wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 17:30:27 -0400, "Lloyd Davies Slappa"
wrote:


and remains one no matter whose id is being stolen
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/

Get back to being led around by Lloyd Davies, you clueless retard. You have
to be the easiest play on the net.

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:47:14 -0400, "Dee Flint"
spake thusly:


"Opus-" wrote in message
.. .

[snip]

Sorry, but I can say for an absolute fact that your 're wrong. It had
kept me out of ham radio and I know exactly what kind of person that I
am. And before the obligatory "lazy" word is trotted out, I have to
work for the pay cheque that buys the radio, pays the rent for the
building that the radio is in and pays for the tower that is in the
back yard. I have to work extra to pay MORE for a place where I am
allowed a tower, as opposed to less expensive digs.

Honestly, I can't believe how some pro-coders look down on no-coders
with such contempt. I was once a member of a "live steam" model
railroad club. These were larger model steam trains that ran with real
steam instead of electric power. They could be run with either propane
or coal, depending on the individual. The guys who built their
locomotives from scratch NEVER looked down on the guys who bought
theirs from a classified ad. The guys burning coal did NOT call the
propane guys "lazy". We all enjoyed a fine hobby and club meetings
were always good fun and most informative. It was great for a
mechanic, like myself, to rub shoulders with experienced retired
machinists who built these locomotives. At one of our "open houses",
which were located outdoors at the club track, my daughter took her
first steps.

Isn't ham radio supposed to be like that? Is there no camaraderie?

Yes ham radio is supposed to be camaraderie. People are supposed to help
each other. The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders
appear to want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience, or
understanding of the requirements. In addition, most of us have experienced
people who said they could not learn code but upon questioning find that
they did not use a good training method and did not train correctly. Yet
when they decided they were tired of waiting did learn it and got their
upgrade. Then finding out how useful it was in ham pursuits were glad that
they had done it.

That does NOT justify the snot-nosed attitude.

So far of each of the reasons that people put forth as to why they can't
learn it have been disproven by the example of other people with the same
problem having gone ahead and done it. The 5wpm level is obtainable
although some of the problem do make faster speeds a problem (constant
tinnitus may be a severe problem at 20 wpm for example). My ex-OM had 70%
hearing loss in both ears and severe tinnitus. He passed the 5wpm. I know
people with dyslexia who have passed. The blind have passed. Even the deaf
have passed using flashing lights or vibrating pads.

Bravo for them. But that does not explain why some pro-coders are such
snot-rags.

Do you have competitions in your model railroading activity? If you enter
that competition, you all have to follow the published rules with no
exceptions. If it is a competition for the "homebrewers", then those who
don't do so can enjoy viewing them but they cannot enter into the
competition.

No competitions, just a bunch of guys who like live steam model
trains. The club did not exist for that.

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 21:39:24 GMT, Opus- spake thusly:

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 10:54:45 -0400, "Dee Flint"
spake thusly:


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. net...
Dee Flint wrote:
The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders appear to
want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience, or
understanding of the requirements.

Speaking as a ham licensed for 50+ years, I would say a
lot of the divisiveness stems from coded hams trying to
substitute Morse code skill for technical knowledge and
intelligence.

Ham#1: "I've got a PhD in RF Engineering."

Ham#2: "Who cares, I flunked out of high school but
I can do 40 wpm at Morse code. So there!"

Eliminate the code requirement and triple the difficulty
of the technical exams. Problem solved.

Nope, won't solve the problem.

The solution is to accept people as true hams that passed the exams existing
at the time they were licensed. PERIOD!!

The solution is to accept the people who are licensed, regardless of
weather or not you agree with the test method.

My dad got his drivers license back in 1943 with NO test at all! They
just asked him "Are you blind?" He said "No" and the response was
"That will be $1 please".

I got my license in 1978 and I had to take driver training and pass 2
tests. According to some of the pro-code logic here, I should walk up
to him and tell him that he is not a real driver and that I am better
at driving than him. That would go over like a lead balloon.

I forgot to mention that my dad has had a perfect driving record, not
one ticket in 63 years. [yes, I did ask him] As for me, I have been
known to fracture a traffic law or two. I ended up paying a hefty
price for that but my record is clean now.

So, you see, lack of testing did not make my dad a bad driver while
training and testing did not make me a good driver [at least not back
in my teen years]. But then, I am a mechanic and I can rebuild a
transmission in my back yard and you're not a real driver if you
can't.

Opus- wrote:
... that does not explain why some pro-coders are such snot-rags.

