Brian wrote:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , Alun
writes:

I can absolutely guarantee that it is not a point of view
shared by the FCC, and it makes little sense to me either.

Heresy.

All know that ham radio is governed by the BoD at Newington.

So it shall always be.

Amen.

dit dit

Praise be to Hiram.

didit

Always nice to have an affirmation from Len's Little Electrolyte.

Dave K8MN

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"Mike Coslo" wrote:
N2EY wrote:
(snip) Is that bad? Are you against direct
democracy and polling of those most affected?

(snip) You're avoiding the central issue. I think
you know that if such a poll were actually taken,
you might not like the results. (snip)

Bingo! This issue seems to run along "party lines".
I'm just about certain that the more non-amateurs
included in any poll, the lower the support for
Morse code, and vice versa.

I think you and Jim are both (perhaps intentionally) missing the point.
This issue is not limited to just the ham radio community. The frequencies
we use don't belong just to us - they belong to the entire country (all
Americans). As such, the FCC has to take all Americans into account when
making the rules and regulations to govern the use of those frequencies,
and
the license requirements for those frequencies. Therefore, Hans is right -
if you're going to instead propose some type of poll to help establish
what
those license requirements might be, it should include all Americans.

As for myself, if you're going to ask Amateur Radio Operators if code
testing is necessary today to meet the goals and purposes of the Amateur
Radio Service (as defined in Part 97) and serves some valid need as far as
the American public is concerned, then I would love to see the results of
that poll - it would be very interesting to see how many (or how few)
operators would actually place the goals and purposes of the Amateur Radio
Service, and the needs of the American public, above their own desire to
keep a code testing requirement.
Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

Why Dwight, you doubt that all hams wouldn't "vote" based on common
sense, logic and what is rational as a requirement in the 21st century??
:-) :-)

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"N2EY" wrote:

(snip) What we're saying is that on the single
issue of continued Morse code testing, (snip)

(snip) Not me. I EARNED mine. I encourage
others to EARN theirs. Is that bad? Shall I
apologize for my accomplishments and sit idly
by while others try to trash a community I
belong to?

If what you're demanding to "earn" that license is unnecessary and based
on a false premise, then I think it is bad. You haven't established, at
least not to my satisfaction (nor the satisfaction of the ITU, FCC, and
several countries around the world),

Actually, that would be ALL countries since not one country asserted a
position
of retaining the mandatory code knowledge for all HF hams.

9 countries as of Nov 14th.

...why Morse code is necessary (notice I
said necessary, not enjoyable) for ham radio today. And there is no truth
whatsoever to the premise that those without code skills in the ham radio
community are trashing anything. Instead, the vast majority are dedicated,
well-behaved, enthusiastic, participants of this community.

Several countries around the world have moved, or are moving, forward to
eliminate the Morse Code testing requirement while the United States sits
back and watches.

The list is available at:

http://www.rsgb.org/licensing/nomorse.htm

Is this the actions of a modern, progressive, country with
feet planted firmly on today and eyes on the future? It's time to move on,
Jim. Morse code is going to be even less necessary in the future. As such,
Morse Code testing has no ligitimate place in that future
Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

Agree completely!

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Alun" wrote in message
...
snip
Several countries around the world have moved, or are moving, forward
to
eliminate the Morse Code testing requirement while the United States
sits back and watches.

What's the count now?

I think they include at least the UK, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland, the
Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Papua New Guinea and Australia (not until
Jan 1st). New Zealand may actually do it before Australia, as they have
said it would be before the end of the year, but have given no date. I am
pretty sure I have missed a couple out, too.

See the list at:

http://www.rsgb.org/licensing/nomorse.htm

How many countries have eliminated the code test, vs. how many have
retained it so far?

Most do still retain it, but I think this has far more to do with
bureaucracy than intent

The changes to government regulations, in the USAand in many other
countries, take time. Did Jim expect an overnight change in the 100+
countries? Frankly, I'm pretty amazed at the ones that have been able to
do so on such a short time interval.

Is this the actions of a modern, progressive, country with feet planted
firmly on today and eyes on the future?

What does all that mean, exactly? Besides the removal of the last
remaining vestige of code testing?

It's time to move on, Jim.

To what?

Let's say that tomorrow FCC just dumps Element 1. One sentence:
"Element 1 is waived for all applicants, pending revision of the
rules". Could happen, y'know.

