Twenty average members of the public were asked what they thought of
radio amateurs:

9 said amateurs were the cause of interference.
3 thought amateurs were nut cases.
5 said amateurs were odd but harmless.
3 had never heard of radio amateurs.

Five top people in the electronics world were asked their opinion:

3 would not employ radio amateurs in their organisation.
1 had heard amateurs on air and opined that they spoke a load of tripe.
1 said that most technical blokes talked a load of tripe anyway.
1 said he would employ an amateur if qualified for the job.

That was in 1965, so not much changes or does it?



Charlie.


--
M0WYM
www.radiowymsey.org

Sales @ radiowymsey
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/gnome7763/m.html?

M0WYM wrote:
Twenty average members of the public were asked what they thought of
radio amateurs:

9 said amateurs were the cause of interference.
3 thought amateurs were nut cases.
5 said amateurs were odd but harmless.
3 had never heard of radio amateurs.

Five top people in the electronics world were asked their opinion:

3 would not employ radio amateurs in their organisation.
1 had heard amateurs on air and opined that they spoke a load of tripe.
1 said that most technical blokes talked a load of tripe anyway.
1 said he would employ an amateur if qualified for the job.

That was in 1965, so not much changes or does it?


If you think that's bad, you should see what they say about people who
cite bogus surveys on the newsgroups!

- Mike -

On 30/07/10 20:47, Michael Coslo wrote:


If you think that's bad, you should see what they say about people who
cite bogus surveys on the newsgroups!

- Mike -

Ha ha,

Not bogus thought but from the April 1965 edition of the Short Wave
Magazine but I did post it to the wrong group!


Charlie.

--
M0WYM
www.radiowymsey.org

Sales @ radiowymsey
http://shop.ebay.co.uk/gnome7763/m.html?