On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:32:01 -0500, He'sDoneItAgain
wrote:

Looks like "no-code" is finally here...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf

All the CBer's should be happy.

helmsman wrote:

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:32:01 -0500, He'sDoneItAgain
wrote:

Looks like "no-code" is finally here...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf

All the CBer's should be happy.

They'll move on to complaining about the written test material next.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

dxAce wrote:

helmsman wrote:

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:32:01 -0500, He'sDoneItAgain
wrote:

Looks like "no-code" is finally here...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf
All the CBer's should be happy.

They'll move on to complaining about the written test material next.




They did a LONG time ago, Steve. That's how the multiple choice with
published answers came about.

D Peter Maus wrote:

dxAce wrote:

helmsman wrote:

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:32:01 -0500, He'sDoneItAgain
wrote:

Looks like "no-code" is finally here...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf
All the CBer's should be happy.

They'll move on to complaining about the written test material next.

They did a LONG time ago, Steve. That's how the multiple choice with
published answers came about.

Even that will go by the wayside and they'll simply sign an 'X' at the bottom of
a form.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On 2006-12-16 08:32:48 -0500, dxAce said:

.

They did a LONG time ago, Steve. That's how the multiple choice with
published answers came about.

Even that will go by the wayside and they'll simply sign an 'X' at the
bottom of
a form.

dxAce
Michigan
USA


I seriously doubt that.

"helmsman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:32:01 -0500, He'sDoneItAgain
wrote:

Looks like "no-code" is finally here...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf

All the CBer's should be happy.


The ham bands sound like LIDville nowadays. Have you not been listening and
the most dysfunctional newsgroups on Usenet are amateur topic groups. I feel
sorry for the good hams that have to put up with the ****. They should make
the test to where anyone with a IQ of less than 120 can not apply. I
remember listening to some pretty sharp guys on the ham bands when I was a
kid. Learned a lot about propagation and antennas etc.. just listening to
them. Now days you gotta dig for a good QSO. They should set a part of the
hf bands for just CW operators and you can't operate unless you have a CW
license and they should have a test to see if your a retarded LID and if so
you get the jackoff spectrum. I mean why not?

BH

Brian Hill wrote:
...
BH



While analog communications decline in importance (and it is a stretch
defining CW as digital), digital communications are where the brains are
at. You might wish to upgrade your equipment.

JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Brian Hill wrote:
...
BH

While analog communications decline in importance (and it is a stretch
defining CW as digital), digital communications are where the brains are
at. You might wish to upgrade your equipment.

JS

I'm not talking about equip, I'm talking about brains. The fight here isn't
about CW so much as it is about a bunch of guys that wish to not hang out
with a bunch of retards and yes there are some sharp people that don't know
or use code that would be welcome but the fear is that no code will bring
more dorks into the mix and I understand their point.

BH

Brian Hill wrote:
I'm not talking about equip, I'm talking about brains. The fight here isn't
...
more dorks into the mix and I understand their point.

BH



Brian:

I find the same ratio of dorks-to-brains exists in amateur radio as
exists in the "normal population." Indeed, the amateur topic newsgroups
reflect this same tendency.

A license and/or knowledge of CW has never been able to help the dorks ...

Regards,
JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Brian Hill wrote:
I'm not talking about equip, I'm talking about brains. The fight here
isn't ...
more dorks into the mix and I understand their point.

BH

Brian:

I find the same ratio of dorks-to-brains exists in amateur radio as exists
in the "normal population." Indeed, the amateur topic newsgroups reflect
this same tendency.

A license and/or knowledge of CW has never been able to help the dorks ...

Regards,
JS

You may be right. I'm just expressing the pro code viewpoint and your not
going to change their mind on it no matter how much you argue the point.

BH