| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
July 23rd 06, 03:26 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
|
|||
|
|||
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Al Klein wrote: On 22 Jul 2006 12:45:02 -0700, " wrote: Al Klein wrote: On 22 Jul 2006 09:02:12 -0700, "an old friend" wrote: Part of that code is honesty. How honest is it to memorize answers to a test? absolutely and conpletely honest By taking the test you're claiming that you understand the questions and know the answers. By releasing the Question Pools, the FCC is claiming that you must memorize the answers. No one is claiming any such thing. By memorizing the answers you're not learning enough to understand the questions. But I wouldn't expect you to understand what "honesty" means. Why not? how balanced is to to place CW over all over ham knowledge? No one is, any more than by requiring people to know the law one is putting the law "over all ham knowledge". CW is pass/fail. To fail CW denies all HF privs (except for Alaska). How progressive is it? How progressive is it to not require people to know ... oh, yeah, that's progressive, since the new thing is to hand out licenses because people have some kind of "right" to get on the air. Then why is it with the prospect of losing the CW Exam, that you'se guys want to "beef up" the written exams? how loyal is it to denny the nation the benifits of allowing more operators What "benefits" does the country get from more people using radios who don't know the first thing about them? (Whatever "denny" means.) It's always been that way. You could even buy Heathkits already assembled. (and Get a context clue: deny). to aquire the expence needed to truely work on hf You don't acquire knowledge (which is what's needed) by playing with a radio. Then the military has wasted billions of dollars over the years "training" radio operators. how patriotic is it to keep a staion forom aquiing the skill to be ready for service to conutry and community? How does playing CB on the ham bands give one "the skill to be ready for service to conutry and community"? Who knows? That's not what Mark is talking about, is it? Or any skill, other than getting what you want? You don't acquire skill by doing something that requires no skill. So it really is all about CW. Why have a written Exam at all? And you, particularly, don't acquire knowledge by demanding something for nothing. The requirements for an amateur radio license have been all over the map over the history of the service. The ORIGINAL amateur radio license had no Morse Code Exam, even when Morse Code was the only means of communicating. Get over it. Everyone else is moving on. |
|
#2
July 23rd 06, 11:44 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
|
#3
July 24th 06, 12:06 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Al Klein wrote: On 23 Jul 2006 07:26:05 -0700, wrote: Al Klein wrote: By taking the test you're claiming that you understand the questions and know the answers. By releasing the Question Pools, the FCC is claiming that you must memorize the answers. Must? Where's the "must"? Or do you mean "If you aren't intelligent enough, or motivated enough, to learn a little, the only way to get a license is to memorize the answers." well the only way you are going to lean the rules question is to momorize No one is claiming any such thing. By memorizing the answers you're not learning enough to understand the questions. But I wouldn't expect you to understand what "honesty" means. Why not? Because he's already admitted that he's dishonest. a admission that of itself proves me more honest than you how balanced is to to place CW over all over ham knowledge? No one is, any more than by requiring people to know the law one is putting the law "over all ham knowledge". CW is pass/fail. To fail CW denies all HF privs (except for Alaska). Theory is also pass/fail. To fail to get the required number of correct answers denies all privs - HF, VHF, UHF ... no sigle element of i and besides you content nobody has trouble passig it so it not pass fail but pass/pass How progressive is it? How progressive is it to not require people to know ... oh, yeah, that's progressive, since the new thing is to hand out licenses because people have some kind of "right" to get on the air. Then why is it with the prospect of losing the CW Exam, that you'se guys want to "beef up" the written exams? We don't. liar as you go on to prove We want to get back the level it used to be before it was dumbed down to the point that you could almost pass it if you never heard of the FCC, ham radio or electronics. establish the need ofr such testing and I will support you Just by guessing at the answers. It used to require that you draw (was it 3?) schematics. so what? From scratch. Let's see how many people could do that today. A Colpitts oscillator, a Hartley oscillator and some other circuit that I've forgotten at the moment. They're still as relevant today as they were 50 years ago. and when was the last time you had to assemble one without any notes to help you? how loyal is it to denny the nation the benifits of allowing more operators What "benefits" does the country get from more people using radios who don't know the first thing about them? (Whatever "denny" means.) It's always been that way. You could even buy Heathkits already assembled. But you had to actually *know* a little theory to use one legally. nope you just had to pass the test Today all you need is the time to take the test and the money for the test and the equipment. bull**** must you undermine the ars by insutling allnew ops? that is not coutesous either Al IOW, a CB "license" with a tiny bit of annoyance up front. How does CB benefit the country? why do you hate CB so bad? did one of pinn your coax? no support for your postion just insults You don't acquire knowledge (which is what's needed) by playing with a radio. Then the military has wasted billions of dollars over the years "training" radio operators. I trained operators when I was in the military. We didn't do it by giving recruits radios and telling them to go jam each other. I am glad to read that neither does the ARS your point ? or were you just ranting? how patriotic is it to keep a staion forom aquiing the skill to be ready for service to conutry