What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

In article .net,
says...
wrote in
oups.com:


wrote:
On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote:


wrote:
wrote:
You may
not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree
that we have a problem. Right?
notice you have gotten no reply


Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response...

The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care..

indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse
than the problem because it does not promote cw forever

Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big
enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with
any valid reasoning.


You see no value in being effective communicators,

The most effective communication is plain english!

73

Chris

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Slow Code is a disgrace to Amateur Radio!




On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 00:41:18 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

wrote in
roups.com:


wrote:
On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote:


wrote:
wrote:
You may
not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree
that we have a problem. Right?
notice you have gotten no reply


Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response...

The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care..

indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse
than the problem because it does not promote cw forever

Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big
enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with
any valid reasoning.


Here's a valid reason for continued CW testing: To keep lowlifes like you
and Markie out of ham radio and off HF. You're too lazy to try to be
real hams. You see no value in being effective communicators, therefore
you're both worthless to the service and if you had to use CW to save a
life that person would die. You're both probably too lazy to use a
microphone to help save anyone too.

I'd like to see the No-code Tech class go away with a 5 wpm Tech the being
entry level to the service, or bring back a code only Novice class again.
Require 13 wpm code test for general and 20 wpm an Extra again.

People that don't like it should stay on CB. Ten-Four? This should
provide you and Markie a lot to stroke each other with. You both seem to
sing the same tune.

SC

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 20:45:49 -0500, john wrote:
Slow Code is a disgrace to Amateur Radio!

Let Slow Code post, and "john" comes stumbling in while stepping on
his crank, with both cap guns blazing.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Slow Code wrote:
wrote in
oups.com:
wrote:
On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
You may
not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree
that we have a problem. Right?
notice you have gotten no reply


Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response...

The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care..

indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse
than the problem because it does not promote cw forever

Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big
enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with
any valid reasoning.

Here's a valid reason for continued CW testing: To keep lowlifes like you
and Markie out of ham radio and off HF. You're too lazy to try to be
real hams. You see no value in being effective communicators, therefore
you're both worthless to the service and if you had to use CW to save a
life that person would die. You're both probably too lazy to use a
microphone to help save anyone too.

I'd like to see the No-code Tech class go away with a 5 wpm Tech the being
entry level to the service, or bring back a code only Novice class again.
Require 13 wpm code test for general and 20 wpm an Extra again.

People that don't like it should stay on CB. Ten-Four? This should
provide you and Markie a lot to stroke each other with. You both seem to
sing the same tune.

SC

Why do you say I'm a low-life?

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

wrote:
On 17 Oct 2006 17:39:19 -0700, wrote:


Slow Code wrote:
wrote in
oups.com:
wrote:
On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
You may
not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to agree
that we have a problem. Right?
notice you have gotten no reply


Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response...

The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care..

indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse
than the problem because it does not promote cw forever

Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big
enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code with
any valid reasoning.

Here's a valid reason for continued CW testing: To keep lowlifes like you
and Markie out of ham radio and off HF. You're too lazy to try to be
real hams. You see no value in being effective communicators, therefore
you're both worthless to the service and if you had to use CW to save a
life that person would die. You're both probably too lazy to use a
microphone to help save anyone too.

I'd like to see the No-code Tech class go away with a 5 wpm Tech the being
entry level to the service, or bring back a code only Novice class again.
Require 13 wpm code test for general and 20 wpm an Extra again.

People that don't like it should stay on CB. Ten-Four? This should
provide you and Markie a lot to stroke each other with. You both seem to
sing the same tune.

SC

Why do you say I'm a low-life?

according to him anyone not devoted to cw is a lowlfie

That's really sad.

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Papa Dog wrote in
:

In article .net,
says...
wrote in
oups.com:


wrote:
On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote:


wrote:
wrote:
You may
not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to
agree that we have a problem. Right?
notice you have gotten no reply


Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response...

The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care..

indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse
than the problem because it does not promote cw forever

Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big
enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code
with any valid reasoning.


You see no value in being effective communicators,

The most effective communication is plain english!

73

Chris


Yes you're right, unless you're trying to pass a message through someone
that doesn't know how to speak english.

CW is a wonderful thing. Real communicators know CW and know how to use
it.

SC

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Slow Code is the kind of guy that everybodys hates on the air. He is
the Jammer because no one listens to him.



On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:13:24 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

Papa Dog wrote in
:

In article .net,
says...
wrote in
oups.com:


wrote:
On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote:


wrote:
wrote:
You may
not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to
agree that we have a problem. Right?
notice you have gotten no reply


Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response...

The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care..

indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse
than the problem because it does not promote cw forever

Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big
enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code
with any valid reasoning.


You see no value in being effective communicators,

The most effective communication is plain english!

73

Chris


Yes you're right, unless you're trying to pass a message through someone
that doesn't know how to speak english.

CW is a wonderful thing. Real communicators know CW and know how to use
it.

SC

What is the ARRL's thought on having good amateurs?
 

Slow Code is the kind of guy that everybodys hates on the air. He is
the Jammer because no one listens to him.



On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:13:41 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

wrote in
ups.com:


Slow Code wrote:
wrote in
oups.com:
wrote:
On 13 Oct 2006 07:59:20 -0700, wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
You may
not agree with their suggested solutions, but you'd have to
agree that we have a problem. Right?
notice you have gotten no reply


Having waited almost a week for a reasonable response...

The silence is telling. I believe you are right, he doesn't care..

indeed and it gets worse I am sure he believes the solution is worse
than the problem because it does not promote cw forever

Slow Code is only here to troll. He's a fan of CW, but not a big
enough fan to actually defent the continued testing of Morse Code
with any valid reasoning.

Here's a valid reason for continued CW testing: To keep lowlifes like
you and Markie out of ham radio and off HF. You're too lazy to try to
be real hams. You see no value in being effective communicators,
therefore you're both worthless to the service and if you had to use CW
to save a life that person would die. You're both probably too lazy to
use a microphone to help save anyone too.

I'd like to see the No-code Tech class go away with a 5 wpm Tech the
being entry level to the service, or bring back a code only Novice
class again. Require 13 wpm code test for general and 20 wpm an Extra
again.

People that don't like it should stay on CB. Ten-Four? This should
provide you and Markie a lot to stroke each other with. You both seem
to sing the same tune.

SC

Why do you say I'm a low-life?


Did I say low-life? I meant to say lazy.

SC