[CW] Re: ARRL Proposal -- no credibility all around

[Kenneth Cooperstein]

ARRL: How can it be reconciled that the new novice class will be limited 
to 100 watts because of lack of RFI proficiency, but that existing tech 
and novice classes will get a free pass to legal power?  Such a major 
inconsistency undermines the credibility of the rest.

CW snobs:  What difference does it make how fast a CW operator 
transmits?  We don't revoke the privilege to speak in public because 
someone speaks too slowly.  No one forces you to communicate with a 5 
wpm operator.  The low-end of the bands should be big enough and 
reserved for CW, regardless of speed.  I see no valid reason for having 
fast lanes and slow lanes for CW.  You want a 20 wpm net?  You can have 
one without excluding CW operators from the whole sub band..  This is 
pure snobbery and the proponents of reinstating speed testing lack 
credibility.

IMHO, the purpose of preserving CW is that it is the communication mode 
of last resort in major [biblical type] disasters:  Simple equipment, 
low power, narrow bandwidth.  This purpose is furthered by establishing 
CW-only sub bands open to everyone, regardless of class. The only 
parameter I would tie to level of expertise is power.  The fact that 
commercial CW operators of yesteryear were expected to operate at 20-30 
wpm is utterly immaterial today.

With nothing but incredible petitions submitted, the FCC will do what is 
politically expedient, which will be the worst option.

Ken KC2JDY