RadioBanter - View Single Post - 05-235

November 21st 05, 01:19 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.policy

wrote:
wrote:
From: on Wed 16 Nov 2005 19:09
wrote:
From: "Bill Sohl" on Wed 16 Nov 2005 08:35
wrote in message
an old friend wrote:
wrote:
Bill Sohl wrote:

Way back in time the pro-coders managed to set themselves up as
"extra" amateurs BECAUSE of their telegraphy skill, all through
lobbying to keep morse code as the "hot ticket."

Not true, Len.

ABSOLUTELY TRUE, Miccolis. Everyone realizes it. Why not
admit that it is so?

Let's go through it, shall we? Pro-coders (one can only wonder if Len
means those who favored morse testing, those who favored morse use or
those who were simply proficient at morse code) made up their own
regulations. It isn't explained how or if these "pro-coders" all became
Extra Class ticket holders. Extra Class license holders can't obtain
that license without passing the most difficult theory and regulatory
written exam offered in U.S. amateur radio and not all of those with
morse code skills became Extra Class licensees. Len's statement appears
to have some gaping holes.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. NO "holes," Heil. An abbreviated synopsis
is all.

Big holes, Len.

Before Restructuring took effect in 2000, the Extra code test
rate was 20 WPM.

Unless a medical waiver was obtained, in which case the Extra
could be had for a code test of as little as 5 wpm.

The "modern" Extra class license was added in the 1951 restructuring
that
also added the Novice and Technician class licenses. The code test
speed
for the Extra was set at 20 wpm at that time.

Why? Because the older-timers influencing
the NAAR lobbyists thought they were hot snit for amateur
radio because so many had been professional telegraphers.

No, that's not true at all.

It was a way of keeping the old pro status past retirement.
Since they were already skilled in telegraphy, they got a free
set of perquisites in a HOBBY activity.

What about the thousands of others - like myself - who earned the
license because we wanted the privileges? In my case, that was
in 1970, at the age of 16.

Prove that the "old First Phone" examination was "less hard"
than the Amateur Extra exam. You never completed that last
test element on your alleged Commercial radio operator license
and could only get a SECOND class.

Kindly prove that the old Amateur Extra was less difficult than the old
First Phone.

Heil, quit being the snotty lil kid trying to turn tables. That
makes YOU look dumb. I took all the test elements for a First
'Phone 49 years ago. I've seen the test elements for an Extra
of that time.

Where?

Back then those test elements were only given by FCC examiners. They
were not legally available to folks like you (outside of FCC). In fact,
back then
FCC required 2 years' experience as a General or higher license just to
*try*
the Extra test.

The Commercial license was still more difficult
than the amateur...NOT because I took any, but because the
Commercial license covered a LOT more EM territory, a LOT more
modes in Commercial radio then.

But you don't really know because you didn't take both. Some of those
who *did*
take both say the Extra written was "harder".

EVERYONE knows that the Amateur Extra is granted ONLY when
BOTH the code test AND the written examination tests are
passed. One CANNOT have one without the other.

One can now obtain it with s very slow f i v e w o r d p e r
m i n u t e morse exam. That's very, very slow.

That's NOT an "answer," Heil. You can't throw your prunes
and say they are apples with that sort of response.

The statement still holds. In order to get an Extra ham
grant, every applicant has to pass BOTH the telegraphy
and written tests. That's in the regulations, not in
your stupid little s l o w w o r d s .

Yet you denied it earlier.

No, Jimmie, Speroni's RESULTS are ALL THERE IS. HE did all
the "interpreting" and some of that is WRONG...see a "pro-code"
comment from an English Department [instructor] who said out-
right in her Comment that she is neither into amateur radio
nor desirous of obtaining a license.

I took a look at those comments. The teacher is clearly in support of
continued Morse Code testing. So there is nothing "WRONG" with
the classification in the Speroni count.

How would *you* classify the English Teacher's comment, Len?

btw, that English Teacher is a member of the public expressing an
opinion to the FCC. First Amendment and all that.

Hmmmmm. Don't you fit right into that particular category, Len?

Obviously NOT, Heil.

Yes, you do, Len. You're neither into amateur radio
nor desirous of obtaining a license.

which
as nothing to do with the instructor who did the comment used
by Speroni as being "for 'CW'" and claimed NO INTEREST and NO
EXPERIENCE in radio.

So what? The teacher's comments are clearly pro-morse-code-test.
That's what counts for purpose of the tally.

Heil, I've sold enough work through my work (without meeting
editors face-to-face) to warrent them paying me for my work.

"warrant".

I've done the same, Len. No big deal.