"Brian Hill" wrote in :


"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:52 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once

But you don't now, and it's now now, it's not once.

proving that one has little to do with the other.

And that you have little to do with this conversation.

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be gone
sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys but
it's just the sign of the times.

BH


We have to keep trying to save Ham radio while we still can because once
it's all the way in the ****ter it will be even harder to pull back out &
clean up.

A Ham who'll stand for nothing will sit for anything. I won't accept
more dumbing down.


Help save Ham radio:


1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all
elements required for their license class every ten years.


2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%.


3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.


4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.


5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve
things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB.

"Slow Code" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Brian Hill" wrote in :


"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:52 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once

But you don't now, and it's now now, it's not once.

proving that one has little to do with the other.

And that you have little to do with this conversation.

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be gone
sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys but
it's just the sign of the times.

BH


We have to keep trying to save Ham radio while we still can because once
it's all the way in the ****ter it will be even harder to pull back out &
clean up.

A Ham who'll stand for nothing will sit for anything. I won't accept
more dumbing down.


Help save Ham radio:


1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all
elements required for their license class every ten years.


No reason to. This has never existed in the history of amateur radio and
there is no reason to think it would improve things.


2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%.


Might be OK.


3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.


Probably wouldn't make a real difference either way.


4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.


Probably wouldn't make any difference.


5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve
things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB.


Terrible idea. The only way to get ARRL to change is to get involved in the
politics of ARRL and work to try to effect the changes that you want.

Dee Flint wrote:
"Slow Code" wrote in message
nk.net...


3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.


Probably wouldn't make a real difference either way.


4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.


Probably wouldn't make any difference.
certainly would but then you are into killing the ars of course


5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve
things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB.


Terrible idea. The only way to get ARRL to change is to get involved in the
politics of ARRL and work to try to effect the changes that you want.
ask Carl Stevenson about that one

somebody wrote ...

Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.

Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.

.... and new aircraft pilot license requirement: Demonstrate an engine start
by spinning the prop -- by hand. Even if you intend to fly only jets, some
old "prop-job" might be the only thing that can get through in an emergency.

I wonder: Did the radio amateur community go through anything like this for
the transition away from spark?

"Sal M. Onella" wrote:


I wonder: Did the radio amateur community go through anything like this for
the transition away from spark?


Yes, they did.


--
73, Eric F. Richards, KB0YDN,
"A few old diehards still blazoned 'Spark Forever!' on their QSL cards..."
- from "200 Meters & Down", copyright 1936, ARRL

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...


5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve
things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB.


Terrible idea. The only way to get ARRL to change is to get involved in
the politics of ARRL and work to try to effect the changes that you want.


You're most likely correct on getting into the "politics" of the ARRL to
"try" to get anywhere. But, good luck. It is more like a "good ole boys
club". Anytime I've ever seen any reps to the area at a hamfest - they acted
like snobs more than trying to communicate with hams of their concerns OR to
try to win those hams who weren't members - to become members. If the rep
couldn't give me the time of day, the ARRL didn't need my money either. I
stopped my membership when it was due for renewal. That was a good 15 years
ago or better. How did the rep act like a snob? He turned to his bud who was
with him behind the table and ignored others "trying" to gain his attention
and talk to him about whatever. Oh - he may look and say Hi, but god forbid
you interrupt his conversation with his buddy. So much for the "MEET YOUR
ARRL REP HERE"

lou

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:37:53 -0400, "clfe"
wrote:

ago or better. How did the rep act like a snob? He turned to his bud who was
with him behind the table and ignored others "trying" to gain his attention
and talk to him about whatever. Oh - he may look and say Hi, but god forbid
you interrupt his conversation with his buddy. So much for the "MEET YOUR
ARRL REP HERE"

Instead of canceling your membership you should have complained to
Newington. I've known a lot of League reps - some are great, some are
so-so and some are terrible. About the same mix as any large group of
human beings. Canceling your membership didn't make the situation any
better.

Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:37:53 -0400, "clfe"
wrote:


ago or better. How did the rep act like a snob? He turned to his bud who was
with him behind the table and ignored others "trying" to gain his attention
and talk to him about whatever. Oh - he may look and say Hi, but god forbid
you interrupt his conversation with his buddy. So much for the "MEET YOUR
ARRL REP HERE"


Instead of canceling your membership you should have complained to
Newington. I've known a lot of League reps - some are great, some are
so-so and some are terrible. About the same mix as any large group of
human beings. Canceling your membership didn't make the situation any
better.


Remember also that most reps are elected by the few who bother to vote
for them. Most are unopposed. Sort of like politicians.

Dave WD9BDZ

David G. Nagel wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:37:53 -0400, "clfe"
wrote:


ago or better. How did the rep act like a snob? He turned to his bud who was
with him behind the table and ignored others "trying" to gain his attention
and talk to him about whatever. Oh - he may look and say Hi, but god forbid
you interrupt his conversation with his buddy. So much for the "MEET YOUR
ARRL REP HERE"


Instead of canceling your membership you should have complained to
Newington. I've known a lot of League reps - some are great, some are
so-so and some are terrible. About the same mix as any large group of
human beings. Canceling your membership didn't make the situation any
better.


Remember also that most reps are elected by the few who bother to vote
for them. Most are unopposed. Sort of like politicians.

Dave WD9BDZ
anyone that thinks you jion the ARRL and stand for office should
inquire of Carl Stevenson

On 25 Jul 2006 09:31:14 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

anyone that thinks you jion the ARRL and stand for office should
inquire of Carl Stevenson

Or Steve Mendelson?