Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Steve N." wrote in
: OK, OK, OK I'll bite just a bit... "Slow Code" wrote in message ink.net... "Steve N." wrote in : Slow, It's is a shame you have to: 1- talk like this and 2- have so little respect for others and 3- have no ability to rationally discuss prows and cons complex issues and 4- have a poor understanding of what makes a good ham and 5- have so little understanding some real-world practical aspects of this issue and most importantly... 6- show such poor ham characteristics. 7- and probably have so little real knowledge of ham radio, is my guess. and 8- be a troll If you're also a 20 WPM extra, then we can easily do without your immature attitudes and behaviors here and on the bands. Hey guys! it is also a shame you get drawn into these types and feed their small minds. 73, Steve, K9DCI Yes, Yes, yes, but what are your thoughts on the following: No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all elements required for their license class. sc, Lesee... Well, I believe you have some discussable concepts here. In other areas there are currency requirements. Flying, for example. If you haven't kept up, you need refresher flights with an instructor. We first try to outline what is gained / lost over time and whether re-testing can address these issues. Old timers will be required to learn about QPSK and all the modern concepts. Then we go from here. One general area you seem to fail to address is some of the practical aspects regarding number of licensees and the viability of retaining the Amateur Service all together. If the number of Hams keeps declining, will there be ANY licenses...and do you (in general) want to preserve something, or kill it all if numbers fall, manufacturers stop producing products, etc... This can not be ignored in the rest of the discussions. I know Extras who couldn't build a thing, yet are active, intelligent and law abiding. They have interest I can discuss with them. I also know no-code'ers that are the most serious hams around...not to mention several that came from CB and are now died-in-the-wool-hams. I also hear Extras on the air that should aim for a tree the next time they drive a car. Is learning CW a "right of passage" and an effort that helps to strengthen the Ham...yes...for some. Does it guarantee an excellent, expert Ham? Not by a long shot. That comes from elsewhere. However, based on the post of yours that I responded to, I choose not to go further since you have demonstrated such a poor attitude, I feel it is not worth the time exploring with you. Ill pick more important battles. Enjoy your Hamm activities (if you have any) and be content. you brand or devisiveness accompliches nothing except, perhaps allowing a few of the responders to vent and possibly hear (though by accident) some reasonable points. Do you have a call, name? With a pseudonym like yours, I'd think you'dbe on the other side. What are you affraid of? 73, Steve K9DCI The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%. How about the licence grade depending on the score? How about much more strict requirements for on-air procedure. I hear many who have licenses and still don't know how to communicate efficiently in emergency drills or ID properly. Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra. CW only was a requirement due to international treaty in the first place. That is no longer the case. You are clrarly hung up on CW. WHY? What does it bring / guarantee? Why is CW so much more important that all other aspects of on-air operation? Make the no-code Tech license one year non-renewable. This still comes directly from the "CW or nothing" concept. 73 (in the truest sense) My arguement has always been for the quality of the hams. You appreciate something more that you had to work to achieve, and respect the rewards it gives. Cheapening something makes it disposable. Ham numbers are declining. sc |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Slow Code wrote: "Steve N." wrote in : OK, OK, OK I'll bite just a bit... This still comes directly from the "CW or nothing" concept. 73 (in the truest sense) My arguement has always been for the quality of the hams. You appreciate something more that you had to work to achieve, and respect the rewards it gives. you arguement is false I value things based on their proifit to me My tech license is higher profitable becuase it took little to get and get me a lot Cheapening something makes it disposable. how is making testing reflect reality cheapening? Ham numbers are declining. becuase of age mostly hams are litterly dying off sc |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Slow, Can you address any of my comments in my previous, or here ? My arguement has always been for the quality of the hams. OK. Given this, is it true that everything else is unimportant to you - only the quality? [there always have been jerks around.] You appreciate something more that you had to work to achieve, and respect the rewards it gives. I think I can agree with this. Give a kid a car or whatever, and he's more likely to treat it badly. Make him work for it and he appreciates the value and shows the appropriate care with it.. Cheapening something makes it disposable. Yea.... I understand that having to do the CW thing is more work and more likely that the licence will be valued, but what about putting the prospective ham through other, more rigorous hoops, like electronic theory, emcom, etc. Why won't more modern "hoops" work the same way to bolster the individual's respect for the service? Ham numbers are declining. I believe this is true, but what is you reason for stating this? Are you glad this is happening or sad or indifferent? 73, Steve, K9DCI |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Steve N." wrote in
