How to tell a NCG or NCE

[ky5u]

If you are so inclined, you can easily see if someone is a NCG or NCE from the AE7Q database. Below is an example of a no code slacker listing... The four important things...

1. Now a General or Extra
2. Previously a Technician
3. Code Profeciency 0wpm
4. Activation date after 2/27/07


Callsign KI6BUT
ULS File Number 0002415676
FRN 0014353734
Licensee ID/SGIN L01095827/000
Applicant Type I - Individual
Entity Type L - Licensee or Assignee
Entity Name Bushnell, Michael G
Attention
First Name Michael
Middle Init G
Last Name Bushnell
Name Suffix
Street Address 9072 Harness St
Po Box
City Spring Valley
County San Diego County
State CA - California
ZIP Code 91977
Maidenhead DM12mr
Radio Service HA - Amateur
License Status A - Active
Grant Date 2005-12-20
Effective Date 2007-02-27
Cancel Date
Expire Date 2015-12-20
Last Action Date 2007-02-27
ULS/Geo Region 6
Callsign Group D - 2x3
Operator Group C - 1x3
Operator Class G - General
Prev Class T - Technician
Prev Callsign
Vanity Type
Is Trustee
Trustee Callsign
Trustee Name
Next Callsign
Code Proficiency 0 WPM


Remember that a new applicant will not have a "prev class" . Lets give them the benefit of the doubt. And remember, on the air, lets give EVERYONE a chance.

[kn4ds]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Feb. 28 2007,14:31)]If you are so inclined, you can easily see if someone is a NCG or NCE from the AE7Q database.

3. Code Profeciency 0wpm
Code Proficiency 0 WPM


Remember that a new applicant will not have a "prev class" . Lets give them the benefit of the doubt. And remember, on the air, lets give EVERYONE a chance.
I personally don't care, but whatcha wanna bet someone gets all upset by this and tries to make AE7Q remove that little bit of info?

[K7JEM]

Not really. A person can be a "tech with code" and show as 0 wpm. Why? Because the FCC database no longer tracks techs with code. At some date a few years ago, the FCC no longer granted Tech+. Therefore, the database won't show if they have passed code or not. They could have passed the code test last July, and didn't upgrade to general or extra until now. The VE's do not send the CSCEs into the FCC to have a code proficiency annotated.

It only seems to matter in some peoples small minds, however. The vast majority of hams do not care what code proficiency you have mastered. Some pea-brained individuals will care, and thats their problem.

Joe

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Feb. 28 2007,15:03)]Not really. A person can be a "tech with code" and show as 0 wpm. Why? Because the FCC database no longer tracks techs with code.
Moot point. Most Tech+'s and tech w/code upgraded to general or extra.

I can't imagine many people sitting around with a CSCE for element 1 and not taking the ridiculously easy general (and extra) written exams.

[K7JBQ]

Hmmm,

If I'm conversing with someone in code, and he's clicking along at a nice smooth 20 words per...I doubt I'm going to be looking up his "code proficiency."

If the conversation is via PSK, RTTY or phone, I doubt it matters much either.

So please, what's the point?

73,
Bill

[ky5u]

Subject: No Code Generals and Extras

Quote[/b] ]jbq: If I'm conversing with someone in code, and he's clicking along at a nice smooth 20 words per...

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!

[kc9jqm]

Quote[/b] ]So please, what's the point?

Anal retentive stupidity

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Feb. 28 2007,14:31)]If you are so inclined, you can easily see if someone is a NCG or NCE from the AE7Q database. Below is an example of a no code slacker listing... The three important things...

1. Now a General or Extra
2. Previously a Technician
3. Code Profeciency 0wpm


Callsign KI6BUT
ULS File Number 0002415676
FRN 0014353734
Licensee ID/SGIN L01095827/000
Applicant Type I - Individual
Entity Type L - Licensee or Assignee
Entity Name Bushnell, Michael G
Attention
First Name Michael
Middle Init G
Last Name Bushnell
Name Suffix
Street Address 9072 Harness St
Po Box
City Spring Valley
County San Diego County
State CA - California
ZIP Code 91977
Maidenhead DM12mr
Radio Service HA - Amateur
License Status A - Active
Grant Date 2005-12-20
Effective Date 2007-02-27
Cancel Date
Expire Date 2015-12-20
Last Action Date 2007-02-27
ULS/Geo Region 6
Callsign Group D - 2x3
Operator Group C - 1x3
Operator Class G - General
Prev Class T - Technician
Prev Callsign
Vanity Type
Is Trustee
Trustee Callsign
Trustee Name
Next Callsign
Code Proficiency 0 WPM


Remember that a new applicant will not have a "prev class" . Lets give them the benefit of the doubt. And remember, on the air, lets give EVERYONE a chance.
I think this (http://www.ae7q.com/show/CallDetail.php?ID=2804898) is a better example.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (kc9jqm @ Feb. 28 2007,13:38)]Quote[/b] ]So please, what's the point?

Anal retentive stupidity
Call: KC9JQM Class: Technician

I see your point of view. And you answered the question of WHAT's THE POINT albeit by your example.

[kc9jqm]

Quote[/b] ]Call: KC9JQM Class: Technician

I already know that.

That's the 4th time you've done that to
me. Having memory problems? I suggest
looking at these fine products:

http://www.brainquicken.com/images2/p_riskfree.jpg

Mega Memory (http://www.amazon.com/Kevin-Trudeaus-Mega-Memory-Superpower/dp/0688153879)

[N0NVT]

just another troll. who cares what license someone holds??does your mother,,father,,or wife,,kids care?? no!! why should you care what someone else does?? there is no regulatory board of inspectors out here. if you want to do something start a neibourhood watch and keep your streets safe instead of sitting on your duffs and wondering why someone did`nt go with code. get productive, not destructive. i retired from guardian angel street duties. we kept our streets safe at night for the people. i`m from fla,,not 50 yet,,still in my 40`s,,and still able to do what i once did. i lift weights, still kick box, and have a college degree in criminal justice. so, i`m not stupid, or lazy. yes,, i can still do 15wpm with the key. am i licensed to do code now? no!! i now am a tech. so,,,do you care?? will that make me any worse now that i no longer hold an advanced ticket?? i don`t care what ticket you hold,, only what kind of person you are. i`m not judgemental of people. your either a good person or not!! have a nice day.... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Feb. 28 2007,13:42)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Feb. 28 2007,14:31)]If you are so inclined, you can easily see if someone is a NCG or NCE from the AE7Q database. Below is an example of a no code slacker listing... The three important things...

