MnMikew wrote:

wrote in message
...
"MnMikew" wrote:


"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
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!

Wazziss??? I'm in full agreement with Tracy and Steve on something..
*looks
around for the four horsemen of the apocolypse*

It would be more of an incentive for me to get my ticket if I could use
HF.
I have ZERO interest in CW. Maybe open a little HF for techs?

Many of us had ZERO interest in CW. And it wasn't easy for us either.
Learn just enough to pass and never use it again.
There should be no free lunch.

Yes, perhaps. But the CW requirement probably keeps a lot of people out of
ham radio.

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

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

To state the obvious, CW is just one of *many* modes available to hams;
moon bounce, meteor scatter, lots of digital modes (PSK, MFSK, RTTY,
Hellschrieber and probably a few I missed), slow scan TV, fast scan TV,
APRS and on and on.

CW-just another mode. Why test for it and not test for, say, moon
bounce? You probably missed it, but a while ago the FCC said CW was
required in the old days when CW was primarily used for marine
safety-they didn't want hams to be transmitting over distress calls.
That was it. Period. As you are well aware, CW for maritime applications
is virtually dead.

Before you think I am a whining, sniveling "no coder", I am a 20 wpm
Extra who operates 20% digi modes and 80% CW, fairly comfortable at
25-30 wpm.

And puh-leze, don't even think about trotting out the old saw that "I
had to learn the code so the new guys should too". That's akin to saying
everyone should hand crank the engine on their car rather than using
those new fangled $#@*^! electric starters.

73,
Carter K8VT

Carter-K8VT wrote:

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy... and I don't really give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some dumbass 'tard isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has no damn business
being in amateur radio.

Get the point dumb****?

Keep on trying to dumb things down... we got your number.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Frankly, I don't give a rats behind about CW ability. Unless someone
is interesting to chat with, they can go take a leap.

CW masks the voice, speech inflections, emotion in the speech, etc,
etc...

CW is for anti-social ma'roons, phone is for the educated to have a
real exchange of ideas over...

Video is good too, but only if it is a lady ham and she is wearing a
thong! grin

John

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Carter-K8VT wrote:

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no
business in amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy... and I don't really
give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some dumbass
'tard isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has no
damn business
being in amateur radio.

Get the point dumb****?

Keep on trying to dumb things down... we got your number.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

I hate telephones,except my old antique telephones which I do not use.I
am thinking about rigging up my old 1933 Western Electric desk telephone
so I can use it.But first,I need to find an exterior bell box with the
bells for it.Cell phones sound like a choked chicken when they "ring"
Only fools use cell phones.
cuhulin

Yep, it pretty much all sucks...

.... only good thing, it beats CW...

John

wrote in message
...
I hate telephones,except my old antique telephones which I do not
use.I
am thinking about rigging up my old 1933 Western Electric desk
telephone
so I can use it.But first,I need to find an exterior bell box with
the
bells for it.Cell phones sound like a choked chicken when they
"ring"
Only fools use cell phones.
cuhulin

dxAce wrote:


Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy... and I don't really give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some dumbass 'tard isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has no damn business
being in amateur radio.

So I guess you are saying that you don't have to be smart for moon
bounce or meteor scatter...well, I can't argue with "logic" like that.

Get the point dumb****?

Well, at least you're consistent--the usual dx "ace" vulgar, name
calling response rather than intelligently debating the issues...just
like m II pointed out in his right on the mark "Journalism" post-- Ace:
Yeah, but they're ninety percent 'tards, like you are you moronic
screwed up CanaDUHian idiot...

Well, I guess I should be thankful that you didn't call me (gasp, horror
of horrors), a ...Canadian.

You seem like a very angry, bitter and vulgar person, unable to carry on
an intelligent debate and actually address the issues.

Get help.

73,
Carter K8VT

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Carter-K8VT wrote:

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in
amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy..

If it's that easy then why test for it?

.. and I don't really give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some dumbass 'tard
isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has no damn
business
being in amateur radio.
There are thousands of techs who would disagree.

MnMikew wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Carter-K8VT wrote:

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in
amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy..

If it's that easy then why test for it?

. and I don't really give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some dumbass 'tard
isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has no damn
business
being in amateur radio.
There are thousands of techs who would disagree.

Of course they would! Many of them can't pass the code test. DUH!

A real no brainer.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

dxace:

Most won't learn to knit, crochet or tat either!!!

Damn! They could make themselves some damn fine sweaters, slippers
and table cloths too.

Dumb flunkies anyway! ROFLOL!

John

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


MnMikew wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Carter-K8VT wrote:

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no
business in
amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy..

If it's that easy then why test for it?

. and I don't really give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some
dumbass 'tard
isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has
no damn
business
being in amateur radio.
There are thousands of techs who would disagree.

Of course they would! Many of them can't pass the code test. DUH!

A real no brainer.

dxAce
Michigan
USA