Bring it on!!!

Probably will

What happens next?

Lots of upgrades, plus no-coders on 10m the next day

Works for me. Anyone see a problem in that?

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Alun
writes:

Well, I guess that's a religeous issue, so I won't be able to convince you
otherwise.

If you look me up you'll see I'm an Extra, and you'll be able to figure
out that I passed 20 wpm. What you won't see, is that I've been a ham
since 1980, not 1992, as I'm not originally from this country.

Alun, with all due respect, such experience ist VERBOTEN in this
chat room.

Len, with all the respect that you feel you're due, this still isn't a
chat room.

The requirement to exist in this chat room requires a struct obediance
to morsemanship, tradition forever rooted in old ways back before all
the morseodist regulars ever existed.

That flies in the face of evidence that there are a wide number of views
expressed here. Once again, this isn't a chat room.

However, ham radio is not a job or a vocation, just a hobby.

Hobby, avocation, interest, passion--it still boils down to the fact
that you aren't involved in it.

In this chat room, the REGULARS maintain a LIFESTYLE of devotion,
obediance to love honor and obey amateur radio in all its past glory.

This isn't a chat room and I submit that you have no way of knowing what
regulars who post here do in amateur radio. You don't have a close
friendship with any of them and you aren't connected to amateur radio.
By the way, aren't YOU a regular here?

LIFESTYLES take precedence over logic, common sense, and
anything else not associated with amateur radio (except Michael
Jackson, foreign policy, overall economic decisions by government
and partisan politics).

It would be interesting to see you come up with proof of the LIFESTYLES
claim or of your peculiar ideas about logic, common sense, etc. If
logic and common sense prevailed, you'd likely not haunt this newgroup
at all.

Ham radio to the regulars is far more than a vocation.

Excuse me, aren't you a regular? Do you believe that ham radio is more
than a vocation? Has anyone else here told you that they believe it?

Vocations
in radio are to be pejorated, denigrated, spat upon, reviled, made fun
of and other niceties of the TURF where chat room homies consider
their 'hood.

Now you're blowing smoke. I can't remember anyone taking shots at my
voacation in communications except YOU. So the guy complaining about
others not respecting his work in radio is the same guy insulting my
work in radio. Isn't that precious?

Good old Len "Do As I say and not as I do" Anderson!

Dave K8MN

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...

Vocations
in radio are to be pejorated, denigrated, spat upon, reviled, made fun
of and other niceties of the TURF where chat room homies consider
their 'hood.

You mean like this sort of thing, Len?

BEGIN GOOGLE QUOTE

From: (Lenof21)
Subject: Morse monkeys are the worst!
Date: 2000/03/28
Message-ID:
References:
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy
X-Admin:


In article , (Jeffrey Herman)
writes:

Jim wrote:
(Jeffrey Herman) wrote:

Gee, I was originally WA6QIJ (from '76). Two-by-three calls *can* be an
OTer's call.
Jeff KH6O (formerly WA6QIJ WH6AEQ NH6IL KH2PZ KH6OO WH6U)

Yeah, Jeff. But you're different. You talk the talk, but you don't
walk the walk......
73, Jim KH2D

I don't "walk the walk," eh? Try 12 hours on, 12 hours off for four
years straight, copying CW. 12 and 16 MHz in the left earphone, and 22
and 26 MHz in the right during the day, or 4 and 6 in the left, and 8
and 12 in the right at night -- the Collins receivers automatically
scanning the calling segments in each of those bands.

Pile-ups? How about one every six hours around the clock -- hundreds of
ships calling so as to pass their time-sensitive WX observations; at
the same time let's not forget that several ships are standing by with
distress situations -- medical emergencies, mechanical difficulties,
engine room fires, men overboard, shifted cargo / listing due to heavy
seas and taking on water. You'd wet your pants sitting one hour of a
typical shift. It wasn't a contest where you could turn off the radio and
take a nap if it got too stressful -- this was the real life stuff --
lives being lost or saved.

That's all very nice and dramatic but this was the United States
Coast Guard, right? The same USCG that gave you food, lodging,
shelter, and free clothes that you could wet in as needed? The
same USCG that taught you morse code cognition? It wasn't
amateur radio, was it?