It is usually because they don't have a clue technically
and base their entire level of self esteem on skill in an
obsolete mode. Kicking out all the people with an IQ of
less than 110 out of amateur radio would probably solve
the whole problem.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Opus- wrote in
:

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 14:23:50 -0400, Dave spake
thusly:

What lie??

It's not a lie that code has kept good people out of ham radio.


Whaaaaaaaaa!

SC

"Slow Code" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Opus- wrote in
:

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 14:23:50 -0400, Dave spake
thusly:

What lie??

It's not a lie that code has kept good people out of ham radio.


Whaaaaaaaaa!

SC

It is obvious that it hasn't kept unpleasant people out of Amateur Radio..

Harold
KD5SAK

"Opus-" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 10:54:45 -0400, "Dee Flint"
spake thusly:


"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. net...
Dee Flint wrote:
The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders appear to
want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience, or
understanding of the requirements.

Speaking as a ham licensed for 50+ years, I would say a
lot of the divisiveness stems from coded hams trying to
substitute Morse code skill for technical knowledge and
intelligence.

Ham#1: "I've got a PhD in RF Engineering."

Ham#2: "Who cares, I flunked out of high school but
I can do 40 wpm at Morse code. So there!"

Eliminate the code requirement and triple the difficulty
of the technical exams. Problem solved.

Nope, won't solve the problem.

The solution is to accept people as true hams that passed the exams
existing
at the time they were licensed. PERIOD!!

The solution is to accept the people who are licensed, regardless of
weather or not you agree with the test method.


Which is exactly what I said.

My dad got his drivers license back in 1943 with NO test at all! They
just asked him "Are you blind?" He said "No" and the response was
"That will be $1 please".

I got my license in 1978 and I had to take driver training and pass 2
tests. According to some of the pro-code logic here, I should walk up
to him and tell him that he is not a real driver and that I am better
at driving than him. That would go over like a lead balloon.

Not according to my logic. He met the requirements of the time and you have
met the requirements of yours.

Dee

"Opus-" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:47:14 -0400, "Dee Flint"
spake thusly:


"Opus-" wrote in message
. ..

[snip]

Sorry, but I can say for an absolute fact that your 're wrong. It had
kept me out of ham radio and I know exactly what kind of person that I
am. And before the obligatory "lazy" word is trotted out, I have to
work for the pay cheque that buys the radio, pays the rent for the
building that the radio is in and pays for the tower that is in the
back yard. I have to work extra to pay MORE for a place where I am
allowed a tower, as opposed to less expensive digs.

Honestly, I can't believe how some pro-coders look down on no-coders
with such contempt. I was once a member of a "live steam" model
railroad club. These were larger model steam trains that ran with real
steam instead of electric power. They could be run with either propane
or coal, depending on the individual. The guys who built their
locomotives from scratch NEVER looked down on the guys who bought
theirs from a classified ad. The guys burning coal did NOT call the
propane guys "lazy". We all enjoyed a fine hobby and club meetings
were always good fun and most informative. It was great for a
mechanic, like myself, to rub shoulders with experienced retired
machinists who built these locomotives. At one of our "open houses",
which were located outdoors at the club track, my daughter took her
first steps.

Isn't ham radio supposed to be like that? Is there no camaraderie?

Yes ham radio is supposed to be camaraderie. People are supposed to help
each other. The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders
appear to want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience,
or
understanding of the requirements. In addition, most of us have
experienced
people who said they could not learn code but upon questioning find that
they did not use a good training method and did not train correctly. Yet
when they decided they were tired of waiting did learn it and got their
upgrade. Then finding out how useful it was in ham pursuits were glad
that
they had done it.

That does NOT justify the snot-nosed attitude.

No it doesn't but there are a lot of "better than thou" types in all areas
of human endeavor. Ignore them or you'll drive yourself nuts.


So far of each of the reasons that people put forth as to why they can't
learn it have been disproven by the example of other people with the same
problem having gone ahead and done it. The 5wpm level is obtainable
although some of the problem do make faster speeds a problem (constant
tinnitus may be a severe problem at 20 wpm for example). My ex-OM had 70%
hearing loss in both ears and severe tinnitus. He passed the 5wpm. I
know
people with dyslexia who have passed. The blind have passed. Even the
deaf
have passed using flashing lights or vibrating pads.

Bravo for them. But that does not explain why some pro-coders are such
snot-rags.


As I said, human nature has a lot of negative aspects no matter what the
activity. All one can do is ignore it and do their personal best.

Do you have competitions in your model railroading activity? If you enter
that competition, you all have to follow the published rules with no
exceptions. If it is a competition for the "homebrewers", then those who
don't do so can enjoy viewing them but they cannot enter into the
competition.

No competitions, just a bunch of guys who like live steam model
trains. The club did not exist for that.