1. Now a General or Extra
2. Previously a Technician
3. Code Profeciency 0wpm


Callsign KI6BUT
ULS File Number 0002415676
FRN 0014353734
Licensee ID/SGIN L01095827/000
Applicant Type I - Individual
Entity Type L - Licensee or Assignee
Entity Name Bushnell, Michael G
Attention
First Name Michael
Middle Init G
Last Name Bushnell
Name Suffix
Street Address 9072 Harness St
Po Box
City Spring Valley
County San Diego County
State CA - California
ZIP Code 91977
Maidenhead DM12mr
Radio Service HA - Amateur
License Status A - Active
Grant Date 2005-12-20
Effective Date 2007-02-27
Cancel Date
Expire Date 2015-12-20
Last Action Date 2007-02-27
ULS/Geo Region 6
Callsign Group D - 2x3
Operator Group C - 1x3
Operator Class G - General
Prev Class T - Technician
Prev Callsign
Vanity Type
Is Trustee
Trustee Callsign
Trustee Name
Next Callsign
Code Proficiency 0 WPM


Remember that a new applicant will not have a "prev class" . Lets give them the benefit of the doubt. And remember, on the air, lets give EVERYONE a chance.
I think this (http://www.ae7q.com/show/CallDetail.php?ID=2804898) is a better example.
But in that example, has the person passed the code test, or not? It is not very clear, and that is my point. There are going to be some individuals that have passed a code test, yet show "0 wpm".

I'm not sure we can say either way on your example. Only the individual knows for sure.

Joe

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] ]vxb:dummies,,all dummies. . .

vxb: i`m not judgemental of people.

You seem like a nice guy and I don't want to wake up with my cat's head ripped off on my doormat. So don't be mad, ok?

[n6vmo]

Callsign N6VMO #
FRN 0014459150 #
Licensee ID L01099783 #
Entity Name John C Maetta #
First Name John #
Middle Init C #
Last Name Maetta #
Name Suffix #
Local Address 460 Milky Way #
City Lompoc #
County Santa Barbara County #
State CA - California #
ZIP Code #93436 #
Maidenhead CM94sp #
Applicant Type I - Individual #
Radio Service HA - Amateur #
Grant Date 1989-08-29 #
As Of Date 1998-04-04 #
Expire Date 1999-08-29 #
Birth Date (hidden) #
Call Region 6 #
Geo Region 6 #
Callsign Group C - 1x3 #
Operator Group A - 1x2, 2x1, 2x2 #
Operator Class E - Amateur Extra #
Prev Callsign #
Trustee Callsign #
Next Callsign #
Code Proficiency #20 WPM

[N5FOG]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Feb. 27 2007,14:31)]If you are so inclined, you can easily see if someone is a NCG or NCE from the AE7Q database. Below is an example of a no code slacker listing... The three important things...

Ah chucky you can't stand it, so you're going to find some way some how to try to save the great status quo that makes you a big time ham operator.

The fact of the matter is for every one 1 bitter ass like you trying to drive a wedge in the hobby over a code test there are several hundred who genuinely care about the hobby and don't care if who they are talking to passed a code test or not.

Charles you really need to get professional help, you are letting this become a very unhealthy obsession.


FOG

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Feb. 28 2007,16:02)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Feb. 28 2007,13:42)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Feb. 28 2007,14:31)]If you are so inclined, you can easily see if someone is a NCG or NCE from the AE7Q database. Below is an example of a no code slacker listing... The three important things...

1. Now a General or Extra
2. Previously a Technician
3. Code Profeciency 0wpm


Callsign KI6BUT
ULS File Number 0002415676
FRN 0014353734
Licensee ID/SGIN L01095827/000
Applicant Type I - Individual
Entity Type L - Licensee or Assignee
Entity Name Bushnell, Michael G
Attention
First Name Michael
Middle Init G
Last Name Bushnell
Name Suffix
Street Address 9072 Harness St
Po Box
City Spring Valley
County San Diego County
State CA - California
ZIP Code 91977
Maidenhead DM12mr
Radio Service HA - Amateur
License Status A - Active
Grant Date 2005-12-20
Effective Date 2007-02-27
Cancel Date
Expire Date 2015-12-20
Last Action Date 2007-02-27
ULS/Geo Region 6
Callsign Group D - 2x3
Operator Group C - 1x3
Operator Class G - General
Prev Class T - Technician
Prev Callsign
Vanity Type
Is Trustee
Trustee Callsign
Trustee Name
Next Callsign
Code Proficiency 0 WPM


Remember that a new applicant will not have a "prev class" . Lets give them the benefit of the doubt. And remember, on the air, lets give EVERYONE a chance.
I think this (http://www.ae7q.com/show/CallDetail.php?ID=2804898) is a better example.
But in that example, has the person passed the code test, or not? It is not very clear, and that is my point. There are going to be some individuals that have passed a code test, yet show "0 wpm".

I'm not sure we can say either way on your example. Only the individual knows for sure.

Joe
It's safe to assume that Katie Breen didn't pass the code test.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (Kc5fog @ Feb. 28 2007,16:13)][quote=AG4YO,Feb. 27 2007,14:31]The fact of the matter is for every one 1 bitter ass like you trying to drive a wedge in the hobby over a code test there are several hundred who genuinely care about the hobby and don't care if who they are talking to passed a code test or not.
Hey you, quit the personal attacks and namecalling okay?

[KG4NEL]

Who cares...

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Feb. 28 2007,14:16)]It's safe to assume that Katie Breen didn't pass the code test.
But you don't know that, at least from looking at the info given. If she wasn't high profile ARRL, there would be even more ambiguity.

The ARRL offered tests before midnight on 2/22, and after midnight on 2/23. People at the same building within a few minutes of each other were taking the old and new tests, we can't tell from this database which group she is in. Thats my point, there is no definitive database that lists "for sure" whether or not a person has passed a code test, at least if "0 wpm" is listed. For hams that are listed at 5wpm or greater, it is probably accurate. But some of those hams that are listed as "0 wpm" have actually passed a 5 wpm test.

Don't take this database to the bank on the 0 wpm line, it just isn't accurate, it can't be.

Joe

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif aw let the kids carry on with their childish antics...at least they are mostly confined to one or two threads and not insulting every one on every thread.

Eventually the moderators or even FRED him self will intervene with some banning from making future posts.

They need to remember that this is FRED s house ( the internet site ) and we are his guests. If a guest mis behaves, they are asked to leave.

So, let the kids ramble and spew out their venom, eventually things will get better.

