In article , Dwight Stewart
writes:


"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:

Dwight Stewart wrote:

Code testing serves no real purpose today,

Prove itÅ*


Prove it does, Larry. Prove code testing serves a purpose today worthy of
a specific government requirement above and beyond all other operating
modes.

Brian:

I, and my fellow PCTA's, have been doing that for years here on this
newsgroup, Fidonet, and in the editorial pages of the ham magazines.
Now, it's your turn. I axed YOU to "prove" that "code testing serves
no real purpose today." So do it. Provide your "proof," make it
convincing, and do it right now -- or you will have just provided "proof"
that you don't know what you're talking about!

The trends are moving towards the elimination of code testing. If you
have a good reason to change that, now is certainly the time to speak up.

I have "spoken up" about this -- at great length.

Nothing you've said so far has been able to change those trends.

That's because we have a dumbed-down culture, and one voice cannot
change an entire culture. Six years ago, I encouraged Nancy Kott and
the FISTS to organize a campaign of "speaking up" which could have
easily changed the outcome of the Restructuring NPRM of 1998. That
didn't happen. Now, too little too late, she is making a last ditch
effort. Well, when the "Zero WPM" NPRM comes out, I will provide my
comments, as I did in '98. However, I can't do everyone else's reading,
writing, and thinking for them. I had to do that for my alleged "bosses"
in the Air Force, and I've decided I'm no longer going to give away my
intellectual effort for anyone else to claim as their own. All of my
fellow FISTS will have to come up with their own arguments to keep
code testing, if that's what they want to do.

Endlessly
repeating what you've already said hasn't either. So, perhaps you should
think of something new to say.

If I am speaking the truth, which I am, then repeating that truth is just
as valid as the repetitive, boring, and obnoxious droning of the NCTA.

So, Brian -- are you going to defend your statement, or not?

73 de Larry, K3LT