As an international treaty requirement Morse knowledge
has died as of 7/5/03:

The IARU web site has release it final report on WRC 2003.

You can read the full report at: http://www.iaru.org/rel030703.html

The final version of S25.5 & S25.6 a

25.5 §3 1) Administrations shall determine whether or not a person
seeking a licence to operate an amateur station shall demonstrate
the ability to send and receive texts in Morse code signals.

25.6 2) Administrations shall verify the operational and technical
qualifications of any person wishing to operate an amateur station.
Guidance for standards of competence may be found in the
most recent version of Recommendation ITU-RM.1544.

They say the effective date is July 5, 2003.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
"Kim" wrote in message
...
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Kim wrote:

Dan, I can understand your exasperation with people who choose not
to
learn
CW or decide that they don't like it. However, that is as far as
the
understanding goes. It seems impossible to me that you can't
understand
that people know what they do, or don't, like.

Kim,

Have you *ever* had the experience of "having to" try something you
thought you wouldn't like, and finding out you really enjoyed it?


I'll truly have to get back to you on that! Just sitting here thinking
about it, I can come up with more examples of things that I knew I would not
like that have come true:

1. Moving to Texas. Yes, I have "become accustomed" to being down here.
But I'd much rather really be right back up in my hometown with the
Battenkill River, Goose Egg Mountain, the Vermont border in eye's sight,
etc.

2. Working in downtown Dallas. Again yes, I have "become accustomed" to it,
but I knew I would not like it and I really don't. It's just that the
darned money is so good, 'spose I am willing to sacrifice a little to have
the money...

3. Having kids. Seriously. All the time I was growing up and as a
teen-ager, I knew I would not like having kids. Well, I tried a couple out.
I love both of them dearly and my granddaughter is divine--but I'd never go
through having kids again if I could go back and knew then what I know now


Do you know anyone who has had such an experience?


I'd have to check. I don't know.


We all have to learn things that we may not like all that much. I had
to sit and learn classes in school that I found boring to distraction.

I think there's a difference between what we "must" learn in school for
a
real degree vs. what we must know to operate as a licensed amateur. I
don't
need an amateur license to "get by" in life. I do need my High School
Diploma, or better, to get by.

That reasoning works to support Mike's argument. If a high school
diploma is a practical necessity, why should it require ANY
non-essentials?


Oh, well. I don't think it should. I think things such as Sports and Band,
etc, (the so-called extra-curicular activities) should be in there--as I
think they help form skills that will be needed in the world. But, in the
regular K-12 school years, I think things such as elective courses really
need to be "rethunk." I took Greek Mythology, Philosophy, Psychology, etc.,
in my years of High School, but I really don't think they should have been
available and don't think they should be today: EXCEPT, perhaps, in magnet
schools (down here, the term magnet school, defines schooling set aside for
"gifted" children).


Those nonessentials could be considered arbitrary,
capricious, irrelevant, discriminatory, hazing, etc.


Exactly, and I think they are to some extent, at least on a regular campus.
Those of who were involved in classes such as Latin and, well, the
"renaissance" courses(?) were considered quite the nerds--and we considered
anyone outside our circle as squares. There was nothing to teach us that
people have different interests and that all are OK. Well, at least nothing
taught more strongly than teen-age hormones raged! LOL


OTOH, since a ham
license is not a necessity, it can require all sorts of stuff that
some would say is nonessential.


And, does. And, again, I think the non-essential stuff should be removed.
I'd rather see a majority of hams define what is non-essential, though; and
I'd like to see those decisions being made without ego or prejudice.


For instance, I happen to absolutely know I would not enjoy jumping
out
of
an airplane to parachute. I've never tried it, no. But I don't
intend
to
because "it's just not me."

But if you wanted to parachute out of planes, you would indeed have to
jump out of a plane. I know that sounds redundant or maybe redumbdant,
but it helps prove my point. You aren't that interested in that sort
of
hobby, so you don't do it. It is strange that so many people have a
problem with my basic premise: that people who aren't willing to learn
the requirements are not all that interested in the ARS. In this case,
the requirement is the Morse test.

Not really a good analogy, because in order to parachute you have to
jump out of, or off of, something.