BTW--- aint no one forcing you to read all of this junk any way...so tell me again why YOUO ( or I ) am here , instead on being at one of the nicer threads ( with soooo many to choose from ) !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[n7rjd]

And some thought a decision by the FCC one way or the other would put an end to the code/no-code debate. I guess you're showing them.

The decision has been made, the law has been changed. It's a done deal. At least allow the new and newly upgraded operators a chance to show what they can do.

My guess is the ratio of good operators to poor operators won't change much with or without them. I've been listening to people tuning up over the top of ongoing conversations long enough to know it's not all no-code HF operators.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Feb. 28 2007,16:35)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Feb. 28 2007,14:16)]It's safe to assume that Katie Breen didn't pass the code test.
But you don't know that, at least from looking at the info given. If she wasn't high profile ARRL, there would be even more ambiguity.

The ARRL offered tests before midnight on 2/22, and after midnight on 2/23. People at the same building within a few minutes of each other were taking the old and new tests, we can't tell from this database which group she is in. Thats my point, there is no definitive database that lists "for sure" whether or not a person has passed a code test, at least if "0 wpm" is listed. For hams that are listed at 5wpm or greater, it is probably accurate. But some of those hams that are listed as "0 wpm" have actually passed a 5 wpm test.

Don't take this database to the bank on the 0 wpm line, it just isn't accurate, it can't be.

Joe
Joe, please stop. You have a patch for every NCT sore!

If it looks like one, talks like one, acts like one is what I go by.

And to me it doesn't matter ANYWAY because I will talk to everybody.

WRT Katie, there was an article on the ARRL website about how she was one of the first to get her upgrade under the new rules.

She didn't pass a code test.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (KE7DLG @ Feb. 28 2007,14:43)]The decision has been made, the law has been changed. It's a done deal. At least allow the new and newly upgraded operators a chance to show what they can do.
I agree, and this chain has nothing to do with giving upgraded Techs a fair chance on the air. In most cases I have heard, they're doing pretty good early on. This is an Internet discussion.

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Feb. 28 2007,14:48)]Joe, please stop. You have a patch for every NCT sore!

If it looks like one, talks like one, acts like one is what I go by.

And to me it doesn't matter ANYWAY because I will talk to everybody.

WRT Katie, there was an article on the ARRL website about how she was one of the first to get her upgrade under the new rules.

She didn't pass a code test.
Yes, like I said, she is high profile ARRL, so we probably know for sure. But other people are nobodies, you don't know them from Adam, and you will have no idea if they passed a code test or not. You can't depend on this or any database for that info, since the info doesn't exist at any central location. You can't go "Aha! I see you listed as 0 wpm, so you never took a test!! Got you, slacker!'

Then they come back and say "Oh, but I did pass a test in 2006, have the CSCE right here, loser." And the hate and animosity continues.

Why don't people just let it drop? Why is anyone concerned with a database, especially one that is not accurate? Why does Charlie persist in this endeavor? It's just stupid and divisive. If you want to be stupid and divisive, then continue. If you want to let it drop, and accept hams as they are, then it doesn't matter.

Charlie "welcomes" the new hams on the one hand, then slams them on the other, it just boggles the mind.

Joe

[kc4ylv]

You can tell a "no code" general or Extra by the way he walks. They have a distinctive hunch from all of the OF monkeys on their back, watching their every move.

[ky5u]

Cliff Notes (for JEM): What this is is an Internet discussion about the various issues without taking it out on the newbees on the air. I think that's pretty fair.

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Feb. 28 2007,12:31)]an example of a no code slacker
Here we go again.

[KI4ODO]

You know what strikes me as funny. First off, if you hear a DX station from a country that dropped the code requirement, there will be a pile up of folks to talk to this "plug and play" scumbag no code guy LOL. Second, I hear guys who have been on 75 or 40 meters for years tell you plain as day they hate code, and will never use it "I jist wont to tawk". So is it better to learn code to USE (like me and some others I know of are doing) or to learn just enough to pass a test, never to be used again?
Of course it doesn't really matter now because the FCC decided for us. We did not make the choice, the freakin' FCC did, NOT US. So we may be better off to move forward, get along, and ENJOY HAM RADIO!

[K3VR]

Interesting website. My present call is listed, and my old call as an Advanced op, but my first call in 1976 is not listed. I wonder if that's because it pre-dates the ULS?

Also, when did the FCC (what year) drop the 20 WPM requirement for Extras... Anyone remember?

[AC0H]

Quote[/b] ]The fact of the matter is for every one 1 bitter ass like you trying to drive a wedge in the hobby over a code test there are several hundred who genuinely care about the hobby and don't care if who they are talking to passed a code test or not.
Are these several hundred NCT's some of those who waited around for the FCC to get rid of the requirement rather than do what was required at the time to upgrade?

Yep, you're right, they care a whole bunch about the hobby.

[n7rjd]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Feb. 28 2007,05:31)]Below is an example of a no code slacker listing...
Or another way to look at it.

Those who wish to keep code alive will now have to actually find ways to make it more appealing to people. The government will no longer be the heavy allowing you to slack in your presentation.

Don't get me wrong, I was all for keeping the code requirement and still wish the decision would have gone the other way. I just will not judge people on the basis of which law they were licensed under.

And allow me to save you the time, if you were to look up my listing you will see 5 wpm. No, I am not one of the older 20 wpm Extras so I guess you could consider me to be a half slacker. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[n7rjd]

Quote[/b] (AC0H @ Feb. 28 2007,08:27)]Quote[/b] ]The fact of the matter is for every one 1 bitter ass like you trying to drive a wedge in the hobby over a code test there are several hundred who genuinely care about the hobby and don't care if who they are talking to passed a code test or not.
Are these several hundred NCT's some of those who waited around for the FCC to get rid of the requirement rather than do what was required at the time to upgrade?

Yep, you're right, they care a whole bunch about the hobby.
I don't see where the post quoted stated that the several hundred were of any one particular license class. I think you will find that he meant operators of various license classes that, while some may enjoy the code, they don't believe the sun rises and sets on a set of paddles.

I also feel that several hundred would be a very conservative estimate. My personal guess would be that a majority of operators care enough about the hobby to accept the hand dealt and do what we can to keep the hobby up and running.

[kc4ylv]

Quote[/b] ]Are these several hundred NCT's some of those who waited around for the FCC to get rid of the requirement rather than do what was required at the time to upgrade?

Yep, you're right, they care a whole bunch about the hobby.

Applying Judeo-Christian-based "sacrifice equals worth" values to government-issued radio certifications is a retarded argument, and I'm not afraid to say it.

