Feedback after the EXAM

[AB8RU]

I just talked to someone the other day this made sense ( attn all dead horse complainers please take a number and wait in the room down the hall on the right ) #what he told me was this...................

He found at first the Code Exam was like he really did not want to do it at first, but however now since he is NOT REQUIRED to do any more testing, he now desires to advance himself and go out and buy a CW only rig QRP possibly to try and increase his speed !

This was very profound .. # # # # # # # # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[KB1KIX]

There is an upswing in activity here as well.

Though many wish to not admit it, dropping the code has increased CW activity here.

Jonathan

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif ...still lots of folks who can not send their OWN call sign the same way 2 times in a row...!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[w3dub]

Yep. Forcing something down somebody's throat never works... it's not a filter.. etc. Bunch of crap all.

I've heard the same thing... that people are interested in it for TRUE reasons.. not because they HAD to learn it. Even I, who couldn't stand code.. am even thinking about learning it.. i actually stopped on 30 to listen to a QSO and try to pick out letters here and there.

Now it's time for the know coders to step up. Promote it... i do the same for digital modes.. SSTV, etc.. always trying to get people into it.

Now they have to work for activity like the rest of us! ;)

[ky5u]

Hogwash! There may be a case for new hams who may become interested in CW this way, but those who have dodged the code test for years are not going out in great numbers to learn telegraphy. Just more "feel good" tonic for the insecure.

[WA2ZDY]

Quote[/b] (KB3JGU @ June 03 2007,23:44)]Even I, who couldn't stand code.. am even thinking about learning it.
How could you not stand it if you didn't even know it? That reminds me of my six year old looking at his plate of a food he's never tasted and telling me "I don't like that."

Not trolling here OM but your statement makes no sense.

[w3dub]

I knew about 50 percent.. read later on in that post. it just wasn't my thing. I more despised the fact that I had to learn a mode that I really had no plans to use regularly.

It's like forcing somebody to use RTTY or PSK or SSTV. CW is a MODE, nothing more.

Maybe I should have rephrased that.

[kd7msc]

Quote[/b] (KB3JGU @ June 04 2007,03:52)]CW is a MODE, nothing more.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

CW is tradition.

I am not much of a code operator but I am working at it. Keep code alive for the sake of the hobby!

[WA3KYY]

Based upon the activity over Memorial Day weekend I'd say the ole mode is in fine shape. Just got an email from the QSL manager for HZ1EX wanting to verify they got my call correct so I can get my card for our 40M QSO http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[KI4ODO]

KD7MSC, I agree

[KE5FRF]

Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ June 04 2007,13:02)]Quote[/b] (KB3JGU @ June 03 2007,23:44)]Even I, who couldn't stand code.. am even thinking about learning it.
How could you not stand it if you didn't even know it? # That reminds me of my six year old looking at his plate of a food he's never tasted and telling me "I don't like that."

Not trolling here OM but your statement makes no sense.
That is a very good analogy! To add to it, my six year old son will sit at the table and practically hold his breath till he turns blue before he'll put something new in his mouth. Often its because it "looks yuck" but he never tasted it. When we learned of his diabetes, we changed our eating habits around it. He requires 45 carbs at every meal, and I give him yogurt as a treat. At first, he hated the idea of yogurt, but now, he asks for it when he eats!

Yep, I had the same kind of attitude first about CW. I just didn't think it would be fun to listen to a bunch of beeps and try to figure out what the other guy was saying. But perseverance pays off and when you finally have a 100% copy QSO, there is nothing better!

I have to agree with Charlie, AG4YO...Somehow I doubt that there are really swarms of new HFers flocking to CW, and I tend to fall on the common sense side that not having a requirement means that few will bother. I've been hopeful that this is wrong, but I'm not hearing a lot of new ops saying :
"Gud Eve OM, new tech hr trying CW for first time HW? AR de n1oob K"....It just ain't happening, and its a shame.

Kind of like what would happen if mothers across the US were told they couldn't feed kids brocolli. Do you think kids would all of a sudden be begging mommy for a spear? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[ab8yy]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ June 04 2007,08:40)]Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ June 04 2007,13:02)]Quote[/b] (KB3JGU @ June 03 2007,23:44)]Even I, who couldn't stand code.. am even thinking about learning it.
How could you not stand it if you didn't even know it? # That reminds me of my six year old looking at his plate of a food he's never tasted and telling me "I don't like that."

Not trolling here OM but your statement makes no sense.
That is a very good analogy! To add to it, my six year old son will sit at the table and practically hold his breath till he turns blue before he'll put something new in his mouth. Often its because it "looks yuck" but he never tasted it. When we learned of his diabetes, we changed our eating habits around it. He requires 45 carbs at every meal, and I give him yogurt as a treat. At first, he hated the idea of yogurt, but now, he asks for it when he eats!

Yep, I had the same kind of attitude first about CW. I just didn't think it would be fun to listen to a bunch of beeps and try to figure out what the other guy was saying. But perseverance pays off and when you finally have a 100% copy QSO, there is nothing better!

I have to agree with Charlie, AG4YO...Somehow I doubt that there are really swarms of new HFers flocking to CW, and I tend to fall on the common sense side that not having a requirement means that few will bother. I've been hopeful that this is wrong, but I'm not hearing a lot of new ops saying :
"Gud Eve OM, new tech hr trying CW for first time HW? #AR de n1oob K"....It just ain't happening, and its a shame.

Kind of like what would happen if mothers across the US were told they couldn't feed kids brocolli. Do you think kids would all of a sudden be begging mommy for a spear? #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
The CW organizations are saying CW is on the rise. This either means it is new hams doing it or old hams who haven't done it before are now doing it. Either way - CW is not going anywhere.

I also don't think CW or the lack thereof, is creating bad hams. A ham is either a good op or a bad op and it doesn't have anyting to do with CW requirements. And almost any bad op can be made a good op if we stop chasing them away and teach them.

If they won't learn, then that's another story. But telling them to get lost because they aren't "real" hams is not going to change their operating practices. Will probably make them worse.

This we do NOT want do we?

Steve

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (ab8yy @ June 05 2007,12:09)]I also don't think CW or the lack thereof, is creating bad hams. A ham is either a good op or a bad op and it doesn't have anyting to do with CW requirements. And almost any bad op can be made a good op if we stop chasing them away and teach them.
I think we partially agree. Many of these guys were bad Amateurs before they got on HF. CW didn't make them better or worse, it just kept many of them off of HF for a long time. Therefore, I disagree that we can make any bad op good if "we" do something. THEY have to WANT to learn, then we can help them. But excuses got them this far and it's a hard habit to break for them.

[N8CPA]

CW kept people off HF? Wasn't one of the arguments against Elements 1(a, b, c) that it WASN'T a filter? Now that it's gone, it was? What gives since the FCC gave?

Then, because a few mosquitoes survived, DDT wasn not an insecticide. Okay. I get it.

[K0RGR]

I think I've seen a rise in CW activity, and I've certainly seen many people mouth the words that they intend to learn it. I hope it's true.

I haven't detected anybody actually trying to use computers to do CW yet, and that's a little disappointing. I was hoping we'd see a corner of each HF band full of computerized CW signals by now. Maybe what's needed to make this take off is a very inexpensive CW radio kit that can be easily used this way. The Small Wonder Labs RockMite for $29 would fill the bill. It'll get you 1/2 watt of CW on either 80 or 40 meters (other bands available too). It's crystal controlled so tuning should be a breeze. You'd need a computer with sound card interface for receiving, and a means of directly keying the transmitter for sending (legally, I don't think Techs can get by with injecting tones into a SSB rig).

Why do I think computerized CW is a good idea? If it takes off, it guarantees me somebody to talk to using CW in the future. All I need is a way to generate machine-quality code, and there are nice portable keyboards that will do that. There's a little kit on the market that produces a tiny board that will convert the output of your standard keyboard to Morse. I've thought about using that with one of those flexible roll-up keyboards for portable use. The whole thing would fit in a tiny box for backpacking.

[w4nti]

Quote[/b] (KE5FRF @ June 04 2007,12:40)]Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ June 04 2007,13:02)]Quote[/b] (KB3JGU @ June 03 2007,23:44)]Even I, who couldn't stand code.. am even thinking about learning it.
How could you not stand it if you didn't even know it? # That reminds me of my six year old looking at his plate of a food he's never tasted and telling me "I don't like that."

Not trolling here OM but your statement makes no sense.
That is a very good analogy! To add to it, my six year old son will sit at the table and practically hold his breath till he turns blue before he'll put something new in his mouth. Often its because it "looks yuck" but he never tasted it. When we learned of his diabetes, we changed our eating habits around it. He requires 45 carbs at every meal, and I give him yogurt as a treat. At first, he hated the idea of yogurt, but now, he asks for it when he eats!

Yep, I had the same kind of attitude first about CW. I just didn't think it would be fun to listen to a bunch of beeps and try to figure out what the other guy was saying. But perseverance pays off and when you finally have a 100% copy QSO, there is nothing better!

I have to agree with Charlie, AG4YO...Somehow I doubt that there are really swarms of new HFers flocking to CW, and I tend to fall on the common sense side that not having a requirement means that few will bother. I've been hopeful that this is wrong, but I'm not hearing a lot of new ops saying :
"Gud Eve OM, new tech hr trying CW for first time HW? #AR de n1oob K"....It just ain't happening, and its a shame.

Kind of like what would happen if mothers across the US were told they couldn't feed kids brocolli. Do you think kids would all of a sudden be begging mommy for a spear? #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Perhaps when folks re-discover that CW just plain works better under noisy, QSB, QRM conditions a a very low investment the "magic" will return.

I remember my FIRST on the air QSO like it happened yesterday. That was July of 1961. Somehow phone just isn't the same. I don't remember my first phone QSO at all. When you do it with a rig you built yourself, and use manual on/off keying that you TAUGHT YOURSELF, it just can't be described unless you have that Tee Shirt.

Dan/W4NTI

[WE4AU]

Quote[/b] (N8CPA @ June 05 2007,16:43)]CW kept people off HF? Wasn't one of the arguments against Elements 1(a, b, c) that it WASN'T a filter? Now that it's gone, it was? What gives since the FCC gave?

Then, because a few mosquitoes survived, DDT wasn not an insecticide. Okay. I get it.
Steve,

I think the argument for CW not being a filter was in regard to the fact that passing a CW test did not keep lids, dirtbags, potty-mouths and other various forms of sub-human life from obtaining a ticket. There are some mental midgets out there in the ether that were able to pass a code exam.

Water tends to seek its own level. I suspect the same is true for all us that partake of this great hobby. There are some 30+ WPM Generals out there that are technically challenged and will never try to upgrade to Extra. There are some incredibly technically-oriented ops that may never get past E & T on the code. The vast majority are in between. For those who excel in both...Elmer!

We all need to remember to keep it clean, and have fun!

Regards,
-Bruce

[ab8yy]

Quote[/b] (AI4WA @ June 05 2007,14:38)]Quote[/b] (N8CPA @ June 05 2007,16:43)]CW kept people off HF? #Wasn't one of the arguments against Elements 1(a, b, c) that it WASN'T a filter? #Now that it's gone, it was? #What gives since the FCC gave?

Then, because a few mosquitoes survived, DDT wasn not an insecticide. #Okay. #I get it.
Steve,

I think the argument for CW not being a filter was in regard to the fact that passing #a CW test did not keep lids, dirtbags, potty-mouths and other various forms of sub-human life from obtaining a ticket. #There are some mental midgets out there in the ether that were able to pass a code exam.

Water tends to seek its own level. #I suspect the same is true for all us that partake of this great hobby. #There are some 30+ WPM Generals out there that are technically challenged and will never try to upgrade to Extra. #There are some incredibly technically-oriented ops that may never get past E & T on the code. #The vast majority are in between. #For those who excel in both...Elmer!

We all need to remember to keep it clean, and have fun!

Regards,
-Bruce
Bruce, this is exactly the point I was trying to make at least. I think CW was keeping a lot of good ops from either upgrading or getting into the hobby in the first place. As you stated, there are plenty of bad ops out there right now - that DID pass a 20WPM test. So, it didn't do anything to filter THEM out now, did it?

As for computerized CW, one of the biggest reasons I think this hasn't taken off yet is because for the reason given that CW works great in very poor conditions and noisey times, a computer is very poor at decoding a CW signal unless it is clear and loud. Any noises in the background are usually detected as code and it messes up the decoding of CW.

I have looked at this and CW is the worse of all soundcard modes I think. The computer can send it just great and with no problem. In fact MixW will actually key the transmitter on and off so that even Techs can use one. But, realistically, I think a vast majority of hams can send CW faster than they can receive it - so being able to send with a computer is of no benefit if the ocmputer won't receive it properly.

The best way to break into CW in my opinion is to go listen to it until you can get your speed up to the point of being able to copy what you are hearing.

And then you'll be ok without the aid of a computer. I use computer all the time for other digital modes, but CW is best done by ear and hand. If a newbie doesn't have a CW key, then yes, the computer interface is great for sending it - but still need to be able to receive by ear to make it worth the effort of learning it.

Finally, using a computer doesn't teach you anything and you'll never learn CW that way.

Steve

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (ab8yy @ June 06 2007,09:23)]Bruce, this is exactly the point I was trying to make at least. I think CW was keeping a lot of good ops from either upgrading or getting into the hobby in the first place. As you stated, there are plenty of bad ops out there right now - that DID pass a 20WPM test. So, it didn't do anything to filter THEM out now, did it?
Your logic: It's ok to pass laws making it easier for more child molesters to hang out near schools because there are ALREADY some hanging out there. Sorry for the extreme example, but your contention above was never justification for removal of what was the only "better than nothing" filter we had.

[ab8yy]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ June 06 2007,06:45)]Quote[/b] (ab8yy @ June 06 2007,09:23)]Bruce, this is exactly the point I was trying to make at least. #I think CW was keeping a lot of good ops from either upgrading or getting into the hobby in the first place. #As you stated, there are plenty of bad ops out there right now - that DID pass a 20WPM test. #So, it didn't do anything to filter THEM out now, did it?
Your logic: #It's ok to pass laws making it easier for more child molesters to hang out near schools because there are ALREADY some hanging out there. #Sorry for the extreme example, but your contention above was never justification for removal of what was the only #"better than nothing" filter we had.
That comparison doesn't even deserve a response - it was stupid and rediculous to even associate the two. They are NOT the same. And that isn't an example of a filter anyway.

I would have agreed with a filter of some sort if it worked. But obviously the CW filter didn't work - which was my point.

We just need to toughen up the written exams a little better. I'm sure there would be no argument from anyone on that.

Steve

[N8UZE]

Quote[/b] (ab8yy @ June 07 2007,14:40)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ June 06 2007,06:45)]Quote[/b] (ab8yy @ June 06 2007,09:23)]Bruce, this is exactly the point I was trying to make at least. #I think CW was keeping a lot of good ops from either upgrading or getting into the hobby in the first place. #As you stated, there are plenty of bad ops out there right now - that DID pass a 20WPM test. #So, it didn't do anything to filter THEM out now, did it?
Your logic: #It's ok to pass laws making it easier for more child molesters to hang out near schools because there are ALREADY some hanging out there. #Sorry for the extreme example, but your contention above was never justification for removal of what was the only #"better than nothing" filter we had.
That comparison doesn't even deserve a response - it was stupid and rediculous to even associate the two. They are NOT the same. #And that isn't an example of a filter anyway.

