beerbarrel wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:21:35 -0400, dxAce
wrote:

The written test probably does as well. Should that also be dropped.

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in amateur
radio. 5 WPM is incredibly easy, heck, even the 'tards should be able to master
that.

dxAce
Michigan
USA


CW is not going to go away just because they drop the requirement.
Like Steve says, It's not that hard. Most anyone can learn 5 wpm in as
little as a month or less. I think that something worth having is
worth earning.

As I recall it took me about a month or so back in '69 to learn 5 WPM. Got my first
ticket back in 1970.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

John S. wrote:


Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving test.


If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea.

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:21:35 -0400, dxAce
wrote:


The written test probably does as well. Should that also be dropped.

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in
amateur
radio. 5 WPM is incredibly easy, heck, even the 'tards should be able to
master
that.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



CW is not going to go away just because they drop the requirement.
Like Steve says, It's not that hard. Most anyone can learn 5 wpm in as
little as a month or less. I think that something worth having is
worth earning.

I say give techs a piece of HF and if they like HF, they can take the test
to get access to the rest of it. I'm half-heartedly studying for the tech
test and only really have interest in 2m right now.

I couldn't agree more with dropping CW from the ham test.
It reminds me of the legal profession here in South Africa.
It used to be a requirement that lawyers had to pass Latin in high school
and have at least two courses in Latin for their law degree.
That was scrapped about ten years ago amid loud protests from the dinosaurs.
Today the law profession is flourishing more than ever before with high
quality judges and advocates.
The only thing I have noticed is that the high and mighty no longer spew out
Latin quotations = R.I.P.

Our SARL (South African Radio League) ham club is diminishing by the year
and the once crowded ham bands are now empty.
We need to make it easier for new entrants to come into this wonderful
hobby.

--
John Plimmer, Montagu, Western Cape Province, South Africa
South 33 d 47 m 32 s, East 20 d 07 m 32 s
RX Icom IC-756 PRO III with MW mods
Drake SW8 & ERGO software
Sony 7600D GE SRIII
BW XCR 30, Braun T1000, Sangean 818 & 803A.
Hallicrafters SX-100, Eddystone 940
GE circa 50's radiogram
Antenna's RF Systems DX 1 Pro, Datong AD-270
Kiwa MW Loop
http://www.dxing.info/about/dxers/plimmer.dx

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
MnMikew:

Interesting theory. We could propose a test to see if what you say is
true.

Say, require a person to do 5 WPM before they can use usenet, IRC or
IM clients? ROFLOL!

Perhaps we would find it is actually a "good thing." Next we could
require a person be able to rollerskate 5 miles over rough pavement
before we allow them a drivers license? I mean, what if traffic is
too heavy or their car breaks down--it will be useful! grin

John

John Smith wrote:
MnMikew:

Interesting theory. We could propose a test to see if what you say is
true.

Say, require a person to do 5 WPM before they can use usenet, IRC or
IM clients? ROFLOL!

Perhaps we would find it is actually a "good thing." Next we could
require a person be able to rollerskate 5 miles over rough pavement
before we allow them a drivers license? I mean, what if traffic is
too heavy or their car breaks down--it will be useful! grin

John

Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving test.

"John S." wrote:

John Smith wrote:
MnMikew:

Interesting theory. We could propose a test to see if what you say is
true.

Say, require a person to do 5 WPM before they can use usenet, IRC or
IM clients? ROFLOL!

Perhaps we would find it is actually a "good thing." Next we could
require a person be able to rollerskate 5 miles over rough pavement
before we allow them a drivers license? I mean, what if traffic is
too heavy or their car breaks down--it will be useful! grin

John

Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving test.

Typical old and tired 'tard boy comment!

Keep trying!

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Code proficient!

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:41:48 UTC, beerbarrel
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 07:31:02 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



Joel Rubin wrote:

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 19:33:36 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-05-143A1.doc

John

Code ability should be one alternative among other technical tests. It
seems very odd to freeze a technical test in a museum of bygone
technology.

If one cannot learn at least a minimal 5 WPM code then they have absolutely no
business obtaining an amateur license.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



Agreed!
Then you should also learn how to ride a horse in order to deliver the
mail on time.

--
"What do you mean there's no movie?"

Yeah. The logic escaped a lot of people the first time. We keep
hoping that in the repeating some common sense will sink into the
conceptually challenged minds out there. Hasn't happened yet...

John

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


"John S." wrote:

John Smith wrote:
MnMikew:

Interesting theory. We could propose a test to see if what you
say is
true.

Say, require a person to do 5 WPM before they can use usenet, IRC
or
IM clients? ROFLOL!

Perhaps we would find it is actually a "good thing." Next we
could
require a person be able to rollerskate 5 miles over rough
pavement
before we allow them a drivers license? I mean, what if traffic
is
too heavy or their car breaks down--it will be useful! grin

John

Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use
of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving
test.

Typical old and tired 'tard boy comment!

Keep trying!

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Code proficient!

Count Floyd wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:41:48 UTC, beerbarrel
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 07:31:02 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



Joel Rubin wrote:

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 19:33:36 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-05-143A1.doc

John

Code ability should be one alternative among other technical tests. It
seems very odd to freeze a technical test in a museum of bygone
technology.

If one cannot learn at least a minimal 5 WPM code then they have absolutely no
business obtaining an amateur license.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



Agreed!
Then you should also learn how to ride a horse in order to deliver the
mail on time.

Yet again another old and worn out 'tard boy comment!

Keep trying!

dxAce
Michigan
USA

John Plimmer wrote:

I couldn't agree more with dropping CW from the ham test.
It reminds me of the legal profession here in South Africa.
It used to be a requirement that lawyers had to pass Latin in high school
and have at least two courses in Latin for their law degree.
That was scrapped about ten years ago amid loud protests from the dinosaurs.
Today the law profession is flourishing more than ever before with high
quality judges and advocates.
The only thing I have noticed is that the high and mighty no longer spew out
Latin quotations = R.I.P.

Our SARL (South African Radio League) ham club is diminishing by the year
and the once crowded ham bands are now empty.
We need to make it easier for new entrants to come into this wonderful
hobby.

Why does everything need to be made easier? Can't the 'tards learn the code? If
so, WHY can't the 'tards learn the code?

If ordinary folks could pass the test in years past what is so different today?

Laziness?

dxAce
Michigan
USA