"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Bill Sohl wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message


a whole bunch of snippage to trim this one up


Whether or not the Morse Code is an anachronism, whether or not it
should or should not be tested for, the elimination of the Morse code
test *is* a reduction in the amount of knowledge needed for a amateur
radio license; undeniable unless a person wants to look silly.


The problem with your analysis is that you are attempting to
apply some mystical "amount of knowledge" criteria which
is NOT what licensing is about. Certainly, as a separate
knowledge base, the end of morse testing reduces one speciifc
piece of knowledge and testing. BUT, that is all it does.

Nope, just stating the obvious. No mysticism either.


Those responsible for such a reduction in knowledge needed for a
license, regardless of their reasons, now find themselves in league with
those who propose even less knowledge needed for that ticket. Politics
makes for strange bedfellows.


FALSE - As Jim will attest, I have been an advocate of better written
testing for a long time. Working to eliminate an
unneeded (IMHO...but shared by WRC) requirement does not
automatically put me or anyone else inleague with those that have
a desire to lower or eliminate written tests.

No one is doubting your personal convictions, Bill. Related example:
Those who oppose elimination of smoking in public places because of
personal "rights" issues, and those who oppose it because they want to
smoke in public are on the same side of the fence.


I understand that Carl and Bill do not support lessening of the
knowledge needed. But that does not really matter.

Sure it matters. Our opinions are as valued as ayone else
in the dialog.

Yes they are. Nice out of context quote there too! Clip there and it
means one thing, put it next to the sentence it was suposed to be in,
and it means something else entirely.

Those who want the
tests to consist of nothing but sending in an application (if that)
**applaud their efforts** That is another thing that is pretty hard to

deny.

You deny that people who want the tests reduced or even eliminated
don't think it is a good thing that the Morse code test is being
eliminated?


PLEASE tell us who the "just send in an application"
advocates are? I haven't seen any semblence of support
for that stand anywhere.

Well, I haven't taken a poll or collected names, but I've read enough
from people who think that the tests are too hard now. If I get the
gumption, I could google them out.

Please do, since I've been in this newsgroup since day 1 and
can't recall even handful.

Let's put it this way: Those who do not believe that the tests should
be radically simplified or eliminated, but believed the Morse code
requirement should have been eliminated may some day find themselves on
the losing end of the proposition, just as those who support Morse code
testing have lost the battle at this time.

Agreed, but it'll be a long wait to see if that pans out (IMHO).

I remember when you had to have a license to use CB.

So? CB, even then, had NO testing to get that license.

And now there is not even that....

Even what? There NEVER was any CB testing. The license
was nothing but an administrative excersize.

Look, I seriously doubt that there will ever come a time when there is
no test at all. We would probably lose the spectrum allotment before
that happens. That is just some slippery slope stuff.


But I have NO doubt whatsoever that there will be pressure to simplify
and reduce the difficulty of the testing process. Its all conjecture, so
we'll just have to wait and see.

Fair enough, but you know my position on lowering written
testing.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK