Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

Opus- wrote in
:

Don't you have some offs to ****?



Why do no-coders always break down in the middle of an argument and start
spewing profanities? I just don't understand it. It must be do to their
limited mental abilities.

Opus being a Cannuk probably doesn't help either.

SC

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

"Slow Code" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Opus- wrote in
:

Don't you have some offs to ****?


Why do no-coders always break down in the middle of an argument and start
spewing profanities? I just don't understand it. It must be do to their
limited mental abilities.

Opus being a Cannuk probably doesn't help either.


Just like pro-Mexican immigration Neo-Kommies, their last argument of refuge
is the race card.

Translation - they don't have an argument.

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

Libertad wrote:

"Slow Code" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Opus- wrote in
:

Don't you have some offs to ****?


Why do no-coders always break down in the middle of an argument and start
spewing profanities? I just don't understand it. It must be do to their
limited mental abilities.

Opus being a Cannuk probably doesn't help either.


Just like pro-Mexican immigration Neo-Kommies, their last argument of refuge
is the race card.

Canuck is a race, 'tard boy?

dx

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

Slow Code wrote:
Opus- wrote in
:

Don't you have some offs to ****?



Why do no-coders always break down in the middle of an argument and start
spewing profanities? I just don't understand it. It must be do to their
limited mental abilities.

Opus being a Cannuk probably doesn't help either.

SC

Removing the code requirement at this late date would do little to
increase the number of hams applying for a license. At one time,
possibly 30 years ago it would have made sense to replace the code test
with one that emphasizes skills that actually have a use in the real
world. Sadly, I think that there is little that can be done to attract
younger hams into the hobby. There are just too many license-free ways
of communicating with people from around the world.

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

wrote:
On 29 Oct 2006 12:05:42 -0800, wrote:


Slow Code wrote:
Opus- wrote in
:

Don't you have some offs to ****?



Why do no-coders always break down in the middle of an argument and start
spewing profanities? I just don't understand it. It must be do to their
limited mental abilities.

Opus being a Cannuk probably doesn't help either.

SC

Removing the code requirement at this late date would do little to
increase the number of hams applying for a license.
but it can help retain those we get and encourage them into intagrate
into the ARs as opposed to being driven out by such as SC


How would retaining the code requirement help to retain those you do
get. I do not understand.



At one time,
possibly 30 years ago it would have made sense to replace the code test
with one that emphasizes skills that actually have a use in the real
world. Sadly, I think that there is little that can be done to attract
younger hams into the hobby. There are just too many license-free ways
of communicating with people from around the world.
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

wrote:
wrote:
On 29 Oct 2006 12:05:42 -0800, wrote:


Slow Code wrote:
Opus- wrote in
:

Don't you have some offs to ****?



Why do no-coders always break down in the middle of an argument and start
spewing profanities? I just don't understand it. It must be do to their
limited mental abilities.

Opus being a Cannuk probably doesn't help either.

SC

Removing the code requirement at this late date would do little to
increase the number of hams applying for a license.
but it can help retain those we get and encourage them into intagrate
into the ARs as opposed to being driven out by such as SC


How would retaining the code requirement help to retain those you do
get. I do not understand.
obviously you do not understand since the opisite was said ending code
tsting could help retain the new hams

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
On 29 Oct 2006 12:05:42 -0800, wrote:


Slow Code wrote:
Opus- wrote in
:

Don't you have some offs to ****?



Why do no-coders always break down in the middle of an argument and start
spewing profanities? I just don't understand it. It must be do to their
limited mental abilities.

Opus being a Cannuk probably doesn't help either.

SC

Removing the code requirement at this late date would do little to
increase the number of hams applying for a license.
but it can help retain those we get and encourage them into intagrate
into the ARs as opposed to being driven out by such as SC


How would retaining the code requirement help to retain those you do
get. I do not understand.
obviously you do not understand since the opisite was said ending code
tsting could help retain the new hams

I see that you real as well as you spell, which is not very good. I
was responding to the following: "but it can help retain those we get
".

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of hamradio?
 

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of hamradio?
 

wrote:

SNIPPED

http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


Mark, this is one of many references to your blogspot. What are you trying to say?

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

You forgot the most important part....
How about helping out the rest of the world in emergencies?

After any disaster, the first comunications out of the effected area comes
from hams. NOHA gets a lot of there hurricane information from hams in the
affected area. Sometimes while the ham op is in the middle of it.

