Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters  (Read 33344 times)
K5END
Member

Posts: 1309




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: November 27, 2009, 05:05:40 AM »

Jim,

Your points are good. However I think we are arguing apples and oranges, pardon the cliche.

My point is, a single aspect is not sufficient to make an evaluation--good or bad.

The SSB BS we hear sometimes on the air is behavior. That is something we can judge as appropriate or not.

OTOH, I know of some proficient Morse code/CW ops who don't fall into the category of what I would call good hams.

Knowing code does not prevent someone from being a jerk. Code is not a baptism into the good-Ham category. Look at some of the posts here on eham for example.



73
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3835




Ignore
« Reply #31 on: November 27, 2009, 06:27:44 AM »

K5END writes: "My point is, a single aspect is not sufficient to make an evaluation--good or bad."

I think it depends on the aspect. For example:

K5END: "The SSB BS we hear sometimes on the air is behavior. That is something we can judge as appropriate or not."

Someone who intentionally behaves inappropriately on the air is a bad ham - by definition. We can make that evaluation based on that single aspect.

I'm not talking about the person who goes 10 minutes and 3 seconds without IDing, the one who sometimes forgets to push the SPLIT button or the occasional heck or darn that slips in. I mean the stuff that clearly way over the line, and which is obviously deliberate.

K5END: "OTOH, I know of some proficient Morse code/CW ops who don't fall into the category of what I would call good hams."

In 42 years as a ham, I can only think of one: W9WNV, Dr. Don Miller. Skilled operator, even more skilled con artist. Except he got a little sloppy and his DX con game was discovered. Fascinating story; I remember it well. But Don Miller was the exception that proved the rule.

K5END: "Knowing code does not prevent someone from being a jerk. Code is not a baptism into the good-Ham category. Look at some of the posts here on eham for example."

There is no one test that will absolutely guarantee that everyone who passes it is a Good Ham. Same for any other qualification, such as electronics knowledge, professional experience, educational background, military service, political affiliation, etc. Particularly when the test is a one-time thing that may have been done decades ago.

There are bad apples in every human endeavor, regardless of the tests, qualifications, etc.

But the fact that something isn't a 100% perfect filter/predictor/qualifier doesn't mean it's useless.

I'd put it this way: "All else being equal, the ham who knows _____ is a better ham than the one who doesn't know ______."

Put the same amateur-radio-related knowledge in both blanks (as long as it's a positive thing) and the statement works. It can be anything from "how to solder a PL-259" to "Part 97" to "standard phonetics" to "Morse Code".

---

What I and many others object to is the idea that Morse Code skill makes no difference in Amateur Radio. And the idea that the same person cannot be both skilled in Morse Code and knowledgeable in theory, regulations, etc.

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
WX7G
Member

Posts: 5917




Ignore
« Reply #32 on: November 27, 2009, 08:37:55 AM »

Let's restate the CODE/NO CODE thing more narrowly.

All things being equal is a CODE ham superior to a NO CODE ham? To answer this without wandering off into endless anecdotal accounts we must define what we mean by 'superior.' As it sits that is one w-i-d-e word.

If we define 'superior' to mean more effort has been expended, we find that CODE is superior to NO CODE. Notice that we can pick a definition or definitions for 'superior' that will give us NO CODE is superior to CODE. Have we (I) created a straw man who is easily knocked down?
Logged
WX7G
Member

Posts: 5917




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: November 27, 2009, 08:39:53 AM »

A new ham song:

"have noticed lately that 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters" sung to the tune of "it's starting to sound a lot like Christmas..."
Logged
W1IT
Member

Posts: 53




Ignore
« Reply #34 on: December 18, 2009, 08:48:58 PM »

What you are experiencing is the qualification less
amateur radio service.
Its a cancer and its spread to all bands. It used to be largely confined to two meter repeaters, but now with cheese doodle exams and no code, this type of low lifer is everywhere on all bands.

Its sad.
Logged
WZ9O
Member

Posts: 40




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: December 19, 2009, 02:57:38 AM »

It gets tougher everyday as more and more mental midget newbie’s arrive and drag it futher into the sewer.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!