Yet Another Code Rambling
James D. Warren (K7JDW)
on
December 17, 2003
View comments about this article!
This is just some more code related rambling, so if you have something important to do I would ignore this post.
Up front, I am a no-code Tech, but whether or not they keep or drop the code requirement for General/Extra does not matter to me in the least. If it is dropped, I will upgrade to General, but the chance that I would ever use the HF bands is very slight.
A short time back, I talked my son into getting a license (Tech), so we could work together on some antenna projects (my main interest). My wife decided that she should get a license, too, even though she will rarely use the radio, other than to talk to us. This post revolves mainly around her.
It surprised me when Lorraine said she wanted to get a license, because she has shown absolutely no interest in radio. I was happy, since it gave me a second person to "help" when I was testing my latest project. A local VEC was giving a 1-day license class, so I signed her up. She passed the test with flying colors. She said that the test was pretty easy, but she could not understand why a Tech in Utah should have to know what region Guam was in. -- I can't answer that one.
Now to the main point of this post: Even though Lorraine still has almost no interest in radio, she does have a desire to learn code. Apparently, it has always interested her, but she has never done anything about it. She says that the three of us should learn code this winter. If we do, we will probably upgrade to General licenses. I have reviewed the General question pool, and have absolutely no doubt that I can tutor her enough to pass the test. Extra is a bit more difficult, but the Tech and General tests are just a bit of a joke, in my humble opinion.
Once Lorraine is a General Class ham, maybe she will want to actually use that code that she is so interested in. This will be a case of a person with absolutely no interest in electronics or radio, but who does have an interest in code. She also seems to like to talk to folks just for the sake of conversation (total opposite from me, in this respect), so she fits the profile of a ham much better than I do. Will she be looked on as a "real" ham by those who look down on those of us who have no interest in code? Will she be more of a ham than some Tech that knows radio inside out, but has no interest in code?
I think it is great that she wants to learn code, and I might try to learn it with her. She would learn it whether it is a requirement for General, or not. I may have to pressure her to take the written test, but she will know code.
Now, I wonder what will come next. I worry that she might become interested in DX and contests, both of which I have no interest in at all. What if she drags my son's interest in that direction, too? Pretty soon they may be too tied up with CW that I won't have anyone to help me, again. And, what if they pass the General tests, and I don't? Will they look down on me and call me a CB'er, or even worse? (I do have a CB, and I used to repair them as a side job, so I guess she would be correct.)
Well that's enough rambling, its time to get back to work. (I bet you wish you had closed this when I suggested it in the first line.) -- jdw
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by OLDFART13 on November 25, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Apparently, you are afraid that she will be a better ham than you are. Learning the code makes one a more consummate ham operator.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by KX8N on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Why did the moderators even post this on eHam? Surely there's better stuff being submitted than this. Why go through it again, and not even in a different form?
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by K5DVW on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Sounds like you need to divorce her and go live under a bridge rather than face that possible humiliation!
Or, maybe if you stick around she'll let you use her fancy contesting rig to rag chew on HF while she's being the control operator.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by HAMFAN on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KX8N, You are right! And when you're right you're right. I submitted a better article than this and the editor I (I guess) doesn't want to print it. It's about making all the anonymous posters like oldfart13, curmudgeon and the other coward haters/flamers/trolls post under their callsigns.
Dude, you should just be happy that your wife and son are willing to become hams at all. Waste no time worrying about what other hams are interested in....even those of your own household. There's plenty enough things to do in ham radio to suit everyone's interest. It's all good.
Anxiety must be abandonded.
73 KE4ENX
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by W2BSA on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KE4ENX and KX8N, You're both right. There are several better articles here rather than more code ramblings.
To the editors, stop this code rambling. It does nothing but get arguments started about the value or lack of value of morse testing.
73,
Bill, W2BSA
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I suspect that economics is the real reason that these articles see the light of day.
The whole “Code Issue” has proven itself to be the all time “Controversy Champ”, and generates more “Hits” on the site than about anything else you could think of. (Except maybe a Free Beer offer!)
As we all know, “Hits” translate into advertising revenue.
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by OLDFART13 on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Those of you that think that eham should not post these articles here should not contribute their comments and ad fuel to the flame. If you don't like it don't read it and don't comment. Or better yet write your own article and have it published.
73, Bob
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by K9PO on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"She passed the test with flying colors. She said that the test was pretty easy, but she could not understand why a Tech in Utah should have to know what region Guam was in. -- I can't answer that one:
Because a tech can work DX and even earn things like DXCC. This can be doen with satellites. A tech license does not mean just FM and repeaters there is so much more out there on VHF that many people just are missing out on. Too me the more challengin radio is long haul point to point with VHF and higher bands. HF is not all the much of challange as the technical details are pretty wll known. The biggest HF challenge is having the realestate to put up good antennas and having the cash to pay for equipment. QRP HF, well that is a bigger challenge.
Scott
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by LNXAUTHOR on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>> the Tech and General tests are just a bit of a joke <<
this brings up a good point; there's no doubt that being able to pass the 35-question test for the Technician license isn't too difficult after some drilling on a computer or Web site...
but instead of focusing on the mechanics of licensing, the important thing to consider and understand is the *content* of the test questions and the question pool...
initially grasping the concepts of proper operating procedure, courtesy, numbering systems, band schemes, and safety rules is extremely important...
just as having a basic college degree doesn't automatically qualify a person for entry into an occupation as a mid-level manager, a salary for a house in the 'burbs and a high-end sports car (which some folks don't seem to understand nowadays), getting an amateur radio license doesn't make a person a good, knowledgable, or experienced operator...
an academic degree is a single, basic building block for an education or career, and an amateur radio license (whether Tech, General, or Extra) is just the starting point in the hobby...
getting an amateur radio license is "jumping off the blocks," and the start of a wonderful learning experience...
in other words, IMHO the learning starts AFTER getting the license, not the other way around...
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by K3UD on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I finally figured out why we get so many articles on this topic.
The CIA has determined that the best way to get Saddam to open up is to torture him by forcing him to either read all of the posts ever generated concerning the code issue or have then read to him 24/7 for 3 or 4 straight weeks.
Merry Christmas
Happy New Year
Or (more politically correct)
Happy Holidays
73
George
K3UD
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by KG5JJ on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I recently badgered my GF into answering trivia questions on the QRZ website, and was pleasantly surprised that after about 30 minutes of "fun" she showed much interest in obtaining a license.
For several years up to this point, she was intimidated by all my gear and its operation. Sometimes it just takes a simple gesture to have some "fun" to hook potential hams into getting licensed. I hope she follows through. Yes, she is fascinated more by the Morse instead of SSTV, RDFT, and other digital modes I use.
73 KG5JJ (Mike)
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC0SAB on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Our world is full of issues to be passionate about. Code is not one of them. When I read this article I approached it with the "glass is half full" attitude. It was exciting to hear about someone whose wife and son are now licensed and that their interests are developing in different directions. His questions about how they and others will think of him(without code) is a question many of us have struggled with concerning our choice of equipment, our code skills, etc. Everyone grapples with these questions in different areas of their life.
I read the article with a bit of levity. Perhaps he was serious, perhaps not.
The article, to me, really wasn't about code at all.
If you have passion or compassion to spare this season, channel it toward making a difference; not in licensing requirements, but in meeting needs.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by N2XE on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
James, you wrote:
"Will she be looked on as a "real" ham by those who look down on those of us who have no interest in code? Will she be more of a ham than some Tech that knows radio inside out, but has no interest in code? "
I firmly believe that when people write or say things it tells you much about them. Deep down inside, you feel and you know that Morse is an essential part of being a Ham. The question is--why do you feel that way?
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NI0C on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Concluding a very thoughtful response, LNXAUTHOR said: "the learning starts AFTER getting the license, not the other way around..."
The author of the article above seemed to be fearful that his wife and son may be interested in different aspects of ham radio than he is. I don't know why this would be a concern except that it could get expensive! Certainly you could each learn a lot from each other.
73 de Chuck NI0C
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>>Will she be looked on as a "real" ham by those who look down on those of us who have no interest in code? Will she be more of a ham than some Tech that knows radio inside out, but has no interest in code?<<<<
Apparently you are "generalizing."
Your statement indicates you feel people may "look down on you" because of your lack of interest in CW.
This seems to be a very common stereotypical view in the Amateur Radio community today. It is noteworthy to indicate that life is simply not this black and white in the real world of Amateur Radio in 2003. CW proficiency neither makes you a bad or good Amateur Radio operator in itself.
The facts are that there are many facets of Amateur Radio to experience. For example, while an individual may be proficient at sending and receiving CW, they might not know a darn thing about satellite or other forms of digital communications.
Contrary to popular belief, It is not a particular license class issued by the FCC that necessarily reflects a person's personal level of expertise they have acquired involving Amateur Radio communications.
A good Amateur Radio operator is not determined by their CW proficiency alone. It is rather the quality of combined learning experiences and technical expetise and knowledge that is acquired over a period of time that more accurately determines a persons level of operating skill.
73
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by N3TTN on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K7JDW wrote: "Will she be looked on as a "real" ham by those who look down on those of us who have no interest in code?"
Possibly. I would not worry too much about the opinion of a few blowhards, who will have no practical effect on your operating, or enjoyment of amateur radio. Solution? Ignore them...it eats at them like acid.
K7JDW also wrote: "Will she be more of a ham than some Tech that knows radio inside out, but has no interest in code?"
I doubt it, especially when the conversation turns to "Effective Radiated Power", "Intermediate Frequencies", "balanced/unbalanced feed lines", "GaAsFET's", and other mundane "radio" stuff.
73, N3TTN
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by W7CO on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It is funny how people react to articles written on this forum. In my case I focused on the idea that your wife went out and got her ticket. No matter what the reason. In my case I gently worked on my spouse for over 25 years before she finally went out and took the test this spring. Of course she passed with flying colors and is now holds a Tech license.
Next I decided to fix her up with a 2 meter radio in her van. I got it all installed and told her it was ready to go. Her answer: "Look buster I said I would take the test. I never said I would pass it and I never said I would talk on the radio." So there it stands. I hope it doesn't take another 25 years to get active. I probably don't have them. Women, who can understand them.
Ok all you critics, come on I can take it.
Mike W7CO
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by W7WIK on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
It's a hobby. why are you so concerned about where your wife goes in the hobby? Yes, code will probably make her a better operator. Any radio technician can fix a radio... a well rounded operator will probably know the code.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by RobertKoernerExAE7G on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
“If it is dropped, I will upgrade to General, but the chance that I would ever use the HF bands is very slight.”
That is unfortunate. You might have fun building HF antennas. Some people become Extras, just for the challenge of passing the test.
When I turn my rig on, I never worry if someone considers me to be a “real” ham.
That never occurred to me when I was a Novice either.
I didn’t become a ham to please others.
Besides, that was one of the advantages of being a Novice, we were restricted to Novice sub bands, and nobody expected us to be anything other than novices. It was a beginning ticket that lead to all the other tickets. Dumb Novice was quite true!
Wherever you, your XYL, and son wind up within ham radio, I hope you derive years of enjoyment.
73
Bob, headed thru my third sunspot cycle.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by W5EEX on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Interesting post....my first reaction is....be happy with what you have.....a kid and a wife both interested in some aspect of ham radio. Even better if she likes code...I am a CW op too....always good to see newcomers to talk to. I have a wife and 4 sons....none of them even slightly interested in the hobby....so consider yourself lucky and enjoy what you have.
73,
W5EEX
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KG4RUL on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHH!!!!!!
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by K3NDE on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Can't believe you posted this and rambled on with such non-sense.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NE1RD on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
On December 17, 2003 "LNXAUTHOR" said:
"... in other words, IMHO the learning starts AFTER getting the license,
not the other way around..."
