[Lowfer] Alternate Morse code test

[Jay Rusgrove]

John
I think cw is a lot like spinach.
Most of us as kids probably hated spinach but our parents made us eat
it anyway. Most of us probably swore as children we'd never eat
it when we got older. Many of us actually ended up really liking the stuff.
Jay

 
John Davis wrote:
Did I inadvertently log into the luddite@qth mailing
list?
Sorry for not comprehending just how proving you can do something one

time --something you may or may not ever voluntarily USE again thereafter--

would improve my character, cleanse my soul, or make me any more thoughtful

an amateur operator.
As the engineering manager of a radio and television transmitter fleet,
I am

accustomed to matching the experience and training of applicants to
the

skill sets necessary to perform our work.  Not once in 40 years
of

broadcasting have I seen the ability to, say, play the violin, translate

into the ability or desire to keep frequency and power and modulation
levels

within prescribed limits, troubleshoot circuitry to component level,

communicate diplomatically with our audience, or fill out station logs.

Strangely, neither have I seen the ability to send and receive Morse

translate into those same skills.
We maintain an amateur-friendly shop here, in contrast to many broadcasters

these days.  We value the technical skills, and more than that,
the

ingenuity of some of our ham operators in getting the job done even
when we

lack the resources to do everything by the book.  I have noticed
no

difference in this trait between our no-code Technicians and our old-timer

Extras.  The only distinction I have seen is that the ones who
are ACTIVE in

the hobby make better broadcast engineers than the ones who aren't--whatever

the modes they use.
I say this to make the point that I'm certainly NOT anti-ham, as if
that

could even remotely be suggested.  I am merely code-neutral. 
It's like

learning DOS was for me a decade ago--not something I'll personally
be

interested in, unless or until it will enable me to do something else
that's

even more interesting.  And I'm not interested in coping with
the many lids

on 20m or 75m these days, any more than the ones on 11 meters. 
An LF ham

band would be a different matter, if the regs still require code by
that

time.  And if they don't, I'll be no less knowledgable or courteous
an

operator simply because of it.  Nor will most people.  LF
is not an

attractive place for appliance operators.
While it appears recent developments may be perceived by some members
of

this list as a personal affront, I am disappointed to see how quick
some of

the guiding lights of our hobby have been to express such bitter negativity

in this fundamentally off-topic thread.  Some of those sentiments
being

expressed can be taken personally too, after all.
Or are the name-callers right?  Maybe I'm just guilty of being...
--A Dummy
_______________________________________________

>From the Lowfer mailing list

Send messages to: Lowfer@mailman.qth.net

To sub/unsub visit: 
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer





--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
text/html (html body -- converted)
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  ---