Still my point is that when there are rules, one is obliged to follow them
whether they like them or not.

Dee, N8UZE

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Opus- wrote:
... that does not explain why some pro-coders are such snot-rags.

It is usually because they don't have a clue technically
and base their entire level of self esteem on skill in an
obsolete mode. Kicking out all the people with an IQ of
less than 110 out of amateur radio would probably solve
the whole problem.

Not hardly. A couple of the most obnoxious people I know rate as geniuses
on IQ tests. Brain power and social graces are independent attributes.

Dee, N8UZE

From: "Dee Flint" on Sun, Oct 22 2006 8:47am

"Opus-" wrote in message

[snip]

Sorry, but I can say for an absolute fact that your 're wrong. It had
kept me out of ham radio and I know exactly what kind of person that I
am. And before the obligatory "lazy" word is trotted out, I have to
work for the pay cheque that buys the radio, pays the rent for the
building that the radio is in and pays for the tower that is in the
back yard. I have to work extra to pay MORE for a place where I am
allowed a tower, as opposed to less expensive digs.

Honestly, I can't believe how some pro-coders look down on no-coders
with such contempt. I was once a member of a "live steam" model
railroad club. These were larger model steam trains that ran with real
steam instead of electric power. They could be run with either propane
or coal, depending on the individual. The guys who built their
locomotives from scratch NEVER looked down on the guys who bought
theirs from a classified ad. The guys burning coal did NOT call the
propane guys "lazy". We all enjoyed a fine hobby and club meetings
were always good fun and most informative. It was great for a
mechanic, like myself, to rub shoulders with experienced retired
machinists who built these locomotives. At one of our "open houses",
which were located outdoors at the club track, my daughter took her
first steps.

Isn't ham radio supposed to be like that? Is there no camaraderie?

Yes ham radio is supposed to be camaraderie. People are supposed to help
each other.

Then why don't they?

The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders
appear to want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience, or
understanding of the requirements.

Nonsense. Pro-coders do NOT have some "lock" on What The
Requirements Should Be. They never did, despite all the
pro-code propaganda drilled into your respective psyches.

It should be quite obvious that every other radio service
has either given up on using morse code for communications
or never considered it in the first place. Manual radio-
telegraphy has only a slight advantage in communications
with other amateurs using radiotelegraphy who do not speak
English.

Note: Nowhere in the "requirements" (Title 47 C.F.R. Part
97 for US radio amateurs) is it mandatory for US amateurs
to communicate with foreigners. NB: Non-English speakers
using International Morse Code are, essentially, required
to learn parts of English to understand the English
alphabet (difficult if their native language is syllabic
or has a different alphabet).

The ITU-R "requirements" (Radio Regulations) no longer
"require" administrations to test ALL their amateurs for
any license having below-30-MHz privileges. The major
(in population) nation administrations have dropped their
morse code testing or substitute other tests in lieu of
morse code. Since some of those nations do not have
English as a primary language, those will have some future
difficulty using that (supposed "universal language" of
morse code) for communications with USA radio amateurs.

In addition, most of us have experienced
people who said they could not learn code but upon questioning find that
they did not use a good training method and did not train correctly.

More overtly biased opinion...written AS IF morse code
were an "absolute requirement" when it is merely an old
regulatory hanger-on in USA amateur federal rules.

The REGULATION (not "the requirement") for US radio
amateurs is simply a man-made regulation which can be
un-man-made. It is not some God-given commandment of
radio. Indeed, all other US radio services operating
below 30 MHz do NOT use morse code radiotelegraphy.
Why should radio amateurs be held elevated to some
special significance?

Except for the older military-trained radiotelegraphers
in US amateur radio, all the tales told (by so-called
successful pro-coders) have them doing basic learning
then trying out on the amateur radio bands for greater
skill in radiotelegraphy.

The basic fallacy of pro-coder thinking is that "all"
have some innate ability to learn morse code. That has
been disproven as far back as World War II when the US
military began screening new recruits for the aptitude
to learn morse code. That fallacy has been disproven
by countless other tales of individuals who tried the
so-called "good training methods" and tried to "train
correctly" (even under strict supervision).

Yet
when they decided they were tired of waiting did learn it and got their
upgrade.

The "upgrade requirements" were lobbied for to emphasize
morse code radiotelegraphy skill. That is history. It
would have been difficult to overcome the lobbying of the
ARRL towards such "upgrades through morsemanship." Yet
there has been efforts by concerned radio amateurs (who
have been tested to the maximum telegraphic radtes) to
eliminate the morse code test entire. That is not some
strict USA effort since the ITU did change international
amateur Radio Regulations in 2003...under pressure from
the IARU. Your sentence is written with an obvious
pro-coder bias.