When all else fails...we are there!!!!
Been there, done that
Joe


SNIPPED

Removing the code requirement at this late date would do little to
increase the number of hams applying for a license. At one time,
possibly 30 years ago it would have made sense to replace the code test
with one that emphasizes skills that actually have a use in the real
world. Sadly, I think that there is little that can be done to attract
younger hams into the hobby. There are just too many license-free ways
of communicating with people from around the world.


Amateur Radio is about much more than "communicating with people from
around the
world".

Amateur Radio is about LEARNING !!! LEARNING some physics, learning
about
sunspots, learning about antennas, learning about propagation, learning
about
some electronics, learning about digital communication techniques,
learning
about VHF propagation, learning about microwaves, learning about wide band
tv
systems, learning about narrow band tv systems, learning about ... [you
complete
the phrase].

If you just want to talk around the world, use CB. If you just want to
talk
around town, use FRS. If you want to LEARN about radio become an Amateur
Radio
operator [make a commitment to LEARN].

/s/ DD, W1MCE

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of hamradio?
 

wrote:

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 17:53:09 -0500, Dave wrote:


wrote:

SNIPPED

http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


Mark, this is one of many references to your blogspot. What are you trying to say?

what ever I like
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


FLIP answer. Tnx for nothing.

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of hamradio?
 

wrote:

SNIPPED

Amateur Radio is about LEARNING !!! LEARNING some physics, learning about
sunspots, learning about antennas, learning about propagation, learning about
some electronics, learning about digital communication techniques, learning
about VHF propagation, learning about microwaves, learning about wide band tv
systems, learning about narrow band tv systems, learning about ... [you complete
the phrase].

I notice none of the things you list is Morse Code

If you just want to talk around the world, use CB. If you just want to talk
around town, use FRS. If you want to LEARN about radio become an Amateur Radio
operator [make a commitment to LEARN].

/s/ DD, W1MCE

http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


I can still put 18-20 wpm on paper [with arthritis in fingers] and read 25+ wpm.

What is your skill level?

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

Your name wrote in
:

Slow Code wrote in news:76c0h.19656$UG4.15739
@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

well the real easy answer to that question and the only one needed is:
NO.


Good, we should keep the requirement then, because it has kept a
lot of Bad people out of ham radio.

SC

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

Dave wrote in
:

wrote:

SNIPPED

http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


Mark, this is one of many references to your blogspot. What are you
trying to say?


Don't try to figure it out Dave, you'll just get a headache.

SC

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

In article .com,
wrote:

Snip off topic crapola

Quite frankly I'm tired of seeing posts arguing about the amateur code
requirement in rec.radio.shortwave so I'm kill filing everyone in the
thread or any other thread with that subject from now on.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

Telamon wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Snip off topic crapola

Quite frankly I'm tired of seeing posts arguing about the amateur code
requirement in rec.radio.shortwave so I'm kill filing everyone in the
thread or any other thread with that subject from now on.
so do it and stop whing about it

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
wrote:

Snip off topic crapola

Quite frankly I'm tired of seeing posts arguing about the amateur code
requirement in rec.radio.shortwave so I'm kill filing everyone in the
thread or any other thread with that subject from now on.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

A-men.......... Bro! It's not getting anyone anywhere. Just tying up
bandwidth and making the groups BORING. I've killfiled more people than I
think the computer can keep track of. DAMNED. We'll be talking to ourselves
pretty soon.

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of hamradio?
 

Good, we should keep the requirement then, because it has kept a
lot of Bad people out of ham radio.

SC

How come it didnt keep you out ?

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

wrote:
On 29 Oct 2006 13:06:10 -0800, wrote:


an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
On 29 Oct 2006 12:05:42 -0800, wrote:


Slow Code wrote:
Opus- wrote in
:

Don't you have some offs to ****?



Why do no-coders always break down in the middle of an argument and start
spewing profanities? I just don't understand it. It must be do to their
limited mental abilities.

Opus being a Cannuk probably doesn't help either.

SC

Removing the code requirement at this late date would do little to
increase the number of hams applying for a license.
but it can help retain those we get and encourage them into intagrate
into the ARs as opposed to being driven out by such as SC


How would retaining the code requirement help to retain those you do
get. I do not understand.
obviously you do not understand since the opisite was said ending code
tsting could help retain the new hams

I see that you real as well as you spell, which is not very good. I
was responding to the following: "but it can help retain those we get
".
I "real"? indeed I see what you are responding to but you clearly
can't read the sentence since neither of the preceeding poster is
tlaking about reatining code testing
and neither he 2 yet futher in the tree were talking and code testing
at all

the only one that thinks the poster are sufggesting code testing will
retain anything is you and where you get is beyond me



said:
"Removing the code requirement at this late date would do little to
increase the number of hams applying for a license. "

To which responded:
"but it can help retain those we get "

And said:
"I see that you real(sp) as well as you spell, which is not very good.
I
was responding to the following: "but it can help retain those we get"

And said:
"the only one that thinks the poster are sufggesting code testing will
retain anything is you and where you get is beyond me"

If will take the time to read the threaded responses
he will understand how the thread unfolded.







http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

"Radiosrfun" wrote in message
...