I would have agreed with a filter of some sort if it worked. #But obviously the CW filter didn't work - which was my point.

We just need to toughen up the written exams a little better. #I'm sure there would be no argument from anyone on that.

Steve
The CW test was NEVER, EVER intended to be a filter. It was intended to be a test of one of the basic skills used by ham radio operators. No more and no less.

The filter argument is stupid.

Note that I was in favor of keeping the code test but NOT as a filter.

[ky5u]

Whether it was intended to be a filter is irrelevent. The "there are already bad amateurs" argument as proof the code test was not a filter was wishful thinking. As I said, it was not a perfect filter but it was one none the less. I know dozens of former lazy NCTs who were "filtered out" by the code test. For better or worse, they've upgraded now that the test is history. Your baseless pontification won't change the fact that until the test was removed, they were off of HF.

Even so, this was only one of many reasons to keet the code test. The FCC did not agree. And if you can't hear how much worse the HF bands are since the social promotions began in March...

[n0ov]

Congrads. Now what I've been saying is proven to be true -- take code testing away, make it another mode and more folks will try; big difference between learning something to do it for fun vs learning something 1/2 way to pass a test

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ June 07 2007,12:40)]Whether it was intended to be a filter is irrelevent. The "there are already bad amateurs" argument as proof the code test was not a filter was wishful thinking. As I said, it was not a perfect filter but it was one none the less. I know dozens of former lazy NCTs who were "filtered out" by the code test. For better or worse, they've upgraded now that the test is history. Your baseless pontification won't change the fact that until the test was removed, they were off of HF.

Even so, this was only one of many reasons to keet the code test. The FCC did not agree. And if you can't hear how much worse the HF bands are since the social promotions began in March...
The filter argument is indeed silly, and doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

If the code test was some sort of "lid filter", it would have prevented bad ops from getting on HF. It didn't. It would also have allowed "good ops" to get on HF. It didn't do that, either.

The only thing it filtered out were those that were unable or unwilling to learn code. It had no other effect. In some ham's minds, a person that is unable or unwilling to learn code IS a lid. This is a problem with those hams, not with the "no coders".

The truth is it kept some bad ops off of HF. It also kept a lot of good ops off of HF. It was not a filter, but more like an attenuator.

Joe

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif The best part is --- while you are busy reading these posts or making your own post, you most likely are NOT paying a lot of attention to what is going on...on the radio.

oops.

Now if only I had a radio. THAt would be nice. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (n0ov @ June 07 2007,15:53)]Congrads. Now what I've been saying is proven to be true -- take code testing away, make it another mode and more folks will try; big difference between learning something to do it for fun vs learning something 1/2 way to pass a test
If for no other reason than it is a way for new applicants to distance themselves from the no code slacker upgrades.

[N8UZE]

Quote[/b] (n0ov @ June 07 2007,18:53)]Congrads. #Now what I've been saying is proven to be true -- take code testing away, make it another mode and more folks will try; big difference between learning something to do it for fun vs learning something 1/2 way to pass a test
However, that is extremely childish. Falls in the category of cutting off their nose to spite their face.

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (N8UZE @ June 08 2007,08:35)]Quote[/b] (n0ov @ June 07 2007,18:53)]Congrads. Now what I've been saying is proven to be true -- take code testing away, make it another mode and more folks will try; big difference between learning something to do it for fun vs learning something 1/2 way to pass a test
However, that is extremely childish. Falls in the category of cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Learning something on your own, because you want to, is never a bad thing. You think that new ops that learn code because they want to are being childish?

Some hams just can't get past the fact that there are people that will learn something because they want to. They think everything has to be mandated and tested.

Hams live in a strange world.

Joe