOTHING to do with it. If you ARE going to learn the code, it makes more sense to learn it at the fastest speed right away. If you learn it at 5 wpm, it makes it much harder later to go faster with it. Nope, it doesn't. If that were the case, I would be in the same speed league as you. If you are going to take a 20 wpm test, and ditch the code upon passing the test, it might make sense, but to someone that intends to actually use the code, it does not. You would be a "one speed wonder" .. The first person that came along at 9 wpm would cause you to vapor lock. I started at -5 wpm and went up. Quickly. It sure didn't seem to hurt me, being I peaked at my limits of "clean" manual "paddle" keying. My abilty to send cleanly using a paddle determined my real world limit. Not my abilty to receive. I can't send cleanly with a paddle over about 55-60 wpm and thats pushing it to the edge. After that I get too sloppy for my tastes. Being I refuse to use a keyboard, which I hate, that was my limit. If I used the keyboard, I probably could have eventually hit 70-75-80 wpm. The dots are so fast at those speeds, even at 60, that you don't really listen for individual dots. You gauge from the length in ms of the string. It's almost a blur. To be a decent CW operator, you must gradually work through all the speeds. Your theory does not hold water. But to be expected from someone who doesn't work cw. Lowering the speed to 5 wpm was idiotic. As if that made it easier or something. Well, being many upgraded to extra in one fell swoop after they dropped speed, it must have made some difference if the rest couldn't get 13 or 20 wpm. Of course, I suspect the vast majority of those didn't really practice enough. Ever hear of the Farnsworth system? Duh... Learning the code is like learning a language, you hear the musical sounds of the letters and words, slowing it down only makes it harder. Slowing it down only makes it harder to keep track of previously sent letters, if head copying. That makes it harder to make words out of the copy. You have to copy behind a bit. But slowing it down does not make it harder to copy the characters. Trust me, for a rank beginner, it's easier to learn and pass 5 wpm, than it is to learn and pass 20 wpm. That is, unless they alter the proper timing, and leave huge gaps between letters on the test. And thats not 20 wpm any more. The farnsworth method teaches incorrect character spacing, and overall lousy timing. You learn lousy timing from day one, and that is no way to live. Not what I consider good. An *actual* 20 wpm at normal spacing will cause a beginner to vapor lock when they test, if they learned with the improperly spaced farnsworth method. The Farnsworth method is NOT a good method to use for people that intend to use the code in the real world. MK |
Jeff Renkin wrote in message
When you get the license for HF amateur operation, you get privileges that include code. No, you have the privileges to use code on VHF and UHF if you want to and don't ever have to pass a code test. In case you are not aware, parts of those bands are set aside for code as well. In case you are not aware, the international treaty did not include VHF. Code proficiency is part of the requirement. It was part of the requirement to get a technician's class license too, wasn't it? But that was dropped, right? In case you are not aware, it was only dropped because international treaty did not include VHF. Next...MK |
I find my self in agreement with you Stinger. The worth of anything in life
is only how hard was it to obtain? Why would anyone buy a Rolex when a Timex does the exact same thing an order of magnitude cheaper? The Rolex is a sign of achievement by the wearer. Those of us who worked to learn the code hate to see our Rolex turned in to a Timex by a group of people who can't afford a Rolex. I guess in a world where achievement is disdained, because it makes the under-achiever feel bad, the move is not unexpected. Fred W4JLE Ex V3CB V31GR (Hamming for over 47 years and still loving it!) "Stinger" wrote in message ... Bottom line, it's too bad the trend is toward dropping the requirement. Until now, the morse code requirement served the dual purpose as a de facto "intelligence test" to get in to ham radio, and it also required some committment (which in turn gets hams to respect the medium). |
"w4jle" W4JLE(remove this to wrote in message
Those of us who worked to learn the code hate to see our Rolex turned in to a Timex by a group of people who can't afford a Rolex. It doesn't really bother me. The only bummer part is there will be fewer and fewer CW ops in the next years. I could really care less if they drop the code tests. With 5 wpm, for all practical purposes, they already have. I just can't stand the whiners...Whine, whine, whine....Such a waste of energy, particularly being they are wasting it in the totally wrong direction. They should tell it to the fcc, not other hams, or SWL's on NG's. It's like whining about the broken cruise control in your Ford truck at a J.C. Penny's. :/ We don't have any control over it, so whining to us is a total waste of time. It makes me laugh that someone would spend so much time and energy trying to convince people that have absolutely no control over the matter. Better than the freaking comedy channel if you ask me. MK |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com