: Slow, Can you address any of my comments in my previous, or here ? My arguement has always been for the quality of the hams. OK. Given this, is it true that everything else is unimportant to you - only the quality? [there always have been jerks around.] So let's have more? You appreciate something more that you had to work to achieve, and respect the rewards it gives. I think I can agree with this. Give a kid a car or whatever, and he's more likely to treat it badly. Make him work for it and he appreciates the value and shows the appropriate care with it.. Cheapening something makes it disposable. Yea.... I understand that having to do the CW thing is more work and more likely that the licence will be valued, but what about putting the prospective ham through other, more rigorous hoops, like electronic theory, emcom, etc. Why won't more modern "hoops" work the same way to bolster the individual's respect for the service? Yes, 85% passing score for writtens. Ham numbers are declining. I believe this is true, but what is you reason for stating this? Are you glad this is happening or sad or indifferent? The numbers don't matter, quality does. Reasoning a service is good because it has lots of members, CB should be great then, but it's like a kindergarten. sc |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Slow Code wrote: "Steve N." wrote in : Ham numbers are declining. I believe this is true, but what is you reason for stating this? Are you glad this is happening or sad or indifferent? The numbers don't matter, quality does. number do Matter this line show you as a complete fool Reasoning a service is good because it has lots of members, CB should be great then, but it's like a kindergarten. it also suffering from ZERO danger of losing it freqs either still nothing in your materail even suggests that CW testing is good for the ARS besudes you and your freinds have failed to convine the FCC of ithat read the NPRM if you can't sell even if it were the truth it would not matter sc |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Slow Code" wrote in message t... "Steve N." wrote in : Slow, Can you address any of my comments in my previous, or here ? Unfortunately, it appears not too well.. is it true that everything else is unimportant to you - only the quality? [there always have been jerks around.] So let's have more? ...is not an answer to my question and this question provides no clue. It implies I said that more jerks will result from those that will always be there...I think. or that I want more... You appreciate something more that you had to work to achieve, and respect the rewards it gives. ...snip... Yea.... I understand ... but what about putting the prospective ham through other, more rigorous hoops, like electronic theory, emcom, etc. Why won't more modern "hoops" work the same way to bolster the individual's respect for the service? Yes, 85% passing score for writtens. OK, 85% is another kind of hoop. but Please answer my "Why" question. Ham numbers are declining. I believe this is true, but what is you reason for stating this? Are you glad this is happening or sad or indifferent? The numbers don't matter, quality does. OK, so this seems to answer my other question. While I agree, that in a perfect world I would also restrict licences to only those who have a decent head on their shoulders...however, do _you_ trust _me_ to decide whose head is good? These are my last questions: Do you believe: 1- CW and 85% on exams will prevent or seriously limit the number of knuckleheads who sneek through? 2- That I am lying when I tell of some no-code techs that I personally know are the most serious, level headed and law abiding hams I know? 3- That I am lying when I tell you that I also know some very good hams who came up through CB and are just as law abiding when on the ham bands as anyone, just as serious about being good citizens, do emergency prep work and help others? Reasoning a service is good because it has lots of members, [ is incorrent reasoning] is what the implied completion of that sentence is. I agree. There have been and are some pretty wacko organizations. ....but... CB should be great then, but it's like a kindergarten. Is a gross generalization. How often do you listen? How many "CB'ers" have you recently talked to? I listen once in a while just to see what's going on and be able to speak with first hand knowledge, and do hear some garbage, but I also hear of how it has helped in aread and ther ewere no hams around to help. Also, some areas have been worse than others, 1- I believe you have a limited view of CB [and no, I haven't been a "CB'er" but I have carried a radio on a few, I think two long trips where I would have trouble getting into repeaters for long periods.]. I have been helped by "CBers". 2- what percentage of CB users are jerks? 3- What percentage of hams are jerks? then... 4- What percentage of jerks makes the service bad? My suggestions CW optional as it is now for *ALL* modes, but remove from the tests...except possibly for Extra - my jury's still out on this. 85-87% on tests, but Much more on propagation, antenna systems and emergency station operations and emergency communications and laws. Then some others in the "if I were Amateur Radio Service God" department... Currency requiremets like pilots that include familiarity recent developments. Proof of license, and that you can understand, explain and operate at least 90% of the functions on a radio in order to buy. If I wanted to be an old timer, I'd also require construction of something...knowledge of the history of ham Radio. Then being more modern, something like proficiency in software, digital modes and satellite ops. Gee, I should spend more time on these.... not. More important fish to fry. Sorry, guys, I just couldn't resist a little chain jerking here. 73, Steve, K9DCI At lease I got sc to answer a few questions ... sort of. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Steve N." wrote in