[kc7eku]

[QUOTE=Quote ]If you are so inclined, you can easily see if someone is a NCG or NCE from the AE7Q database. Below is an example of a no code slacker listing... #The three important things...

I beg to differ, you information is incorrect. #I have a 0WPM Code Proficiency, but somehow I upgraded to General on the 6th of February 2007. #

Quote[/b] ]AG4YO - #"no code slacker listing"
Quote[/b] ]Hey you, quit the personal attacks and namecalling okay?

No, how bout you start an intelligent post without slinging mud, and then base it off correct information. #And then, don't get upset when someone hurls the mud back at ya.

Callsign KC7EKU #
ULS File Number 9407122525 #
FRN 0010573954 #
Licensee ID/SGIN L00831063/000 #
Applicant Type I - Individual #
Entity Type L - Licensee or Assignee #
Entity Name KELLEY, JASON M #
Attention #
First Name JASON #
Middle Init M #
Last Name KELLEY #
Name Suffix #
Street Address 9396 Twin Mountain Cir #
Po Box #
City San Diego #
County San Diego County #
State CA - California #
ZIP Code 92126
Maidenhead DM12kv
Radio Service HA - Amateur #
License Status A - Active
Grant Date 2004-06-17 #
Effective Date 2007-02-06 #
Cancel Date #
Expire Date 2014-07-15 #
Last Action Date 2007-02-06 #
ULS/Geo Region 6
Callsign Group D - 2x3 #
Operator Group C - 1x3 #
Operator Class G - General #
Prev Class T - Technician #
Prev Callsign #
Vanity Type #
Is Trustee #
Trustee Callsign #
Trustee Name #
Next Callsign #
Code Proficiency #0 WPM

[AC0H]

Quote[/b] ]Applying Judeo-Christian-based "sacrifice equals worth" values to government-issued radio certifications is a retarded argument, and I'm not afraid to say it.
Oh really, if we can't apply Judeo-Christian-based "sacrifice equals worth" values to government-issued radio certifications, what else shouldn't we apply them too?

Everybody get ready for the slacker's manifesto!

[N5BO]

Not everybody has the correct "Code Proficiency" listed in this database...

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (kc7eku @ Feb. 28 2007,15:42)]
[QUOTE=Quote ]If you are so inclined, you can easily see if someone is a NCG or NCE from the AE7Q database. Below is an example of a no code slacker listing... The three important things...

I beg to differ, you information is incorrect. I have a 0WPM Code Proficiency, but somehow I upgraded to General on the 6th of February 2007.

Quote[/b] ]AG4YO - "no code slacker listing"
Quote[/b] ]Hey you, quit the personal attacks and namecalling okay?

No, how bout you start an intelligent post without slinging mud, and then base it off correct information. And then, don't get upset when someone hurls the mud back at ya.

Callsign KC7EKU
ULS File Number 9407122525
FRN 0010573954
Licensee ID/SGIN L00831063/000
Applicant Type I - Individual
Entity Type L - Licensee or Assignee
Entity Name KELLEY, JASON M
Attention
First Name JASON
Middle Init M
Last Name KELLEY
Name Suffix
Street Address 9396 Twin Mountain Cir
Po Box
City San Diego
County San Diego County
State CA - California
ZIP Code 92126
Maidenhead DM12kv
Radio Service HA - Amateur
License Status A - Active
Grant Date 2004-06-17
Effective Date 2007-02-06
Cancel Date
Expire Date 2014-07-15
Last Action Date 2007-02-06
ULS/Geo Region 6
Callsign Group D - 2x3
Operator Group C - 1x3
Operator Class G - General
Prev Class T - Technician
Prev Callsign
Vanity Type
Is Trustee
Trustee Callsign
Trustee Name
Next Callsign
Code Proficiency 0 WPM
There's the proof of what I am talking about. You can't go by the DB 100% when "0 WPM" is indicated. It just has no way of knowing. It is probably very accurate if some other figure other than 0 is indicated.

Joe

[N4AUD]

Code testing is history. We don't make the rules, the FCC does. I was against dropping code testing but IT'S GONE!!!! Can't we just put this to bed and get over it already??? IT'S OVER!!! DONE!!! FINIS!!! THE END!!! DEAD!!! DECEASED!!!

[KC9ECI]

It says Code Proficiency 5 WPM for me and I can go a bit faster than that....

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Feb. 28 2007,15:06)]Cliff Notes (for JEM): What this is is an Internet discussion about the various issues without taking it out on the newbees on the air. I think that's pretty fair.
Without taking what out on them? The fact that they upgraded?

You can't have it both ways, Charlie. If you welcome the newcomers, then welcome them here, and on the air. But if you call them "slackers" either here, or on the air, then you are being disingenuous in your welcome.

The fact that you would post such an issue speaks volumes about your real feelings, especially considering that the DB is flawed, and subject to misinterpretation.

If you want to berate new hams (or old) based on behavior witnessed on the air, then you would have a legitimate argument. But to berate them solely because you perceive (by a flawed source) that they don't "measure up" is just wrong. It matters not if your words are here, or on the air, they still show the inner you.

Joe

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (N5BO @ Feb. 28 2007,16:00)]Not everybody has the correct "Code Proficiency" listed in this database...
It's not even a correct assumption. At best the line should read "tested code proficiency" since a person could get better or worse after the test. Many people tested at 5wpm can do better than 20, and some of those tested at 20 may not now be able to do 5 or 10.

This is something the author (of the website) has added in, and in so doing makes the whole DB seem suspect. What else is added in? Why add anything other than what the FCC data says? I have not seen a license that proclaims a code speed, just a license class like technician or extra. He makes assumptions about people's code proficiency based solely on their license class, which is both irrelevant and counterproductive.

Joe

[W5HTW]

Quote[/b] (K3VR @ Feb. 28 2007,15:25)]Interesting website. My present call is listed, and my old call as an Advanced op, but my first call in 1976 is not listed. I wonder if that's because it pre-dates the ULS?

Also, when did the FCC (what year) drop the 20 WPM requirement for Extras... Anyone remember?
The Restructuring of 1999, issued Dec 31, 1999 and went into effect April 15, 2000. That dropped the 13 wpm for Advanced and General and the 20 wpm for Extra. The only code test available since that date has been 5 wpm.



Ed

[AB8XA]

The database is more than just suspect. It shows 0 wpm for my entry, license date of 8 Feb 2007.

[kc4ylv]

Quote[/b] ]Everybody get ready for the slacker's manifesto!

Ready?

They have the same privileges as you.

The End.

[K7JBQ]

Quote[/b] (kc4ylv @ Feb. 28 2007,17:01)]Quote[/b] ]Everybody get ready for the slacker's manifesto!

