Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Clint, that's something that I agree with you 110% on.
This type of attitude is not productive, and does nothing to further the cause of the hobby. Hoping that BPL will destroy Amateur Radio to spite the 'no coders' is a nonsensical position to take. Sour grapes, I believe, is the term for this type of thinking! 73, Leo On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 19:12:44 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote: " Your EXACTLY right, those are my true feelings. I think its just perfect for all the No-Coders. Not only will they be able to get there No-Code Extra, and all of HF, but the beauty of it is, they will have so much noise to deal with, they will not have any one to talk to. What a just reward for all there WHINNING. I cant wait. And the PCTA crowd wonders why they aren't being met with a warmer reception from the newbies wanting to enter the hobby. -- -- Get in touch with your soul: www.glennbeck.com OR, if you're a liberal, maybe you can FIND one |
#22
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
And the PCTA crowd wonders why they aren't being met with a warmer
reception from the newbies wanting to enter the hobby. You got to be Kidding, we dont need no WARM RECEPTION from you CBPLUSSERS |
#23
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Leo" wrote in message
... Clint, that's something that I agree with you 110% on. This type of attitude is not productive, and does nothing to further the cause of the hobby. Hoping that BPL will destroy Amateur Radio to spite the 'no coders' is a nonsensical position to take. Sour grapes, I believe, is the term for this type of thinking! 73, Leo It's like taking off your nose to spite your face... I love this hobby, it's a blast; it has so many avenues to pursue and so many different ways to enjoy it. I even like it because it adds to my shortwave listening pleasure! Why wish it destroyed? How horrible! The very reason I state the feelings I have to the controversial issues that are posted is because I feel, ultimately, that I would like to see as many potential hams come into this hobby as possible. I think a lot of people are constantly worried about the low calibur class of people that would flood the hobby; some, I think, are people that simply don't want just anybody coming into the hobby, but would rather see a small slice of the population that meets thier criteria join and nobody else. Both are negative for ham radio, because i'm sad to say, the first group I mentioned still wouldn't be willing to try to pass a written test and probably wouldn't be able to; as for the second group of potential hams I listed, well, there just won't be enough of them to keep ham alive. What do you have if you allow ham radio to stagnate? And leo, of this i'm serious.... you have a hobby that loses what little clout it has with the FCC because of DROPPING membership, and thus, we'll see MORE of our bands taken away that are above 30 megs (I am STILL ****ed off that we lost 220! And I understand that the U.P.S., that petitioned successfully to steal 220-222 megaherts away from the hams, don't even use it anymore!) God, let's work together and keep this going. You and I and many people in here may have our differences, but we're both ham operators and enjoy our hobby. Hell, leo, meet me on HF sometime and we'll have a ball. Clint KB5ZHT |
#24
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
one of the two factions fighting over the code testing issue.
PCTA = Pro Code Testing Agenda ... NCTA = No Code Test Agenda The former wants to continue testing mores code profeciency as a means of judging whether or not you can recieve a ham radio license. The latter want to remove the last vestiges of morse code testing, the 5 wmp code test. Anything past that is debatable, as to what they really want or believe, but those are the basics. Clint KB5ZHT -- -- Get in touch with your soul: www.glennbeck.com OR, if you're a liberal, maybe you can FIND one -- "William Warren" wrote in message linux.org... "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote: And the PCTA crowd wonders why they aren't being met with a warmer reception from the newbies wanting to enter the hobby. Please tell me what "PCTA" means. TIA. Bill (Filter the qrm for direct replies.) |
#25
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 20:40:02 -0500, "Clint" rattlehead at computron
dot net wrote: "Leo" wrote in message .. . Clint, that's something that I agree with you 110% on. This type of attitude is not productive, and does nothing to further the cause of the hobby. Hoping that BPL will destroy Amateur Radio to spite the 'no coders' is a nonsensical position to take. Sour grapes, I believe, is the term for this type of thinking! 