Jeff, the time for demanding Medals for Meritorious Service in
the USCG is past for you. That was not amateur radio, it was
PROFESSIONAL radio. You were paid for what you did (in
several ways). It was your JOB. I'm sure that the USCG did
not put you on watch if you couldn't cut it. I don't see how
all that makes you some Number One Ichiban HAM Honcho
NOW.

HF CW too much for you? Okay, sit the evening MF CW watch, instead.
500 kHz in the left phone, 499 in the right (even you're bright enough
to figure out why). What's that? An Auto-Alarm? Don't wet your pants
again, Jim, just realize that those twelve four-second dashes with
one-second pauses are setting off alarm bells on board every ship
in the Pacific within radio range -- the ship's in grave distress,
breaking up in heavy seas. Imagine the intensity of a storm that
would rip a ship in half. Have you ever heard what a transmitter
sounds like when the radio room gets flooded with sea water? It
emits a scream-like sound -- here are the final words the RO was
sending to me at the moment his transmitter screamed:

SOS NMO DE D*** HV TO LEAVE SHIP NOW TU OM FER high pitched whine

That's where the log entry ends.

Transmitters don't "scream" Jeff. They are inanimate things that
run on electricity. When the radio room on that unfortunate ship
flooded, many things could have temporarily put the transmitter
on full Continuous Wave and also to shift frequency slightly.
The "scream" you heard, if it was not in your head alone, could
have been a true CW with a frequency shift just enough to make
it sound something like a "scream."

Now sit there, Jim, and try your best to comprehend that the man
you were just in QSO with has drowned; he was one of the last men
aboard the ship -- most of the others had taken to lifeboats.

You were safe on shore, listening to a radio...provided by the
USCG, the same military service that provided you with food,
lodging, shelter, clothes (to wet in), and a modest monetary
stipend each month for your JOB. I'll bet you even got Rank
with that USCG service.

Meanwhile, in time NOW, the last officer in charge has only
to start the GMDSS...which will send distress call AND the
position of the sinking ship. As accurate as possible without
having to wet pants or make some heroic, dramatic act out
of it. No "screaming" transmitters.

Maybe the voice position is more to your level of ability. Now don't
be overwhelmed -- you'll have to listen to about 30 voice channels:
2182 kHz, 2670 kHz, the 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 22 high seas maritime
and aeronautical SSB channels, and four remote VHF sites, with each
site piping in marine channels 6, 12, 16, 22, and 23. Don't worry,
each of the 30 speakers has a little LED which will flash so you'll
know which transmitter to key up to answer someone's call. Let's
see how good you are at juggling: You have a sinking motorboat on
Kauai ch. 16 with too many family members and not enough life jackets
-- listen to those screams in the background, Jim. You'll have to
phone the air-station to launch a helo and phone CG station Kauai to
launch their 41 footer, all the while extracting as much info from
the downing family as possible. What now? The Maui ch.16 speaker has
someone yelling for help -- he's aground on a reef; phone Maui fire
department so they can launch their helo and rescue boat. Whoops -- now
you've got a ship on 12 MHz SSB with a medical emergency -- crewman with a
burst appendicitis; get USPHS on the phone and set up a phone patch
between the duty doctor and the ship. Now you've got the helo and 41
footer on channel 23 asking you to take their radio guard while they're
enroute to the drowning family. Uh oh -- the two-tone SSB Auto Alarm on
2182; oh, it's just the drunk Mexican fishermen again, playing with their
radios and singing to each other; but don't touch that volume control --
you'll have to listen to their singing all night long.

What was your comment again?

....you knew the job was dangerous when you took it...

As I said, the time for Medals For Meritorious Radio Service in
the USCG is past for you, Jeff. You were safe on shore, no
lifeboats needed, and, when your watch was over, you could
go off duty, hit the bunk, or chow down on USCG food after
changing your pants.

Yeah, Jeff. But you're different. You talk the talk, but you don't
walk the walk......
73, Jim KH2D

You're right, Jim, I didn't walk any walk; I ran a marathon each
shift, a marathon that would have left you exhausted at the *starting*
line.

Thank you Superham, once more you've saved Metropolis.

Of course, if you want some "comparisons," you can always
hang around a TRACON sometime at a busy Center if
radio "marathons" are your cuppa. Plenty "runners" in that
radio "marathon," a whole room full plus lots in the sky,
all doing things on voice. If there be "screams," then
they can be heard on cockpit voice recorders.

Enjoy your little walk, Jim. And change your wet pants.

