In article , Mike Coslo writes:

N2EY wrote:
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

While the intent may be good, this is a REALLY BAD idea ...

I agree, Carl. But will they listen to you?

Flooding the FCC Commissioner's e-mail inboxes with such
letters will only

[make them angry]

at ALL of ham radio, not
just pro-code-test or no-code test factions.

Agreed! But will they listen to you? And what do they have to lose?

There is a right way and a wrong way to do this ... and this
is DEFINITELY the WRONG way.

There are lots of wrong ways, including things like breaking the
rules, emailing the wrong people, putting together proposals that are
not well-developed, etc. Heck, I cringe to read the comments sometimes
because of the obvious lack of spell- and grammar-checking.

Those who support the elimination of the Morse test from US
FCC rules would be well-advised to join NCI
http://www.nocode.org
and follow the news.

But will tney listen to you, Carl? How many have joined? There are
over 687,000 US amateurs, plus an unknown number of prospective hams -
how many have actually joined your organization?

And of course there is the big question of.....WHY!

Because the organization exists for the sole stated purpose of ending all code
testing for any class of license. It costs nothing but a few mouse clicks to
join, but as far as anyone outside the organization knows there are less than
4000 members worldwide (look at the highest member number you see and subtract
1000). That's how many have ever been members, not how many are currently
active. A few members resigned after the 2000 restructuring because they
decided that 5 wpm was enough, and did not want to see total code test
elimination.

All these people
yakking here are US citizens with (I think) one exception. What is the
purpose of joining an organization that has accomplished it's apparent
sole purpose in this country?

That goal has not yet been accomplished! Element 1 or equivalent credit is
still required for all classes of US ham license with HF privileges. FCC hasn't
changed those rules yet. Heck, FCC hasn't even gotten a proposal to do so yet.


I mean how many people really care if they
have the Morse code test in Lower Sloshingbottom?

See above.

NCI's Board of Directors is working the strategy for how to
best approach the FCC on this matter and we will keep the
membership informed when we have finalized those discussions.

In other words, "join our organization and trust us to do what's best,
don't go running off half-cocked and make all of us look bad". That's
what the ARRL has been saying for decades...

NCI knows better than the rest of us.

While I don't agree with that, their BoD certainly knows more about dealing
with the FCC than those who advocate breaking the rules.

Is there an argument that can convince a PCTA to join NCI?

That's not the problem - there doesn't seem to be one that can convince some
vociferous NCTAs to join! Or even to see that their actions damage the very
cause they claim to champion.

Join No Code International! Hams for the 21st Century.

Will these "hams for the 21st Century" listen to you and toe the party
line?

They don't seem to be so far do they?

We're only talking about a vociferous few, Mike. So far. It will be interesting
to see what happens on Aug 1.

Help assure the survival and prosperity of ham radio.

I think we can agree that annoying the Commissioners, breaking the
rules, and acting like we don't know how the system works isn't going
to help the survival and prosperity of ham radio.

But that doesn't mean it isn't going to happen.

Hopefully saner heads will prevail.

There's one thing about all this that puzzles me, though. The FCC made
their opinions clear back in 1999 and again in 2000. The agenda for
WRC 2003 was known more than a year in advance and the outcome for
S25.5 correctly predicted by you (Carl) as a "slam dunk". Yet your
organization is still figuring out what to do next wrt FCC?

I myself have no idea why there isn't a whole sequence of events
marked out for an orderly transition.

You mean by FCC? They don't work that way. Look how long the last restructuring
took.

Like who becomes what in the hierarchy of licenses.

Do Novices lose their licenses? Aside from CW, their test is so
rudimentary?

Tech pluses?

Lots of stuff that will become apparent as time goes on.

Nobody should lose their license. Nobody should lose operating privileges
UNLESS they are compensated for by new privileges.

Consider this: There's a whole bunch of stuff that my 1967-70 era tests didn't
cover (like PSK-31). But FCC trusts that since I have a clean record I have
kept up with the rules and regs. So why should a Novice or Tech be any
different?

How long will it take to decide, and will "your people" listen to you?
They don't have much to lose, and they don;t even think they will get
caught. Many don't understand how the system works, but think they do
and don't care about long-term effects or the image of the ARS as a
whole.

Newsgroup postings are bad enough, but some are advocating massive
spamming and rulebreaking. Is that to be the way of "hams for the 21st
century"?

Like it or not, the removal of the Morse test has removed one element of
knowledge from the licensing process. Argue with me if about the
definition of knowledge, but it is the removal of just that. Knowledge.

Skills are a form of knowledge, so there's no argument.

Sure sounds like entropy in action to me.

Exactly. Were the writtens beefed up when the code was lowered? No, just the
opposite, although folks will argue that point too.

A whole lot of people find that removal of knowledge a positive thing
for them. This includes that mythical engineer who is so busy he or she
cannot take the time to learn Morse or is so fearful of leaning
something that they may not use. Unfortunately, it also includes some
people who find that rules are for other people.

What I find most ironic is that if the proposed rule-breaking actions are
carried out, it may damage the nocodetest cause and prove what some procodetest
people have said for years.

And yes, I worry about those people. I have great concern for the
people who think that a Technician can now pick and choose where to
transmit, who think that all ya gotta do to change the rules is have
everyone email the head people at the FCC, and whatever these good folk
dream up next.

The oddest thing is that even when someone as knowledgeable as Carl, Bill or
Phil, who are "on their side" tells them they're wrong, they argue.

N0BK would call it surreal. He's gone, so I'll have to do the honors.

73 de Jim, N2EY