[QCWA] FCC NPRM:

[W1EOF]

Paul -

Very well said OM. I've been a ham for 34 years. In that time, I have had
approx 34 non-CW QSOs. So you can see I'm a diehard CW man. Yet I see no
point in keeping this as a prerequisite to getting a amateur radio license.

I just don't buy the argument that the CW test is a barrier to riff-raff. If
it is, then how did we get some of those hams on 75m who use inappropriate
language and poor operating tchniques? Me? I'd much rather that they make
the tests harder.

The thing that is the largest potential barrier to getting GOOD people into
radio is the classest and rude comments I read all the time regarding new
hams. When I became a ham the Old Men treated me as an equal, not as a
second-class citizen. We really need to ge together to make ham radio
better, not to fracture it into factions that war with each other.

73,

Mark W1EOF


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul L Schmidt [mailto:k9ps at arrl.net]
> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:09 AM
> To: Discussion of QCWA
> Subject: Re: [QCWA] FCC NPRM:
>
>
> Gene A. Nailon wrote:
> >
> > FROM: K5DLE  Gene Nailon  k5dle at juno.com
> > 20 July 2005
> >
> > Hello QCWA;
> >
> > You must be very proud!  You are going to get just what you
> > want and deserve.
> >
>
> I'm not exactly sure what that means.  It seems to me that the
> FCC's process of a rulemaking proposal is supposed to accomplish
> just that - determine what we want, need, and deserve.
>
> > Congradulations,
>
> Have we somehow graduated to/from something?  (That popular
> mis-spelling of the word is generally reserved greeting cards
> at graduation time - was that the intent?)
>
> The worldwide regs no longer require a morse examination.
>
> My state doesn't require someone wanting a driving license to
> demonstrate ability with a standard transmission.
>
> Both morse and standard transmissions are still legal to use
> if one wants to.  In fact, one of my cars has a standard
> transmission -- as do some of those 250+ horsepower 6-speed
> sports cars I've seen advertised on TV.
>
> The NPRM shouldn't be seen as a loss of a mode - it should be
> seen as an opportunity to evaluate how far we have come with
> communications technology, where we are going, and to what
> extent tradition and history need to be included in the
> requirements for new licensees. The FCC doesn't make those
> decisions in a vacuum -- they solicit comments from citizens
> before making the decison, and often adjust the proposal to
> reflect comments received.
>
> This isn't time to gripe about the proposal.  It's time to
> assemble thoughts in a well laid-out format and get them ready
> to present to the FCC.
>
> -ps
> _______________________________________________
> QCWA mailing list
> QCWA at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/qcwa
>
>