[CW] Dissing the ARRL

Sat, 10 Jan 2004 13:49:16 -0500

Jay,

Your first line says it all:  You hated it.

I wonder why?

There is a difference between dislike and hatred.  With hatred, your being
is engaged in a active fight.

This is Amateur Radio - one who loves!

You say to teach Morse Code the "right way", not "your way".

I find this curious!  Some of us are teachers, some of us are operators,
some of us have 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 and 70 years experience with this.

I would assume that someone with 70 years of radio experience - as some of
the "gang" here was licensed in 1933 when the FCC opened shop - and have
been teaching code and operating code, might have found the "right way" -
and that "right way" is "their way".

I was an amateur for 15 years before my first professional assignment.  I
already had qualified for my professional licenses.

But on my first ship - after all the "Amateur" experience, I learned VERY
quickly that I didn't have the the real stuff for doing CW.

Several shore stations REFUSED to copy my messages!  They just said "BYE,
COME BACK WHEN YOU CAN SEND" and that was it.

I was running my words together - I was sending poorly!

But in Amateur circles, I was a member of First Class CW Operator's Club
(FOC) and other groups, how could this be?

Was this a "Old Boy's Club"?

Certainly NOT.  There was NO way the coast stations could determine by my
callsign (a ship callsign) if I was a new man or not.  It was the WAY I was
sending.  They couldn't copy me.

I could have been RESENTFUL - but what a waste!  Instead, driven by my love
of radio, I became better.

Later, no coast station ever refused my messages - and I knew that I was
sending good code!

What a treat to know that!

73

David Ring, N1EA

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Eimer" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: [CW] Dissing the ARRL