Jeff KH6O

Jeff, you've never been under Incoming, have you? While
trying to get return artillery support on a radio while your
ears, your whole body is numbed by HE infall on your
position? Most folks in that position don't wet their
pants...every sphincter tightens up, ears go deaf, eyes
close tight, and every breath may be the last.

I just helped plant my bro-in-law, another veteran.
Why don't you quit the shore station histrionics and go
back to ancient radio history. It will ease your troubled
mind...and keep your pants dry.

Len Anderson
ex-RA16408336


END GOOGLE QUOTE

"Alun" wrote in message
...
(Bert Craig) wrote in
om:

Alun wrote in message
. ..
(Bert Craig) wrote in
om:

Alun wrote in message
. ..
"Bert Craig" wrote in
t:

"Rupert" wrote in message
ink.net...
Len Over 21 wrote:

As of 6 PM EST on 11 November 2003, the number of ECFS
documents on public view a

What would be interesting is to find out how many are for the
change, and how many want to keep the code.

Me too. All this roundabout bravo sierra could be bypassed if
there was a ballot sent to all approx. 700,000 U.S. licensed
hams. As long as quorum is met, it's on! This concept (Democracy)
frightens the bejesus out of many folks who claim to speak for
those not yet licensed.

But that's an empty argument. Get licensed and vote, tah dah! The
big bad "barrier" does not preclude anyone from getting their
no-code Tech ticket and executing a vote.

Simply announce a "record date" by which one must be licensed (To
give those "yet to be licensed a fair shot at a voice in the
process.) and send a ballot out to all those licensed "of
record." Makes too much sense and requires some effort. IOW,
against the contemporary trend.

73 de Bert
WA2SI




Those who have not obtained a licence because of the code trest are
just as entitled to express their opinion to the FCC as you or I.

I agree, Alun. The Technician license requires no code test.

73 de Bert
WA2SI


True, but some don't take it because they only want HF, not because
they couldn't answer the questions. All I'm saying is that they should
have a vote in any poll.

73 de Alun, N3KIP

Hmm, sounds like a motivational issue. If you want HF, the road to the
General and Extra begins with the Technician exam...no matter what. If
they're truly "interested" in participating in participating in the
process of this change, you'd think the Tech exam would be...wait a
sec, lemme stop. I just remembered whom we're talking about. Kinda
sad. :-(

No, Alun. I really DO believe that Amateur Radio operators should
define Amateur Radio. What a concept, eh?

73 de Bert
WA2SI


Well, I guess that's a religeous issue

Alun, if this were a religeous issue I'd be trying to convince you that all
real hams must use the code. I'm not trying to convince anybody of anything.
I'm merely stating my beliefs re. the retention of the 5-wpm Morse code exam
a.k.a. Element 1 for HF privies.

, so I won't be able to convince you
otherwise.

Two years ago, I made a decision to get my AR license. I'd heard some
rumblings of a code vs. no-code debate, but I didn't care. I wanted my
ticket. I had precious little spare time between a new house, a newborn
child, (Our second.) and a promotion at the job along with the increased
responsibilities, but I didn't care. I wanted my ticket. My XYL also needed
help (read: "free labor") getting her business off the ground and that ate
up spare time as well, but I didn't care. I wanted my ticket.

See a recurring theme? I wanted my ticket.
1. Research the requirements.
2. Meet said requirements.
3. Enjoy the privileges that come from meeting said requirements.

I decided that I'd get up early each day and spend 15 to 20 mins. practicing
with the ARRL code CD's. Additionally, I managed to sneak in an evening or
two before turning in. It never occured to me that someone was oppressing me
by forcing me to do this. I viewed it as an investment in bettering myself.
All because...yep, you guessed it, I wanted my ticket.

So no, Alun. You will NEVER convince me that 5-wpm Morse code test is a
"barrier" to anyone. 13-wpm? Maybe 20-wpm? Yeah, very likely. However, 5-wpm
just isn't. Not because I (or anybody else) say(s) so, just because it
isn't. Ask a Handi-Ham. Now there's an example of "motivated" individuals.

If you look me up you'll see I'm an Extra, and you'll be able to figure
out that I passed 20 wpm.

Congratulations, that's a significant accomplishment.

What you won't see, is that I've been a ham
since 1980, not 1992, as I'm not originally from this country.

I kinda picked up on that from your website. Nice job, BTW.