This is an interesting view. If one cannot learn anything until
licensed it would follow that testing people on their knowledge
before getting a license would be nonsensical. After all, if
one cannot learn before license issuance then there would be
nothing to test. Is that really your position?
On December 17, 2003 James D. Warren (K7JDW)
"Will she be more of a ham than some Tech that knows radio inside out,
but has no interest in code?"
prompting by "OLDFART13" to reply:
"Apparently, you are afraid that she will be a better ham than you are."
Sir, I think you missed the point here. This was clearly a rhetorical
question, asked not for the information but to produce an effect, as
"who cares?" for "nobody cares". [Definition courtesy of the Oxford
English Dictionary.]
I believe his point was quite the opposite: that a solid knowledge
of radio theory and practical electronics experience would likely
constitute "more of a ham". A more careful reading may have
avoided this miscomprehension.
On December 17, 2003 "NI0C" wrote:
"The author of the article above seemed to be fearful that his wife and son
may be interested in different aspects of ham radio than he is.
I don't know why this would be a concern except that it could get expensive!"
Fearful? I didn't read anything fearful here. The original
poster was just using a bit of IRONY ("expression of one's
meaning by language opposite or different in tendency..."--
thanks again OED). Is he really "afraid" he won't have anybody
to help? Is he really insecure that this hobby might become
something that can be shared between his son and his wife.
Is he really "afraid" that he'll be left behind? Of course
not. From the original post:
"Now, I wonder what will come next. I worry that she might
become interested in DX and contests, both of which I have
no interest in at all. What if she drags my son's interest
in that direction, too? Pretty soon they may be too tied up
with CW that I won't have anyone to help me, again. And,
what if they pass the General tests, and I don't? Will they
look down on me and call me a CB'er, or even worse? (I do
have a CB, and I used to repair them as a side job, so I
guess she would be correct.)"
And some earlier text:
"I have reviewed the General question pool, and have
absolutely no doubt that I can tutor her enough to pass the
test. Extra is a bit more difficult, but the Tech and
General tests are just a bit of a joke, in my humble opinion."
The justoposition of the notions that he could tutor his
wife so she could pass (an easy test) and he could not
himself pass that test later is, of course, absurd.
=-=-=
In next week's lesson, we will discuss the nihilistic
views of Winnie the Pooh, Dadaism's affect on modern
electronic circuit design, and Nietzschanism: specifically
the interaction of man and superman regarding the
temptation and resistance to temptation for writing
stupid, long-winded, and pointless eHam postings.
I know I need it. :-)
Philosophically and pointlessly yours,
-- Scott (NE1RD)
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by N6AJR on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
go to G4FON.co.uk, down load his software to learn code the easy way, and this all be comes moot.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2003 on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
OLDFART13 is an embarrassment to amateur radio, even an embarrassment to the Internet.
Ted
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by OLDFART13 on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Amateur2003 is typical of the type of person who has nothing constructive to say; therefore, has to make personal attacks towards individuals. Please go back and read my post on this forum and attack them but don't make general and useless comments like you did.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2003 on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>don't make general and useless comments like you did<<
Hey Fartman, I'll let you down easy friend, everyone thinks you are "useless". To these discussions, to amateur radio and lastly, to society. The only person that finds any "value" in your posts is you.
You are a bitter little old man, or an excuse for a man but go ahead and troll on brother.
Ted
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Antique Mode Praddlling
|
|
|
by NE1Z on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Great, she wants to learn code!
Who cares? Why must we continue to cling to this antique? We are behind technology & likely to stay there until the service is disbanded, at this!
I hope the code test is replaced with a spelling, grammer & sentence structure test.
That will surely keep all the trash out of this "professional-amateur" hobby!
You are all legends in your own minds!
NE1Z/Bill
|
| |
|
Try Code Quick 2000
|
|
|
by ADAM12 on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This article is as interesting as any other usually posted here so quit complaining; you're not adding anything of worth.
To the author (and anyone else prepared to listen), I would suggest checking out Code Quick 2000 software to learn morse code. It's not cheap, but I think it's the best out there and it comes with a 90 day money back guarantee. Check out the page after page of glowing testimonials (mine is one of them).
http://www.cq2k.com
I'm not in any way connected to these people, 'just think it's a fantastic way to learn the code.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NI0C on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To Scott (NE1RD):
I find it amusing that, in a single posting, you take me to task for taking K7JDW literally while you insist on taking LNXAUTHOR literally.
Long before I was first licensed, people referred to the license as a "ticket." It's a starting point, a ticket to a hobby that can provide decades of learning as well as enjoyment and service. Much of that learning is acquired by experience in one's activities as an amateur-- after one is licensed. That's how I interpreted LNXAUTHOR.
73 de Chuck NI0C
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NE1RD on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Dear NI0C:
Actually, I was just having too much fun. I probably should
have cut your part out (since I didn't think you bought into
all that) but I was on a roll. I think we've both set the record
straight here.
Thanks for my much-due prompting without a personal
attack. Sorry again for mixing you up with the rest.
-- Scott (NE1RD)
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by K0RGR on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Boy, your son and your wife both got ham tickets! Three hams in the family is like a trifecta!
As a word of encouragement to your wife, some of our best CW ops are and have been women. The editor of Worldradio magazine is also the president of FISTS, I believe. She's a good writer, too.
My advice - study with your wife and get the General. Then specialize in some aspect of HF that resembles VHF, like 10 or 12 meters. Try scaling up your VHF/UHF antenna designs to work on these bands. Maybe someday, you will find a way that the two of you can use your mutual hobby - like volunteering to work with the Red Cross disaster teams.
Don't be surprised if the other members of your clan develop their own interests in the hobby. My dad was an HF DXer and absolutely could not understand what I found interesting about VHF. My brothers are DXers and can't be talked into having a ragchew on the air.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NI0C on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Scott (NE1RD):
No problem. Thanks for your reply. You do seem to have a way with words (unlike KG4RUL -- see his posting above).
73 de Chuck
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NOLICENSEASOFYET on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
First and for most, I think that it is wonderful that your wife and your son are interested in your hobby. I read your article and thought you were more trying to bring up that this code, no code and the way "real hams" look down on, well about everyone that isn't them. Thats what I got from what you said. I am scheduled to take the test and want very much to extend my license to extra. I am somewhat interested in code and I would imagine that someday I might decide to learn it.(If I chose to) But I am getting to the point that I don't want to learn it because the pro-code people want to belittle anyone that has a different opinion that they do. Its pathetic, certain responders on here, and everyone knows who you are, are like a stupid dog that you can fake out by pretending to throw something. I believe this article was written by someone that sits back and laughs at the stupidity of the responses by the people that want to bash everyone, anyone that they can because they have ananimity, (and if thats spelled wrong, TS) its ridiculous beyond discription. And no wonder there are some people that enter articles that have reference to code/no code. Most likely when they are bored and want to watch stupid dogs chase ghost sticks that are not even there. And without a doubt, these very people are sitting behind their computers reading this right now, telling themselves how much smarter and how much a better "operator" they are than me. Soooo, carry on with your ignorance, Since they canceled Benny Hill, I haven't gotten to watch alot of old men acting like idiots.
Flame on.....
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by TECH2003 on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I am amazed that these Stupid Old Farts want to hold on to the dying code. It is soon to be eliminated so there is no need to learn it. It's not used anymore and it doesn't serve any purpose, kind of like the old farts.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by W3DCG on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hey, my wife is interested in CW too. She cannot stand the sound of SSB unless it is perfectly tuned in, and then most of that is all a big humoungous yawn to her. She gets that way with any Tone less than 9, also.
She passed her Tech, just because she was at the hamfest and it was a supposedly a challenge...she never studied, except to ask me questions while I prepared for General. I studied both study guides. I think she did study about two hours before the hamfest.
Lately she is simply busy working, and making sure the kids do their homework. This constant presence and pressure she places on them to do more than is required by the school, takes up all her time, full time employment plus full time and then some Mothering.
I asked her opinion in the code debate. Naturally her response was, it should be back where it once was, 5/13/20, and if she were really interested in ham radio she would want it no other way.
But then, she does use her voice in a professional capacity, as well as her mind. She does IVR recordings, "scripts" we call them. She also programs call screening algorithms for call-center operators to follow.
She has been extremely frustrated with the elementary school next door. Teachers who don't teach. They'd rather do their job as little as possible. In fact it shows in many who practice a nearly complete lack of proper grammar skills, there by perpetuating it in the next generation. This attitude of do the absolute least and gimme by paycheck cuz i is a teacha, Welfare State mentality.
CW is simply a tradition for HF entry. At times, I wonder- geez, at 5wpm, perhaps the value of it is meaningless indeed.
Yes there are many communicator based ham radio operators who enjoy communicating, and simply enjoy CW, like those who enjoy typing and or speaking into a microphone. Then there are the very technical types. For them all the joy is making something that actually works. Theres a few who excel in both arenas. It is all about the journey.
Deleting CW requirements is simply, deleting one historically significant, tradition, that was once vital to the identity of HF. Once could say, that if a ham did HF, they knew Morse. How many can say they know that? For now in the US, at least they know it on a rudimentary if non practical level.
From my own experience, and I do occasionally enjoy phone these days- it is likely that many will miss out on this traditional and still extremely widely used form of communication as requirements on a global scale have been omitted. Were it not required I likely would have simply stayed on phone. Once would be hard pressed to find any value to CW unless beyond the 13 wpm receive level.
Oh moan, to reitereate, 20 years ago, CW was just as difficult to learn as it is now, and 20wpm never stopped those who really wanted that last big ticket, whether or not they liked CW or thought they did not. However, it was a major accomplishment, regardless of one's interest in the hobby. Even if it was something from which to never again return, the Extra could say they did it. And, they surely did.
In that day, having made Extra was a greater accomplishment than it is now. That is all. Nothing more, but certainly nothing less.
It would be incorrect to assume that because one is approaching 60 years of age and passed their Extra as a teenager or close- is lost in some thickness of stubborn. A ham radio operator back then, was always interested in the latest technology had to offer.
Why should that have changed because one is now approaching 60? There are Old Timers a plenty, who embrace technology. The ham type by nature, has generally always been the type who gravitates towards the latest and greatest gagetry.
What is so wrong about having to learn code, while maximizing the benefits of digital within the realms of radio?
Effort. It seems, that requiring CW requires too much effort. Lower the standard and next get rid of it altogether.
Surely the philosophy we wish to teach our children.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by WA2DTW on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I hope you all learn code. It is well worth the time and effort, and will enhance your enjoyment of radio.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W3DCG said it all,
"It is all about the journey."
Technology changes... So do we...
This could be similarly described as we should all know how to ride horses, to qualify for a modern day drivers license.
There is nothing wrong with knowing how to ride a horse. In fact, it takes great skill to master.
While I continue to enjoy CW as a mode of operation, Most modern day hams (yes, including us old farts)have come to the reality that we have done things in the past that are no longer done in the spirit of advancing ourselves or the hobby in a modern day society.
I think CW is a great language to learn, and anyone that has taken the time to learn CW, are certainly a unique class of individual. Like the early radio pioneers, today's CW op's are well deserving of earned and distinctive recognition indeed.
They may remove CW as a requirement, but you can never remove a persons past experiences in the life long journey of Amateur Radio.
