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