Then finding out how useful it was in ham pursuits were glad that
they had done it.

Another fallacy and another pro-coder bias statement. It is
obvious that many, many US radio amateurs were NOT favorites
of morse radiotelegraphy and never used it after they received
their first license.

So far of each of the reasons that people put forth as to why they can't
learn it have been disproven by the example of other people with the same
problem having gone ahead and done it.

Yet another fallacy and a repetition of the earlier fallacy
that all US human beings are somehow able to learn morse
code...provided they have some (mysterious) "attitude"
adjustment in favor of radiotelegraphy as an "absolute"
requirement in radio?

The 5wpm level is obtainable
although some of the problem do make faster speeds a problem (constant
tinnitus may be a severe problem at 20 wpm for example).

Then they should use "flashing lights or vibrating pads."

The reduction to 5 WPM equivalent word rate was an attempt
of the FCC to satisfy both the pro-morse-code-test citizens
and the (ever-growing) NO-code-test advocates. It satisfied
neither.

My ex-OM had 70%
hearing loss in both ears and severe tinnitus. He passed the 5wpm.

It would seem that one of you (perhaps both) at lost the
ability to understand the "I do" at your marriage ceremony?

Did your "EX" pass using flashing lights or vibrating pads?

I know people with dyslexia who have passed.

I knew people with terminal cancer who "passed." [just not
the code test]

I "know people" ranging from PhD aerospace gurus to never-
make-star-quality bimbo actresses and thousands of shades
of personal abilities in between. I know few dyslexics.

The blind have passed.

I am acquainted with several blind people through the
Braille Institute. None of them had any desire to learn
morse code. They were thankful enough to be able to get
around by themselves and be reasonably productive in life.

Even the deaf have passed using flashing lights or vibrating pads.

In the year that Ham Radio magazine sold out to CQ, I
interviewed 11 licensed radio amateurs preparing an article
for that magazine. ALL of them passed their code tests
for amateur radio licenses when they could still hear.
None of them "passed using flashing lights or vibrating
pads." All were male. One was a practicing dentist.

Do you have competitions in your model railroading activity? If you enter
that competition, you all have to follow the published rules with no
exceptions.

Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R. does NOT manadate that US radio
amateurs engage in "competition" radio activity.
Federal law (Communications Act of 1934 plus the Tele-
communications Act of 1996) requires ALL US radio
amateurs to follow its regulations. That is NO contest
nor a "competition" activity. It is merely the LAW.

As with all US federal agencies, the FCC does accept
citizen commentary to them regarding radio regulations.
The FCC responds to Petitions submitted by US citizens
in regards to those radio regulations. [however, not
with blinding speeds of decision in regards to amateur
radio] Nowhere does the FCC discriminate between those
are already licensed in amateur radio versus those not
licensed. FCC does not treat the group of already-
licensed as some kind of fraternal order of the already-
licensed to be listened to over and above all other
interested citizens.

The morse code test (for under-30-MHz operating privileges)
affects the non-licensed US citizens. It does NOT affect
those already legally licensed as radio amateurs...except
in the limited conditions of certain already-licensed
Technician classes. That code test does NOT legally
affect ANY other already-licensed US radio amateur. If
they say it does then they have some emotional disturbance
(not a legal problem nor a regulatory problem).

I know a few model railroaders. As far as I know none
are into "competitions" concerning their hobby. They do
it for the fun of model railroading. As a hobby, not
as a substitute for life...nor advancing the state of
the art in rail transport.

I know many more model builders and model aircraft flyers.
[I have been both] The Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA)
is a membership organization (about a quarter million
members in the USA) with a large rule set to follow in
flying model aircraft. That rule set is for both
competition flying and for safety; there is special
liability insurance for members of the AMA in regards to
that flying activity. There is no absolute requirement
to be an AMA member to enjoy model airplane flying nor is
there some federal test one must take to be one. It is a
hobby...yet the AMA has successfully petitioned for and
gotten many radio channels expressly for model remote
control. No code test nor license was required. You may
read about it in Part 95, Title 47 C.F.R. under Radio
Control Radio Service.

"Park flyers" are free to fly models, even to radio-control
them, all without being licensed by the FCC or as a member
of the Academy of Model Aeronautics. Add to that the R-C
cars and boats. There is a very large model hobby industry
existing in the USA to provide for such hobbyists. From
the size of that industry the number of modelers would
easily equal the number of USA radio amateurs...if not
exceeding it.

Your comments in regards to "competitiveness" do not apply
to US citizens seeking to change existing radio regulations
in the USA, any radio service.