Something to consider...

[KD7UKT]

Greetings, all...

I was just browsing the currently active topics here, and something struck me that it might be worthwhile to consider.

First, have you noticed all the threads about hams that are rude, unfriendly, or downright hostile to newcomers to the airwaves?

Second, I am sure just about everyone has seen or heard at least one story about how "ham radio is dying," because we are not attracting new hams fast enough to replace those that let their licenses lapse or go SK.

So, I am wondering if these two items are possibly related. I sort of think that at least in some cases, they may be. On the QRZ homepage is a letter that our benevolent site owner got from a prospective ham, indicating that at least some of them visit and (presumably) read this site.

Please think about it for a few minutes (at least) before responding... knee-jerk reactions are not what we need on this issue.

[WB2WIK]

1. Rudeness and lack of consideration on the part of hams or anyone else is nothing new, and hasn't seemed to change over the years; however, access to the public has changed significantly because of the internet, and it does seem that a higher percentage of "no life" folks spend more time on the 'net than they really should...

2. Ham radio is far from dying, it's been keeping up with general population growth, almost exactly, decade to decade, year to year and month to month.

3. So, I don't see any relationship!

73,

Steve WB2WIK/6

[w5alt]

Yep, I've heard both of those complaints for over 30 years now.

QRZ is not a valid cross section of ham radio. What actual data supports either conjecture?

Are they related? You bet. But more in the minds of the complainers than in reality, I suspect. People who categorically say hams are rude also say that ham radio will die.

I've also heard that the younger generation is going to hell, that the US can't compete with Japan, Mexico, etc., that CW is dying, that computers would reduce paper usage, that bomb shelters are needed to protect us from communism, that the millenium bug would bring civilization to its knees, etc., etc., etc.

So what's your point? Drawing global conclusions from scanning the topics on QRZ.COM sounds suspiciously similar to a knee-jerk reaction to me.

73,

[KD7UKT]

Actually, I speak also from some personal experience. I was all ready to take my tech test, started reading message boards (not just QRZ.com, but others as well), and was so discouraged by the anti-new-ham and anti-no-code-tech attitude that I actually stuck the ham books on the shelf for over a year. It wasn't till two hams at work and my best friend (a no-code tech herself) started pushing me that I started studying again and got both my Tech and my General (in one testing session). In point of fact, one reason I wanted to get my General right away was to AVOID being looked down on as a no-code tech!

So I know just what some of the negativity on these boards can lead to in the mind of a prospective ham. You can stick your head in the sand and say that it doesn't happen, since these prospective hams don't stand up and say anything, but I can say that it darned near happened to me.

Knee-jerk? Not on your life... this concept has been percolating in the back of my mind since I stuck those books on the shelf, never intending to return to them. (I even stuck them on eBay, but never got a bid on them.)

So, take a deep breath and do some deep thinking on it, please?

[WB2GOF]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w5alt @ June 17 2003,12:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've also heard that the younger generation is going to hell, that the US can't compete with Japan, Mexico, etc., that CW is dying, that computers would reduce paper usage, that bomb shelters are needed to protect us from communism, that the millenium bug would bring civilization to its knees, etc., etc., etc.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
...And Saddam Hussein most certainly possesses weapons of Mass Destruction.

[KA8NCR]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD7UKT @ June 17 2003,10:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Actually, I speak also from some personal experience. I was all ready to take my tech test, started reading message boards (not just QRZ.com, but others as well), and was so discouraged by the anti-new-ham and anti-no-code-tech attitude that I actually stuck the ham books on the shelf for over a year. It wasn't till two hams at work and my best friend (a no-code tech herself) started pushing me that I started studying again and got both my Tech and my General (in one testing session). In point of fact, one reason I wanted to get my General right away was to AVOID being looked down on as a no-code tech!
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

If you want to start making correlations, I'll give you one from personal experience.

Ever since there has been a no-code license class, the movers and shakers within my local amateur radio club have been no-code techs. Those that have participated most heavily and bring the most favored opinions of amateur radio by the public have been from no-code techs. No-code techs also represent the highest ratio of upgrades and continually bring new amateurs into the hobby and new members into our club.

Those within the organization that complain the most and do the least have general or higher class licenses.

Want some more correlation?

How about the three amateur radio operators that I know that best exemplify the amateur spirt and reflect the Amateur's Oath (or code of conduct), don't operate CW. One is a no-code tech class license holder. One is amateur extra and hasn't operated code for probably 30 years and the last is too busy in promoting amateur radio to actually operate much.

It's all perception. I think you're creating a tempest in a teapot.