73
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by CODEBASHER on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
After I got my ticket, my wife and kids were intrested in listing to the radio, but after the "Newness" wore off, and the terrible things that were said here towards the no-code hams they decided not to get involved with such people. I tried to tell them that not all hams talk this way. But the damage was aready done. This is why I had gotten bitter towards Generals and Extras that were know-code. I will never try again to learn the code. You can thank all those who, we will say, commented less flateringly towards the no-coders. I enjoy 50mhz and up. so I'm here forever! HF is for demented old fools to bash the no-code folks, and bragg about talking to some one far away. If they do away with the CW requirement, watch out here I come!
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KG4PFO on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Codebasher.........Im with you on that one!!
Im waiting in the shadows......know "no" code
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8JZO on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I hate to say it . . . but I too will wait out the dropping of the code. I've tried learning, and for some reason it just doesn't sink in. That's why code doesn't interest me. Besides, have you heard some (not all) of the hams already on HF whom do know the code? And they call us CB'ers . . .
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by LNXAUTHOR on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
to CODEBASHER, KG4PFO, KC8JZO:
- i'm sorry that you either do not have the desire to learn CW or to pursue upgrading your license due to the 5WPM requirement...
- in my case, i too found it difficult, but in hindsight, not really *that* difficult to learn CW... it took about four weeks of practice in two 15-minute sessions (of three 5-minute sessions) per day every other day during that time...
- totalling up the time to invest: about 15 days X 30 minutes, or about 7.5 hours spread over a month...
- i took the Element 1 test before taking the Element 3 exam, which was just a tad harder than the Element 2 exam...
- i saved my practice pages in a notebook, and it is interesting to look back on the pages now... after starting off, i quickly got up to recognizing about 10 characters...
- you have to learn 43 characters for the FCC requirement... the 'magic' started to happen when words started to appear on the page...
- i used an MFJ-418, which allowed me to practice anywhere, anytime... you can find these on ebay and elsewhere in the 'used' equipment lists on various ham dealer Web sites...
- the actual test is not that difficult! all you have to do is get 25 characters in a row correct on the exam! this is easier to do than one might think...
- but if you think that learning CW and passing the Element 1 exam is difficult, wait until you take the Element 4 exam... i found that exam to be *far* more difficult (but not insurmountable)...
- give it a try and don't be discouraged... hey, i'm an idiot, and if i can do it, ANYONE can!
:-)
- the result is certainly worth the effort!
- hope to hear you on HF!
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by RFSOAKED on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I would have loved the chance to wait it out for code to be dropped, but then i'm a 13wpm General so i would have been waiting a while.
It took me 7 1/2 years to learn the code. Yep, you read that right, 7.5 years. I know what your thinking, thats crazy. Well its true though. I would learn some of the letters, than something in life would push it to the back burner till the next winter thinking i would have time to spend on it. The next winter would come and i would have to re-learn the past letters and try to work in some new ones. Finally at the 7.5 year mark i worked on the code a full week until i was so sick of it that i made myself swear that i would never even tune the CW portions of the band for at least another 7.5 years.
Well, i failed the test twice, so it was on to the next hamfest testing session within driving distance later that summer. I spent nearly two weeks of listening to that crap called CW, on the way to work, on the way home, after supper when the kids went to bed, over and over for nearly two weeks. I thought i would never get the sound of it out of my head, i felt like i was on the virge of becoming insane every time something beeped and i screamed "NO MORE!"
I went to the testing session, passed the test on the second try, and never looked back. I had already passed the written at the previous testing session. So the fourth time was the charm, but i really do despise code now. I think it has to do with being forced into something that i never desired to use in the first place. I used code a few times for meteor scatter and stuff like that, its worth digging into a bit more, but i dont have the audio turned up when doing so. That radio feeds the sound card, and i watch the waterfall display and the s-meter, but i don't listen to it anymore. I know some pro-codes may be looking at my post as odd by now, but i really can not stand the sound of it anymore after forcing myself to learn it.
Its kind of like growing up, you have that one favorite food that your parents should always provide at meal time, for me it was macaroni and cheese, god i loved that when i was a kid. But i ate it all the time as a child, and now i just cant stand to eat it, just the mere site of it makes me lose my appetite. So, learn code if you must upgrade now, if your a bit more patient just skip the insanity and wait for the requirement to be removed, there seems to be thousands and thousands of other no-code's to keep you company on 50MHz and up until that happens. I enjoy 6m SSB, so i talk to the Tech's all the time, so far i haven't met a bad one yet.
And in response to one other poster, take a look at any QST printed, find the enforcement issues column, and read about yet another General or Extra that has been behaving like a jackass on the air. Funny, cause i only recall a couple bad Tech's listed there, but plenty of HF operators over the years, obviously code is not a filter, so dont use that old excuse. Well, my whip is worn out, someone put a bullet in this dead horse and send it to the glue factory. I've had my word, flame if you want, i really dont care. I don't subscribe to any topics, i just post once and move on now.
73, (AHHHHH, i can almost hear that racket)
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2003 on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't care what any of the so called "expert hams" think. I'm having fun and loving life. Poor FARTMAN don't know what I'm talking about but a lot of you do. I'll be honest with you all, I'm 58 years old and have done nothing but drive a truck for 30 years and talk on CB, no technical skills at all. That 35 question test nearly made my head explode and I read a book to take it. I didn't memorize anything, I'm ain't that sharp anymore. Learn the code??? Shoot! Forget it.
I used to post with my call and had a picture of me with a real rig, my old truck on my profile. I'm black and you should have seen all the "anonymous" emails some of these brave old code farts sent on public library commputers or fake names. I was told one time that maybe if I wasn't so stupid and if I tried doing morse code on jungle drums I might be able to learn it. Pretty typical of these good ole boys.
Happy Holidays Everyone, even you FARTMAN, I love ya' bro!
Ted
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2003 on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W5UX I love you too baby. You give me more credit than I deserve, it took me almost two months to learn this stuff.
HO! HO!
Ted
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To NOLICENSEASOFYET;
I love the Benny Hill analogy! I have been trying for months to come up with a really apt summary of this whole thing, and you did it! Good!!!
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To AMATEUR2003;
In the past, I have made a few negative comments about “Anonymous Posters”, but I can certainly understand your position.
Not everyone on the Internet “Lives to Flame”!
Have a Very Merry Christmas, and a Prosperous New Year!
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NOLICENSEASOFYET on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I want to rattle my two cents around again. I will only mention Benny Hill towards the end of my comments.
I think that the code is wonderful, for those people who want to participate in it of their own free will. This being said, I believe that this is no more than someone who can touch their nose with the tip of their tongue thinking others are lazy and ignorant for not wanting to or not caring to try.
I find myself reading literature on this hobby and nearly always go further than I need to to learn for only test purposes. I am finding all the aspects very interesting and am considering picking up a few college classes in electronics to further my interest. Thats the way I want to enjoy this wonderful hobby. Others may want to enjoy 2 meter, or still others may want to search out the enjoyment of high frequency exploration. Each person enjoying their hobby (please take special note to "their") in the way that they find it most pleasing. Gentlemen, ladies and flamers.... This is what this hobby is suppose to be. Again, code is a wonderful art, a experience to be enjoyed by many.....of their own free will. You can't force feed new potential operators morse code. No more than you can force someone who just wants to draw....to be an artist. If you try to force it....they will eventually hate even drawing.
Now to the people out their that want their hobby to flurish, to grow and develope with time in a respectable way. Respect others, their ideas, their desires to participate in the ham radio hobby the way they want to...the way they desire. Maybe in time...with encouragement, they will obtain a desire to learn and participate in morse code and your love for the hobby will stay alive. But if you try to force feed people, or shame them into learning it, the inevitable will happen and it will become a faint DX from the past. People may remember the bitter old ham operators that killed morse more....than the debate over code/no code.
I remember watching Benny Hill.... It was hilarious. But after watching it over time...it seemed to be alot of old farts....acting stupid and ignorant. After awhile I changed the channel. Today the Benny Hill Show would probably be alittle too racy for today standards unless aired on cable or dish tv. Seems that people are evolving, wanting something better. Although I liked watching Benny, if you tryed to force me to watch it, and shamed me for not wanting to. Most likely I would hate and dispise it. So if you want your morse code to remain a "wanted" part of ham, heck even a desired and valued element. Maybe you should consider the method in which you are trying to keep it alive. Shame and discontent only bred hate and discontent. Be an encouragement to new hams to learn the code, not a nazi enforcer and maybe you will find that others will embrace morse from the simple desire to do so.
73
or 73ssssssssssssssssss
see I can do it either way, but if you tell me its wrong and try to shame me.....bet your bottom dollar I will do it again.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2OO3 on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I dont want to learn the code. It is too hard for me. I don't want to do all that work for a general license, but once code is eliminate then I will upgrade. I studied for one day to get my tech license.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>I know some pro-codes may be looking at my post as odd by now, but i really can not stand the sound of it anymore after forcing myself to learn it.<<<
RFSOAKED,
Just because there are those of us that know code, doesn't mean we have to like it.
I don't know if your a General or Extra, it doesn't really matter. The point here is simply that there are people that enjoy CW, and there are those that don't.
I think it is rather odd that when a person states that they don't like CW that they are automatically categorized as a "No Coder."
Similarly when an individual indicates that they know CW, it is automatically assumed that they are "Pro Coder."
"No coder" = Doesn't know any CW
"Pro coder" = Sends CW at 60wpm
Why the heck is everyone so darn black and white on this issue? Can a person that knows CW just choose to side with the "No Code" side of the fence as a licensing requirement?
It is funny to hear people telling me to "learn CW,it's easy..blah blah blah" Well I got a newsflash for them. I already know CW, I have known CW since I was 13 years old. But hey thanks for your gracious offers to teach us so called "No Coders" some lessons.
Ted described hate mail he received because of his similar "No Code" stance on this matter. I too have received similar emails.
The email I received indicated that "I should stop being a lazy "technician" sloth and learn Morse code" well, I can only imagine the look on his face when I replied that I already know Morse code!
The dumbass must have automatically assumed that just because I have a newly issued U.S. callsign, that I fell off the proverbial turnip truck and knew nothing about Amateur Radio. Yes, it's true, some of us actually move here from other countries and the F.C.C. doesn't transfer foreign radio station licenses any more than the department of motor vehicles transfers drivers licenses.
Interesting story: After driving for over 25 years and coming to the U.S., I had to get a U.S. drivers license. They asked me if I ever had a drivers license before and I replied "yes." They asked me what state it was issued, and I replied, "It was not a U.S. drivers license."
They quickly signed me up to do a written test, and a road test was to follow another day.
So I proceeded to "drive home" from the DMV and studied to do a driving test to get a "new" U.S. drivers license. This is the same road test that applies to a teenager that has never had a drivers license before.
Now for the really crazy part, I was the only person that showed up at the DMV that morning actually driving my car to my actual driving test!!??
Needless to say, DMV driving instructors appeared a little bit confused that day. They later realized that It was perfectly legal for me to drive to the DMV driving test using my valid "out of country" drivers license!!?? ...Now that's what I call a bureaucracy.
Similarly, this is not a question of anyone's unwillingness to learn CW. As RFSOAKED explained, it is more about what you might have already learned and may not choose to repeat.
73 - Happy Holidays
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2003 on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Oh I just love it :-)
I must have got on some stupid racist bigot's nerves since he hijacked my screen name with the OO's. Real good, the same type of individual who still wants me at the back of the bus I'm sure. You "pro-coders" have someone you can be proud of for sure. I'll bet it was FARTMAN but I still have nothing but love for you baby.
Ted
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2003 on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Kent Carroll, KB9YZL I read your good words too and I do realize it's not everyone who likes CW that talks nasty and insults everyone. I get just as bad throwing my words around too sometimes. Hey, I'm still having a blast with my new radios though. It's the only hobby I can really get into with my health problems. Doc and family don't even want me by myself anymore without a cell phone.