and community? How does playing CB on the ham bands give one "the skill to be ready for service to conutry and community"? Who knows? That's not what Mark is talking about, is it? That's exactly what he's talking about. nope that isn't what I am tlaking about Give someone a radio and a "license" to use it and he'll "acquire the skill to be ready for service to country and community". That's what Mark said, right up above. lying again never said anything about giving a license away what was that you said about being dishonest How does one acquire skill by playing radio? the only to aquire skill at using a radio is by USING a radio Or any skill, other than getting what you want? You don't acquire skill by doing something that requires no skill. So it really is all about CW. Why have a written Exam at all? You don't acquire technical skill by doing something that doesn't require technical skill. meaning no need for a CW test? You don't acquire operating skill by doing something that requires no operating skill. no need for writeen test either thn? And you don't acquire skill in CW by cursing into a mike. who siad you did but I for one have no interest in learning CW at all even if that were possible for me (which I do not believe is the case bt that is another arguement) you OTOH seem to think it polite to disparage opertors that you likely have never heard But that's what Mark and his ilk want - we'll have "skilled operators" honestly in time if we did give the license away the user would develope skill with it if we allow people to buy radios and put them on the air with no skill or knowledge. By osmosis? Or by magic? the same way the skill were devloped in the first trail and error would still work althogh I don't advocate reling on it And you, particularly, don't acquire knowledge by demanding something for nothing. The requirements for an amateur radio license have been all over the map over the history of the service. The ORIGINAL amateur radio license had no Morse Code Exam, even when Morse Code was the only means of communicating. So you'd get a license not knowing CW, build a radio (you couldn't buy one then) and ... what? Sit and look at it. Some things are just too obvious to need mentioning. Get over it. Everyone else is moving on. Evidently not, or I'd be the only one in the world advocating that a test should actually test for something. on here there are perhaps 3 people still advocating a Morse code test OTOH nobody advocates ywe drop testing except occasion the frustrated advocate of Code testing Yes personalyI think some the thing we current test are at best questionable I would prefer to foucs more on rules and safety question I realy don't think any body needs to memorize thatwhat freg is white in SSTV signal he know prehaps where to look it out but to have that knowledge memorized no way and yet there is such a question on the current extra pool There are actually millions of us who don't think lack of instant gratification is the worst thing in the world. what has that got to do with maintining your frat house game called Morse Code testing? What next? DXCC awards for those who *want* to work 100 countries? who cares about a DXCC award? I certianly don't realy or does not caring about working "countries that have no people in them and sometimes barely exist at high tide make me not a ham either |
|
#4
August 3rd 06, 04:05 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Al Klein wrote: On 23 Jul 2006 07:26:05 -0700, wrote: Al Klein wrote: By taking the test you're claiming that you understand the questions and know the answers. By releasing the Question Pools, the FCC is claiming that you must memorize the answers. Must? Where's the "must"? Or do you mean "If you aren't intelligent enough, or motivated enough, to learn a little, the only way to get a license is to memorize the answers." No, not all all. It should be obvious that if you can make a ridiculous statement such as the one you made above, I can make a ridiculous statement also. No one is claiming any such thing. I guess you missed this part which is key to you're not understanding that my statement was ridiculous. By memorizing the answers you're not learning enough to understand the questions. But I wouldn't expect you to understand what "honesty" means. Why not? Because he's already admitted that he's dishonest. When will you admit that you are dishonest? how balanced is to to place CW over all over ham knowledge? No one is, any more than by requiring people to know the law one is putting the law "over all ham knowledge". CW is pass/fail. To fail CW denies all HF privs (except for Alaska). Theory is also pass/fail. To fail to get the required number of correct answers denies all privs - HF, VHF, UHF ... There is no pass/fail practical for SSB, FM, AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY, FAX, Packet, PSK, etc, etc, etc. How progressive is it? How progressive is it to not require people to know ... oh, yeah, that's progressive, since the new thing is to hand out licenses because people have some kind of "right" to get on the air. Then why is it with the prospect of losing the CW Exam, that you'se guys want to "beef up" the written exams? We don't. That is not true. We want to get back the level it used to be before it was dumbed down to the point that you could almost pass it if you never heard of the FCC, ham radio or electronics. You're referring to the Conditional license, right? Just by guessing at the answers. It used to require that you draw (was it 3?) schematics. You tell me? Was it 2 or was it 3? Is this your lucky day? From scratch. Let's see how many people could do that today. A Colpitts oscillator, a Hartley oscillator and some other circuit that I've forgotten at the moment. You should self-modify your license and cease amateur operation until you remember. The amateur is self-policing, and you no longer meet your own standard. They're still as relevant today as they were 50 years ago. Other things are relevant today that weren't even known 50 years ago. how loyal is it to denny the nation the benifits of allowing more operators What "benefits" does the country get from more people using radios who don't know the first thing about them? (Whatever "denny" means.) It's always been that way. You could even buy Heathkits