: "Slow Code" wrote in message t... "Steve N." wrote in : Slow, Can you address any of my comments in my previous, or here ? Unfortunately, it appears not too well.. is it true that everything else is unimportant to you - only the quality? [there always have been jerks around.] So let's have more? ...is not an answer to my question and this question provides no clue. It implies I said that more jerks will result from those that will always be there...I think. or that I want more... You appreciate something more that you had to work to achieve, and respect the rewards it gives. ...snip... Yea.... I understand ... but what about putting the prospective ham through other, more rigorous hoops, like electronic theory, emcom, etc. Why won't more modern "hoops" work the same way to bolster the individual's respect for the service? Yes, 85% passing score for writtens. OK, 85% is another kind of hoop. but Please answer my "Why" question. Ham numbers are declining. I believe this is true, but what is you reason for stating this? Are you glad this is happening or sad or indifferent? The numbers don't matter, quality does. OK, so this seems to answer my other question. While I agree, that in a perfect world I would also restrict licences to only those who have a decent head on their shoulders...however, do _you_ trust _me_ to decide whose head is good? These are my last questions: Do you believe: 1- CW and 85% on exams will prevent or seriously limit the number of knuckleheads who sneek through? 2- That I am lying when I tell of some no-code techs that I personally know are the most serious, level headed and law abiding hams I know? 3- That I am lying when I tell you that I also know some very good hams who came up through CB and are just as law abiding when on the ham bands as anyone, just as serious about being good citizens, do emergency prep work and help others? Reasoning a service is good because it has lots of members, [ is incorrent reasoning] is what the implied completion of that sentence is. I agree. There have been and are some pretty wacko organizations. ...but... CB should be great then, but it's like a kindergarten. Is a gross generalization. How often do you listen? How many "CB'ers" have you recently talked to? I listen once in a while just to see what's going on and be able to speak with first hand knowledge, and do hear some garbage, but I also hear of how it has helped in aread and ther ewere no hams around to help. Also, some areas have been worse than others, 1- I believe you have a limited view of CB [and no, I haven't been a "CB'er" but I have carried a radio on a few, I think two long trips where I would have trouble getting into repeaters for long periods.]. I have been helped by "CBers". 2- what percentage of CB users are jerks? 3- What percentage of hams are jerks? then... 4- What percentage of jerks makes the service bad? My suggestions CW optional as it is now for *ALL* modes, but remove from the tests...except possibly for Extra - my jury's still out on this. 85-87% on tests, but Much more on propagation, antenna systems and emergency station operations and emergency communications and laws. Then some others in the "if I were Amateur Radio Service God" department... Currency requiremets like pilots that include familiarity recent developments. Proof of license, and that you can understand, explain and operate at least 90% of the functions on a radio in order to buy. If I wanted to be an old timer, I'd also require construction of something...knowledge of the history of ham Radio. Then being more modern, something like proficiency in software, digital modes and satellite ops. Gee, I should spend more time on these.... not. More important fish to fry. Sorry, guys, I just couldn't resist a little chain jerking here. 73, Steve, K9DCI At lease I got sc to answer a few questions ... sort of. Maybe you have a few CB buddies you'd like to see get licensed, and dumbing things down will help, I don't know. Outcome based licensing. No one wants to be a ham if they have to work a little harder for the license and so no one wants to support having a good test to get one. sc |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Slow Code" wrote in message
.net... (snipped) Maybe you have a few CB buddies you'd like to see get licensed, and dumbing things down will help, I don't know. Outcome based licensing. No one wants to be a ham if they have to work a little harder for the license and so no one wants to support having a good test to get one. sc Another self proclaimed superior ham perpetuating the myth that CBers are too dumb to pass the test. Keep that rift between hams and CBers and your hobby will die an agonizing death. You have yourself to blame. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Slow Code" wrote in message .net... "Steve N." wrote in : "Slow Code" wrote in message t... "Steve N." wrote in : Slow, Can you address any of my comments in my previous, or here ? Unfortunately, it appears not too well.. is it true that everything else is unimportant to you - only the quality? [there always have been jerks around.] So let's have more? ...is not an answer to my question and this question provides no clue. It implies I said that more jerks will result from those that will always be there...I think. or that I want more... You appreciate something more that you had to work to achieve, and respect the rewards it gives. ...snip... Yea.... I understand ... but what about putting the prospective ham through other, more rigorous hoops, like electronic theory, emcom, etc. Why won't more modern "hoops" work the same way to bolster the individual's respect for the service? Yes, 85% passing score for writtens. OK, 85% is another kind of hoop. but Please answer my "Why" question. Ham numbers are declining. I believe this is true, but what is you reason for stating this? Are you glad this is happening or sad or indifferent? The numbers don't matter, quality does. OK, so this seems to answer my other question. While I agree, that in a perfect world I would also restrict licences to only those who have a decent head on their shoulders...however, do _you_ trust _me_ to decide whose head is good? These are my last questions: Do you believe: 1- CW and 85% on exams will prevent or seriously limit the number of knuckleheads who sneek through? 