However, ham radio is not a job or a vocation, just a hobby.

So? Some would disagree, but let's proceed on the premise that it's only a
hobby. (We'll ignore the service aspect.) Why sould we lower the standards
for our hobby?

I welcome the
unmotivated as much as I would welcome anyone else.

Why on Earth would one want to welcome the unmotivated? How many other
aspects of AR can we apply the "don't get in the way of my fun" mindset? How
about rules and regs, or gentleman's agreements re. voluntary bandplans, or
how 'bout them writtens? Why should I demonstrate knowledge of digital modes
when I'm only interested in running SSB?

Why shouldn't they
have fun too?

No one's preventing anybody from having fun. Ex. An AR lives in an antenna
resticted apartment and laments how his/her options are limited. I'd hang a
retractable wire from the window at night, run a counterpoise, and operate
40m CW QRP via a tuner in a heartbeat...all for about $200, less than many
dual-bander V/UHF h/t's. You know how 40 is at night, yes? So where's the
real limiting factor? Um hmm.

If someone wants HF and doesn't want to learn code, why
should they bother to study for a VHF and above licence, when they could
be scuba diving or building model railroads or what have you? (Not hobbies
of mine, personally, but whatever turns you on).

Thank you, Alun. I couldn't have said it better myself.

I know this is sacrilege
to true beleivers, but so what?

The notion that only hams should decide the future of ham radio is just
that, a notion. I can absolutely guarantee that it is not a point of view
shared by the FCC, and it makes little sense to me either. At the very
least all prospective hams have a vested interest, irregardless of the
reasons they don't have a licence, reasonable or otherwise. I'm sure the
FCC would cast their net a lot wider than that.

73 de Alun, N3KIP

Gotta run for breakfast. It's cool to agree to disagree, Alun. Take care OM.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Bill Sohl" wrote in
link.net:


"Alun" wrote in message
...
snip
Several countries around the world have moved, or are moving,
forward to
eliminate the Morse Code testing requirement while the United States
sits back and watches.

What's the count now?

I think they include at least the UK, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland,
the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Papua New Guinea and Australia
(not until Jan 1st). New Zealand may actually do it before Australia,
as they have said it would be before the end of the year, but have
given no date. I am pretty sure I have missed a couple out, too.

See the list at:

http://www.rsgb.org/licensing/nomorse.htm


OK - The RSGB list has UK, Switzerland, Belgium, Germany, Norway, the
Netherlands, Ireland, Singapore and Luxembourg. However, I'm also aware of
Papua New Guinea and Finland who have abolished the code test already,
Australia who have announced a date of Jan 1st, and New Zealand, who say
sometime before the new year (but no date). So that's actually 11 so far,
and at least 13 by the new year, probably more. I don't think we will know
which countries might keep a code test until at least July (i.e 12 months
after the ITU decision), and I don't think they will be a majority (?).

How many countries have eliminated the code test, vs. how many have
retained it so far?

Most do still retain it, but I think this has far more to do with
bureaucracy than intent

The changes to government regulations, in the USAand in many other
countries, take time. Did Jim expect an overnight change in the 100+
countries? Frankly, I'm pretty amazed at the ones that have been able
to do so on such a short time interval.

Is this the actions of a modern, progressive, country with feet
planted firmly on today and eyes on the future?

What does all that mean, exactly? Besides the removal of the last
remaining vestige of code testing?

It's time to move on, Jim.

To what?

Let's say that tomorrow FCC just dumps Element 1. One sentence:
"Element 1 is waived for all applicants, pending revision of the
rules". Could happen, y'know.

Bring it on!!!

Probably will

What happens next?

Lots of upgrades, plus no-coders on 10m the next day

Works for me. Anyone see a problem in that?

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"N2EY" wrote:

So you assume that the goals and purposes
of the ARS are incompatible with any
code testing at all?


Yes.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Mike Coslo" wrote:

How you gonna educate them? Most people
wouldn't have a clue what we would be talking
about. Do you propose an education system
without either Pro or Anti-code bias?

(snip)

How are you going to approach anything like
a knowledgable poll pool?


Actually, I'm not proposing anything at all. In my opinion, the FCC is
doing a fine job of regulating the Amateur Radio Service. If someone is
going to propose a poll to influence that, then the poll should take into
account everything the FCC must take into account (that includes all
Americans, not just those currently licensed in a particular radio service).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/