Charles:

That is an excellent "theory", too bad all anyone has to do is open
their eyes and look around to immediately prove it false...

John

"Charles Brabham" wrote in message
m...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
N2EY:

One point you got right, ham radio HAS TO compete with a superior
form of communication--the internet!

You got that wrong, right off the bat. Ham Radio and the non-ham stuff
both have thier good and bad points. That is to say; Both are superior
to the other - and inferior to the other at the same time. It is most
accurate to just say that they are different.


And, the only way it can is drop the code...

How about hopping on one leg with a paper sack over our heads,
squawking like a chicken? - It would have about the same amount of
positive effect.

You seem to be really loaded up with ignorant and anti-ham
catch-phrases, easy to parrot I suppose. Did you pick up the ignorant
attitudes at:

a. TAPR
b. ARRL HSMM group
c. WL2K
d. ARESCOM

... Or is there some other source of utter cluelessness that you have
associated yourself with?

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org
Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com
Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php

John Smith wrote:
N2EY:

I mean you have convinced me you are hopeless...

Actually I'm *hopeful*, John. I simply don't agree with you
about some things that you take for granted as facts.

You really don't seem to be open to change...

you don't see a problem... you are fine with the numbers...

Those claims are incorrect. I do see a problem with declining
numbers of US hams. I just don't blindly accept your one-step
solution, that's all.

I don't think you give a
damn if we ever get enough young hams in here to make it interesting...

That claim is incorrect in at least two ways.

First off, I would like to see more hams - of all ages, and from all
walks of life. But not at the cost of trashing the amateur radio
service in the blind pursuit of numbers.

Second, I think hams of all ages can be "interesting". I don't have an
age bias against young or old, male or female.

frankly I just don't think you give a damn about anything but status
quo...

That claim is incorrect also.

you have convinced me you are stone set in your ways and think
everything is fine... go for it... we will see as time passes...

We have seen that reducing the license test requirements in 2000
led to a short-term peak in the number of US hams, followed by a
decline
to levels lower than before the restructuring.

But we're only talking a few percent.

the bands are boring

To you. Not to everyone. Perhaps you could tell us how to
make them more interesting?

and that is the way you like 'em--

That claim is incorrect.

I have interesting QSOs every time I'm on the ham bands. Of course
I'm rarely using 'phone - I'm usually on Morse Code (CW). Last night 40
meters was full of Morse Code signals from 7000 to 7060 or so. Some
interesting conversations. I fired up my Elecraft K2 at the 5 watt
level
and had a nice chat with a ham in Indiana.

have at it... I got
the internet to chat on while I wait...

To each his own.


wrote in message
ups.com...
John Smith wrote:
N2EY:

One point you got right, ham radio HAS TO compete with a
superior form of communication--the internet!

For some uses the internet is better than ham radio. For other
uses ham radio is better. The competition is for time only.

And, the only way it can is drop the code...

Do you mean hams should stop using Morse Code, or that there
should not be a Morse Code *test*?

In either case, how will that help ham radio compete for
time?

wrote in message
ups.com...
Charles Brabham wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
N2EY:

I have asked the young men why they have no interest in getting
a
ham
license, it is because of the limitations placed on the no code
license--and the fact they are not interested in learning code
to
chat
with someone DX--a task which can be accomplished much easier
and
reliably over the net with instant messaging, IRC chat, etc...
that is
REAL. THAT is dropping the numbers of hams and putting bands
in
danger
of being lost... that is holding our numbers at such low
levels
the FCC
begins to find us more a bother than anything else...


This does NOT make sense when our numbers are near their all
time
high.

Yes - both in total numbers of US hams, and the ratio of hams to
the
total US population.

In recent years the totals have begun to go down, and the
percentage
of
the
population as well. Reducing the license test requirements in 2000
has
not brought growth, yet some folks insist that more and more
reductions
in test requirements are the only solution.

It's just another one of those guys who thinks that Ham Radio is
only
relevant in as much as it resembles the Internet. - In other
words,
the guy
has no clue about the hobby but wants to run it down because it is
not the
Internet.

BINGO!

Yet it is exactly the fact that amateur radio *is not* the internet
that is
the draw!

I use this attitude as a handy intelligence test for amateurs...
If
they
cannot differentiate between Amateur Radio and the Internet, or if
they
cannot see why there should and would be differences between the
two - then
I know that they are brain-damaged ( or even worse ) - associated
with TAPR
or the ARRL's HSMM group.

In any case the attitude indicates a clueless state in relation to
the
amateur radio hobby.

Makes sense to me!

