" wrote in
ups.com:


John Smith wrote:
Dee:

England feared granting us independence and the right to govern
ourselves, frankly, they were correct; we have been a problem ever
since!

Warmest regards,
JS

I'm of the opinion that the ARRL feared to give US radio amateurs
their independence from morse code testing. :-)

LA


Secretly, the ARRL would like to see the code requirement go away,
but they can't display that outwardly because it will make them look like
they are against having good skilled hams. Rest assured, when the code
requirement is eliminated, the ARRL (Anti-Radio-Relay-League) with try to
come up with a way to capitalize on the dumbing down of the service so
they can get more money in the corporate bank account.

SC

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
"Paul Keinanen" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 01:25:01 GMT, Slow Code wrote:


No, the bands are going to get worse over the long haul. We got people
that don't want to be skilled knowledgable hams. If they're too lazy
to
learn CW they are going to be too lazy to learn other things too.
Technical discussions will decline. It will start to sound like CB.

From the European perspective, I do not understand this discussion.
Most European countries (except Russia) removed the CW requirement
after a few months of the ITU WRC decision that CW test is not
required at frequencies below 30 MHz.

We have the ARRL wispering in the FCCs ear.

I haven't observed any problems with persons using the HF bands
without the CW test.

Listen for yourself, can you tell which European operator has passed
the CW test and which one has not passed the test.

Paul OH3LWR

Other countries are not a problem.

No country should be a problem.

Personally I do not attempt to predict
what will happen in the US. However some fear that with easy licensing
and
the lax enforcement here that there could potentially be serious
problems.

Riley isn't doing his job?

I think what I wrote before one of the recent restructurings was, "What
I fear most about eliminating the Morse Code Exam is a lack of
enforcement, and what I fear most about maintaining the Status Quo is a
lack of enforcement."

A lack of enforcement is a lack of enforcement, and a Morse Code Exam
CANNOT be used as a substitute.

If you recall, I've never been the one to claim it is any type of filter
etc. I simply think it is one of the basics and for that reason believe a
basic requirement is suitable.

Dee, you were talking about a lack of enforcement and I was talking
about a lack of enforcement. We were talking about a lack of
enforcement...WITH REGARD TO MORSE CODE TESTING. You absolutely were
saying its being used as a filter in that context.

You came so, so very close to accepting the truth, then you got scared
and ran away.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:
"Paul Keinanen" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 01:25:01 GMT, Slow Code wrote:


No, the bands are going to get worse over the long haul. We got
people
that don't want to be skilled knowledgable hams. If they're too
lazy
to
learn CW they are going to be too lazy to learn other things too.
Technical discussions will decline. It will start to sound like CB.

From the European perspective, I do not understand this discussion.
Most European countries (except Russia) removed the CW requirement
after a few months of the ITU WRC decision that CW test is not
required at frequencies below 30 MHz.

We have the ARRL wispering in the FCCs ear.

I haven't observed any problems with persons using the HF bands
without the CW test.

Listen for yourself, can you tell which European operator has passed
the CW test and which one has not passed the test.

Paul OH3LWR

Other countries are not a problem.

No country should be a problem.

Personally I do not attempt to predict
what will happen in the US. However some fear that with easy
licensing
and
the lax enforcement here that there could potentially be serious
problems.

Riley isn't doing his job?

I think what I wrote before one of the recent restructurings was, "What
I fear most about eliminating the Morse Code Exam is a lack of
enforcement, and what I fear most about maintaining the Status Quo is a
lack of enforcement."

A lack of enforcement is a lack of enforcement, and a Morse Code Exam
CANNOT be used as a substitute.

If you recall, I've never been the one to claim it is any type of filter
etc. I simply think it is one of the basics and for that reason believe
a
basic requirement is suitable.

Dee, you were talking about a lack of enforcement and I was talking
about a lack of enforcement. We were talking about a lack of
enforcement...WITH REGARD TO MORSE CODE TESTING. You absolutely were
saying its being used as a filter in that context.

You came so, so very close to accepting the truth, then you got scared
and ran away.


Not hardly. I was discussing the fact that OTHER people consider it a
filter. I have never, ever made any statement to that effect. I was
discussing OTHER'S opinions and fears for the enlightenment of the ham from
another country who asked why it was such a big deal here.

Just because I chose to discuss the opinions presented by some does NOT mean
I subscribe to those opinions.

Dee, N8UZE

Please folks, do not reply to these off topic posts.

If these idiots never get any replies, they will eventually give up
and go away.

Thanks,

Bill, W6WRT

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 08:14:22 -0800, Bill Turner wrote:

Please folks, do not reply to these off topic posts.

If these idiots never get any replies, they will eventually give up
and go away.

Thanks,

Bill, W6WRT

Hmmm, violating your own rule.

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...


A lack of enforcement is a lack of enforcement, and a Morse Code Exam
CANNOT be used as a substitute.


If you recall, I've never been the one to claim it is any type of filter
etc. I simply think it is one of the basics and for that reason believe a
basic requirement is suitable.

and there of course you are plain wrong

Neither Morse code nor cw has been truly basic to Ham radio at any time
in our history in making this statement you spout bogus propaganda

Morse Code has NOTHING whatever to do with radio it just so happens to
exist and was apllied to first spark (which sure isn't CW) as it was
applied to various wired aplication

indeed the Morse Code test know even prove one can use Morse Code (as
can be seen by skimming the threads bashing newbie code users on QRZ)

indeed with you Dee we have a clear case of the dmage done the ARS by
Code testing

we have an extra class our most tested therefore in theory our most
knowledgable class of hma making down right stupid statement about what
Ham radio is

now it isn't entirely her fault of course she is product of th e system
foisted on one by the FCC allowing the ARRL to decide what we needed to
be real hams

it is rather like the case in B5 of Akara 7 where the leader fed
propagnad about what made a real Akaran to leath weapons and turned
them loose during an invasion the result was the they repelled the in
vasion and killed off all of the inhabitants of Akara 7 as well

Dee Flint is a poster child for what went wrong with incentive licensing