already assembled. But you had to actually *know* a little theory to use one legally. No you didn't. Today all you need is the time to take the test and the money for the test and the equipment. IOW, a CB "license" with a tiny bit of annoyance up front. How does CB benefit the country? Sounds like you need to look for a different hobby if you have such disdain for your fellow amateurs. Best of Luck. You don't acquire knowledge (which is what's needed) by playing with a radio. Then the military has wasted billions of dollars over the years "training" radio operators. I trained operators when I was in the military. We didn't do it by giving recruits radios and telling them to go jam each other. I used radios in the military. I never used a CW key in the military. I never jammed another operator, although Brandywine asked me to reduce power once. how patriotic is it to keep a staion forom aquiing the skill to be ready for service to conutry and community? How does playing CB on the ham bands give one "the skill to be ready for service to conutry and community"? Who knows? That's not what Mark is talking about, is it? That's exactly what he's talking about. Give someone a radio and a "license" to use it and he'll "acquire the skill to be ready for service to country and community". That's what Mark said, right up above. How does one acquire skill by playing radio? We self-train. It is a continuous process of improvements. You mistakenly believe that at the conclusion of The Exam, the "operator" is 100%. Never was, Never will be, and neither were you weren't. I'm beginning to think that you're from the school of "The Older I Get, The Better I Was!" Or any skill, other than getting what you want? You don't acquire skill by doing something that requires no skill. So it really is all about CW. Why have a written Exam at all? You don't acquire technical skill by doing something that doesn't require technical skill. You don't acquire operating skill by doing something that requires no operating skill. And you don't acquire skill in CW by cursing into a mike. Nor do you. But that's what Mark and his ilk want - we'll have "skilled operators" if we allow people to buy radios and put them on the air with no skill or knowledge. By osmosis? Or by magic? I've listened to emergency responders on a scanner before. They don't use Morse Code, they don't use CW. They use FM/Voice. Somehow they are effective at it, not having taken a Morse Code test. How can this be? Tell you what. The next time your YL dials 911 for you, she has to communicate with the 911 Operator in Morse Code. She can just sound it out with her mouth, no keyer, sounder, clacker or anything else required. When the Operator tells her to speak normally, your YL is allowed to say once, and only once, using her normal voice, "Real communications takes place with Morse Code" and then revert back to sounding out her message with Morse Code dits and dahs. Agreed? On your block of granite, she will say, "Here Lays Al Klein, Who had no use for Voice Modes. May He Rest In Peace" And you, particularly, don't acquire knowledge by demanding something for nothing. The requirements for an amateur radio license have been all over the map over the history of the service. The ORIGINAL amateur radio license had no Morse Code Exam, even when Morse Code was the only means of communicating. So you'd get a license not knowing CW, build a radio (you couldn't buy one then) and ... what? Sit and look at it. Some things are just too obvious to need mentioning. Please diagram that radio from "Scratch." Get over it. Everyone else is moving on. Evidently not, or I'd be the only one in the world advocating that a test should actually test for something. There are actually millions of us who don't think lack of instant gratification is the worst thing in the world. Dial 911 and tell the operator that you don't need instant gratification, take your time. What next? DXCC awards for those who *want* to work 100 countries? You seem to be confused. DXCC is an award offered by the ARRL, not the FCC. It has nothing to do with licensing. You ask "What next?" How about a test for everyone else except you, where you get to try to recall what was on your test, but can't. |
|
#6
August 3rd 06, 02:53 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
Al Klein wrote:
Testing isn't about memory, it's about knowledge. Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize the individual characters? -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
|
#7
August 3rd 06, 03:12 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Cecil Moore wrote: Al Klein wrote: Testing isn't about memory, it's about knowledge. Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize the individual characters? Probably, Cecil, since it would then make it difficult to pass the test. "I" There. You just got ONE "character" of several electronics-related formulas. Now do something with it without knowing the rest of the "characters" that go with it. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
|
#8
August 3rd 06, 03:26 PM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that persondie?
K4YZ wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize the individual characters? Probably, Cecil, since it would then make it difficult to pass the test. You missed the point. The Morse code skill exam requires memorizing the characters. Memorizing is being condemned as an evil act. Since memorizing is evil, the Morse code skill exam should be the first thing to be eliminated. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
|
#9
August 10th 06, 03:18 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
Cecil Moore wrote: Al Klein wrote: Testing isn't about memory, it's about knowledge. Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize the individual characters? -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp We aren't made to memorize every value of resistor and capacitor, or every offset for the six meter repeater subband. |
|
#10
August 10th 06, 05:25 AM
posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
|
|||
|
|||
|
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die?
|
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Bonafied Proof of LIFE AFTER DEATH -- Coal Mine Rescue | Shortwave | |||
Hybrid Mode