Ready?

They have the same privileges as you.

The End.
This is true.

However, they don't have the ability to put them to full use.

73,
Bill

[N5FOG]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Feb. 27 2007,16:17)]Quote[/b] (Kc5fog @ Feb. 28 2007,16:13)][quote=AG4YO,Feb. 27 2007,14:31]The fact of the matter is for every one 1 bitter ass like you trying to drive a wedge in the hobby over a code test there are several hundred who genuinely care about the hobby and don't care if who they are talking to passed a code test or not.
Hey you, quit the personal attacks and namecalling okay?
There you go Ryan with the double standard.

Its perfectly ok for Chuck throw insults and do some name calling like his "no code slacker" comments but when I throw one back his way its a issue?


FOG

[k2gsp]

Why it's the "Bitter Boy Parade." And we have Charlie and the usual suspects leading the band. You guys really need to let go of these negative feelings. They are a stressor that can lead to cardiac problems and strokes. You won't do Amateur Radio any good drooling your oatmeal and sitting in your waste after a stroke or an MI. And I have heard that stroke victims have a really hard time on the key. You could end up a 0wpm op.

[KD6NIG]

Quote[/b] (K7JBQ @ Feb. 28 2007,17:34)]Quote[/b] (kc4ylv @ Feb. 28 2007,17:01)]Quote[/b] ]Everybody get ready for the slacker's manifesto!

Ready?

They have the same privileges as you.

The End.
This is true.

However, they don't have the ability to put them to full use.

73,
Bill
Not yet. You know whats coming next, its already happened.

*Cough* phone band expansion at the cost of code only areas *Cough*

For now, you're right. If this supposed "surge" occurs on HF, you'll see the modes once again 'restructured for demand'.

[kn4ds]

Quote[/b] (K7JBQ @ Feb. 28 2007,19:34)]However, they don't have the ability to put them to full use.
How ya figger?

That's kind of a blanket statement... I've seen a lotta folks who were >< that close to passing their code test, and the rug got yanked out from under them. Doesn't mean they can't send/receive code... nor does that mean they can't get on the air and work CW. And some may enjoy doing computer-to-computer CW in the CW bands.

On the other hand, there are Generals, Advanced and Extra class folks out there who couldn't send/receive code anymore either... they did what they had to in order to upgrade and promptly forgot it.

There are people who don't have the ability to work 10m FM repeaters, on both sides of the code coin. Some don't have the gear to work digital modes.

There are people on both sides that don't have the ability to put their privileges to full use. Big deal.

Y'all suppose we can get past this "I'm better than you" "No, I'm better than you" garbage based on whether or not someone passed a code test? I haven't seen anybody say "Oh, geez, you're right, you are better than me" on either side of the argument, and if I were a bettin' man, I'd bet I ain't gonna see it, either.

There's another thread asking if we're doing enough to promote amateur radio... maybe we are, maybe we're not, maybe we should, maybe we shouldn't... those are arguments for that thread. But one thing's for sure... all this whoopin' and hollerin' over who's got the biggest..umm... set will certainly help tear it down.

[k8pg]

THEY DONT OWN OR HAVE A CW INSTRUMENT AND ONLY USE FONE:)

[KI4MHA]

Well what is this post all about? Other than to start some $#IT.
The code requirement is gone! I'm with KG4NEL, who cares?
:rock: :0 ;) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[K7JEM]

And then there are those that work CW 95, 99, or 100% of the time. But they are making "full use" because they know and use the code. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Double standard going on.

Joe

[wa5tts]

Forget it.

[K7JBQ]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Feb. 28 2007,18:16)]And then there are those that work CW 95, 99, or 100% of the time. But they are making "full use" because they know and use the code. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Double standard going on.

Joe
No double standard intended. Simply a statement of fact.

Those who operate 100% CW do so by choice, as do those who operate 100% phone, or digital, or whatever.

At this point in the sunspot cycle, CW and PSK are far more productive than voice, at least for those of us for whom "QRO" means 100 watts and whose antenna "farms" are more like small garden plots or windowboxes.

Yes, I have a microphone. In about 3 years I might even dust it off.

73,
Bill

[K7JEM]

There's no fact going on because no-one uses ham radio to its fullest use. Everyone makes choices, some people choose to use CW, others phone or PSK. Some do all of those, but not SSTV or EME. There's just too much available in HR to make a statement like that. It's just ludicrous.

There is plenty of opportunity for those that operate SSB only, or any other mode. HR is what you make of it, and what gives you enjoyment. I don't operate HR because it makes others happy, and I don't care what they think.

Productivity is not the issue, if it was everyone would operate QRO and no-one would operate QRP. But certain people enjoy QRP, even though it is not making full use of your privileges.

Joe

[ai4ep]

So...what IS the way to maximize the full use of your privileges ----

1) use a different mode every night ?
2) use a different mode every hour of the day till you used all of them ?
3) your suggestion ?

[KL1ZB]

Using the FCC database, I am writing an auto squelch program and its almost done. I have the voice recognition routines tuned to about 70% accuracy. I'm working on the AI for the auto squelch control so assuming they identify correctly and using other variables like signal strength the AI should be able to filter out about 40% to 70% of all NCG and NCE traffic on any given freq.

All the haters and OF should love this program

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Feb. 28 2007,16:20)]You can't have it both ways, Charlie. If you welcome the newcomers, then welcome them here, and on the air. But if you call them "slackers" either here, or on the air, then you are being disingenuous in your welcome.
I can have it both ways because I am. I give everyone a fair shot on the air and I will continue to express my opinions here. I have done it for years and I will continue to do it.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (KI4SXC @ Feb. 28 2007,17:56)]Why it's the "Bitter Boy Parade." And we have Charlie and the usual suspects leading the band. You guys really need to let go of these negative feelings. They are a stressor that can lead to cardiac problems and strokes. You won't do Amateur Radio any good drooling your oatmeal and sitting in your waste after a stroke or an MI. And I have heard that stroke victims have a really hard time on the key. You could end up a 0wpm op.
Here, rub some of this on to make you feel better....

[k2gsp]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Feb. 27 2007,22:38)]Quote[/b] (KI4SXC @ Feb. 28 2007,17:56)]Why it's the "Bitter Boy Parade." And we have Charlie and the usual suspects leading the band. You guys really need to let go of these negative feelings. They are a stressor that can lead to cardiac problems and strokes. You won't do Amateur Radio any good drooling your oatmeal and sitting in your waste after a stroke or an MI. And I have heard that stroke victims have a really hard time on the key. You could end up a 0wpm op.
Here, rub some of this on to make you feel better....
You might want to hold on to that Charlie. You and the Bitter Boys Club seem to have the chapped ass around here.