> True.
> I hated it, even though I found it easy to learn.  I didn't use it for
> months when I got on HF, because there were thousands of "new" things to
do.
> But as I accomplished some of my goals, and as conditions for DX worsened
> with the fading of the sunspots, I got into it, and now use it all the
time.
>
> But at the same time, I got turned off by all the potential Elmers, who
> instead of encouraging me to get my speed up, came on this list (and
others)
> and bitched about "lowering standards" ruining the bands.
>
> Get real.  Get out there and TEACH someone to do it right.  Not to do it
> YOUR WAY, but the RIGHT way.  Realize that some people will never use CW,
so
> teach them electronics, or tubes, or antenna design, and definitely teach
> them all protocol and etiquette.  And when you find one that loves the
> code - make them BETTER than you are.
>
> But don't force anyone to learn something they don't absolutely HAVE to
> know.  That wil turn them off.  RF safety is one area that all hams need
to
> know - and I daresay that many QCWA hams don't - because it wasn't an
issue
> when they got licenses, so unless they picked it up on their own.....  But
> Morse is NOT, beyond recognizing what it is, so as not to inadvertently
> interfere with it (which falls under etiquette, see above).
>
> Make it fun, and they'll learn it anyway - make it required and
> unnecessarily hard, and you just run potential good ops off.
>
> Jay
> AD5PE
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Wilder" <[email protected]>
> To: "Tony Martin W4FOA" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>; "John
> Rippey" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 4:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [CW] Dissing the ARRL
>
>
> > I have been following this thread about CW and its need and found some
> interesting things.
> > 1. CW is alive and well...just listen to 40 meters in the wee hours of
the
> morning.
> > 2. CW will be with us for decades to come.
> > 3. I for one still use either a straight key and now a BK-100 Japanese
> bug...but will never
> > go to a set of paddles or a keyboard to generate CW.
> > 4. As far as requiring CW to get a ham licence...who cares?  CW is fun
for
> those who like
> > to use it is not necessary for the rest of the world.
> > 5. I feel that it is more important to the ham community that new modes
> are important.
> > I remember when SSB first started and the doomsday hams predicted that
ham
> radio was done.
> > 6. Progress is the key to the survival of of ham ardio.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > At 03:45 PM 1/7/2004 -0600, Tony Martin W4FOA wrote:
> >
> > >John,
> > >
> > >Part of what you say is very true, especially regarding the lack of
> > >recruitment from within the CW ranks as well as the fact that "Elmers"
> are
> > >unfortunately almost a thing of the past.  However, I think you have
> missed
> > >the MAIN reason, that being the very fact that CW is no longer required
> to
> > >get a ham license..(after all, 5 WPM requires practically no skill).
The
> > >average new ham takes the path of least resistance....if there was a
> serious
> > >CW requirement, you might have less hams but at least there would be
some
> > >effort required...."if it's worth having, it's worth working for".  I
> can't
> > >imagine being restricted to "a shack on the belt". Heck, my cell phone
> does
> > >a better job and I don't have to "identify" or ask "anybody using the
> > >frequency"?
> > >
> > >Some of the blame falls on each of us, some of the blame falls on ARRL,
> and
> > >some of the blame falls on today's society.  So many people today in
> North
> > >America simply want something for nothing!  I think it is unfair to
cast
> any
> > >blame at the FISTS organization...at least they are trying to do
> something.
> > >I try my best to encourage the new hams to at least give CW a fair
shake
> and
> > >I'm happy to report, several have taken the challenge and are enjoying
> CW.
> > >
> > >Just my opinion...YMMV.
> > >
> > >--...  ...--  (73 for the CW challenged)
> > >
> > >Tony, W4FOA
> > >Chickamauga, GA
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "John Rippey" <[email protected]>
> > >To: <[email protected]>
> > >Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 2:04 PM
> > >Subject: [CW] Dissing the ARRL
> > >
> > >
> > >> I would like to ask the ARRL bashers what goal is being sought here?
> > >>
> > >> The pro-Morse-code argument on this web site can be reduced to a
demand
> > >> that the Federal government continue a Morse testing requirement. In
> other
> > >> words, some CW ops want a federal bailout, just like many other
> interest
> > >> groups do, ranging from illegal immigrants to Dakota wheat growers.
> > >>
> > >> Asking Uncle Sam's help implies that CW cannot stand on its own as an
> > >> appealing way to communicate and therefore must be mandated by
federal
> > >law.
> > >> This may also mean, couldn't it, that CW enthusiasts over the years
> have
> > >> not bothered to promote the mode and recruit newcomers to it? If
there
> had
> > >> been a conscious, organized, directed recruitment program (ever heard
> of
> > >> Amway? What has FISTS been doing all these years?), there likely
would
> be
> > >> lots more CW ops today and far less need for the ongoing
hand-wringing.
> > >The
> > >> alternative argument, of course, is that no amount of vigorous
> recruitment
> > >> would have been be able to attract newcomers to a dying mode. Since
no
> > >> serious recruitment effort was made, either supposition may be
correct.
> > >>
> > >> No matter, that horse is out of the barn and I find it unseemly that
a
> > >> number of our fellow citizens are looking to Uncle Sam as our savior
> once
> > >> again to make up for one more private-sector failure.
> > >>
> > >> 73,
> > >> John, W3ULS
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> CW mailing list
> > >> [email protected]
> > >> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >CW mailing list
> > >[email protected]
> > >http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> > >
> > >
> > >---
> > >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> > >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > >Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 1/2/2004
> >
> > Bob & Carole Wilder
> > 6032 Idlemoore Court
> > Theodore, AL 36582-4117
> > 251-653-5274
> > http://home.earthlink.net/~bwild
> > Asst USAF State MARS Director- Alabama
> > AF2HD/AFA2HD
> > All incoming and outgoing messages are
> > checked for virus using AVG version 6.0.558
> > and Virus database 350 updated 01/02/2004
> > Get your FREE copy at
> > http://www.grisoft.com/us/us_dwnl_free.php
> >
> >
> > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> > multipart/mixed
> >   text/plain (text body -- kept)
> > 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
> > [email protected]
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CW mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
>