I don't have a problem with the CW requirement for an amateur ticket on
its
face. However, if its primary purpose is that of "filtering" people
from
the hobby, as many attitudes seem to demonstrate, then I am all about
getting the requirement outta here.

I think what really bothers some folks about the code test is the fact
that it acts as a "Great Equalizer". Very few prospective hams already
know the code, which means that, when starting out to get a license,
the Ph.D. in EE is placed on the same playing field as the elementary
school kid. It can't be learned (by most people) by reading a book or
watching a video, or picked up in bits and pieces here and there.
Guessing doesn't help you pass it.


Many of us do have such a problem with being on an "even playing field,"
don't we? Pity.


Also, once you learn it, the code is extremely useful in amateur
radio. Particularly HF/MF amateur radio.

I do not believe that a knowledge of CW
makes one any better a ham than any other.

I think it does. Maybe not the test itself alone, but the USE of the
mode. It's a useful skill for hams to have. That doesn't mean it MUST
be tested, however.


Ah, but would there be alternatives you would consider as a good
replacement, since CW--after all--is such an issue among hams?


I also don't believe, as you
mention later in this post, that one's interest level is important to
this
hobby.

So, why is it so difficult for you to understand that people can and
do
make
the decision that the CW part of this hobby is something they are
not
interested in? Are you saying that there is nothing you would not
try
to
see if you liked it or not? You don't know yourself well enough?

If a person does not want to take the Morse test, that is their right
and privilege. They won't get the HF ticket however.

At least not right now, eh?

You got a date in The Pool yet? (see the thread by that name)


No, haven't looked at that one. I'll check it out.


If they are interested in the ARS, but do not learn Morse because they
don't like it, they are not as interested as someone who does make the
effort.

But, who dictates that "interest" is a necessity for this
hobby/avocation?

The FCC, among others. If someone is interested in the ARS, but does
not bother to get a license because they don't like taking (written)
tests or studying for same, then they are not as interested as someone
who does make the effort.


To the extent that meeting requirements could be considered as indicating
interest, I suppose you have a point. I was thinking more in terms of, if
the requirements were reduced, would it mean there were "less interested"
hams? Heck, for me, anyone who persists through the brickabrack that
happens in this hobby is surely demonstrating an increble interest!! I have
practically given up on ham radio. Between my husband and I, there is not
one radio (of about 25) that is connected right now. It's just too damned
much of a political hotbed for anyone who truly wants to be involved in ham
radio (at least around here).


I don't care about someone's interest level. There are, what
Jim/N2EY(?),
650,000+ amateurs in this country alone.

686,802 as of yesterday. ;-)

But how many of them are active?


Heh heh. Two here aren't.


Of them, there are numbers of
every kind of thinking and interest level, right? I don't care about
someone's "interest." I care that once they are a licensed amateur they
conduct themselves within the parameters of the FCC's R&R.

OK, fine - now how do we assure that? Look at the enforcement actions
by FCC - hams of all license classes being cited for doing dumb
things. Each and every one of them had to pass a written test - in
most cases, several written tests. Yet they break the rules, and in
most cases the violations are not technical things like a misadjusted
or broken rig. Instead, most of the violations I read about today are
"operating" violations - jamming, cussing, failure to ID, operation
outside of one's license privileges, etc. Really basic stuff that was
covered at the Novice level.

Yet almost all of that stuff happens using voice modes, rather than CW
or data modes. There must be reasons for the enormous disparity in
behavior.

That is all that is required.

So how do we get it?

73 de Jim, N2EY


Well, adhering to the FCC R&R is not a choice. At least it isn't if one
gets caught. And, if more hams were willing to "snitch" on each other,
there'd be a better chance of catching those who don't abide by regulation.

Kim W5TIT

On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:53:58 -0400, Scott Unit 69 wrote:

How about essay or fill-in-the-blank
type questions instead of multiple-guess type questions?

This presumes that the examiners are at the professional level and
can properly grade an essay-type question.

No sweat for me and I'm sure for several others here. I have a PE in
several states and have taught electronics at the University level.
What about all the other VEs out there?

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

Kim W5TIT wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Bill Sohl wrote:

Bottom line: Knowledge of morse is neither a positive or negative
indication of any individual's interest(s) in ham radio.

It is if a person refuses to learn it, or waits until the requirement
goes away.