[kn4ds]

Sometimes, I miss .kill

[wv6z]

Meh, who cares, time has moved on. The choices now are sell your stuff, get on the air and have fun. I really pity most of you. Most of you guys sound like the elite goon squad from NC on 3.915.

I heard one of those brain dead OFs actually key up and say, "I heared one of them thar slayunt A Ezzzzezzz own heyuh laste naaaaaht. Them slants iz so stoopit he didn't even know heez postuh say 'salyunt A G'." "Thats cuz heezuh Extreee, heez postuh say 'slayunt A E." ssssssssssssssssss *crackle* ssssssss "Oh." sssssssssss...... idiots! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

There are a lot of weird and aggravating Techs, you know, the Super Repeater Operator types with out a doubt, but they are harmless buffoons. The really creepy ones are the old buzzards with one foot in the grave and one foot on a 'nanner' peel that really give me the willies. Bitter disgusting OFs is all they are. Man, half dead guys that won't be here much longer have always scared me. Well, until I became one and now I realize that those of us that are that miserable are really just as harmless as the nut jobs that say "Hi, Hi and Fine Business!" on the repeaters.

Get over yourselves, what a pack of nut jobs!
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[wg7x]

I really wonder about this fellow and his data base.

He is incorrect about me, and I'm fairly certain that on this one data point, he is wrong about many others also.

I sent him an E-mail asking about this. Should be interesting, if he replies at all.

If one data point in the data-base is incorrect, others probably are also. So why use his data at all, since licensing data is a matter of public record, and QRZ already does it better?

Hummm?

73 Gary

[wv6z]

Well Gary, as we all know by now, having a ‘back up’ to refer to in times of a sites (just like this one) downtime due to system failure or routine maintenance, is always a good idea. However, if I can’t find what I am looking for on the ULS or here, I have little patience for sites that are a pain to navigate like his. I was unable to pull up all of the info about myself, or anyone whose call immediately popped into my head and have it display all of the info like was shown for Katie’s, just for example. Maybe I am lazy, or just to impatient or dumb to persevere, but any site that is that difficult to use will NOT be visited by me on a regular basis.

[kn4ds]

Quote[/b] (wg7x @ Mar. 01 2007,00:45)]I really wonder about this fellow and his data base.
Charlie's like the BOFH refusing the answer the Kloophone™

[w5lda]

Run and hide? From the likes of AG4YO. I hardly doubt that

[ky5u]

All the personal attacks don't change the fact that, as I said before the change, you can't hide your no code status from anyone who wants to know. Anyone who cares to look can find out whether you're hiding behind a General or Extra license.

[kn4ds]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Mar. 01 2007,11:21)]All the personal attacks don't change the fact that, as I said before the change, you can't hide your no code status from anyone who wants to know. Anyone who cares to look can find out whether you're hiding behind a General or Extra license.
And as I said... I don't care. I'm not hiding behind anything... I'm perfectly aware that anybody can look at any number of databases and know when any upgrade took place, and draw their own conclusion.

You're making way more of this than is necessary. But, hey, as long as you're giving me crap, you're leavin' somebody else alone.

[ai4ep]

well, we all know who was a tech and now is a general as of last weekend...


thanks for the info, Charlie !!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Mar. 01 2007,09:21)]All the personal attacks don't change the fact that, as I said before the change, you can't hide your no code status from anyone who wants to know. Anyone who cares to look can find out whether you're hiding behind a General or Extra license.
Not true, Charlie.

The DB has already been proven to be defective, just a figment of the webowners imagination. He has no way of knowing if someone has passed a code test, since that info hasn't been made public for techs for a couple of years.

The FCC doesn't maintain a DB of your code speed, just doesn't exist. So where does this guy get his info? Make it up? Make assumptions?

I wouldn't depend on it for a whole lot.

I would rather base my evaluation of someone's ham ability by how they act on the air, not whether or not they've passed a test for an archaic mode.

But hey, that's me. YMMV. If you want to check the presumed status of someone's code ability, have at it. Stupid is as stupid does.

Joe

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Mar. 01 2007,09:51)]well, we all know who was a tech and now is a general as of last weekend...


thanks for the info, Charlie !!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
You lost me again, mon ami tete chou (my esteemed friend). Vous avez fumé le cigarette drôle? No? (Would you like to smoke a a cigarette and think it over?)

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Mar. 01 2007,10:07)]I wouldn't depend on it for a whole lot.
Then don't. I say close enough.

[kn4ds]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Mar. 01 2007,12:07)]The FCC doesn't maintain a DB of your code speed, just doesn't exist. So where does this guy get his info? Make it up? Make assumptions?
It sure looks to be assumptions based on license class and effective date.

Relatively accurate, too, except in the case of Tech Plus, where it's been shown to be plain wrong.

But, hey, he needs some justification for completely ruining some guy's day when he writes "NO CODE LOSER" on the QSL card he sends 'em.

[n8yx]

Quote[/b] (KE4UWL @ Mar. 01 2007,10:19)]But, hey, he needs some justification for completely ruining some guy's day when he writes "NO CODE LOSER" on the QSL card he sends 'em.
Perhaps the individual who would do so lacks in other areas of his/her life?

[ai4ep]

ema osa orrysa hatta iha aveha onfusedca ouya irs.

me so sorry that I have confused you sir.

I surely thought that some one who has mastered CW would have no problem understanding a extra from Alabama...but I see that surprises still do occur.

Perhaps I need to tone my posts down to a lower grade school level.....? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[AC0H]

Quote[/b] ]The FCC doesn't maintain a DB of your code speed, just doesn't exist. So where does this guy get his info? Make it up? Make assumptions?

They do maintain a database of the test elements you passed.

Pretty easy to see who passed what and those who didn't even try.

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (KE4UWL @ Mar. 01 2007,10:19)]But, hey, he needs some justification for completely ruining some guy's day when he writes "NO CODE LOSER" on the QSL card he sends 'em.
That wouldn't ruin my day, just make me chuckle.

Some people are more concerned with other people's qualifications than they are with their own. If I got a card like that, I would scan it and post it here. Only a total lid would do something like that, but there are plenty of total lids out there.

Joe

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (AC0H @ Mar. 01 2007,10:24)]Quote[/b] ]The FCC doesn't maintain a DB of your code speed, just doesn't exist. So where does this guy get his info? Make it up? Make assumptions?

They do maintain a database of the test elements you passed.