73 de Jim, N2EY

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org
Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com
Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php

N2EY:

That is ok, I'll just hang around looking for new and exciting
discoveries and ideas to start being discussed.

I know it is going to start any minute now... we have pretty well beaten
to death old the old stuff which has been beat for decades... that can't
go on forever...

John

wrote in message
ups.com...


John Smith wrote:
N2EY:

I mean you have convinced me you are hopeless...

Actually I'm *hopeful*, John. I simply don't agree with you
about some things that you take for granted as facts.

You really don't seem to be open to change...

you don't see a problem... you are fine with the numbers...

Those claims are incorrect. I do see a problem with declining
numbers of US hams. I just don't blindly accept your one-step
solution, that's all.

I don't think you give a
damn if we ever get enough young hams in here to make it
interesting...

That claim is incorrect in at least two ways.

First off, I would like to see more hams - of all ages, and from all
walks of life. But not at the cost of trashing the amateur radio
service in the blind pursuit of numbers.

Second, I think hams of all ages can be "interesting". I don't have an
age bias against young or old, male or female.

frankly I just don't think you give a damn about anything but status
quo...

That claim is incorrect also.

you have convinced me you are stone set in your ways and think
everything is fine... go for it... we will see as time passes...

We have seen that reducing the license test requirements in 2000
led to a short-term peak in the number of US hams, followed by a
decline
to levels lower than before the restructuring.

But we're only talking a few percent.

the bands are boring

To you. Not to everyone. Perhaps you could tell us how to
make them more interesting?

and that is the way you like 'em--

That claim is incorrect.

I have interesting QSOs every time I'm on the ham bands. Of course
I'm rarely using 'phone - I'm usually on Morse Code (CW). Last night
40
meters was full of Morse Code signals from 7000 to 7060 or so. Some
interesting conversations. I fired up my Elecraft K2 at the 5 watt
level
and had a nice chat with a ham in Indiana.

have at it... I got
the internet to chat on while I wait...

To each his own.


wrote in message
ups.com...
John Smith wrote:
N2EY:

One point you got right, ham radio HAS TO compete with a
superior form of communication--the internet!

For some uses the internet is better than ham radio. For other
uses ham radio is better. The competition is for time only.

And, the only way it can is drop the code...

Do you mean hams should stop using Morse Code, or that there
should not be a Morse Code *test*?

In either case, how will that help ham radio compete for
time?

wrote in message
ups.com...
Charles Brabham wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
N2EY:

I have asked the young men why they have no interest in
getting
a
ham
license, it is because of the limitations placed on the no
code
license--and the fact they are not interested in learning
code
to
chat
with someone DX--a task which can be accomplished much
easier
and
reliably over the net with instant messaging, IRC chat,
etc...
that is
REAL. THAT is dropping the numbers of hams and putting
bands
in
danger
of being lost... that is holding our numbers at such low
levels
the FCC
begins to find us more a bother than anything else...


This does NOT make sense when our numbers are near their all
time
high.

Yes - both in total numbers of US hams, and the ratio of hams to
the
total US population.

In recent years the totals have begun to go down, and the
percentage
of
the
population as well. Reducing the license test requirements in
2000
has
not brought growth, yet some folks insist that more and more
reductions
in test requirements are the only solution.

It's just another one of those guys who thinks that Ham Radio
is
only
relevant in as much as it resembles the Internet. - In other
words,
the guy
has no clue about the hobby but wants to run it down because it
is
not the
Internet.

BINGO!

Yet it is exactly the fact that amateur radio *is not* the
internet
that is
the draw!

I use this attitude as a handy intelligence test for
amateurs...
If
they
cannot differentiate between Amateur Radio and the Internet, or
if
they
cannot see why there should and would be differences between
the
two - then
I know that they are brain-damaged ( or even worse ) -
associated
with TAPR
or the ARRL's HSMM group.

In any case the attitude indicates a clueless state in relation
to
the
amateur radio hobby.

Makes sense to me!

73 de Jim, N2EY

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org
Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com
Webmaster: HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com
Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php

wrote:


Last night 40
meters was full of Morse Code signals from 7000 to 7060 or so.

I listened to the 40 meter cw band last night and also found it full of
Morse signals, but johnnyboy says that can't be so as cw is dying out,
no one is interested in using Morse code anymore, so we must obviously
have something wrong with our receivers. If you find the problem let me
know so I can fix mine too.

"Cmd Buzz Corey" wrote in message
news
wrote:


Last night 40
meters was full of Morse Code signals from 7000 to 7060 or so.

I listened to the 40 meter cw band last night and also found it full of
Morse signals, but johnnyboy says that can't be so as cw is dying out, no
one is interested in using Morse code anymore, so we must obviously have
something wrong with our receivers. If you find the problem let me know so
I can fix mine too.

