Ha... yeah, only a ham radio operator would use a non-digital camera.....
and then it would have to be a daguerreotype.
rb


"Brian Denley" wrote in message
...
an old friend wrote:
Slow Code wrote:
(Fred McKenzie) wrote in
:

In article , "Alun L.
Palmer" wrote:

"If you came upon a drowning man, and you had to choose whether to
save him or photograph his demise, what kind of film would you use?"


Getting rid of CW is like choosing the kind of film.

Ham radio is drowning and the anti-code hams want us to think
tossing it bricks will make it float better. Dumbing things down is
never an improvement.
nobody is talking about dummbing anything down

you are
indeed you advocate dummbing down radio and giving hf only to the
unintelgent


SC

Knowing CW is NO indication of any level of intelligence, technical or
otherwise!

BTW film is seeing it's last days too. Ask Kodak!

--
Brian Denley
http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html

Why would they be? 10th graders aren't interested in listening to a bunch of
60yr old men act like 8th graders.
:-)
rb

"Jimmie D" wrote in message
.. .


Yes. That's understandable. Hams these days don't want to act like
hams,
they like to be appliance operators. So kids don't see that CW is
important and fun. All they see is hams gabbing on a microphone like any
CB'er can do.

SC

Actually a lot of tghe boy scouts know morse code, they still arent
intersted in ham radio.

But there's nothing to prevent people who appreciate and love the
language of Morse, the way it sings, its universality, its beauty,
from continuing to use it way into the future.

It is the beauty of Morse, in plain English, never mind the
abbreviations, which boy scouts and others who show an interest should
be taught to appreciate.
----
Reg, G4FGQ


I completely agree with you
N2UBP