[QCWA] Quarter Century or Not??

[Richard]

Since the early 60's the arrl has listened to the minority and made 
proposals to the fcc on changes they would like to see. as was the case in 
incentive licensing. If you will remember the General had full privileges 
and the arrl listened to the advanced & extra and proposed the Incentive 
licensing to the fcc, and they took about 50% away from the general as I 
remember?? It seems they have done their best to propose one thing after 
another to the fcc to make it so easy to get a license. The fcc just before 
they voted, told the amateur community they did not care if we wanted to 
keep the code, just tell us what you want. Now the code is gone, you can 
take the so-called test over until you pass it. Some have called it "drive 
through licensing" to get your ticket now. I have tried my best to lend a 
helping hand to the new people , but they seem to know it  all, and I am one 
of "those" hams. What we have now are Novices with General & Extra 
privileges. It is very sad that it all boils down to numbers.. we are so 
worried about numbers , but with more numbers, comes more money for these 
groups so that is why they have gone that way. I cant remember the magazine 
but they said something like, our leaders now, think it is better to just 
give it away, than to make them work for something.  I have only been a Ham 
since the 60's and have seen many changes, and for me, not for the better. 
as someone put it, "leave no one behind" mentality is where we are now.
Rich
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed" <norift at dishmail.net>
To: "Discussion of QCWA or Ham Radio" <qcwa at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 11:28 AM
Subject: Re: [QCWA] Quarter Century or Not??


> OK... now I will chime in.
>
> I have seen ham radio change greatly over the past 31 years as we run full 
> tilt into the future.   Although I am rather sporadic in my on-air time in 
> ham radio I have kept active in homebrew and kit building equipment and 
> antennas as well as promoting and in being an Elmer to others and where I 
> was able, I have served on VEC teams.
>
> Although it saddened me to see the FCC reduce and then drop the code 
> requirement and subsequently eliminate the "Novice" CW portion of the 
> bands, I really don't care whether a person devotes all their time to one 
> aspect of hamming.   It is their choice.
>
> If folks want a non QCWA then let them create it... do not join QCWA and 
> then change it into something it is not.
>
> I hear the arguments about the needed youth.   They need good role models, 
> not a quick and easy, no one left behind, way to fulfill their perceived 
> desires.   Nothing easily obtained is of any great value.
>
> "Stick in the mud"... no.   Just wanting there to be some standards, some 
> goals left to reach for.
>
> I, like Bob, looked forward to reaching 25 years as a licensed ham so that 
> I could join QCWA.   If that requirement changes to less than the Quarter 
> Century mark then I no longer desire to be a member.
>
> Ed Kotz - AD7GR
> Baker valley, OR
>
>
> Bob & Linda Smith wrote:
>> That is the question and for my .02 I want you to have 25 years in grade. 
>> I don't care what grade or mode or HT or what but I want the QCWA and 
>> what it stands for to stay put.  I waited until my 25 years were up and 
>> was proud to join at that time.  I for one do not want the new board to 
>> change the minimum requirement to something less that 25 years for QCWA. 
>> I hear and understand all the suggestions about our youth and the decline 
>> of our hobby but it is one of the few requirements left that shows 
>> longevity.
>>
>> Back under my rock....
>> Bob Smith WB6ODR, Prescott, AZ
>>
>>
>> Well if this is going to be a discussion then here is my pennies worth.
>> I have to agree with Steve 100% on this item. The future of Ham Radio is
>> in the younger Hams realm. If they are allowed to join us then we can do
>> more elmering of the young group and bring them up properly by us Old
>> F***S and teach them. I find that the old timers do not go to the CB AKA
>> Ham Radio meetings but they do go to QCWA. I find that most members set
>> around talking about all their medical problems when some of the
>> greatest minds in Ham Radio could be bringing up young folk. I have a 33
>> year old new General that now knows more about Vacuum Tubes then a lot
>> of old timers due to this fact.
>>
>> Come on guys lighten up and bring them in the fold!!!
>>
>> Bob W1PE
>>
>> Norm!!
>>
>> SIR...you get my vote for awesome email of the week!!
>> LOVE IT! You are 100%+ correct on every point you make!
>>
>> ROLE MODEL was the key word in all that!!
>>
>> 73
>> Jose - N1BAA
>>
>>
>>
>>> The founders of QCWA had an agenda and that was to recogn
>>> ize the service of  radio amateurs licensed for 25 years
>>> or more.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Bob and the Board of Directors....
>>>>
>>>> For those old "stick in the muds", it's time to start
>>>> building, not continue to allow QCWA to fade, too.
>>>>
>>>> I request that with the NEXT election that the MEMBERS
>>>> be accorded an opportunity to vote on the 25 year
>>>>
>>> requirement. >
>>>
>>>> I'll vote to eliminate such an useless, antique
>>>> requirement. It has long outlived its usefullness.
>>>>
>>>> Steve brodie,
>>>> K5ZYZ
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> QCWA mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/qcwa
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:QCWA at mailman.qth.net