Pretty easy to see who passed what and those who didn't even try.
Nope.

If you were a technician and passed the code test, you would have received no upgrade, and the info wouldn't have been sent to the FCC. You would have a CSCE showing that you passed that test, but there is no DB anywhere that lists that info.

So, you can make assumptions, and they may be correct, but they won't always be accurate. If you don't care if you're accurate (and many people here don't seem to care about accuracy) then go ahead. Just be aware that if it says "0 wpm", that may or may not be correct. We've already seen two examples of people right here on this thread. With only a handful of people commenting, to have 2 wrong is a huge error.

Joe

[AC0H]

Quote[/b] ]Nope.

If you were a technician and passed the code test, you would have received no upgrade, and the info wouldn't have been sent to the FCC. You would have a CSCE showing that you passed that test, but there is no DB anywhere that lists that info.

Bullrot!

If your correct there's no way for the FCC to know if a Tech was operating outside of his/her privi's.

Formerly, if a Tech passed the 5wpm test he/she immediately gets the Novice HF privis on 80,40,15, and 10m. If the FCC didn't collect and store that data in a database, how do they know the difference between a plain old Tech and a Tech with HF privi's?

[ky5u]

Close enough.

[K7JEM]

What are you guys using to show that "code proficiency" line. When I bring up my callsign, I get all the info, but that line is missing.

Which search are you guys using? I can't seem to locate how to see that info.

Joe

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (AC0H @ Mar. 01 2007,10:54)]Quote[/b] ]Nope.

If you were a technician and passed the code test, you would have received no upgrade, and the info wouldn't have been sent to the FCC. You would have a CSCE showing that you passed that test, but there is no DB anywhere that lists that info.

Bullrot!

If your correct there's no way for the FCC to know if a Tech was operating outside of his/her privi's.

Formerly, if a Tech passed the 5wpm test he/she immediately gets the Novice HF privis on 80,40,15, and 10m. If the FCC didn't collect and store that data in a database, how do they know the difference between a plain old Tech and a Tech with HF privi's?
Correct. This was a big beef I had with the system. The FCC had no way of knowing if a tech was legally on HF or not. I'm not making this stuff up, check it out for yourself. The operator retains the CSCE. If the FCC suspects they are operating beyond their class, they ask them to produce the CSCE, since they themselves do not know.

Point is moot now, except for those people who think there is a DB somewhere with that info.

Joe

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Mar. 01 2007,10:55)]What are you guys using to show that "code proficiency" line. When I bring up my callsign, I get all the info, but that line is missing.

Which search are you guys using? I can't seem to locate how to see that info.

Joe
ROFLMAO!!!! You've been motor mouthing on this for weeks and you don't know how to use the database??? Mohahahahahahhahahha! Priceless!

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Mar. 01 2007,11:03)]Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Mar. 01 2007,10:55)]What are you guys using to show that "code proficiency" line. When I bring up my callsign, I get all the info, but that line is missing.

Which search are you guys using? I can't seem to locate how to see that info.

Joe
ROFLMAO!!!! You've been motor mouthing on this for weeks and you don't know how to use the database??? Mohahahahahahhahahha! Priceless!
I never tried it until today, maybe I'm at the wrong search part, or search engine. I get all the info shown on the other posts, except no "code proficiency" line.

Show me a link to what you were using.

Joe

[KD7UNP]

A few of us out here in the Pacific Northwest looked up Charlie's qualifications. #It seems that someone has written an entire book about his life. #It is titled the "DSM 4".
No need to respond Charlie as I would not even entertain engaging you in discussion you apparently would not be able to follow. #Besides that, I am retired now and hardly ever pick the abovementioned book up anymore.

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Feb. 28 2007,15:38)]Subject: No Code Generals and Extras

Quote[/b] ]jbq: If I'm conversing with someone in code, and he's clicking along at a nice smooth 20 words per...

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!
Charlie, he has a good point here. I am a 5 WPM Extra, but click along at 30 WPM if I'm so inclined. Some Technicians WILL learn code. Some WILL advance their skills, and some WILL outperform many old timers with dilligence. His point is very valid.

[ai4ep]

k7jem --- you wont get no LINK information out of Charlie or you would already have it at your computer.

ag4yo --- keep up the good work, you have many of us rolling in the floor laughing...!!

[kn4ds]

Quote[/b] (KD7UNP @ Mar. 01 2007,13:26)]A few of us out here in the Pacific Northwest looked up Charlie's qualifications. It seems that someone has written an entire book about his life. It is titled the "DSM 4".
No need to respond Charlie as I would not even entertain engaging you in discussion you apparently would not be able to follow. Besides that, I am retired now and hardly ever pick the abovementioned book up anymore.
Now that's funny right there...

And just to save Charlie the time...

Quote[/b] ]
Callsign KD7UNP
ULS File Number 0002895085
FRN 0008512493
Licensee ID/SGIN L00645448/000
Applicant Type I - Individual
Entity Type L - Licensee or Assignee
Entity Name Orlando, Robert F
Attention
First Name Robert
Middle Init F
Last Name Orlando
Name Suffix
Street Address
Po Box POB 9101
City Salem
County Marion County
State OR - Oregon
ZIP Code 97305
Maidenhead CN84mx
Radio Service HA - Amateur
License Status A - Active
Grant Date 2003-02-26
Effective Date 2007-01-29
Cancel Date
Expire Date 2013-02-26
Last Action Date 2007-01-29
ULS/Geo Region 7
Callsign Group D - 2x3
Operator Group C - 1x3
Operator Class G - General
Prev Class T - Technician
Prev Callsign
Vanity Type
Is Trustee
Trustee Callsign
Trustee Name
Next Callsign
Code Proficiency 0 WPM

Why looky there... a 0 WPM General... whose Effective Date was 1/29/07... wasn't that when 5 WPM was required for General?

You wanna expound some more, Charlie, on how accurate that database is?

Oh, I know, it's close enough for you to continue to spout your garbage at... but it looks like you're gonna have to include Generals who were licensed before the rules change, because some of them are obviously no-coders, too.

[KD7UNP]

Quote[/b] (KE4UWL @ Mar. 01 2007,11:43)]Quote[/b] (KD7UNP @ Mar. 01 2007,13:26)]A few of us out here in the Pacific Northwest looked up Charlie's qualifications. #It seems that someone has written an entire book about his life. #It is titled the "DSM 4".
No need to respond Charlie as I would not even entertain engaging you in discussion you apparently would not be able to follow. #Besides that, I am retired now and hardly ever pick the abovementioned book up anymore.
Now that's funny right there...

And just to save Charlie the time...

