[CW] Dissing the ARRL

[Abqcooks@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/7/04 7:57:19 PM Mountain Standard Time, N2EY@aol.com 
writes:

> Compare all that to the present system - with or without code test. And 
>  remember that although ARRL and others pushed for better written tests, 
back 
> in 
>  2000 the FCC cut the written testing down by more than a third. Before 
April 
> 
>  2000, an Extra required a 5 written tests totalling 185 questions. Now it 
> takes 3 
>  written tests totalling 120 questions. And there are folks who want even 
> less 
>  *written* testing...
..............................................................................
I received an interesting comment  from a ranking ARRL HQ
staff member the other day.  Being aware that the Board of
Directors will soon meet to decide the ARRL stance on the
upcoming dumbdown,  I had emailed in my 2 cents worth on the 
subject.  My comments suggested that the license requirements
have been watered down way too far already.  Not just code,
but theory as well.  The reply I received was that the "level
of knowledge required to get from zero to Extra is much greater
now than it was in the mid 60s".    
Well, I wasn't around in the 60s so I cant say.  But I do know the
General I took in 1980 was much more technical than the
current General exam which looks pretty simplified to me.
It scares me to see that a ranking ARRL policy maker thinks the written
tests have gotten harder.  Maybe W5YI has been brain washing
the boys at HQ ! !              jim    N5KY