Ted
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NOLICENSEASOFYET on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hey Ted,
If they don't want you on the bus, we can just get off and walk. Don't have any time for people and their prejudices.
73
Mark
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by K4CMD on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
All you folks who say you "don't have time" for this or scream "ARRGHHHHH" about the topic -- are you the same folks who come in and egg on repeater jammers and talk back to the idiots on 80 meters at night? No one's forcing you to read everything on every forum!
Acquire a pulse, I say!
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by K4CMD on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Seriously ... (if that can be done at this point) ...
Good article, James.
I didn't realize one real benefit of code until about 2-1/2 years ago when my son was born. I live in a two-story house (er, trailer? LOL) and my "shack" is the spare bedroom that shares a wall with my son's room. I quickly learned that my late-night ragchewing was going to have to undergo some big modifications if I didn't want to wake up the baby every few minutes. I have learned that when grabbing the mike isn't an option, for the reasons stated above, often pounding on the keyboard of my rather noisy Compaq Presario isn't an option either. However, donning a pair of headphones and the relatively silent paddles of my Bencher allows me to QSO into the wee hours of the morning with nary a peep to bother the new member of the family.
I remember a photo and caption in a book from the 1950s, "How to Be a Ham" by Robert Herzberg (I think that was his name), that showed a ham with a modest station in the corner of his family room. The caption read that he was able to pound brass while wearing headphones and work the world while his family was in the same room watching TV. When I read that as a teenager, I didn't understand how aptly that message would apply to me half a century later!
73,
Meade K4CMD
P.S. I have a dictionary, but as a retired newspaper reporter and professional writer, I don't pull it off the shelf very often. Thanks for recognizing my lingual superiority ...
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KE4ZHN on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Isnt this horse dead yet? Next thing you know BPL will be dragged into it and then we`ll have 2 horses to beat on some more. Quick! Someone call the ASPCA and stop this cruelty!
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I would now like to comment on BPL...
blah blah blah, blah ...blah ..blah.... blah blah blah.blah ... blah......blah.....blah.....
The end
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by N3TTN on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
What a hoot!! Where's OLDFART13 when you need him??
73, and happy holidays to all!
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KE4ZHN on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Poor horsey.....Giddyup ole Paint! Poor thing is just lying there in a pool of blood, beaten and battered with huge welts all over his body. Oh please, someone stop this horrific scene.....LOL
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KI4CYB on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Nice story, And having several people in one house hold liking Amateur radio is also real nice! Congrats...
I was interested in HF but hesitated and was against
learning CW... Im not the type to wait around for something that might not occur (like dropping CW requirement), Not wanting to wait around, I studied and passed element 1&3.
Next will be my Extra, maybe i will be ready by Jan...
73,
Joe
KI4CYB/AG
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AC5KD on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
it would be nice to see the arguments end. one way to do it to satisfy everyone, as if the world is now having to satisfy everyone nowadays, is grant the no-coders the general spectrum, and those who pass code get to go to the advanced and extra spectrum. then everyone will be happy, well, should be anyway. the no coders and coders get their own spectrum in hf. the only ones who would whine and argue after that are the ones who want the whole package for nothing. somehow or another i fear that that would actually happen though.
i passed my extra when it was 20 wpm, i'm happy about it, its my achievement to be proud of. i just wish some folks would put half as much effort into studying code as they do arguing about eliminating it.
ac5kd
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NN6EE on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I our most humble opinion, since everyone has one out here, I'm all for LEAVING the Code-Testing element in for all HF privileges for no other reason than it BUGs the Hell outta the "Wanna-BEs"!!!
It really is INCREDIBLE that they're SO lazy as to not want to learn it, especially since it's STILL one of the most-used modes of Amateur Radio communications in the World!!!
No-Code/No HF Privileges!!!
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2003 on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>It really is INCREDIBLE that they're SO lazy<<
I think some of you all got all this hate built up in you because you spent TOO much time alone in a shack with some old man "elmering" you. I feel for you. All those bad memories and emotions trapped inside you making you into the hateful person you are. What'd those old men do to you boys?
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by WB8NUT on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
When are these code postings ever going to stop? I am starting to really hate code and wish it had never been part of a ham exam - ever - this code garbage is getting so old.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NOLICENSEASOFYET on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Mr. Davis,
Are you saying that anyone that doesn't care to use or learn the morse code is lazy? That baffles the mind to think that anyone that wants to participate in amatuer radio, but doesn't want to practice CW is lazy. I think that is very narrow thinking. I have worked all my life. I have children and participate in alot of their activities. I helped my neighbor cut down five trees the other day just because he was a neighbor. But I am lazy because I don't think that the Element one and element three should be included on the test to become am amatuer radio operator. I have spent many nights reading about radio. Going over literature and text books that involve ham radio. Pretty much reading anything that involves obtaining more knowledge about the ham hobby. But....because I don't think that (and apparently the FCC, the United States Military, all other foreign governments, and a good deal of the American Ham operators.) Don't think that morse code is a "language" that is critical to radio communication. We.......are all lazy. Are you the type to hollow out a pumpkin and put it on your head and then tell everyone else they should do it, and it they don't......their lazy.
I really don't think that this is a matter of anyone thinking that morse is a valued element in radio. I think that this is a ...." I did it and now I am better than anyone that hasn't done it." Do you realize that no one will keep you from communicating in morse code. It won't be outlawed. It will, and note that I said will, because from everything that I have read, it will be discontinued in the test elements required for a ticket. Its going to happen.
Now I respect your desire to right to practice in CW. I respect that at current date, the FCC requires a ham operator to obtain the knowledge of morse to know five words per minute to get a tech. And so on 13 wpm to get a general. How many people do you think, after that test, NEVER-EVER, practice morse.
I don't hate morse code, I think that its wonderful. And most likely someday, after many years of enjoying ham radio as a hobby. I may learn and even practice morse. But when I want, not when some childish bully calls me names like wanta be.
I watched a show with my children the other day. I can't remember what it was. But it was about some cartoon character painting his nose a different color. And then downgrading everyone that didn't have the same. Then when everyone painted his nose the same, he just changed the color and continued to do the same. This went on and on, until the moral of the story came out in the end. Just do what you like and don't be intimidated or shamed into doing things you don't. When the Federal Communications Commision removes the requirement for morse from testing, it will just be the same, and it will give you complaining bunch of idiots the right to claim you were hams when morse was a requirement. It will never end. Makes me wonder about the misery the people in your life must be living with.....if you go around being better than them because they aren't ..........just like you.
I wish I wish..... you know this is a wonderful hobby. Most of the people in this hobby seem very nice and considerate. I am not so fair minded to think that all humans are perfect, I am far from it. But I know, without a doubt that I am not lazy because I don't care to utilize morse code. And face it gentlemen, ladies......most of the world doesn't require it in the military, civilian life, or testing for ham license, we are the last country.
Like when we see movies of other countries. And the person is driving on the opposite side of the road. People say, "they are driving on the wrong side". But don't realize we are the minority on driving on the right hand side of the road. So in truth who is on the wrong side. If the United States and the FCC still requires morse and is the minority in the world........who is wrong....and who is lazy for not wanting to change.
73
bring in the flame throwers
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2OO3 on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Wusssuuuuup wit all dis talk bout code vs no-code? Don't be hatin. Instead of all this talk bout which click you wit or if you fo or aginst code, why can't we jus be brothers? Together, theres no tellin how high we can go.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2OO3 on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Yo yo yo, I did try to learn dat code thing last week but it was jus to hard for me and I did try for like 5 minutes but its to hard because I must got dat bad hearing and itz a medical problem so they should just eliminate dat code and give me da HF because i did pass my tech exam and got da license when i studied for like an hour so i did do the werk and now i am a ham radio oparater and when da code is eliminated den i will be on hf and talkin wit the oder pepz dat dont want to be messin wit dat code and we be the future of ham radio not dem old farts whoz no use anymore.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AMATEUR2003 on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Hey ya'll. You've got to check out the new profile FARTMAN made for me with the OO's. I love it. I know the man loves me too cause he went through this trouble.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7PLU on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Code no-code what dadididit-dididit
l e a r n t h e c o d e y o u l a z y b u m s - i t i s e a s i e r t h a n r e a d i n g t h i s g i b b e r i s h . . .
NOBODY CARES-
How about someone starting a gay church full of left-wing members, with a right-wing minister, teaching about pro-choice and genetic research, with a bible written in CW . . . We may have something here . . . Lets throw in some gun control and some 1.5kw boots for out-of band operation on 10 meters for the illegal-alien driver's license issued trucker community.
MAYBE . . . Oh- nevermind. . .
Loren B. Cobb / KD7PLU
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>>That baffles the mind to think that anyone that wants to participate in amatuer radio, but doesn't want to practice CW is lazy. I think that is very narrow thinking.<<<<
Dear Mr. NOLICENSEASOFYET,
Run Forrest run, while you still can!
Welcome to our wonderful world of beaten dead horses.
Happy Holidays,
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by AB5XZ on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Ho hum.
Put things in perspective:
Morse's patent included a way to send text with code cut into metal bars, the words being looked up at the other end from a codebook. He described a receiver that would automatically decode and print the text directly, no ear required. That wasn't too easy to implement (typewriter not invented yet), so his first telegraph receiver used a galvanometer needle to scribe a line on a moving paper tape, with wiggles for the dits and dahs. Smithsonian still has the paper tape with "what hath God wrought".
But, when all this got into the field, the operators found that they could listen to the clicks of the galvo needle and decode it faster by ear (by that time Vail had redesigned Morse's code - using information theory that hadn't been invented yet - to work better).
So, if you want to do original Morse, use RTTY or packet or PSK31.
And, by the way, you can do those with a Tech license.
73TomAB5XZ
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
<<<KG4YJR on December 18, 2003 said,
_._ _ ._ ._ _ _.
... _ _ _ ... <<<<
Reply,
.. / -.. --- / -. --- - / ..- -. -.. . .-. ... - .- -. -.. / -- ... --. / -.- - .- .--- . / --- .-. / -.-- .- .--- . / ..-. --- .-.. .-.. --- .-- . -.. / -... -.-- / ... --- ... / ... .. --. -. .- .-.. .-.-.- / --... ...-- / -.. . / -.-. .... .- .-. .-.. . ... / -.- -.-. ---.. ...- .-- --
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>So, if you want to do original Morse, use RTTY or packet or PSK31.
And, by the way, you can do those with a Tech license.
73TomAB5XZ <<<
.. / ... ..- .-. . / .- -- / --. .-.. .- -.. / - --- / -... . / .- / - . -.-. .... / --- -- .-.-.- / .... .- .--. .--. -.-- / .... --- .-.. .. -.. .- -.-- ... / - --- / .- .-.. .-.. / --... ...-- / -.. . / -.-. .... .- .-. .-.. . ... / -.- -.-. ---.. ...- .-- --
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 18, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Do they sell CW paddles for keyboards yet?
