We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC

wrote:
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 01:37:55 GMT, Slow Code wrote:



We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

More important is that Extras at least should have to prove they can
solder, troubleshoot, and use test equipment do determine if a radio
operator is or is not in compliance.

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On 24 Nov 2006 12:42:00 -0800, "Bret Ludwig"
wrote:

More important is that Extras at least should have to prove they can
solder, troubleshoot, and use test equipment do determine if a radio
operator is or is not in compliance.

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

I couldn't resist. :-)

Exactly how does one use solder to determine if a radio operator is or
is not in compliance?

Made my day.

Bill, W6WRT

Bill Turner wrote:
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On 24 Nov 2006 12:42:00 -0800, "Bret Ludwig"
wrote:

More important is that Extras at least should have to prove they can
solder, troubleshoot, and use test equipment do determine if a radio
operator is or is not in compliance.

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

I couldn't resist. :-)

Exactly how does one use solder to determine if a radio operator is or
is not in compliance?

Made my day.


There is this thing called a comma. We have three things he

1. Solder.
2. Troubleshoot.
3. Use test equipment to determine if a radio operator is, or is not,
in compliance.

Three separate activities.

maybe its not solder - he probably ment weld aluminum!

"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On 24 Nov 2006 12:42:00 -0800, "Bret Ludwig"
wrote:

More important is that Extras at least should have to prove they can
solder, troubleshoot, and use test equipment do determine if a radio
operator is or is not in compliance.

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

I couldn't resist. :-)

Exactly how does one use solder to determine if a radio operator is or
is not in compliance?

Made my day.

Bill, W6WRT

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On 24 Nov 2006 13:56:16 -0800, "Bret Ludwig"
wrote:

There is this thing called a comma. We have three things he

1. Solder.
2. Troubleshoot.
3. Use test equipment to determine if a radio operator is, or is not,
in compliance.

Three separate activities.

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

The way you have it written conjoins all three activities into one,
which is applied to determining if the radio operator, etc, etc.

Here's a better way:

"More important is that Extras at least should have to prove they can
solder, troubleshoot, and in addition, use test equipment do determine
if a radio operator is or is not in compliance.

There are some other styles that could be used too, but just stinging
together words separated by commas is begging for misinterpretation.
Perhaps you were absent that day.

"Unambiguous" is one of my favorite words. :-)

Bill, W6WRT
shoulda been a lawyer

Slow Code wrote:
We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC

We should have the examiners measure the size of prospective HAM's
dicks. That would get us back to the basics here that you've been
preaching about.

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 01:37:55 GMT, Slow Code wrote:



We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC
++++++++++
And we should just read your posts if we want to know what ham radio
will be like if irrelevancy is a required subject.

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

Slow Code wrote:
We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

I agree. At least 100 wpm for Novice/Tech and something really hard
for General and up. Don't laugh, it's been done.

Also, lets have them memorize the Baudot code, demodulate PSK31 by ear
(no computers allowed) and launch at least one satellite into orbit.
They should be required to build an oscillator from a crystal set,
erect a 200 foot tower all by themselves and change the tubes in a
1500 watt amplifier while it is running at full output.

Hams today are a bunch of weenies.

Bill, W6WRT
who passed the 20 wpm test by about .001 wpm

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 01:37:55 GMT, Slow Code wrote:



We need to keep the CW requirement and increase it. We shouldn't let ham
radio get dumbed down again.

SC

And we should insist they learn Swahili, Tasmanian, and in all
honesty, speak in binary proficiently. . . Well, one has to learn how
to beat upon a railroad track with a rock for CODE, might as well take
in the more simple aspects as well, huh?

My computer does CODE better and faster than you can `Slow. . . So,
what does that make you then? A Slacker or just a stupid agitator?

There is NO NEED for anybody to learn CODE. Not unless they WANT
to. What the hell does CODE have to do with SSTV? Or Packet? OR
Phone? There, I gave you THREE aspects of communications via "HAM"
that harbors Absolutely NO use of LEARNING CODE in any way, form, or
shape. Can you truefuly offer me as many NEEDFULL aspects of HAM
Radio which demands the use of Code?

Absolutely NOT!

In that regard, your very "hobby" denounces Your insistence upon
CODE, as a requirement, as arcade and dusty as a dead rat's fart.

We are NOT living in the 1920's any more `Slow. . . It DOESN"T
MATTER ANY MORE if People can beat on a railroad track with a rock or
not. NO ONE HAD THE **** WE HAVE TODAY, THEN! Hells bells `Slow, I
said it before and I'll state it again. The Damn CELL PHONE is
Cheaper and BETTER at communication than any silly HAM station in the
world! And it doesn't take no bloody HAM license to use it, ether.
Just a simple bank account.. . No wait. . Not even that in some
cases. Just a wad of dollars in your grubby little fist will suffice,
and there's No waiting on Sun Spots ether!

Honestly Slow, its people like you who make me want to sell my radio
station for a 1911 colt. . . They don't do CODE ether, but its damn
good with Binary!