"K0HB with non-approved radios" wrote in message news:221cd76d407ae3d8168be302c6e36efd.128005@myga te.mailgate.org...
"N2EY" wrote


It's interesting that you call the seven-class two-ladder system "progressive
thinking", but today favor a two-class license system, as I recall.


What was progressive was the notion (which ARRL rejected) that a ham
could be advanced along technical/scientific lines without being able to
copy Morse code.

Where did you see that concept in the 1975 dual ladder proposal? In
that proposal, all of the VHF/UHF licenses required code tests except
for the very basic "Communicator" class, which would have had an
extremely simple written exam. Full privileges would have required an
Extra, with its 20 wpm exam.

It's interesting that you didn't take the time to
review my proposal to FCC in response to WT Docket 98-143. If you'd
taken just a moment, you'd have noted that it included the same notion
of a "dual ladder" which included an option for advanced electronics
qualifications without Morse testing.

I reviewed it but did not see it as "progressive" in that sense. Your
proposal is actually a four-class system, with three tests: two
written and one code. The only incentive offered for more technical
tests is more power.

73 de Jim, N2EY