Or decided to make all ham operators in the year 2003 learn Morse Code before they
are allowed to use a microphone.

Nope. You wouldn't be forced to give up anything at all, be it a
microphone or a washing machine.

That doesn't make any sense as a reply to what it is replying to, but oh well.

Only to be able to recognise it and
prove as much by copying at a ridiculuosly low speed than even a
5-yr-old can easily master in a short time.

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.

Lowering the speed to 5 wpm was idiotic. As if that made it easier or
something. Ever hear of the Farnsworth system? 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.

And many 5 year olds also get their extra license in one testing session. Yet many
who are yelling at people to learn the code, don't have their extra licenses, so they
are hypocrites. Hypocrites that can learn the code easy, but don't have the brains
to figure out common sense questions on the written part that you don't even need to
study for to pass, you should know all that stuff before you even set up a CB radio
system.

It is proven that there are those people who can master the code without any problem
and yet can't seem to pass the written tests, and those that master the written tests
never having studied but can't seem to learn the code. It is also proven that the
later type of person is the more intelligent one too. Many an engineer don't have
HF ham licenses because of the code, and they have more knowledge and experience in
radio than many hams who have no right playing with what they are playing with as they
only memorized answers and cause all sorts of problems.

Then you have those that could master the written part AND learn the code.
We in this class are even more intelligent and realize how stupid the code requirement
is today. We also have the curiosity to want to know why it ever WAS a requirement
in the first place.

It DID have a purpose back when Ham operators were considered a reserve during war when
the military needed people to be able to decode their morse code messages and relay the
messages. But since the military no longer uses code at all, this requirement has no
purpose today.

But many idiots out there think that the code requirement is just something to make it
harder to get a license! As if the laws were made just to keep a large group of
people from being hams and helping out their country during emergencies and to keep the
pool of public service radio people smaller than it could be. Some think it is to
keep CB people from getting a license. Ridiculous.

But with that insane thinking, when talk of removing the code requirement comes up,
they want to know what you will replace the code with so that getting the license is
still hard to get.

These people have no clue at all. These are the same morons that vote for
Republicans and Democrats thinking there is really a difference between the two, and
continue to vote for them no matter how many times their taxes are raised, and laws are
passed taking away their rights and freedoms.

Think of it this way. The test you take to get your driver's license is not to make
it harder for people to get a license, it is because you need to know those things
before you are allowed to be on the road with the rest of us. If you like to ride
horses as a hobby, that is fine, but you are not required to be tested on riding horses
to get a license to drive a car.

And let's say, that all of us had to learn what to do when you see a flashing yellow
light, and then one day, the government bans the use of any flashing yellow lights for
some reason. Do we still make everyone learn what to do when they come up to a
yellow flashing light if that situation is NEVER going to occur and they don't need to
know this anymore? Of course not, but then there will be those that think we have
to replace that part of the test with something else, so that it is not too easy to get
a driver's license, right? Idiots.

The original REASON for having the code requirement is no longer, since the military
doesn't use it any more. Thus.... No reason to force people to learn it anymore.

Common sense folks! But it is fun to see all those that don't have the brains to
realize this. It amazes me also, how many people that are for keeping the code
requirement don't even KNOW why it was a requirement in the first place. That just
REALLY is outrageous. And it is 100% of them that don't know, because if they DID
know, they couldn't possible be for keeping the requirement.

The proper analogy would be that of "only requiring that you can
recognise and know (in a most basic manner) how to use a washboard.
There would be *no* requirement to actually use one at all.

Ok, agreed. But it is still a stupid requirement! (funny how you didn't see
that!) Why should anyone be tested on if they know how to use a washboard before
they are allowed to use a washing machine??????

Likewise... Why should one be tested and required to know morse code before being
allowed to talk into a microphone on HF??

They DON'T. The world has finally realized this and made the decision this year!
Other countries have already dropped the requirement that they ONLY kept this long
because of international agreement. Now that there is no international agreement,
the US keeping it would be ridiculous. Especially since ham operators were essential
during 9/11, and since we can expect many more such attacks, thanks to Bush, it is in
the US' best interest to open the doors to as many of those that wish to volunteer
their time and services with ham radio, rather than keep many qualified people out of
it because they don't want to learn something they never intend to use. They just
want to help serve their country.

Keeping the code requirement, is sort of like "letting the terrorists win" !

I think any terrorist would agree that keeping the code requirement and having less
hams to help during the next retaliation attack of theirs, is something THEY would all
like to see.

If you are for the code requirement, you are no different than the terrorists.

Think about it.

Then go and learn Egyptian Hieroglyphics. Don't be lazy!

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

amateur radio is going to survive if the gatekeepers continue to limit
access to those who can prove a working knowlege of morse code. The
code was at one time one of several useful tools for communicating,
but it has been outpaced by other faster technologies that are easier
to learn. Military and commercial use of the code has all but ceased.
So who's left - HAM's.

Is there a need for HAM's to use the code in emergency situations?
Posssibly, but I haven't heard of any recent successes. Several years
ago I tried to listen in on a logjam of ham's trying to run an H&W net
after one particularly nasty carribean hurricane. It was a babble of
voice and code - everyone running over one another. Sorting out the
multiple code transmissions was all but impossible. I truly think
managment of emergency communications is best left to the
professionals with up-to-date tools.

Should amateur radio licenses be subject to passing a test?
Absolutely. However the test should require knowlege of skills that
are appropriate for todays world. Knowlege of radio technology and
electronics are an absolute must for safe operation of poetntially
lethal equipment. Proficiency in communicating by voice and one or
more digital modes on several bands should be a requirement. The
Morse code should not be one of those required digital skills however,
because it has little useful application in todays world.

The gatekeepers of the hobby should be looking for ways to reduce the
average age of the licensed ham by enticing new entrants into the
hobby. Requiring them to learn a technology that is slower than a
78rpm record played at 33rpm is not the way.



(Mark Keith) wrote in message . com...
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

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.

Do a search on Farnsworth Method.

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.

Do a search on Farnsworth Method.

Why would I need to do that. A friend of mine actually knew and talked
to the guy when he was alive. I don't need to search anything. What
makes you think that your comments about learning CW hold any weight
with me, if you can barely make out an SOS? Get a grip...I'm probably
in the upper 90-95% bracket as far as CW users. I think I have a
fairly good grip on the best methods of learning and using code. The
farnsworth method is bad news to anyone that plans to actually use the
code on the air. It promotes poor timing. MK

We had to learn morse code to advance in Boy Scouts. I remember thinking we
were all pretty sharp signalling each other with flashlights at campouts.
Then, our scoutmaster (who was a HAM) let us hear some of the code on his
rig. Those guys were FAST.

-- Stinger

"Mark Keith" wrote in message
om...
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.

Do a search on Farnsworth Method.

Why would I need to do that. A friend of mine actually knew and talked
to the guy when he was alive. I don't need to search anything. What
makes you think that your comments about learning CW hold any weight
with me, if you can barely make out an SOS? Get a grip...I'm probably
in the upper 90-95% bracket as far as CW users. I think I have a
fairly good grip on the best methods of learning and using code. The
farnsworth method is bad news to anyone that plans to actually use the
code on the air. It promotes poor timing. MK