Every night of the week forty is full of CW signals. I guess my MP needs
work too, eh?

Dan/W4NTI

"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Cmd Buzz Corey" wrote in message
news
wrote:


Last night 40
meters was full of Morse Code signals from 7000 to 7060 or so.

I listened to the 40 meter cw band last night and also found it full of
Morse signals, but johnnyboy says that can't be so as cw is dying out, no
one is interested in using Morse code anymore, so we must obviously have
something wrong with our receivers. If you find the problem let me know
so I can fix mine too.

Every night of the week forty is full of CW signals. I guess my MP needs
work too, eh?

Dan/W4NTI


Even my nearly new TS-2000 must need work in that case. I even worked St.
Paul Island a few days ago on 40m CW.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

wrote:
From: on Tues 14 Jun 2005 09:08

John Smith wrote:
I think most of those groups progressive and open to change--this alone
would make classification as a cult difficult...

Try selling the NRA on the idea that the Second Amendment
should be
repealed.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. THIS newsgroup is NOT about owning personal
firearms.

Then why did you mention "a few ounces of pressure", Len?

Try selling NCI on the idea that *some* code testing is OK.

No Code International was found for the express purpose of
ELIMINATING the morse code test. Why should they "change"
and do like you wish them to do?

Because it would show that they are "progressive" and
"open to change", rather than stuck in the past. We are
told that "change is inevitable" so why should NCI
fight change the way they do? Why should they insist on
un-moving devotion to their "principles" and the staunch
"unwillingness" to change on the point of code
testing?

However, the ARRL with un-moving devotion to
its "principles" and the
staunch "unwillingness" to change is what makes it more
appropriate to such classification...

The ARRL is as "open to change" (if not more so) as any of the
organizations named.

Total and complete bull****,

No, it isn't, Len.

.

Why can't you just call me "Jim" or "N2EY", Len?

The ARRL is about as
hidebound to the status quo as is possible for the olde-tyme
league leaders to be and still be human.

How so?

In 1998, *before* FCC released an NPRM, ARRL formally proposed
reducing the
number of amateur radio license classes in the USA from 6 to 4,
proposed reducing the code testing requirements for General and
Extra class licenses, proposed free upgrades for two license classes,
and proposed better written testing.

ARRL also proposed that Technician class amateurs be allowed to
use some HF bands *without having passed a Morse Code test*.

ARRL has recently formally proposed another round of changes,
including elimination of the code test for all but Extra class
licenses.

Hardly "hidebound to the status quo"!

Your claim is incorrect.

That is abundantly
clear in their publications, periodicals, and whatnot output in at least the last half century!

How?

Way back in the late 1940s and early 1950s, ARRL was fully
behind amateurs getting on SSB. There were numerous articles
in QST promoting the mode, SSB construction projects in various
ARRL publications, and even a column in QST "On The Air with
Single Sideband". Some hams even complained to the editor that
ARRL was "forcing SSB down our throats".

Hardly "hidebound to the status quo"

Plenty of other examples all through the past half century.
VHF, UHF, SSTV, repeaters, satellites, AMTOR, packet, EME,
and much more are the subject of both the general ARRL
publications and specialized books.

The June 2005 issue of QST has a two page article on EME
with JT65. You probably don't even know what JT65 is, Len.

The league WILL support the law as it is written.

What would you have them do - break the law?

It must. That
is PC. Beyond that, the league sits on their
collective olde-tyme
duffs, trying to keep the status at the quo of the core
membership.
the Believers.

Those claims are completely incorrect.

The ARRL has been pushing for a revision of the rules to
classify
signals by bandwidth rather than content, and to free up old
technical limitations. What other group has put forth such a
proposal?

What "other group" is there in the USA posing
as "representative
of 'all' amateurs?" [ain't none]

"You cannot answer a question with another question" - Len Anderson

What has the mighty league DONE in all its "pushing" since 1979?
It couldn't defeat Access BPL.

So? Neither could you. Nor any of the many others, amateurs and
professionals, who tried.

You probably wouldn't even know what BPL was if not for ARRL's
publicity efforts.

It couldn't get a whole band at 60 m.

There would be no amateur access to 60 meters at all without
ARRL. And the only reason a band was not authorized was that
NTIA drastically changed their policy after September 11, 2001.

It couldn't stop the IARU (and NCI) led REVISION of S25
at WRC-03.

ARRL did not try to! Back in early 2001, the ARRL BoD changed
policy, and decided not to oppose changing S25.5. That was
more than two years before WRC-2003.