73, Leo It's like taking off your nose to spite your face... I love this hobby, it's a blast; it has so many avenues to pursue and so many different ways to enjoy it. I even like it because it adds to my shortwave listening pleasure! Same here - I started out listening to shortwave too, and had this urge to go further with it, to talk back to the DX...it still amazes me! Why wish it destroyed? How horrible! The very reason I state the feelings I have to the controversial issues that are posted is because I feel, ultimately, that I would like to see as many potential hams come into this hobby as possible. Thinking such as our WA8 friend displays is not going to do the hobby any good at all. If the regulators get the idea that this isn't important to us, and with the pressure that the power companies are putting on them, it might just happen... I think a lot of people are constantly worried about the low calibur class of people that would flood the hobby; some, I think, are people that simply don't want just anybody coming into the hobby, but would rather see a small slice of the population that meets thier criteria join and nobody else. Both are negative for ham radio, because i'm sad to say, the first group I mentioned still wouldn't be willing to try to pass a written test and probably wouldn't be able to; as for the second group of potential hams I listed, well, there just won't be enough of them to keep ham alive. Both sides of the argument seem to share the desire to bring in new people to the hobby. Quality of the new operator, though, is a major concern - I really don't believe that the standards up here are tight enough right now (theoretical testing, forgetting the Code part for a moment...) - as I mentioned, I had a licence, a bunch of radio stuff that I bought at hamfests and hooked up - and no real idea what to do next. Some feel that CW is the answer - some want to see more theory. All (with some exceptions ![]() more, and want to preserve and protect it. Explains why some of the discussions are so - uh - passionate.... What do you have if you allow ham radio to stagnate? And leo, of this i'm serious.... you have a hobby that loses what little clout it has with the FCC because of DROPPING membership, and thus, we'll see MORE of our bands taken away that are above 30 megs (I am STILL ****ed off that we lost 220! And I understand that the U.P.S., that petitioned successfully to steal 220-222 megaherts away from the hams, don't even use it anymore!) That is unfortunate indeed, and demonstrates the power of industry. We still have the 220 MHz band up here, Amateur exclusive - not sure if that will change, but it does highlight what can happen if we don;t work together as a team. Big business has great influence over government up here - and I suspect there too! So, if you still have your 220 rig, come on up and visit - it's still good here! God, let's work together and keep this going. You and I and many people in here may have our differences, but we're both ham operators and enjoy our hobby. Fully agreed - we got off to a bit of a bad start (!), but it ends here...... Hell, leo, meet me on HF sometime and we'll have a ball. Deal. You know, if we can work things out this calmly, there just might be hope yet! ![]() coming from the same place! Now, if we can all just focus on some of the things that threaten the hobby...there's a hell of a lot of work to do! 55, 73 Leo Clint KB5ZHT |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
Interesting to note that Dick just couldn't bring himself to mention that I was the one who took the reporter out and demonstrated the interference to him ... but I'm not surprised. Carl, you've noted that we should stick together on this one. Perhaps "we" doesn't include Dick? There was no insult toward you in his post, and I would note that he posted the link to the article, which no doubt he read, and no doubt saw that you were a part of the article. If we are to get together and fight this thing, it might be worth pointing out that not only should those who support Morse testing try to get along with those who don't - but the opposite is also true. - Mike KB3EIA - |
#27
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
There was no insult toward you in his post, and I would note that he
posted the link to the article, which no doubt he read, and no doubt saw that you were a part of the article. The problem is simple, Capt Karl thinks hes the best thing that ever happened to Ham Radio, and hes just looking for someone to say thank you Karl for saving Ham Radio. |
#28
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On 30 Sep 2003 03:11:28 GMT, Dick Carroll wrote: Leo wrote: Hoping that BPL will destroy Amateur Radio to spite the 'no coders' is a nonsensical position to take. Sour grapes, I believe, is the term for this type of thinking! Leo, I don't want to see *anything* destroy, or even further damage, ham radio. That includes lowering the licensing standards so much that the license is virtually given to anyone and everyone who even the most mild and fleeting interest. History has clearly shown where that leads. Dick, I don't for a moment believe that you (or anyone on this group with few exceptions) want the hobby to be downgraded or destroyed. The comment that I was referring to most assuredly does not reflect that of the majority of Hams (and, coming from an Extra, doesn't lend much credence to either CW or advanced testing keeping out the yahoos... ![]() Looks to me like the bulk of the disagreement here centers around the fact that, if and when code goes, what should replace it? Several schools of thought are clear: One group believes that it should simply be dropped (like most of the countries who have removed CW testing have done). There is a problem with this strategy, or at least a perception here in the group, that doing this would be bad for the hobby as it will admit many folks who don't have to put in any extra effort over and above the current written exam. Another group believe that CW should be retained - it has great historical significance, is an excellent operating mode under adverse conditions, and takes effort to learn - perhaps demonstrating the commitment of the applicant. CW inherently imposes a civility on conversation that straight voice does not - it is slower (at least for me...) than speech, uses standard telegrapher's abbreviations bor brevity, and does not convey emotion like voice does. It's