73
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7QAJ on December 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Great post NOLICENSEASOFYET. Being a no code tech, I can relate to being called "lazy" or "not a real Ham" by those who like to hold their noses high. Some I would like to introduce their noses to my nasty right cross, but that wouldn't be proper way for a Ham to act and I would be lowering myself to their level. Some think that in order to become a real Ham, you need to know CW like they did, but many who think like that don't know which is the hot end of a soldering iron or how to make a clean, neighbor friendly station. Instead, they crank up their plug and play kilowatt amp and CW away, that's if they didn't forget CW after they got their General ticket. I like amateur radio for technical attributes, like building antennas and getting the most out of every watt, and meeting good people on the air using my homebuilt antennas. Personally, I am learning code, not just to pass into HF priveldges, but to learn this exciting mode to make long distance contacts that are otherwise impossible via phone. Do I think CW testing should be retained for HF privedlges? No, not when so many learn code only to pass their General ticket and forget it afterwards. But I do think CW testing should be retained to operate on freqs desingated for CW only. If they get rid of CW testing, fine, I will still learn it anyway. As a man who works long hours for a living, I can understand when people say that they do not have the time to learn CW, it's like learning to speak another language and that can be difficult for those who don't often use their right cranium. I do feel that they are missing out on learning an exciting mode of communication, but I also feel that many HF operators are missing out meeting these "lazy" or "not a real ham" on the airwaves and that's the main reason why I do not support retaining CW testing. To those who want to throw flames, please don't, that is not what this forum or amateur radio is about. But, if you feel that you must flame, pro-code and no-code alike, do it on 27.025 (CB ch.6) where you will most likely have the favor returned.
73s
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KE2IV on December 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well I figure it this way.
Even though we've all been through this argument, again and again, we need to do so.
You see, CW posts create more "hits" on the website than anything else. All of which translates to higher advertising fees based on the "hit rate".
Duh!?
Oh, and as to the poster of this one.
Who cares! If you were better at poundin' then the wife wouldn't need her own key!
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by CWHATER on December 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hmmmmmmmmmmm,
I'll be soooooooo glad when the U.S. terminates morse code as a requirement for HF priviliges!
I'll be sure to elmer ALL of my CB buddies (over 30 in the area) to pass the ridiculously easy multiple-choice tests as soon as that happens. Then, maybe we'll hear something other than "Tales of The Bowels" on 75 meters! Heck, there are far too few AM stations as it is!
I can picture it now.... Cobra 2000 + D-104 + RM CB/HF Transverter = great sounds on 75 and 40 meters. At 8kc on AM and 4.8 KC on SSB, it should! If only we could get that pesky clarifier "un-locked!"
Heheheh! I can't resist...... :-)
73s
Mr. C.W. Hater (CBer / Extra for 19 + years)
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You have to admit, these “Code/No Code” threads are fun to read: If nothing else, they give one a real insight into the human condition.
After months of reading threads like this, my own opinion on this issue hasn’t changed a bit. (Yes….I think Code/CW is still an interesting and valuable mode; No….I don’t think it should be a test criteria.) The funny thing is, after reading all the flames from both sides, my opinion about Code itself has modified somewhat: I used to view it as having no real relevance to my applications. I now find myself dinking around with it just because it’s kind of interesting. I guess it’s sort of like when someone criticizes the taste of one of your preferred whiskeys…….It makes you attend a bit more closely to the flavor.
I am playing around with Code for the same reason that anyone does anything in a “Hobby”………Simple interest, not necessity! As you go through life, you are forced by “Necessity” to learn many survival skills. These lessons, because of their importance at the time, tend to be remembered for a Lifetime…….. I still remember how to completely strip and re-assemble an M16 in the dark, and how to conduct a parachute jump without breaking an ankle! The odds of me ever needing those skills again, however, are almost nil! (At least, at my age, I hope so!)
Code was once one of those “Survival Skills”…….You HAD to know it. Times Change.
Before the inevitable flames start, I’d like to state again that on a personal level, my interest in this debate is strictly academic: My interests are all still in the VHF/UHF world, and I very much doubt that I will ever “upgrade” my license simply to get HF privileges that I would never use. (Regardless of whether there is a Code Requirement or not!)
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KG4YJR on December 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KC8VWM,
··
-- · ·- -· -
··· ·- -- ·
--- ·-·· -··
··· ···· ·· -
--··· ···--
That was about 2wpm on this end, getting the hang of it somewhat.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
That was great!
There was just a little warble detected in your keyboard that time... Mabey your PC didn't warm up enough yet... Nothing to worry about tho..
73 Happy Holidays to All!!!
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
Keep the code
|
|
|
by KD5UPN on December 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It will weed out the CB'ers and women. And better yet, require that all equipment be homebrew or atleast built before 1955. And everybody must wear suspenders.
One of the stated purposes of the amateur radio service is to advance the radio art. Testing for code proficiency seems quite regressive if you ask me. Just as a spark gap transmitter is considered a relic better suited for museums, morse code should be looked at as an artifact from the 19th century.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by N2YZS on December 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Dear OLDFART13,
"Learning the code makes one a more consummate ham operator." Would you please cite the data from which you formed this opinion?
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by WA2JJH on December 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I will say that knowing CW does not make a ham a better person. I have a 20WPM EXTRA. I was plesently surprised by no code techs on 440.
There are plenty that think they are the gift to ham radio. They are all knowing. The think they are always right. They have their extra as long as I do. Yet, they go out of their way to nit-pick.
Code is the law for voice HF priveledges now. So one hasa few choices. 1)learn the CW, and have your HF phone privledges. 2)wait around for the FCC to decide when and if to drop the code requirment. My gut feeling is that is a while away.
3)Stay a tech and be happy with the world above 50MHZ.
Some NCT's I have talked to are happy to stay a NCT.
They like their 6M and 440.
4)refuse to learn the code. Stay a NCT. Troll at those that want to keep the code.
We all know what the law is now. If the FCC does away with CW, I will accept that as law. I may not like it, but I will treat No Code Genersls the same way I expect to be treated.
I had a recent experience where a fellow O.T. was absolutely insulting toward me on EHAM. If some one did that to me in person, I would wait until they yelled loud enough and got to 18" of me. Then by law that is assault. Then I will act accordingly with a physical response. The law backs me up on that.
I can see why NCT's say O.T.'s are condesending and rude!
However, I think nothing gets accomplished when Trolls bash those that took the trouble to learn CW and the theory.
Respect and tolorence goes a long way. Notice I did not take a CW or anti CW stance.
I used to think CW was a riff-raff filter.
In some cases it is.
However, I have had dealings with fellow O.T's that think there are self appointed SUPER-HAMS. They rag on many
I guess no test element will make them decent human beings! It certainly was NOT THE CW requirment that keeped a few misenthropic technocrates out!
Like me, they may have 25 years or more experience, however thier behavior towards others is antithical to ham radio. I can now see why NCT's have contempt for some of us
I say what ever the FCC decides is fine with me. I know what the law is now.
vv All the complaining will not make the FCC make up it's mind faster. One could learn the code faster.
IMHO, if some of the anti-CW crowd put in 1/10th the effort, they can get that coveted General ticket.
Becoming a good ham, is an inside job. No CW or the extra theory element can test hams for that!
73 and Generic holiday greetings de MIKE
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on December 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You tell 'em Mike. AND these forums are monitored. I recently had a vile language poster on an article I posted who crossed the line and our web manager deleted the offending post.
Lets remember that there ARE young hams out there who don't need to read language like that. You know who you are.
IF you can't be civil and civilized to your fellow hams, then another hobby is in order, such as filing one's teeth with a rasp, for instance.
Lets get our blood pressure up over something else worthwhile, like keeping tabs on those who don't support our troops. We're at war folks...there's lots more important things out there.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC5NMW on December 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
This subject has done more to divide the amatuer community than anything in the entire history of amaturer communications!!! GIVE IT A REST WILL YA????
|
| |
|
RE: Keep the code
|
|
|
by CURMUDGEON on December 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Until the digital modes can outperform cw as a weak signal mode, cw will not be antiquated. And the digital modes have not been able to do that, even with all the extra hardware needed for them. I repeat, the digital modes have not achieved the status of dethroning cw as The weak signal mode.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NN6EE on December 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hmmmmmm???
Gee that means that all the "No-Coders" don't even know what Repeater they're using because most Repeaters still have a CW-IDer!!!
Public-Service Repeaters including Law Enforcement still use CW-IDers as well!!!
EE
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7KCP on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
My fellow Hams, now lets be honest about this whole "keep the code get rid of the code " thing. A lot has been written about the prose and cons of keeping the code some on both sides rather well written, and some not. I myself have been rather sharp tongued on the subject, and I have received a few interesting responses because of it. One ham KB9YVG in a obscene response writes "You think like an old timer.. I learned CW in a three hour seesion when I was around 12. I have no particular in interest in HF. You seem like on of those operators who like to have their daughter (obscene response) when they hit that key. I thought '73 met "please don't do my kid", whoops that must be CB talk." and another response by KG4YJR writes "What a moron". It is obvious to all that the defensive vitriolic responses of the "get rid of the code test "crowd is due to the fact that their argument ,no matter how will crafted, is intellectually dishonest. The truth is (and every one knows this ,both pro and con camps) that some are willing to earn their goal and others are not. You see some think that just because they want something they should get it even if it means cheating (changing the rules). Some of these lazy slothful types will argue in an intellectually dishonest manner that their concern is "saving Ham radio" when in fact they simply lack the desire to spend the energy to pass element one. To these lazy slothful types I ask: Why not be honest? And just say the truth ,come on and repeat after me: "I just don't want to take the five words a minute CW test, so change the rules just for me!". Sincerely;
slow code general,
KD7KCP
73
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>>Until the digital modes can outperform cw as a weak signal mode, cw will not be antiquated.<<<<
I would like to know who told CURMUDGEON that Digital is going to replace CW ?!?
F.Y.I. ... There is such a thing as keeping both modes.
This is not a "CW vs Digital" or "Us" vs. "Them" scenerio.
The world doesn't think only in "Black and White" and part of the problem today in Amateur Radio is just that.
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To KD7KCP, and others of similar mind;
Believe it or not, there are operators out there, like myself, who have no interest in the HF Bands, and are following this debate mainly for academic reasons.
While this discussion has been generally interesting, I have to say that NO ONE from the “Pro” side has effectively explained why it is that the “Knowledge of Code” is the “One True Test” for separating “The Men from the Boys” in Ham radio.
Why is the memorization of 43 or so characters more important that a thorough understanding of wave propagation theory, circuit design, or an Electrical Engineering degree??? (I’m not making this up….I have seen posts that indicate just that position!)
Yes!……….We should require more technical knowledge for more advanced privileges!……..But aren’t there more relevant things to test for than the ability to memorize some forty odd characters?
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
I tried it and I liked it . . .
|
|
|
by KD7PLU on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I just made my first CW contact on 20 meters today with station NE5E from my friend's Station- K7CQX.
I feel bad for the people who don't know the feeling of making a CW contact - for the first time- on the air- and trying to keep from fumbling over your key.
I also feel bad for the veteran operators who are not pulling in Tech's and showing them what this is all about.
My objective is to upgrade JUST FOR CW- I can talk on a repeater all I want. Voice is voice. I suppose I'll use HF for voice, but the whole desire for upgrading is just to do code.
If you don't want to try it, don't bash it. My suggestion is open 10 meters to no-code generals. Keep the rest of the bands the same. Bring the code up to 12WPM instead of 5WPM for everything - It's easier that way, trust me. 5WPM sucks. And throw away anything that has dots and dashes on it. Learn through the ears and you'll have it 500% faster.
If any of you want help with the code, send me an email. I will help you get started.
Loren B. Cobb / KD7PLU
|
| |
|
RE: I tried it and I liked it . . .
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>> Bring the code up to 12WPM instead of 5WPM for everything <<<<
You have a good point about 12wpm. It seems more difficult and "rhythmically challenging" to send code at a slower 5wpm pace.
Persons that have never done code before I think would find it is easier to send CW at 12 wpm. as opposed to 5wpm.
To describe this to readers that have never used CW,
Imagine trying to add 2-4 seconds between mouse button clicks when you want to "double click" your favorite program on your windows desktop. This will give you the idea of what 5wpm "feels like" vs. "fast double clicking" a program or 12wpm.
Another way to describe 5wpm is to try and intentionally add a 2 second pause between every word when you are speaking a complete sentence.
