[CW] adios ARRL

[N2EY@aol.com]

In a message dated 1/19/04 9:19:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, Abqcooks@aol.com 
writes:


> Did I miss something ? 

Maybe.


> I dont recall WRC 2003 addressing the issue of reducing
> the theory requirements for licensure. 

Nor I!


> Where did the ARRL come up with this nonsense about
> upgrading Techs to Generals without a written exam. 

The same place as the idea about upgrading Advanceds to Extras without an 
exam.

Both are bad ideas.


> And do we really want people who take a mere 25 question
> non technical Novice "exam" to be handed 2m and HF phone? 

Why not? 

Back in 1967, I got my Novice by passing 5 wpm code and a 20 or 25 question 
written exam that was not very technical. No diagrams, no symbols, no serious 
math. Mostly questions on band edges and when to identify and how long the 
license was good for and not to cuss or call SOS falsely. 

I was 13 and between 6th and 7th grade. I went home not knowing if I'd passed 
the written or not - the volunteer examiner didn't mark the by-mail exams 
back then. 

But I went home and built a transmitter. And when the license showed up on 
October 14, 1967, I put it on the air. That was back in the days when 
transmitters had to be tuned up to work right. That little rig worked a lot of stations 
but never strayed out of the band.


> Most people seem to favor tougher written exams and a majority
> of ARRL members dont approve of any scheme for a codeless 
> HF license.  

How do we know that? The most recent "scientific" survey was done 7-8 years 
ago. 

So what's the ARRL up to ?    $$$$$$$
> 
> I guess it's all about revenue and certainly not about
> representation.  

Maybe. Or maybe not. 

Have you read the "Amateur Radio In the 21st Century" paper by KL7CC? 

Did you read what FCC said in the Report and Order back in 1999? They want 
code testing to just go away. Even though a majority of those who commented (by 
actual count of an anticodetest person!) wanted at least two code test speeds, 
FCC dumped all but 5 wpm. And even though most wanted better code testing, 
FCC cut both the number of written tests and the total number of questions.

Who is FCC listening to in matters of license tests? Ain't ARRL. Looks like 
NCVEC!


> Code issue aside, this proposal is just another major dumbdown.
> Adios ARRL.  One last batch of cards sent out thru the QSL
> bureau and they can forget I exist.  
> Hopefully the FCC will disregard their proposal just like they
> did last time !                     jc
> 

And what did FCC do last time? They went with a proposal that was 
in many ways far worse than what ARRL proposed!

One thing is for sure - the more of us who leave the ARRL, the more the other
folks take over. Heck, those Directors were all elected by *us* - and they're
not paid anyway.

73 de Jim, N2EY


--- 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  ---