"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...


Bill Sohl wrote:

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
"Bert Craig" wrote ...

Well Bill, I'm on the bottom of 40 right now listening to a band FULL
of
irrelevance. hihi
__________________________________________________ _________

Here, Here. Yep, CW is just dead as a doornail, Right Bert?

The fact that morse is in use o ham bands offers no reason
to have a code test in order to begin learning and using the mode.
If a new ham without code knowledge decided to get together
with another ham to mutually learn/use code at veerrrryyy slow
seed (say 1-2 wpm)...would you oppose that?

I'd oppose it happening on the air on HF. That's incorrect and improper
use of
spectrum.

It is? Why, if there's a vacant slot of spectrum to do so? Seems like
there's plenty of spectrum in the "novice" segments now.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

Bill Sohl wrote:

Do you really think the FCC has or will have a change of opinion...
especially in light of the entire international community endorsing
the end of mandatory code testing as an ITU requirement?

Well, I wouldn't condider it a lock. The FCC was recently spanked by
both the Supremes and the Senate. They may be reluctant to send anything
new along for a while.


In addition, the US has shown a reluctance to go along with what the
rest of the world is thinking.

Finally, we haven't ratified all that many treaties lately have we?

So while it might happen, I'm not going to do any betting on it.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Bill Sohl" wrote ...

I agree completely...I applaud your efforts, and would like to know.... Do
you work with your friend on the air? If not, why not?
__________________________________________________ __________________

No, he's not licensed yet and we live too far away from each other for him
to just drop by and use my use my gear as a third party operator. Otherwise
I would. We just spend lunchtime working on the computer with Morse
Academy. But, IMHO, on the air is always the best way to learn.

Arnie -
KT4ST

"Clint" rattlehead@computronDOTnet wrote in message
...


I guess it's too bad that there aren't that many coal fired steam
locomotives
being used anymore.

On the othe hand, there IS very MUCH Morse code being used on ham radio!

and a LOT more FM, ssb, AM, packet, etc too.

Clint
KB5ZHT

Packet has almost disappeared. There is far less packet than voice or
Morse.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Has anyone come up with that WOW argument that will justify
the need for morse testing? So far, nothing new has been
offered by PCTAs at all.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK




well, no..... all the arguments being given to keep the code testing
are easily broken down into thier base, most center-core reason...

"I HAD TO DO IT, SO THEY SHOULD HAVE TO!!!!!"

And that just falls flat on its face.

Clint
KB5ZHT

Ah, but it HAS. I can recall the time when you had to sign ertifying that
you
had'made at least 2 CW contacts within the past six months to be eligible
to
renew your license.


and what decade was that?

Clint
KB5ZHT

You yourself have just stated FSK thus proving that they are not CW only.
Please note that there are portions of the 6m and 2m bands that are indeed
CW only as not even FSK is allowed there. So the statement that there are
no portions of MF/HF limited to cw only is indeed a true statement.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


um, yes. KEEN grasp of the obvious there!

Clint
KB5ZHT

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
hlink.net...
You must have been upset too when states eliminated mandatory
testing on manual gearbox autos and allowed testing to be done
using any car.

Not me, just the folks filing their insurance claims and/or licking their
wounds after someone who didn't know how to negotiate the clutch AND the
brake pedal simultaneously rear-ended them at a red light.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

P.S. My first drivers license was "manual shift endorsed." ggg

In article k.net, "Bill
Sohl" writes:

Do you really think the FCC has or will have a change of opinion...

Maybe - maybe not. Right now there are several petitions under consideration,
and almost certainly more on the way. Lots of comments, etc., to be considered.
Everyone can have their say and then FCC will do whatever FCC wants, based on
whatever FCC thinks is the best thing to do.

And no matter what FCC does, some folks will think it's the wrong thing. But at
least we can have our say.

especially in light of the entire international community endorsing
the end of mandatory code testing as an ITU requirement?

"entire international community"? I think not! Just those few who get to decide
policy.

For example, a poll of German hams found them overwhelmingly in favor of
keeping code tests. Didn't matter.

73 de Jim, N2EY

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...


Mike Coslo wrote:

Bill Sohl wrote:

Do you really think the FCC has or will have a change of opinion...
especially in light of the entire international community endorsing
the end of mandatory code testing as an ITU requirement?

Well, I wouldn't condider it a lock. The FCC was recently
spanked by
both the Supremes and the Senate. They may be reluctant to send anything
new along for a while.

In addition, the US has shown a reluctance to go along with what the
rest of the world is thinking.


actually, only the executive (presidential) branch has shown real resistance
to world pressures. MANY other levels of government, including special
interest groups, work to have the country damn near lay down and let
the world use us as a doormat.... such as Earth First! pushing to have
tighter environmental restrictions placed on american industry, as per
the request of the united nations which WE fund about a FOURTH of
it's treasury.


Finally, we haven't ratified all that many treaties lately have we?

this wouldn't exactly be a "treaty"... all the nations that are chosing to
drop CW testing haven't done so in a huge gathering with a document
with signatures on it, all in agreement.... they are doing it individually
on a case-by-case basis.


So while it might happen, I'm not going to do any betting on it.


that's what a lot of people said to the proposition that higher speed CW
testing being dropped... but it did. It's gone, and will not ever return, to
the
chagrin of many.

Then when the retired head of the Amateur and Citizen's Division of the
FCC
states in his comments to the NCVAEC petition, the writing of which he was
a
party, that it simply is an oxymoron that an Extra Class ham should
be allowed to *not* be proficient in Morse when he is considered an expert
at
ham radio, you might take that as some sort of a clue to thinking in high
places...


the definition of oxymoron is a statement or word that contridicts itself.
it is only
an OPINION but not a FACT that an extra class ham includes within itself the
requirement to be proficient in morse code.

the law is what counts, and currently the only proficiency required is 5wpm
(for any
class for that matter)... and soon, that will be dropped. Then, by law, just
not
to YOUR liking, will be that an extra class ham will not have to show
profeciency
in archaic, outdated communication modes.

Clint
KB5ZHT