harder to have a heated arguement using CW - can be done, but harder ![]() Perlaps in this way the LID-factor is minimized. And sure, it's an antiquated method of communication in an Internet-wired world - but voice comminication is much older ![]() Yet another group would like to see CW replaced with other testing, again if and when CW is retired. I'm in this category (though not passionate about retiring CW). Additional testing on radio operating practices relating to HF, Smith charts, additional theory or even practical operating tests in various modes have been proposed. This may be the best compromise in ensuring that those who join the hobby are prepared and qualified to do a good job when they get on the air, and well represent the caliber of people in the Amateur Radio ranks. One obvious problem with the two approaches above (keep CW, add more testing if it goes) is with reciprocal operating agreements with other countries - if the requirements don't align, we could have a situation where foreign amateurs visiting North America would have reduced privileges during their stay here. All global agreements would require renegotiation - a massive task! There are also several folks here (the WA8xxx initiator of the "hope BPL kills the hobby for the CBPlussers" crap, and hey, Big Al!) whose only purpose it to stir the pot and start fights - and are best ignored. I'll close with a quote from Clint's post to me last night - something that no one here can argue with, and I wish I had said so well: "I love this hobby, it's a blast; it has so many avenues to pursue and so many different ways to enjoy it." Now THAT's the spirit of Amateur Radio! 73, Leo Dick |
#29
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yeah... and PCTA could also stand for Post Code Testing Agenda as well!
-- Ryan, KC8PMX FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!) --. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-. ... --. .... - . .-. ... "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote in message ... one of the two factions fighting over the code testing issue. PCTA = Pro Code Testing Agenda ... NCTA = No Code Test Agenda The former wants to continue testing mores code profeciency as a means of judging whether or not you can recieve a ham radio license. The latter want to remove the last vestiges of morse code testing, the 5 wmp code test. Anything past that is debatable, as to what they really want or believe, but those are the basics. Clint KB5ZHT -- -- Get in touch with your soul: www.glennbeck.com OR, if you're a liberal, maybe you can FIND one -- "William Warren" wrote in message linux.org... "Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote: And the PCTA crowd wonders why they aren't being met with a warmer reception from the newbies wanting to enter the hobby. Please tell me what "PCTA" means. TIA. Bill (Filter the qrm for direct replies.) |
#30
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Kim W5TIT wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message snippage That's a rather lofty goal, Mike, when considering that folks like DICKhead, Larry, and lately, you, act the way you do. Think about it. Most of the people to whom sheer disrespect is aimed at are the folks that have no problem at all with those of you who love, appreciate and admire CW as a mode and even the fact that you wish it to remain as a part of the test requirement. But the lack of tolerance displayed by people such as DICKhead, Larry, you, Dan/W4whatever, and others is overwhelmingly despicable and beyond being able to "join" together for the cause. The only common ground that may be found is that we are all amateurs. And, I doubt you'll even admit that. Whoa there. Kim. Point out what exactly I have done that is so despicable. Is this some sort of thing where I stand up for Dick, then I am the same as him? I don't agree with everything he does. I don't care for him calling people names. I don't care for Larry doing that, I don't care for Steve and his Lennie stuff either. I've had discussions with at least Larry and Steve about it. It's more what you haven't done, Mike, although some of even what you have done. You can't nudge "this one" in the side, wink at that one over there, and pat this one on the back and then stand in the middle of the street suggesting to everyone that we "should all get along." I most certainly can. I haven't taken you to task for the names you call Dick, or the recent post to Hans with the PH*****G stuff in it - and note that I *have* taken Hans to task for it. Changing the spelling does not change the meaning or intent. And I'm not going to respond to every post I find inapropriate. I, for one--and maybe the only one--don't trust people like that. You sit on the fence. I'm waiting to get spike by the barbed wire. Sure. I can't be reliably depended on to take the "party line". I make up my own mind. Many people don't like that at all. Sorry that you feel that way about me Kim. Why? I hardly think it's going to have any impact one way or the other on your every day doings. We don't even know each other. No, its not going to affect me. But I'm still sorry you feel that way. I could apologize for feeling that way too, but that would start a feedbak loop. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Your activity will stop! | Equipment | |||
I Feel Pretty -- please stop this nonsense! | General | |||
House Reverses FCC New Media Rule. Will this help stop BPL? | Policy | |||
Save our shortwave from massive interference – stop BPL/PLC | Equipment | |||
Save our shortwave from massive interference – stop BPL/PLC | Equipment |