12wpm "flows" better and is easier to recognize "CW characters as sounds." I have no problem "hearing" 12wpm, but like when a pause is placed between a persons words when they are speaking, CW sounds at 5wpm loose their emphasis and I end up stumbling and "second guessing" characters.
Somehow 5wpm "sounds" like a completely different form of CW to me.
However, the cold truth is that while CW is not going away as a mode of operation, I don't think it is going to hang around much longer as a licensing requirement.
I too feel bad for the people who don't know the feeling of making a CW contact and I applaud individuals like yourself that encourage others to at least try.
Eventually, someone is going to have to carry the CW torch ahead regardless of licensing requirements and it is up to those of us that are left to teach these individuals this strange and wonderful language.
Of course, Amateur Radio has many avenues to choose from and it is understandable that not everyone is interested in each and every method or mode of operation.
73 Happy Holidays
Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7KCP on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL writes:
>>While this discussion has been generally interesting, I have to say that NO ONE from the “Pro” side has effectively explained why it is that the “Knowledge of Code” is the “One True Test” for separating “The Men from the Boys” in Ham radio.<<
Kent, stop playing stupid. My point was and is obvious. Here we go one more time, see if you can keep up. The point is simply this:
Some are willing to earn their goal and others are not. You see, some think that just because they want something they should get it (even if it means cheating changing the rules).
Kent, a liberal, will say "give me what i want" or "give anything to anybody just because they" or "i want it". A spoiled brat will say "give me NOW!!", the fact that I have not earned it is irrelevant, a classic liberal trait.
A conservative is willing to earn their goal.
Let me put it in a simple way. One type is a parasite(liberal), the other type is a worker(conservative). A worker just naturally has a well earned ("earend" a nasty word for a parasite) disdain for the parasite. The no code type is the parasite and the pro code type is the worker. I have made my point very clear.
Now if you just can't get the point and post some kind of crap like:
>>While this discussion has been generally interesting, I have to say that NO ONE from the “Pro” side has effectively explained why it is that the “Knowledge of Code” is the “One True Test” for separating “The Men from the Boys” in Ham radio.<<
I will see this as proof that I am engaged in a disputation with a FOOL! As it says in the good book do not aurgue with a fool (liberal).So I'm going to bet that I will not be wasting my time with you anymore.
Sincerely;
slow code general,
KD7KCP
73
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by NI0C on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KD7KCP:
I like your enthusiasm for Morse code, however one's love of Morse and one's position on continued required testing for it are separate issues! And, how in the world do you equate being conservative with being a "worker?" That's a real hoot!
Those wishing to argue politics should choose another forum for that. One's politics have little or nor correlation with their position on Morse testing or their Morse proficiency. Attempts to cast or stereotype folks as "lazy" or "liberal" simply won't wash here. Please stick to rational arguments here-- there are enough of them.
73 de Chuck NI0C
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KD7KCP;
I made my post without attempting to insult you, or impugn your level of intelligence in any way.
Shame on you for not being able to respond in kind!
I firmly believe that advanced privileges should be earned. I am in no way arguing with you on that point! I am merely asking the question that is obviously on many minds: “Why do we test for Code Proficiency, almost to the exclusion of all else, rather than Advanced Technical Knowledge?”
Even If Code remains a test criteria, shouldn’t we still be concerned about the shallow technical depth of the current licensing tests?
Finally Richard, on a personal note: You should resist the temptation to categorize people into generalized groups. It’s a mental trap, and one of the first steps toward Bigotry.
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC0RCQ on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To say that Code is now obsolete is like saying that all of ham radio is obsolete...Why fuss with band conditions, building antennas, etc. when all you have to do is pick up a cell phone and call anyone in the world?? Code is a part of the game. If you do not want to learn it, then don't play the game. To say it is archaic is easy. I can make the same pointless arguement for the whole of ham radio; but I understand that code is a part of the package. And with this shortsighted mentality, a lot of hobbies would just cease to exist.
Get over it and learn it just like I had to learn about a bunch of modes (to pass the exams) that I will never use.
With the time everyone spends complaining about learning it, they could have learned it by now.
|
| |
|
RE: I tried it and I liked it . . .
|
|
|
by KD7PLU on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Good point about being tested on other modes that a given ham may never use. I remember Packet, RTTY and other questions being on the test, as well as PSK31 questions being on the new series of tests.
It sure is upsetting to see such a little thing like on and off terrorize the amateur forums. Oh well- Like my CW elmer says . . . "That's just more CW for the rest of us. We should be glad we don't have to share!" hi hi
The problem with CW is that all amateurs who hate it probably looked at a code chart, got frustrated and quit. The proper way: Burn the code chart, get an elmer who is comfortable at 20-50WPM to spend just a LITTLE time with you. Did I say Burn the Dot and Dash charts? Yeah . . . Burn em'! Train the ears.
I'm an NCT about to take my General test. I'm a grunt, I'm also hated by the Old Timers for being a snotty no-code tech. I will help you oher snots if you want. When I get on the bands, my goal is to send clean code and fool all those OM's into thinking I'm a qualified 25-25WPM operator (Until they look me up on QRZ and say "Ah, well he sent good code, but he's just a snotty little No_Code 5WPM idiot."
Watch out all you crusty old CW veterans, I'm coming to a frequency near you- And I have a key, and I'm not afraid to use it.
Loren B. Cobb / KD7PLU
|
| |
|
RE: I tried it and I liked it . . .
|
|
|
by KC0RCQ on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I agree...Good luck with the test...Remember, listen as much as you can on the band of your choice...Listening and copying code is the best way to learn it...
By the way, Merry Christmas to all...
David
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC7BDP on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KD7KCP: If I remember correctly; KB9YZL asked for somebody to post a cogent article delineating factual reasons for keeping CW as a testing medium. And you responded with (in essence) "I'll repeat it, try to keep up"; followed by a rehash of the same old "I had to test so everybody else should" followed by name-calling and vitriol. Are your quite SURE you're not a Lib????
There are reasonable arguments for keeping CW as a testing medium. I have to say that CW is the most reliable method of getting through the crud of lousey band conditions. The computer modes are great.... but guess what? I'm too lazy (actually it's too STINGEY) to get a new battery for my laptop; so I'm tied to the AC mains; which negates the beauty of CW! BTW, I'm a NO-Code, and will stay in that capacity until I decide to learn CW. Even if I do take and pass Element 1 (or if the requirement is dropped before then); I'll not get into HF right away, because 20M and 40M are for those too lazy to accept the challenge of 6 & 2 SSB. The only reason to take on HF would be to use (as in transmit on the air) a couple of the boatanchors I'm rebuilding.
Negate the last paragraph when searching for my point; which is thus: You were challenged to present a cogent argument for keeping CW as a testing medium. You responded with belittlement and vitriol. I'll leave out the fact that your call indicates you received your ticket since "slow-code" became the standard. The fact remains that you did not accept the challenge as presented; instead responding with vitriol and innuendo in the classic Clintonian form. You, sir are far from a Conservative. You are a Liberal in the most heinous form; and have not right to represent yourself otherwise.
Was this post a waste of bandwidth? ABSOLUTELY! So have been most of the posts on this thread. I can type 45 WPM (Although I slow down a bit when using an IBM laptop's tiny keyboard, but isn't that like the 45 WPM-with-a-keyer type slowing down with a straight key?).....maybe some of the "slow-keyboard" afficianados should refrain from posting until they put forth the effort to learn to type faster! While you're at it, stop being lazy and learn the Palmer method of penmanship in order to prove you are worthy to type up posts. This line of thinking makes as much sense as 90% of the posts on this thread.
Sheese!
Jimmy
KC7BDP
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by FRANKM12 on December 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K9PO,
Finally I see someone on here that sees the huge vistas
in VHF/UHF! There's so much there! Long distance point-to-point VHF IS the great challenge! It's the one I'm shooting for. I want the Waterford Crystals! It's going to be in Antenna Design, K9PO, that's where it will be. Whoever comes up with something that works is going to be the man.
Of course then I could become a "more consummate" ham, whatever that is. And I could also spend all my time worrying about something I'm not even interested in at all. The only reason I spend any time at all in CW is to get the General and I only want it for the piece of paper, period.
The challenges of 2 meter, VHF/UHF long distance point-to-point communications is daunting. IT WILL BE DONE. I can't wait. IF we can pull it off somehow in the 100 to 200 watt range it will be an incredible accomplishment.
73
frank
KG4VLQ
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by N4QA on December 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Congratulations to you and yours on being a three-ham family!
Sounds as though your varied interests will provide fertile grounds for some good cross-training.
There is much to enjoy in our hobby.
My personal ham-radio-related activities are homebrewing and operating CW, RTTY and PSK31...though there are plenty of others from which to choose.
You guys are in for a great time. Have fun!
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by N2NFG on December 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WOW....ham radio is starting to HIT a Bottom. The WWW.Real KILLED the hobby.
Hamfests antendees are down, bitching is up..... used to be a good hobby.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on December 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>>KC7BDP You are a moron. <<<<
To KC8VWM,
Why am I here?
KC8VWM...
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by N2NFG on December 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Why don't you two (2) "JERK OFFS" chat via eMail/phone or whatever.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by N2NFG on December 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Why don't you two (2) "JERK OFFS" chat via eMail/phone or whatever.
|
| |
|
Why No-Code Techs and CBers Can't Jump
|
|
|
by W7MD on December 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Listen To The WOMAN:
snip----
She says that the three of us should learn code this winter. If we do, we will probably upgrade to General licenses.
snip----
|
| |
|
RE: Why No-Code Techs and CBers Can't Jump
|
|
|
by CODEBASHER on December 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KD7KCP, you demonstrated why I will never want to learn the code. To become what you are? I think not.
Any one can act like an A*S*H**e as you have done you sir are NOT A HAM a JERK, yes A Ham no.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD4LRU on December 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
.. .... --- .--. . -.-. --- -.. . .-.. .. ...- . ... ..-. --- .-. . ...- . .-. !!!!
|
| |
|
Why I like Code...
|
|
|
by KD7KGX on December 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This article was as good as any other on eHam. I agree with those who have stated "If you don't like the article, don't read it and don't post a comment." Additionally, I challenge those who disparaged the author to write their own article and submit it. It's easy to yell from the cheap seats... and a lot harder to get in the ring and go a few rounds yourself.
I understand why his wife is attracted to code... probably for the same reason I am. It's also the reason I like the digital modes. I'd rather not TALK for hours, but I have no problem swinging a paddle or typing on the keyboard.
Code, and typing, use a different part of the brain for communications. They also bypass the filter that we use for voice, so in many ways we come across differently than we would in a voice conversation. I find it much more relaxing also, almost like reading. And, I don't have to worry about disturbing the house when I operate late at night.
I've heard high-speed QSK CW roundtables where several experienced ops were chatting along, interrupting each other, just like a voice conversation except that the different sidetones helped to tell the parties about. Most of it was too fast for me, but I could tell they were enjoying themselves. Probably a bunch of old-timers who were in the military or merchant marine and spent years working daily using code. It was neat, and impressive.
Even a rudimentary 5 wpm knowledge of code, something that can be obtained by nearly anyone in a couple of weeks, opens up the world via the HF bands. I know that some people refuse to learn it, but I don't understand their reasoning. Let's say they're right for the sake of argument, and code IS old-fashioned and obsolete. So is playing the piano. I enjoy both, and I wish I was a lot better at both. I can't imagine who WOULDN'T like to be proficient at both... the only question is, are you willing to invest the time and effort?