Quote[/b] ]
Callsign KD7UNP
ULS File Number 0002895085
FRN 0008512493
Licensee ID/SGIN L00645448/000
Applicant Type I - Individual
Entity Type L - Licensee or Assignee
Entity Name Orlando, Robert F
Attention
First Name Robert
Middle Init F
Last Name Orlando
Name Suffix
Street Address
Po Box POB 9101
City Salem
County Marion County
State OR - Oregon
ZIP Code 97305
Maidenhead CN84mx
Radio Service HA - Amateur
License Status A - Active
Grant Date 2003-02-26
Effective Date 2007-01-29
Cancel Date
Expire Date 2013-02-26
Last Action Date 2007-01-29
ULS/Geo Region 7
Callsign Group D - 2x3
Operator Group C - 1x3
Operator Class G - General
Prev Class T - Technician
Prev Callsign
Vanity Type
Is Trustee
Trustee Callsign
Trustee Name
Next Callsign
Code Proficiency 0 WPM

Why looky there... a 0 WPM General... whose Effective Date was 1/29/07... wasn't that when 5 WPM was required for General?

You wanna expound some more, Charlie, on how accurate that database is?

Oh, I know, it's close enough for you to continue to spout your garbage at... but it looks like you're gonna have to include Generals who were licensed before the rules change, because some of them are obviously no-coders, too.
That just proves the point of some of the others on this thread. I passed my code test and General early in January. The site Charlie refers to is inaccurate. So you my friend are also a distributor f bad information.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (KD7UNP @ Mar. 01 2007,11:26)]A few of us out here in the Pacific Northwest looked up Charlie's qualifications. It seems that someone has written an entire book about his life. It is titled the "DSM 4".
No need to respond Charlie as I would not even entertain engaging you in discussion you apparently would not be able to follow.

CALL: KD7UNP Class: General

We all know that you guys are to lazy to read...

(Corrected)

[KD7UNP]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Mar. 01 2007,11:50)]Quote[/b] (KD7UNP @ Mar. 01 2007,11:26)]A few of us out here in the Pacific Northwest looked up Charlie's qualifications. #It seems that someone has written an entire book about his life. #It is titled the "DSM 4".
No need to respond Charlie as I would not even entertain engaging you in discussion you apparently would not be able to follow.
Call: KD7UMP Class: Technician

We all know that you guys are to lazy to read...
UNP- not ump. Have another drink.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Mar. 01 2007,12:28)]Quote[/b] (KE4UWL @ Mar. 01 2007,10:19)]But, hey, he needs some justification for completely ruining some guy's day when he writes "NO CODE LOSER" on the QSL card he sends 'em.
That wouldn't ruin my day, just make me chuckle.

Some people are more concerned with other people's qualifications than they are with their own. If I got a card like that, I would scan it and post it here. Only a total lid would do something like that, but there are plenty of total lids out there.

Joe
A total lid would also proudly proclaim that he's a "no code general" or "no code extra."

Right, Joe?

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (KD7UNP @ Mar. 01 2007,11:54)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Mar. 01 2007,11:50)]Quote[/b] (KD7UNP @ Mar. 01 2007,11:26)]A few of us out here in the Pacific Northwest looked up Charlie's qualifications. It seems that someone has written an entire book about his life. It is titled the "DSM 4".
No need to respond Charlie as I would not even entertain engaging you in discussion you apparently would not be able to follow.
Call: KD7UMP Class: Technician

We all know that you guys are to lazy to read...
UNP- not ump. Have another drink.
Thanks for not engaging me in a discussion. LOLOL!!

The four important things...

1. Now a General or Extra
2. Previously a Technician
3. Code Profeciency 0wpm
4. Activation date after 2/27/07

Close enough now.

[KD7UNP]

DSM 4.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (KD7UNP @ Mar. 01 2007,12:00)]DSM 4.
His shoe size and his IQ I guess. Now that we have the database issues cleared up... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[KD7UNP]

Just a note for other contributors to this thread. #The Website in question is actually incorrect in almost all cases noting code wpm. #I have, contacted some of the people who took and passed the code recently as I have, and they have the same notations regarding the code on this website. #The site is quite frankly wrong. #Too bad, as it probably could be a valuable resourse.
I know the truth, as well as others and really, that's what counts. BTW, many of you were right re: CW. It is major fun.

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif rofl --- Charlie, have another drink.

It is the first of the month.

You survived February. You did good. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[ky5u]

Thanks! Might have one when i get home and get back to checking the database for more NCGs. Have me a couple pile driver drinks!

[N5BO]

Quote[/b] (KD7UNP @ Mar. 01 2007,07:13)]Just a note for other contributors to this thread. #The Website in question is actually incorrect in almost all cases noting code wpm. #I have, contacted some of the people who took and passed the code recently as I have, and they have the same notations regarding the code on this website. #The site is quite frankly wrong. #Too bad, as it probably could be a valuable resourse.
I know the truth, as well as others and really, that's what counts. #BTW, many of you were right re: CW. #It is major fun.
My call has 13wpm listen when I passed the 20wpm in 1997 for my extra, so it's not just recent upgrades who passed the cw test before the dropping of it. Personally I could care less since it doesn't pay my bills or put food on the table http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif Just pointing this out for the ones who believe this database is really accurate.

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Mar. 01 2007,11:57)]Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Mar. 01 2007,12:28)]Quote[/b] (KE4UWL @ Mar. 01 2007,10:19)]But, hey, he needs some justification for completely ruining some guy's day when he writes "NO CODE LOSER" on the QSL card he sends 'em.
That wouldn't ruin my day, just make me chuckle.

Some people are more concerned with other people's qualifications than they are with their own. If I got a card like that, I would scan it and post it here. Only a total lid would do something like that, but there are plenty of total lids out there.

Joe
A total lid would also proudly proclaim that he's a "no code general" or "no code extra."

Right, Joe?
Proclaiming such a thing doesn't qualify one as a lid any more than proclaiming that they're a 20wpm extra, or an advanced that had to take a test in front of the FCC, it is just something inane to harp about.

Actually a lid is a poor on the air operator. Unless such proclamations were made on the air, they aren't really "liddish".

Joe

[ai4ep]

...easy on the name calling.

moderators DO read these threads and ( if they deem it necessary ) actually ban folks.


Remember this is FRED s site, we are guests at his web site and we do not want to offend the boss....or make our selves look bad to others.

Just use plain old - fashioned common sense.

[K7JBQ]

Truth be told, this thread has outlived any purpose it may have had.

73,
Bill, K7JBQ
One of the QRZ.com moderators