RadioBanter - View Single Post

August 18th 03, 03:43 AM

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

Mike Coslo wrote in message
...
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo

writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

What WILL be the end of ham radio is a lack of significant
growth ...

Let's get it straight - is dropping Element 1 going to give us lots
more
growth or not?

I don't understand a few of the things Carl says here. That we will
dissapear unless we get "significant growth".

There are more US hams today than at any time in the past.

What exactly is that? a 100 percent increase in a day? increase at 1
percent over population increase?

That's what I've been asking.

I'd like to know the advances they will bring.

Similar to what newcomers have always brought.

I want to hear how those who oppose the ending of the Morse code
requirement are keeping ham radio from marching forward.

Time for the roadmap to the future to be laid out.

Don't hold yer breath waiting;-)

Or is this like the last scene in "The Candidate"?

Refresh my memory on that one, Mike.

The Candidate is a pretty good film about an idealistic fellow, (Robert

Redford) the son of a former Governor, who gets caught up in running for
office after being prodded by the local political machinery. Along the
way, he compromises most all of his values (all that is not relevant to
the case at hand. But in the end, after being elected to office, amongst
the victory celebration, he looks to his campaign manager (Peter Boyle -
Haw) completely confused, and asks "What do we do now?" He was
completely lost and didn't know what to do.

Sounds pretty familiar.....

My point is that I see a close relationship between that ending and the

situation we have here. No real thought has been given to the aftermath
of the ending of the Morse code test.

Some of us have given it real thought, and have posted ideas. But the
mantra has always been that eliminating the code test would solve
everything.

YOU ARE MISTAKEN.

About what?

Unless that was YOUR twisted "mantra."

Nope. Not mine.

It could be...you equate morse code with amateur radio so strongly
that you can't separate them, even in your imagination.

My main interest in amateur radio is HF Morse/CW operation, and designing,
building, aligning, maintaining and restoring equipment to do so. I have other
interests in amateur radio, too.

Others have different interests in amateur radio than I. They do their thing, I
do mine.

But we are all radio amateurs.

You, Len, are not a radio amateur. Nor have you ever been one. Your sole
interests seem to be in a few newsgroups.

Those who do not believe that, that is to say that a Morse code test is
a desirable thing, or those who want the writtens to be reflective of a
fair degree of competence, have an uphill battle, and at the moment are
regarded as the losers.

Not by everyone.

The VEC Question Pool Committee is open to input. They are the ones
who ORIGINATE questions and answers.

Anyone can originate questions and answers for the pools, and submit them to
the QPC.

However, changes the syllabus, testing methods, or other requirements require
FCC rules changes that are beyond QPC authority.

Looking back on the history, however, shows that license requirements
are only one factor - and probably not as major a factor as some would
have us believe. What really matters is the interest and drive of the
person involved. Some people will learn just enough to pass the test
and then shut down, forgetting most of what they "learned" in a short
time. Others will go far beyond the test levels. It's all a choice.

"Interest and drive." :-)

Yes, interest and drive. Those are good things, Len.

That equates to "laziness" and other negative moral/ethical things?

Nope. Laziness is the opposite. Laziness is not a good thing.

"Radio" and "electronics" are such wide-ranging subjects that nobody
can be an expert at all of it.

You aren't an "expert" in radio-electronics?

Nope. I don't claim to be an expert at anything. I challenge you to find a post
where I have called myself an expert.

Gosh, and you "DO electrical engineering."

Yep. For a living. Since at least 1976.

With a Masters degree, too!

That's right. BSEE from the University of Pennsylvania, MaSEE from Drexel
University.

Where is our degree from, Len?

... And even the most knowledgeable "radio
professionals" can be utterly clueless about the practical aspects of
amateur radio.

HARF!!! :-)

Do try to control yourself.

Here are some others I've seen, by various others:

- Institute an age requirement of 14 years as the minimum for any
class of amateur license

Yeah...let's hear it for all those "mature" 6-year-olds on the air
wiith the "big gun contesters."

Your behavior here is often less mature than that of a typical six-year-old,
Len ;-)

Can you name any problems caused by the licensing of young children in the ARS?
Violations by them?

Wow, that 14-year-old arbitrary limit sure must have stung you!

Not me. I'm 49.

Did you know that the 1996 READEX survey commissioned by the ARRL showed that
the age group that was most procodetest was the 24-and-younger group? 85%
procodetest, 15% nocodetest. The hams of the future...

- Eliminate all subbands-by-mode

Blasphemy! Morsemen DESERVE elitism and their own private
spectral playpen!

Sounds good to me. I say the FCC should make at least the lower 15% of each HF
amateur band CW-only.

Right now, the only amateur CW-only subbands are on VHF.

Would you rather eliminate the CW/data subbands, Len?

- Reduce the number of license classes to one all-privs license.

Horrors! Remove the STATUS-TITLE-RANK-PRIVELEGE?!?!?

Can't have that!

- Reduce the number of license classes to two - entry and all-privs.

The OLD system - the one in which you triumphed - is ALWAYS
the BEST!!!

Where do you get that idea?

You get the idea.

Absolutely. Keep your elite morseman status and titles...after all
you are in the Archaic Radiotelegraphy Service!

No, I'm in the Amateur Radio Service. Since 1967.

You are not. You never have been.

The PCTA's, because of their being so negative, and scaring the new
people away?

"Negative"? We're not "negative" - we're FOR something!

What you are FOR is to keep your rank-title-status-privilege and you
don't want that "contaminated" by large-scale changes.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Meanwhile, the real challenges don't get the spotlight. Like CC&Rs -
what good are licenses if we cannot put up effective antennas?

What good are you that can't give in to new ideas, progressive ideas,
that intefere with your standards and practices of the 1930s?

I don't give in to bad ideas. And my standards and practices are those of
today.

You live too much in the past, Len.

N2EY