It couldn't stop the FCC restructuring ELIMONATION
of 13 and 20 WPM morse code test rates.

"ELIMONATION"?

Actually, ARRL proposed the removal of the 20 wpm code
test and the reduction of the General class code test
to 5 wpm. *Before* FCC released that NPRM!

It couldn't stop the
FCC in cutting the number of new amateur radio license
classes in HALF.

Actually, ARRL proposed the reduction of license
classes from 6 to 4 *before* FCC released that NPRM!

CHANGE is happening but the league has become impotent
and represents only the olde-tyme, settled-in-their-ways core
membership.

That claim is simply incorrect.

For a quarter of a century the ARRL had done
little but brag about how good they are, yet still hasn't
increased their membership percentage of all licensed U.S.
radio amateurs.

That claim is incorrect.

US amateur radio is and has long been wide open for
new discoveries,
methods, devices, etc.. Particularly on VHF/UHF, where
there's lots of
bandwidth. You cannot blame the license requirements
for lack of
innovation, because the requirements for full VHF/UHF
privileges have
included no code test and only a minimal written test
for 14+ years.

The real "cult" or "religion" to watch for is the mindset that all
change is good, new is better than old, ending is better than
mending, and similar marketing buzzphrases.

Poor Believer. All radio amateurs desiring below-30-MHz
privileges "MUST" test for morsemanship...because it is the
FIRST mode in radio and all MUST keep the tradition and other
assorted maxims. Coupled (tightly) with the mighty League as
a "potent representative" of "all hams," all that non-
believers
have clear visibility to the CULT FOLLOWING of the MORSE
SECT.

Suppose FCC just dumps Element 1 tomorrow. Will we see a
techno-
revolution in ham radio? Not likely - it didn't happen after
the Tech
lost its code test.

WHERE is demonstrating ANYTHING in this "techno-
revolution?"

It's not up to me, Len. We've been told many times that dropping
the code test would bring in a lot of "technical people" who
would "revolutionize amateur radio". Hasn't happened.

Poor Believer. 2 out of 5 U.S. radio amateurs are Technician
Class licensees and they don't worship morsemanship!

So what?

It must be
a virtual hell for the arrogant and elite morsemen who don't
get
the respect and admiration they insist they deserve...tsk, tsk.

As opposed to the "virtual hell" of certain "arrogant and elite"
non-amateurs who don't get the respect and admiration they demand...

Do you know what JT65 is, Len?

Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer, two-test stinkyboy pudgie
wogie blubbered again and wrote:


BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA..the self-deluded "cw expert" just
"listened," eh? BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! You didn't want to
show off those "sending skills" or I should say lack of them,


Name the time and frequency fatboy, remember I start out at about 30/wpm
but I can get on the straight key and come down to about 2/wpm for you
(however I doubt you can even copy that fast). Put up or shut up fatboy.

Nomen Nescio AKA fatboy two-test wogie slobberd over the keyboard and wrote:

"Stinkyboy?" You8 must be thinking of yourself, colostomy wearer.

Two-test wogie make good spell. What's 'you8'? Drunk at the keyboard
again wogie?

Name the (blathering and plain out and out lying about his non-

existent cw skills, sort of like his nonexistent pilot's and 1st
class radiotelephone license)

Name the time and frequency fatboy, I'll call cq AB8ManyQueers, either
put up or shut up. You won't because you can't copy cw.
Loser two-test wogie, Riley made him retest to keep his license.
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Anonymous AKA fatboy two-test wogie, Riley's favorite whipping boy wrote:
In article
Cmd Buzz Corey wrote:
keyboard the "8"
key is adjacent to the "u" key, stupid, it looks like a simple
typo, unlike your ****ed up spelling of "slobbered" above.

If you weren't on that crack all the time you could hit the 'u' key
instead of the '8'.

Is your colostomy bag full again? I notice you didn't deny
having to wear one you senile useless old ****.

I don't wear one wogie, but if it did it would be full of you.
Notice you never denied wetting the bed. Poor two-test, wets the bed and
had to retest to keep his license.

Poor Butt Cornholer, he can't even do 5 wpm,
'
Put up or shut up two-test, name the time and frequency. We'll see if
you can even copy 2 wpm.

he sure can't pass
the Extra 20 wpm or he would have gotten his Extra Class when it
was 20 wpm if you can do 30 wpm as you "claim".

Really? I have no need for an extra class, I can work all he stations I
want with the Advanced. The only way you were able to make the Extra is
because it only requires the 5wpm test now, but you can't even copy 2wpm
now. BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Name the time and frequency two-test hide-behind-the-curtains fatboy and
we will see if you can copy any cw.