2- That I am lying when I tell of some no-code techs that I personally know are the most serious, level headed and law abiding hams I know? 3- That I am lying when I tell you that I also know some very good hams who came up through CB and are just as law abiding when on the ham bands as anyone, just as serious about being good citizens, do emergency prep work and help others? Reasoning a service is good because it has lots of members, [ is incorrent reasoning] is what the implied completion of that sentence is. I agree. There have been and are some pretty wacko organizations. ...but... CB should be great then, but it's like a kindergarten. Is a gross generalization. How often do you listen? How many "CB'ers" have you recently talked to? I listen once in a while just to see what's going on and be able to speak with first hand knowledge, and do hear some garbage, but I also hear of how it has helped in aread and ther ewere no hams around to help. Also, some areas have been worse than others, 1- I believe you have a limited view of CB [and no, I haven't been a "CB'er" but I have carried a radio on a few, I think two long trips where I would have trouble getting into repeaters for long periods.]. I have been helped by "CBers". 2- what percentage of CB users are jerks? 3- What percentage of hams are jerks? then... 4- What percentage of jerks makes the service bad? My suggestions CW optional as it is now for *ALL* modes, but remove from the tests...except possibly for Extra - my jury's still out on this. 85-87% on tests, but Much more on propagation, antenna systems and emergency station operations and emergency communications and laws. Then some others in the "if I were Amateur Radio Service God" department... Currency requiremets like pilots that include familiarity recent developments. Proof of license, and that you can understand, explain and operate at least 90% of the functions on a radio in order to buy. If I wanted to be an old timer, I'd also require construction of something...knowledge of the history of ham Radio. Then being more modern, something like proficiency in software, digital modes and satellite ops. Gee, I should spend more time on these.... not. More important fish to fry. Sorry, guys, I just couldn't resist a little chain jerking here. 73, Steve, K9DCI At lease I got sc to answer a few questions ... sort of. Maybe you have a few CB buddies you'd like to see get licensed, and dumbing things down will help, I don't know. You sure don't! Also a very bad assumption and groundless..Also wrong, not to mention irrelavant to my words and position. I said that I already know *HAMS* who came from the CB side (only because they either told me directly, or I overheard then discuss it on the air) ---whom I met as Hams. They are top notch hams in every way. I don't do CB, but have an old Morotola 40 CH AM unit because I want to have as much communications capability to handle any eventuality in an emergency. It would have been helpful in a serious malicious repeater interference situation a number of years ago when I didn't have even 27 MHz receive capability and it heloed solve and catch the perps. Outcome based licensing. You'll have to explain the meaning of this. No one wants to be a ham if they have to work a little harder for the license False generalization " On one..." and "harder" than what? This was dis proved by one of the posters responding to you who said somethin like he wa looking forward to learning CW etyc... Unbeknownst to you, there are people who do value things for their own sake and will enjoy the feeling of self accomplishment.. and so no one wants to support having a good test to get one. Well here *IS* one. I support a much harder test in the areas I previously outlined. I *DO* agree that the CW hurdle can be one which makes us value the license to a significant degree...HOWEVER, I believe it is not the ONLY thing which can have this effect, as you appear to believe. I do do CW, enjoy those contacts, marvel at the ability to QSO with any country / language with it and feel ( alittle special being) part of an esoteric group that knows it. However, it doesn't make me a better person simply because I know it. My value derives from a deeper value. Knowing that Hams were a VERY significant factor in communications for 9/11, the SE Asia tsunami and Katrina makes me feel good and I bet there were many code-less hams involved. I'm a "techie" and would love to require everyone to build something and explain something regarding electronics in much greater depth than on the current tests. I also KNOW that this will not guatantee an all around "good" ham. I also enjoy the diversity of those I meet on the air that aren't Electrical Engineers or Technicians. I think that if your position was valid there would haave been no jerk hams in the past, when CW was on all tests. Why was Knowledge of Morse there in the first place? Understanding this in full context is, I believe, critical to cussions on this issue. If you can't conceed that any of my points have any validity, than so be it. It is your right. But I find you very closed minded and unable to intelligently discuss a complex issue in a mature way. It is your right and I'll also deffend your right to have your opinions. If for no other reason, it allows me (and hopefully others) to more firmly and intelligently form and understand mine. 73, Steve, K9DCI Always willing to show my true identity. and hopefuly express thoughtful and well reasoned viewes along with correct and understandable technicial explanations for others. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
AMATEUR RADIO VOLUNTEERS FILLING COMMUNICATION GAPS IN GULF REGIONfrom today's ARRL Letter | Policy | |||
Open Letter to K1MAN | Policy | |||
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #697 | General | |||
ARRL Propose New License Class & Code-Free HF Access | Antenna | |||
ARRL's Incoming QSL Burro Screwing NON ARRL members! | Policy |