[CW] ARRL refused to support code requirement

[Scott Rosenfeld [N7JI]]

I don't see this as necessarily the case.

Let's be honest about it.  5 wpm really doesn't do much practical for 
anyone since you NEVER have to go further to upgrade.

You'd ending up learning higher speeds because you want to.

Which is pretty much the same as if there's no code element at all.

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Nancy  WZ8C wrote:

> I talked to the VEC at ARRL HQ and finally got a straight answer -- they abstained from voting at the VEC conference that Maia referred to in his petition.  
> 
> That has the same effect of not supporting the code requirement, since they knew it would allow Maia to truthfully say there was no opposition among the VEC's to eliminating the requirement.  The ARRL couldn't come right out and vote to eliminate it because it would cause too much of an uproar among the ham community, so they took the weasel way out.
> 
> Nancy WZ8C
> 
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
> or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
> to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---
> _______________________________________________
> CW mailing list
> CW@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> 

-- 
Scott Rosenfeld  ARS N7JI
541-684-9970  Eugene, OR  Land o' much rain
If you find me on the air, I'm probably in my car
ham@w3eax.umd.edu  http://w3eax.umd.edu/~ham