On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 00:40:53 GMT, Mike Coslo
wrote:

If you think about it, it is logical. There is no particular effect on
the FCC one way or the other wheether there is a code test or not. VE's
are doing the examinations, and as far as I know, the test doesn't make
for any extra work at all for the FCC. So they probably don't care very
much when it happens.

I also don't think the code test makes much extra work for FCC. It saw
to that itself when it quit keeping track of which Technicians have
Element 1 credit and which do not.

Which either meant that:

(1) Somebody at FCC dropped the ball when they forgot to provision for
the new license database to contain that information (and they decided
to leave said ball on the ground rather than try to recover it. Why?
Maybe because FCC at that point had quit caring which Technicians had
Element 1 credit and which did not? if so, that carries some
interesting implications, doesn't it?), or

(2) The whole exercise was a test to see if Techs with no code credit
would invade the HF bands now that nobody could really tell for sure
if they had privileges there or not - in which case we seem to have
passed the test since as far as I can see, that didn't happen.

But, I digress. However you arrive at it, it seems that no, FCC would
appear to have no reason to care about the chronology here.

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

Scott Unit 69 wrote:
I'll just put you in the bozo bin...

Who?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Okay, thanks Larry, just wanted to clarify that.

One last other question, define "whining." Is that anything that you just
don't want to hear, or ?? Again, I am asking this actually seriously, not
fecetiously (sp.?) At least I am attempting to see your side of
it............

One could view anything that they don't wanna hear as whining, and if thats
the case I hear thousands of "whining words" on a daily basis.


--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message
...
In article , "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:

I suppose Larry will never consider me a fully-fledged ham, even with
20
wpm, 'cause I operate 100% phone, LOL.

Alun, my opinion of you as a ham is not dependant on your usage of CW.
All I ask is that you don't whine about it, and that as a ham, you make
an
effort to do something more challenging than just yakking into a
microphone. That would imply the use of at least one digital mode. CW
operation would be the icing on the cake, and go a long way to impress
me.

(seriously asking this question)
So if a person is getting into technical research, project building of
any
kind (generically speaking), or any other strong contribution to amateur
radio, but DOES like to "yakking into a microphone" whilst on the air is
a
bad thing?

Just curious,

Ryan:

That would depend on whether or not he/she was whining about the
code test requirements, or gloating over the fact that they had been
dropped. If he/she were, in actual fact, doing the technical R&D you're
talking about, then I would have a very high opinion of their contribution
to amateur radio -- notwithstanding the yakking.

73 de Larry, K3LT

From N2EY:

I've seen that happen time and again. The CW setups at Field Day get the most
attention from nonhams, for some reason.

How did non-Hams see any setup, not even a CW setup, at field day? Were they
invited or did they see the field day setup when they were driving by, and
decided to stop by?

Also, were they male or female, and about what ages were they? Were they
anti-social?

Did they just stop by, or stay a while?

Please explain.

------------------------------------------------------------------
At this year's Field Day, we had a (*rather un-attractive) female non-Ham
visitor. (I don't know if she was invited). She was a reporter and claimed to
be asking questions for the local paper.

No, I didn't stay there the whole time. Also, there was some extra food left
over, and I managed to take some with me.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
*Sorry I don't qualify for any sensitivity awards. I don't want to (be
sensitive) and I don't need to.

In article , "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:

Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
.. --. .... - . .-. ...

Ryan:

What about police and the military? Aren't they also doing God's work?

73 de Larry, K3LT
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . .--. .- .-. .- - .-. .- -. ...
... - -.. .-. .. ...- . .-. ...

In article , "Kim W5TIT"
writes:


Don't hold your breath, Mike. I'm not sure I've ever seen that Larry has
met a chall....sched yet.

Kim:

I "challenge" you to a schedule on 20-meter PSK-31. Put up or shut up!
BTW -- I know you're a Tech, so simply have your OM (a General) serve
as control op! Perfectly legal Third-Party operation. The ball is in YOUR
court now -- so no excuses! You started this, now show us all that you
have any credibility whatsoever. If you squirm out of this QSO challenge,
you will forever be self-nullified in this NG.

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article , "Kim W5TIT"
writes:


Larry doesn't know we read between the lines...LOL

Kim W5TIT

Kim:

I don't know how your newsreader works, but here on good 'ole AOL 5.0,
what I see "between the lines" is about 1/16" of blank screen! To everyone
else who isn't wasting their time reading "between the lines," I assure
you that the meaning contained within my postings is always going to be
right where you have come to expect it to be -- WITHIN the lines.

BTW -- your capacity for making a fool of yourself is seemingly endless,
Kim. Why is that?

73 de Larry, K3LT

I just found some long time ago report I wrote on essential education.(It was
long before I got an amateur radio licence or knew that there was such a
thing). Surprising, among other things, I wrote that I wanted to learn Morse
code. Never was obcessed about it. In fact, I forgot I even wrote that. At that
time, I just believed that its something one should learn.

I no longer believe that.

In article , Radio Amateur KC2HMZ
writes:

Wouldn't it be ironic if nobody filed a petition because everybody
thought someone else was already doing it?

One can only hope. Stranger things have happened.

The problem for the petition-filers is a question of timing and ratification.
If, as the article suggests, FCC doesn't have to wait for Senate ratification
of the treaty, the time to file a petition is right now. But if FCC has to wait
for ratification, filing a petition just makes the filer look clueless in front
of FCC. Which is not a good way to get the desired result. Meanwhile, if
ratification isn't far off, it makes sense to sit tight, refine the petition as
best you can, and then present it as soon as possible after ratification.

You know, kinda like when
the band's open but nobody knows it because they're all sitting there
listening for somebody else to call CQ?

The other thing that occurs to me is, you could basically take the
database of comments filed during the inquiry that preceded the last
restructuring, stamp a new docket number on it, and get it over with.
We've all been through this before in excruciating detail.

Which is what some of us think FCC may do. But then again, maybe not.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Dee D. Flint wrote:
"N2EY" wrote in message
...

In article , Mike Coslo



writes:


I think things like that only help the case for CW. The newbies were
looking at that paddle on the bench, and you could see the gears

turning....

I've seen that happen time and again. The CW setups at Field Day get the

most

attention from nonhams, for some reason.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Simple, it's more "exotic" than voice or keyboard.


When you watch a person using no apparent effort, save what looks like
a nervous tremor in their hand, make a QSO - now that is pretty exotic!

- Mike KB3EIA -