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KC7BDP on December 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>KD7KCP; an a glorious illustration of his eloquence, wit and repartee; penned:
"KC7BDP You are a Moron"
<<<
That's it? That's all you've got? Man, I hope you've better conversational skills when you pick up a mic or key. I could go on waxing on the virtues of sapient thought, but I'm afraid it would be over your head!
>>>N2NFG also graced us with his musings:
"Why don't you two (2) JERKOFFS take this to...."
<<<
I'm sorry; I did not realize that my musing and/or toying with the President of his local Mensa Chapter had so grievously interfered with the discussions of great philosophical preponderance which were taking place in this thread. Properly chastised, I'll retire to my corner now.
Jimmy,
KC7BDP
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by K6WHP on December 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I hope I don't trod on any toes here, but if all those who spent their time rambling on about how hard the code is to learn (I realize the author is NOT among them per se) would put the same effort into using it, they would be surprised how easy it is. I have become acquainted with a number of hams who stumbled along in the beginning at 5 wpm and then took off because they didn't fear it. Sure, It is embarassing when they pass me by, but their progress is meritous.
If people like the author don't like to practice the code (terminally boring), then they should just turn on an HF rig while working on one of their projects and listen. It is surprising how the code can be picked up over time. Letters start to pop out, they become words, words become phrases, and phrases become QSOs..
..and, alas, I have become what I loathe: a gassy old codger dispensing unwanted advice.
Thanks for tolerating.
72/3
k6whp
..
|
| |
|
Why require CW testing?
|
|
|
by KD7KGX on December 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KB9YZL sez:
While this discussion has been generally interesting, I have to say that NO ONE from the “Pro” side has effectively explained why it is that the “Knowledge of Code” is the “One True Test” for separating “The Men from the Boys” in Ham radio.
I reply:
No one who is for continued code proficiency testing (including me) has said this. However, I do believe that code proficiency is more important for a ham radio operator utilizing the HF bands than wave propagation theory, circuit design, or an EE degree. Why? Because a licensed ham is an OPERATOR. You don't need a license to explore the three latter subjects, but even a rudimentary proficiency will be useful if you work HF.
KB9YZL continues:
Yes!……….We should require more technical knowledge for more advanced privileges!……..But aren’t there more relevant things to test for than the ability to memorize some forty odd characters?
I conclude:
I don't know if I agree with this (that we should require more technical knowledge for advanced privileges). How about more expertise in areas relevant to ham radio operation in the relevant bands?
What could be more relevant than testing for proficiency in one of the two primary means of ham radio operations?
Cw proficiency doesn't mean you're a "super ham", or More Worthy. What it DOES mean is that you are proficient in CW. That gives you a leg up, when we're talking about ham radio operating skills, over someone who is otherwise equally knowledgeable yet lacks CW proficiency.
Why is CW proficiency important? Well, especially now as the bands are really degraded, it's a lot easier to make QSOs barefoot using CW than SSB. And despite claims to the contrary, PSK31 et al are nowhere near as useful for making DX QSOs as is CW. There are quite a few people who have worked QRP CW DXCC, but I'd bet there are no mainland US hams who have worked QRP PSK DXCC... and I wonder if it will ever happen.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by WA2JJH on December 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To CW or not to have CW, that is the never ending rant.
Is it worth it for both types of hams to rage and pant.
Saw a bumber sticker, friendship through ham radio.
Damn nice sentiment, to bad tempers have to blow.
Does it matter if you like to chew the rag or pound the brass?
One thing for sure, these rambligs can be a waste of time and a pain in everybodys A--!
As I see it, it divides one ham against another.
While this goes down the BPL companies go Amen brother!
Hams are normally nice patriotic good natured souls.
All that happens in a thresd like this are psychic bullet holes!
Then the worst comes out of people, hatred begins to grow.
Before you know it a thread like this turns into a Jerry Springer Show!
If we keep going, never mind the problem fix the blame. We just turn hams against each other, watch out for a flame!
For those that want to be part of the solution, get back on the air. Respect everyones favorite operating mode.
Other wise you can keep ranting until your Vena Cava explodes!
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by OLDFART13 on December 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>>>by N2YZS on December 19, 2003
Dear OLDFART13,
"Learning the code makes one a more consummate ham operator."
Would you please cite the data from which you formed this opinion?<<<<<
There are basically three modes in ham radio; Phone, CW and Digital. By being able to operate all of these modes one would be a more complete operator. Now, knowing all three of them doesn’t make one a consummate operator, but a lack of knowledge of one of these modes will keep one from being a complete operator. So to be a complete or consummate operator one would have to be able to operate all these modes. So, I will back step a little and clarify my statement to: “To be a consummate ham operator one must know all three of the basic modes.” Not knowing all three modes doesn’t make one a bad operator just not a finished operator.
Entry: consummate
Synonyms: able, complete, finished, practiced, skilled, talented, total, trained, utter, whole
Antonyms: deficient, inadequate, incomplete, mediocre, run-of-the-mill
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
OLDFART13;
Amazing…….You’ve finally posted something that I can agree with without significant reservation!
God ……………..did I just say that?????????
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by OLDFART13 on December 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>>>by KD7KGX on December 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I reply:
No one who is for continued code proficiency testing (including me) has said this. However, I do believe that code proficiency is more important for a ham radio operator utilizing the HF bands than wave propagation theory, circuit design, or an EE degree. Why? Because a licensed ham is an OPERATOR. You don't need a license to explore the three latter subjects, but even a rudimentary proficiency will be useful if you work HF.<<<<<
I have to agree with this. I was all for incentive licensing, even though I initially lost some privileges, and I was for dropping of the code requirement to 5wpm for HF. I am against lowing the standard anymore; however, I wouldn’t be opposed to a proposition that would at least keep the 5wpm CW requirement for the extra class license. But all the no-code groups want to eliminate all CW exams and have no interest in a compromise. Their only concern is can they sell more books, magazines and radios.
I don’t feel that the exams need to be made any harder or more technical. I do feel that the question pools and the amount of questions on the exams should be increased. This is only so that it couldn’t be so easily memorized. I feel that the information in the exams is just right and doesn’t need to be made any harder, but by the same token they shouldn’t be made any easier either.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by FRANKM12 on December 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
OLDFART13,
Technical issues are the main concern for many Amateur Radio Operators. Learning how cicuits work, building kits, studying the Math and Science invovled with Radio, and the Art of it as well. These things are most important to me. Trying to interpret and track down what a very difficult derivation means and how it reduces down to a first order level, hopefuly, is more important to me. Using that data and directly plugging it into an application, i.e. Applied Science is paramount.
Morse Code is ancient and is not even being used by the military. If we have a nuclear war it will be useless like the joke the CW operator made in "On the Beach" where he hooked the key up to a spring loaded window shade so it could generate random CW after everyone was already dead for weeks.
Some of us have persued learning. "More consummate" is redundant.
73
frank
KG4VLQ
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by OLDFART13 on December 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>>>>by KB9YZL on December 24, 2003
OLDFART13;
Amazing…….You’ve finally posted something that I can agree with without significant reservation!
God ……………..did I just say that?????????
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL<<<<<<
It could be the holiday season or it may just be an anomaly. Stranger things have happened.
Merry Christmas and a safe, happy and prosperous new year to all.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by OLDFART13 on December 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>>Morse Code is ancient and is not even being used by the military.<<<<
No other mode comes close to morse code when you factor in that it takes very little bandwidth, very low power levels are required, it uses simple circuits that can easily be made, and it requires very little equipment. Only with CW can one set up a very small portable low power station that can be used for long range, reliable communications.
Perhaps that is why the military teaches CW at Fort Huachuca.
The phrase “more consummate” was used as meaning moving toward being complete.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 25, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To OLDFART13;
Yeah............A Merry Christmas to you too!
I can wait until later to argue with you about something. I'm sure that sooner or later, the new year will provide the opportunity!
73
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by KC0NYK on December 25, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
HEY DUDE! THERE IS AN AMAZING THING ON YOUR COMPUTER..IT IS CALLED SPELL CHECK! TRY USING IT SOMETIME...OR BETTER YET, LEARN TO SPELL.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet another code rambling
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 25, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hey!..........Isn't it great? We can read petty flames even on Christmas Day!
BTW, KC0NYK, your "shift" key is stuck.
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
I'm taking my test on Saturday, 27 DEC 2003
|
|
|
by KD7PLU on December 25, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
And I shall pass . . . See you non-lazy people on The CW bands :-)
I'm trying to clear up the C, Y and Q - They all kind of blend, even though I can pick each one out alone. When I'm doing copy practice I commonly mistke the Y and Q, sometimes the Y and C. Everything else is starting to come quickly, and not with a two second "What was that character?" delay in my brain.
For those of you that think learning CW is difficult- I lost a significant amount of hearing in each ear, and lost tone above about 1400hz in my left ear. I'm learning this because I want to use it. If you don't want to learn the code, cool. I won't criticize you.
If I pass my test tomorrow, I will be very happy. But I won't look down on anyone who hasn't learned yet. And I won't look down on such a thing as a no-code general, if there ever is such a thing. But I expect that unless we want to keep 30-meters and vast segments of our other bands, there better be a required code test in the license structure somewhere.
It -IS- very cool when you can dial into someone sending code and finally 'get it', and know you can communicate with them.
So . . . Wish me luck, and I'll report back on my success or failure on the test. :-)
Loren B. Cobb / KD7PLU
|
| |
|
RE: I'm taking my test on Saturday, 27 DEC 2003
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 25, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Yeah.....for me it's "S" and "U".
My tinnitus makes it hard to readily determine the length of the final bit. (Unless the audio can be adjusted into the "Darth Vader" tone range.)
Merry Christmas & Good Luck with the test.
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7KCP on December 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
My fellow Hams, now lets be honest about this whole "keep the code get rid of the code " thing. A lot has been written about the prose and cons of keeping the code some on both sides rather well written, and some not. I myself have been rather sharp tongued on the subject, and I have received a few interesting responses because of it.
One ham KB9YVG in a obscene response writes
"You think like an old timer.. I learned CW in a three hour seesion when I was around 12. I have no particular in interest in HF. You seem like on of those operators who like to have their daughter (obscene response) when they hit that key. I thought '73 met "please don't do my kid", whoops that must be CB talk."
and another response by KG4YJR writes
"What a moron".
It is obvious to all that the defensive vitriolic responses of the "get rid of the code test "crowd is due to the fact that their argument ,no matter how will crafted, is intellectually dishonest. The truth is (and every one knows this ,both pro and con camps) that some are willing to earn their goal and others are not. You see some think that just because they want something they should get it even if it means cheating (changing the rules). Some of these lazy slothful types will argue in an intellectually dishonest manner that their concern is "saving Ham radio" when in fact they simply lack the desire to spend the energy to pass element one. To these lazy slothful types I ask: Why not be honest? And just say the truth ,come on and repeat after me: "I just don't want to take the five words a minute CW test, so change the rules just for me!".
Sincerely;
slow code general,
KD7KCP
73
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7KCP on December 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I do not use CW myself, but I have lived through two element one tests (passed both). I think it is ok to take a five word per minute Morse code test, it's just part of earning your privilege to use HF.
What I don't get is how can one argue that one should receive such a privilege without earning it.
Can someone please explain this "even though I don't want to earn something I should get it just because I want it" thing?
Sincerely; slow code general, KD7KCP 73
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To KD7KCP;
Richard;……. that was an excellent re-statement of your previous posts.
I am, however, still waiting for you to address the questions I raised earlier.
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by K4CDK on December 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hooray -- for this answer - this seems to be the attitude of a lot of hams, tech, general, extra -- we have beat this thing to death -- those that want general & extra will get them, the rest of the operators --- Hey let's just enjoy the hobby.
K4CDK -- Yes I am Tech getting ready to upgrade to general with or withou the code.