Mike, I think you'll be quite disappointed if you "trust" in someone's
interest level based on their relationship (or lack of) with CW.

Not the CW, Kim. It's any part of the testing regimen that a person
"won't" take. If a person refuses to take the Extra test, they aren't
that interested in being an Extra.

Let's even take your own case. You're a Tech Plus, IIRC. Are you
interested in taking the General test? If yes, you'll be studying for
it. If not, then you aren't that interested in becoming a General.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
some
folk are just not going to hear what I am saying no matter how many
times I say it..

Bingo!

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

Kim W5TIT wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Dan/W4NTI wrote:


I could have stopped at 5 and got my 'Technician ticket' and stayed

there

for decades until the FCC dropped the HF CW to 5. But I chose NOT TO DO
THAT. I completely skipped the Technician. I went from Novice straight

to

General, then up. I did so because I knew if I would have gotten on two
meter AM as a Novice, I would have gotten the Tech then stayed a Tech.

I

forced myself to learn CW. And one day I passed that 12 wpm block. And

I

KEPT pushing myself to get better. Thats my story. Perhaps that will
explain why I think as I do.

Thank you Dan! You made just about perfect illustration of what I was
saying. You were interested enough, and definitely MORE interested thatn
those who chose not to do what you did.

- Mike KB3EIA -



You really think that just because someone learns CW, they have "more"
interest in ham radio? You really do, Mike?

Oh well...

As long as it is one of the requirements, most certainly it is! I don't
care if a person ever uses Morse code aftward, but as long as it is a
test requirement.....

Take my case. I'm a pretty smart guy, despite a person here who thinks
I'm a hockey puck. But picking up Morse code was really difficult for
me. But I really wanted that ticket, so I learned it. The Written parts
were a breeze.

Now let's say I figured I'd just wait till the Morse requirement went
away before I went to the trouble of testing. That would have meant that
I was interested, but not interested enough to study for and take the
test - I was just as interested in waiting.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , "Phil Kane"
writes:

On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:53:58 -0400, Scott Unit 69 wrote:

How about essay or fill-in-the-blank
type questions instead of multiple-guess type questions?

This presumes that the examiners are at the professional level and
can properly grade an essay-type question.

No sweat for me and I'm sure for several others here. I have a PE in
several states and have taught electronics at the University level.
What about all the other VEs out there?

I have BSEE and MSEE from University of Pa. and Drexel, respectively. Also can
do 40 wpm Morse and build my own ham rigs. (It ain't braggin' if ya really done
it...)

The big problem with essay and fill-in-the-blank questions is that the answers
are not 100% objective. There's always a measure of judgement involved.

For example, take a simple question like "what is the length of a half-wave
dipole cut for 7.1 MHz?" With multiple choice, the QPC says that one answer
(say, 66 feet) is the correct one and all others are incorrect.

But with essays and fill-in-the-blank, what tolerance do we put on the correct
answer? Is 67 feet acceptable? 68 feet? 66 feet 3 inches? The person being
tested could write a long dissertation on tapering elements, the effect of
ground, wire/tubing sizes, etc., and come up with a whole raneg of
arguably-correct answers.

And that's just a simple question. When you start getting into explanations and
diagrams, it gets really hairy.

From what I have researched, FCC went to multiple-choice questions for all ham
exams no later than 1961. At least 42 years ago, probably more. Try convincing
them that they've been wrong all this time.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Kim W5TIT wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Bill Sohl wrote:

Bottom line: Knowledge of morse is neither a positive or negative
indication of any individual's interest(s) in ham radio.

It is if a person refuses to learn it, or waits until the requirement
goes away.

Balogny... What this states is that all non-coded techs
have insufficiient interest in "ham radio." Note the above
does not specify any license level whereas below the
poster changes to a specific referral to Extra. That is NOT
how the original post started out.

Mike, I think you'll be quite disappointed if you "trust" in someone's
interest level based on their relationship (or lack of) with CW.

Not the CW, Kim. It's any part of the testing regimen that a person
"won't" take. If a person refuses to take the Extra test, they aren't
that interested in being an Extra.

So what. They may have less interest in Extra, but
that does not equate to a broader lack of interest
in "ham radio" (rather than just Extra) as the original post
was first articulated.

