Stinger wrote:

Actually, John, I agree with what you're saying as far as some sort of
"entrance test" idea goes. Code has served in large part in the past, but
if it were replaced with something that required the same committment and
education, it could be a good thing.

HF mentioned that I was repeating the "badge of honor" argument in my
earlier post. Perhaps I did paraphrase it. But that's not a refutation of
my point -- it's what I believe. We just disagree. Let's try a test.....

I urge anyone leaning toward supporting a policy of "If you can afford it,
you can operate it" to listen to CB radio in any major US city. If you
haven't done this, you cannot imagine what those frequencies are like now.

Now, ask yourself which is better for amateur radio -- a smaller population
of dedicated hobbyists on the air, ready to assist in emergencies, or a much
larger population of vandalistic undisciplined, disrespectful radio
operators that could **** off ham operators around the world, frustrating
anyone that would want to take ham up as a hobby?

-- Stinger

If the goal is to 'weed out' the undesirables, increasing the knowledge
base of the technical test(s) would be a more useful gatekeeper than
learning morse code. Knowing more about the technical aspects of the
hobby might also encourage more construction and experimentation, which
is (was) the primary reason why amateur radio was created.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----