A-men.......... Bro! It's not getting anyone anywhere. Just tying up
bandwidth and making the groups BORING. I've killfiled more people than I
think the computer can keep track of. DAMNED. We'll be talking to
ourselves
pretty soon.



If you mean just SWLs discussing various aspects of the radio hobby on
rec.radio.shortwave, well, let's hope so. The code/no code discussion got
boring years ago. Or perhaps it's the posters who are boring. Either way,
the crossposters from rec.radio.amateur groups make up the bulk of my
killfile.

Frank Dresser

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of hamradio?
 

wrote:

SNIPPED

FLIP answer. Tnx for nothing.

well when you ask a flip question what do you expect
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


I still don't understand why you respond to a post by ONLY listing your blogspot.

What am I missing. My question was not 'flip', it was serious.

But I guess you have nothing worthwhile to say except look at my ....

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

Dave wrote:
wrote:

SNIPPED

FLIP answer. Tnx for nothing.

well when you ask a flip question what do you expect
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


I still don't understand why you respond to a post by ONLY listing your blogspot.
I don't so I can't help you understand beyond that

What am I missing. My question was not 'flip', it was serious.
what are you missing? I realy don't know I could speculate, but I
suspect youd like that even less

But I guess you have nothing worthwhile to say except look at my ....
guess wrong again

By now I am can say you are fool or just another of the troll of the
interent but hopefully you knew that

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

Dave wrote:
wrote:

SNIPPED

Removing the code requirement at this late date would do little to
increase the number of hams applying for a license. At one time,
possibly 30 years ago it would have made sense to replace the code test
with one that emphasizes skills that actually have a use in the real
world. Sadly, I think that there is little that can be done to attract
younger hams into the hobby. There are just too many license-free ways
of communicating with people from around the world.


Amateur Radio is about much more than "communicating with people from around the
world".

Amateur Radio is about LEARNING !!! LEARNING some physics, learning about
sunspots, learning about antennas, learning about propagation, learning about
some electronics, learning about digital communication techniques, learning
about VHF propagation, learning about microwaves, learning about wide band tv
systems, learning about narrow band tv systems, learning about ... [you complete
the phrase].

If you just want to talk around the world, use CB. If you just want to talk
around town, use FRS. If you want to LEARN about radio become an Amateur Radio
operator [make a commitment to LEARN].


I agree - learning something about amateur radio is a requirement for
passing the test. The real question is what kinds of knowlege about
amateur radio should be required of prospective hams before giving them
a license. It would seem to me that testing a prospective ham for
knowlege of how radios operate, how to set up a station properly and
how to operate the equipment safely would be a primary concern. Next
the ham should be able to demonstrate an ability to use the equipment
to communicate in an efficient and courteous manner in a mode that is
widely used. Voice is hands down the most frequently used mode of
communication. Additionally, a knowlege of how to communicate via
radio using voice would be a big help when trying to make contact
during an emergency with professional rescue groups. Having the
prospective ham learn morse code would not provide him with a skill
that has any real world use.

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

Dave wrote in
:

wrote:

SNIPPED

Amateur Radio is about LEARNING !!! LEARNING some physics, learning
about sunspots, learning about antennas, learning about propagation,
learning about some electronics, learning about digital communication
techniques, learning about VHF propagation, learning about microwaves,
learning about wide band tv systems, learning about narrow band tv
systems, learning about ... [you complete the phrase].

I notice none of the things you list is Morse Code

If you just want to talk around the world, use CB. If you just want to
talk around town, use FRS. If you want to LEARN about radio become an
Amateur Radio operator [make a commitment to LEARN].

/s/ DD, W1MCE

http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


I can still put 18-20 wpm on paper [with arthritis in fingers] and read
25+ wpm.

What is your skill level?


Mark in the Dark doesn't have a skill level. He butchers the english
pretty good though.

SC

Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?
 

"R. Scott" wrote in
:


Good, we should keep the requirement then, because it has kept a
lot of Bad people out of ham radio.

SC

How come it didnt keep you out ?


I'm not bad.

SC