Let's even take your own case. You're a Tech Plus, IIRC. Are you
interested in taking the General test? If yes, you'll be studying for
it. If not, then you aren't that interested in becoming a General.
- Mike KB3EIA -

Fair enough on the specific application to General. BUT, would
you state that Kim doesn't have a positive interest in "ham radio"
just because she doesn't upgrade?

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

X-A-Notice: References line has been trimmed due to 512 byte limitationAbuse-Reports-To: abuse at airmail.net to report improper postings
NNTP-Proxy-Relay: library2.airnews.net
NNTP-Posting-Time: Sat, 05 Jul 2003 10:37:08 -0500 (CDT)
NNTP-Posting-Host: !Zq7b1k-YJ*ei?9+Z_b (Encoded at Airnews!)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...


Bill Sohl wrote:
"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message

some snippage

that is always pooh-poohed by the code/code test bashers. They just
won't
recognize it for what it is.
Or maybe they *can't*.


So a nocode tech has no interest in amateur radio because s/he
didn't take a morse test then? Bunk.

Same old, same old.


Gee Bill, that ain't been said! Lets see if I can help out here....

I was a NoCode Tech once. I was interested, and took the test necessary
to get that license.

Then I was interested in getting my General ticket. Here, I needed to
learn Morse code in addition to another written exam. But I was
interested, and learned and passed the tests (flunked the MOrse first
time around) I got the General ticket.

Then I was interested in getting the extra frequency bandwidth and
whatever else that the Extra ticket gives. So I studied for and passed
the test.


In each case, I was "interested" in something. I could have stopped
anywhere along the line, and while exercising my right to not learn
something, the only effect would have been to not get the license.

Would you agree that a person who takes the Extra test is more
interested in getting the Extra ticket than a person possessing a
General license who does not want to because they won't get all that
much in the way of privileges?

What I find strange is that some who are distinctly anti-code test are
having trouble with what I am saying here.

It is either that I am having trouble expressing myself, or that some
folk are just not going to hear what I am saying no matter how many
times I say it..


Okay one more time. Two young ladies are thinking about getting their
drivers licenses. Ida Know wants to get a drivers license, but she is
terrified of three point turns, to the point that she says "Forget it,
I'll just walk or take the bus".

Her friend, Ella Fyno, is also concerned about the three point turn.
But she decides that even if she hardly ever uses the three point turn,
that she'll buckle down and learn how. She works on the three point
turn, eventually passes her license test, and now is happily driving.

WHO was MORE interested in getting that drivers license?

It's not a comparison of the relationship of driving a car to an
Amateur license, or silly names I come up with. It is a question of
different people with different levels of interest in something.

- Mike KB3EIA -


BUT, Mike, it sounded (and still does just a little bit) that you weren't
comparing license level interest to license level interest. It sounded
more, to me, like you were comparing Novice in ham radio is less interested
that General in ham radio.

I would say to you, if you in any way think like that, that I know many
higher class licensed individuals who have a long way to catch up in the
drive and ambition I had (had=past tense) to promote amateur radio. I was
*very* interested in ham radio--probably more than any other ham I
personally know.

The drive to "get more" doesn't equal a level of interest in amateur radio.
In my opinion. Your drive to become an Extra sounds more like an ambition
to thumb your nose at those who did not.

Kim W5TIT

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Kim W5TIT wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Bill Sohl wrote:

Bottom line: Knowledge of morse is neither a positive or negative
indication of any individual's interest(s) in ham radio.

It is if a person refuses to learn it, or waits until the requirement
goes away.




Mike, I think you'll be quite disappointed if you "trust" in someone's
interest level based on their relationship (or lack of) with CW.

Not the CW, Kim. It's any part of the testing regimen that a person
"won't" take. If a person refuses to take the Extra test, they aren't
that interested in being an Extra.

Let's even take your own case. You're a Tech Plus, IIRC. Are you
interested in taking the General test? If yes, you'll be studying for
it. If not, then you aren't that interested in becoming a General.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Mike, you keep bouncing back and forth between whehter your issue is that
someone who doesn't take a General exam is less interested in being a
General, or someone who doesn't take a General exam is less interested in
*ham radio*.

Thus, I give up even trying to understand your issue.

Kim W5TIT