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7KCP on December 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This is what I have to say to the lazy, slothful types who lack the desire to spend the energy to pass element one. I received my first license, Tech with H.F. ( which means of course that I passed element one) on 8/15/00. On 8/8/02, I had to pass element one once again to get my General. I have never, not even once, used C.W. on the air. My daughter passed element one her first time at the age of 15 ( tech with H.F.), and once again at the age of 17 (General). She also has never used C.W. other than to pass the test. If you and your kind would spend half as much time studying for element one as you do whining about it, you could pass it. So stop your whining, pass the test, and be a hero not a zero. Sincerely, Slow code General, KD7KCP 73
I think John is right on the money, see below.
"Anyone too stupid or lazy to pass a lousy 5 wpm cw test doesnt deserve HF privledges, plain and simple. Get off that lazy butt, quit whining and crying and learn something that thousands of others have learned and be proud of the accomplishment of actually earning a ticket instead of being handed a gimme. If some of these jokers spent one third of their time learning cw instead of crying like a spoiled little brat who cant get their way, they already would be an extra. Hasnt the hobby been dumbed down enough already? Does the arrl need members that badly as to look the other way and not bother to lobby the FCC to keep the testing we now have? Sickening! I guess the love of money has polluted this hobby like the rest of present day society where the dollar is more important then principles and values. Pathetic!!
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7KCP on December 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
My fellow Hams, now lets be honest about this whole "keep the code get rid of the code " thing. A lot has been written about the prose and cons of keeping the code some on both sides rather well written, and some not. I myself have been rather sharp tongued on the subject, and I have received a few interesting responses because of it.
One ham KB9YVG in a obscene response writes
"You think like an old timer.. I learned CW in a three hour seesion when I was around 12. I have no particular in interest in HF. You seem like on of those operators who like to have their daughter (obscene response) when they hit that key. I thought '73 met "please don't do my kid", whoops that must be CB talk."
and another response by KG4YJR writes
"What a moron".
It is obvious to all that the defensive vitriolic responses of the "get rid of the code test "crowd is due to the fact that their argument ,no matter how will crafted, is intellectually dishonest. The truth is (and every one knows this ,both pro and con camps) that some are willing to earn their goal and others are not. You see some think that just because they want something they should get it even if it means cheating (changing the rules). Some of these lazy slothful types will argue in an intellectually dishonest manner that their concern is "saving Ham radio" when in fact they simply lack the desire to spend the energy to pass element one. To these lazy slothful types I ask: Why not be honest? And just say the truth ,come on and repeat after me: "I just don't want to take the five words a minute CW test, so change the rules just for me!".
Sincerely;
slow code general,
KD7KCP
73
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7KCP on December 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I do not use CW myself, but I have lived through two element one tests (passed both). I think it is ok to take a five word per minute Morse code test, it's just part of earning your privilege to use HF.
What I don't get is how can one argue that one should receive such a privilege without earning it.
Can someone please explain this "even though I don't want to earn something I should get it just because I want it" thing?
Sincerely; slow code general, KD7KCP 73
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by WD0BCX on December 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I think that your girlfriend "could" be thaught of as a real ham "IF" you lead her through the forrest and show her the trees, nuts and squirrels!
We have one fellow here in town who is comenting eveyday to people on the repeater about " You are really doing a good job, you are full scale" DUH!
We need people to get into the sport and ELMERS, or ELMIRA's to lead them.
GO FOR IT !!!
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling: For those who need
|
|
|
by CODEBASHER on December 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
For those who need it:
A FREE download from CNet.com
ieSpell 2.0.1
http://download.com.com/3000-2378-10220980.html?tag=lst-0-14
ieSpell 2.0.1
Publisher's Description
ieSpell is a free Internet Explorer browser extension that spell-checks text input boxes on a Web page. It should come in particularly handy for users who do a lot of Web-based text entry (e.g., Web mail, forums, blogs, diaries). Even if your Web application already includes spell-checking functionality, this utility is faster than a server-side solution. Plus, you get to store and use your personal word list across all your applications instead of maintaining separate ones on each application.
Note: The program installs as a new button in the IE toolbar (as well as a new menu item under Tools). After filling in a form, click the ieSpell button and it pops up a dialog similar to the Microsoft Word spell check.
Download.com Review
Spell-checking options in word processing and e-mail programs save those who never won a spelling bee from looking like high school drop-outs. ieSpell adds a spelling checker to Microsoft Internet Explorer, providing a safety net for participants in interactive Web boards and people who use Web-based e-mail. We found the tool to be unobtrusive, convenient, accurate, and fast. When you want to check your spelling, activate the program from the Tools menu, the toolbar button, or by using the right-click menu. The intuitive interface resembles any other spelling checker out there, with options to add words to its dictionary and to ignore URLs and e-mail addresses. It includes a direct link to the online Merriam Webster dictionary, giving you the opportunity to expand your vocabulary as you work. Currently, ieSpell only works with the English language (but does include common U.S., Canadian, and UK dictionaries) and is only built for Internet Explorer. While we would like it to check our spelling as we type and fix punctuation errors, we're happy that it detected all of our misspelled words and offered spelling suggestions.
ieSpell 2.0.1
http://download.com.com/3000-2378-10220980.html?tag=lst-0-14
Best of all IT's FREE
73
de N0KLU, Mike
Rolla, Missouri
NCI-4743
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling: For those who need
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on December 27, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Mike makes some great recommendations there, and as he points out; “They’re Free!”
Correct spelling does make reading the posts easier………..but I would like to suggest to some that they “lighten up” on the criticisms of spelling errors. Bad spelling does not necessarily translate into “stupid”.
One of the professors I work for frequently sends emails with spelling errors or typos, in spite of his PHD. This happens because he gets between 150 and 200 emails a day, and his replies are brief and do not have time for a spell check run. We all understand this, and smile about it.
A little “smiling and understanding” would play well here, as well.
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling: For those who need
|
|
|
by CODEBASHER on December 27, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thank you KB9YZL,
I had been burnt several times for bad spelling and went on a search to find a spell checker for Internet Explorer and found this one, it was easy to install, easy to use and best of all it was free. And this spell checker was submitted by a No-Coder.
|
| |
|
KD7PLU/AG . . .
|
|
|
by KD7PLU on December 28, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I am now known as KD7PLU/AG . . . Missed two questions on the General Exam and passed code on direct copy.
If a half deaf redneck from Arizona can do it, so can you.
Loren B. Cobb - KD7PLU/AG
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7KCP on December 30, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Post your call AMATEUR2OO3 you cowardice yellow scum bag.
This is what I have to say to the lazy, slothful types like AMATEUR2OO3 who lack the desire to spend the energy to pass element one. I received my first license, Tech with H.F. ( which means of course that I passed element one) on 8/15/00. On 8/8/02, I had to pass element one once again to get my General. I have never, not even once, used C.W. on the air. My daughter passed element one her first time at the age of 15 ( tech with H.F.), and once again at the age of 17 (General). She also has never used C.W. other than to pass the test. If you and your kind would spend half as much time studying for element one as you do whining about it, you could pass it. So stop your whining, pass the test, and be a hero not a zero.
I think John is right on the money, see below.
"Anyone too stupid or lazy (AMATEUR2OO3) to pass a lousy 5 wpm cw test doesnt deserve HF privledges, plain and simple. Get off that lazy butt, quit whining and crying and learn something that thousands of others have learned and be proud of the accomplishment of actually earning a ticket instead of being handed a gimme. If some of these jokers spent one third of their time learning cw instead of crying like a spoiled little brat who cant get their way, they already would be an extra. Hasnt the hobby been dumbed down enough already? Does the arrl need members that badly as to look the other way and not bother to lobby the FCC to keep the testing we now have? Sickening! I guess the love of money has polluted this hobby like the rest of present day society where the dollar is more important then principles and values. Pathetic!!
My fellow Hams, now lets be honest about this whole "keep the code get rid of the code " thing. A lot has been written about the prose and cons of keeping the code some on both sides rather well written, and some not. I myself have been rather sharp tongued on the subject, and I have received a few interesting responses because of it.
One ham KB9YVG in a obscene response writes
"You think like an old timer.. I learned CW in a three hour seesion when I was around 12. I have no particular in interest in HF. You seem like on of those operators who like to have their daughter (obscene response) when they hit that key. I thought '73 met "please don't do my kid", whoops that must be CB talk."
and another response by KG4YJR writes
"What a moron".
It is obvious to all that the defensive vitriolic responses of the "get rid of the code test "crowd is due to the fact that their argument ,no matter how will crafted, is intellectually dishonest. The truth is (and every one knows this ,both pro and con camps) that some are willing to earn their goal and others are not. You see some think that just because they want something they should get it even if it means cheating (changing the rules). Some of these lazy slothful types will argue in an intellectually dishonest manner that their concern is "saving Ham radio" when in fact they simply lack the desire to spend the energy to pass element one. To these lazy slothful types I ask: Why not be honest? And just say the truth ,come on and repeat after me: "I just don't want to take the five words a minute CW test, so change the rules just for me!".
I do not use CW myself, but I have lived through two element one tests (passed both). I think it is ok to take a five word per minute Morse code test, it's just part of earning your privilege to use HF.
What I don't get is how can one argue that one should receive such without earning it.
Can someone please explain this "even though i don't want to earn something I should get it just because I want it" thing?
Sincerely;
Slow Code General,
KD7KCP
73
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by KD7KCP on December 30, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Have You seen this?
Meet AMATEUR2OO3!
AMATEUR2OO3 is a Subscriber!
Real Name:
Ted
Photo:
Email address:
Email address not available.
My home page is... ( be sure to include the http:// )
www.eham.net
I got interested in ham radio because...
Because I wanted to become an anonymous poster on eham and watch everyone have a cow man!
My favorite thing to do in ham radio is... Because?
Laugh at people on eham.
My equipment consists of...
A computer.
I have earned the following accomplishments in ham radio...
I have logged onto eham.net
The funniest thing that ever happened to me on the air was...
Reading eham.
When I'm not on the radio, you can normally find me...
On eham.
This is unacceptable, I hope that eham.net doesn't condone this type of behavior.
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by CODEBASHER on December 30, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KD7KCP, all I can advise is do the same thing as you would on radio to a LID or non-ham, do not answer his stupid remarks just let him rant and rave unanswered and If everyone ignores him, then one day he will go away,Because it won't be fun any more!
73's de N0KLU, Mike
Rolla, Missouri
NCI-4743
|
| |
|
RE: Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by CODEBASHER on January 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Happy New Year all. Welcome to 2004!
73's de N0KLU, Mike
Rolla, Missouri
NCI-4743
|
| |
|
Yet Another Code Rambling
|
|
|
by WA2JJH on January 18, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ! on yet another code diatribe!
Oh,TNX KENT about Profs that cannot spell!
Of couse on papers I submit to the university or hospital, I use the spell&Grammer
checker.
Unless I an submitting an artical, I just type my 50WPM. Also my fire wall does not allow me to go back to correct a bad preview!!!!!!!! You would be amazed by how many high level alerts I get from EHAM.
I do have spelling and grammer complaint Manager, Her name is HELEN WAITE. You Gots za problem with my spelling and grammer.....Go to HELEN WAITE!
73 and laughs MIKE
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Related News & Articles
Holders of Expired Novice, Tech Licenses Eligible
Dead Electrical Dudes No. 8
Key Clicks
Zach Paddle Review by WK3N
My First QRP Remote
Other General Articles
Trends in USA Amateur Radio License Classes Over Three Years
eHam.net - server performance issues
USS Indianapolis CA-35 Radio Room
Lecher Wire Follow-Up
eHam Hiccup
|