[KB1GYQ]

KD7UKT: It is a good thing that I hadn't seen this site before I got my license, else I might have shelved things as well. Fortunately my on-air experience has been somewhat better.

Oh, there is a connection... those who are grumpy on air and demeaning to newcomers often find that the newcomers will avoid them, giving the appearance of the 'death of radio'. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif That is what a VFO is for, is it not?

[w5alt]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD7UKT @ June 17 2003,13<!--emo&amp;http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Actually, I speak also from some personal experience. I was all ready to take my tech test, started reading message boards (not just QRZ.com, but others as well), and was so discouraged by the anti-new-ham and anti-no-code-tech attitude that I actually stuck the ham books on the shelf for over a year. It wasn't till two hams at work and my best friend (a no-code tech herself) started pushing me that I started studying again and got both my Tech and my General (in one testing session). In point of fact, one reason I wanted to get my General right away was to AVOID being looked down on as a no-code tech!

.....

So, take a deep breath and do some deep thinking on it, please?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
OK, here's my &quot;deep thinking&quot;. Let me get this straight. You wanted to get a ham ticket, studied and then decided not to because you read some negative comments on internet message boards. (There are about 680,000 licensed hams in the US. What percentage of those posted messages that swayed your decision?) Then you met some real hams and decided to get your license. Now you want to correlate the rantings on this message board with reality? What did I miss?

Personally I feel very sorry for anyone naive enough to believe most of what they see on internet message boards! I would never make an important decision based only on the ranting and raving that goes on here or most other boards. I think the problem is that people think that message boards are ham radio.

At any rate, I'm glad you changed your mind and joined us. Welcome and I hope you have as much fun as I have over the years!

73,

[AG3Y]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I've also heard that the younger generation is going to hell, that the US can't compete with Japan, Mexico, etc., that CW is dying, that computers would reduce paper usage, that bomb shelters are needed to protect us from communism, that the millenium bug would bring civilization to its knees, etc., etc., etc.
w5alt
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Hey, Walt, can you remember back into the 60's and 70's (probably more the 60's ) when 73 magazine was going strong? #Who was the publisher of that auspicious rag ? #Yes, that's right, Wayne Greene, who probably made more money for years and years, spouting off about the &quot;end of ham radio as we know it&quot; #than most of us could ever dream of making! #

In fact, when Greene left the magazine for a period of time, it floundered on the rocks, until he came back to pick up the pieces. #It was never quite the magazine after he came back that it had been before, probably because he had mellowed a bit in his old age! #( although he would catagorically deny that ! ) But us old timers will never forget reading those fiesty editorial pages month after month.

I am only bringing this up because so much of the negativism that circulates today is a reflection of the thoughts, comments, and attitude that Greene posessed!

As I think back over the passing of time, I really wonder if all of those warnings, admonitions, and Pontifications really did more good or more harm to the hobby! They certainly made for interesting reading, but . . . .

Likewise, I wonder what results the current division of opinion are creating today? #Negative or Positive ?

The jury is still out.

73 from Jim AG3Y

[w5alt]

Yes, I recognize W2NSD's mentality in most of the modern complaints. While he did bring up some good points, his negative attitude and &quot;sky is falling&quot; mentality turned me off, consequently I never subscribed to 73 Magazine, although I did read most of the issues that my dad collected through the 50's, 60's, etc. As I recall, his alternate radio club was going to save ham radio. What the heck was it called? I can't remember ... must be old age!

Maybe one of the complainers could become a more modern, non-mellowed Wayne Green and put their money where their mouth is, as he did. Maybe they can save ham radio from itself, just like Wayne has done. Or at least make it interesting. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

73,

[N0PU]

Wayne Green was my hero...

I took most of his negativeness with a grain of salt... but &quot;73&quot; was the only the second best Ham Mag ever printed... &quot;Ham Radio&quot; was better for real technical content... and it went under first because most Hams couldn't follow it... too deep for most...

[AG3Y]

I LOVED &quot;Ham Radio&quot; ! ! ! # I still have some old issues lying around! #Nearly an inch thick, and stuffed with technical material! #( Heavy Sigh ! )

73 from Jim AG3Y

[N0WVA]

I dont see any relation at all. I do see a relation to the low numbers in the ham ranks and society in general being as bright as a box of rocks, so, go figure.

[KB1GYQ]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0WVA @ June 18 2003,19:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I dont see any relation at all. I do see a relation to the low numbers in the ham ranks and society in general being as bright as a box of rocks, so, go figure.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
How dare you insult rocks like that!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0WVA @ June 18 2003,16:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I do see a relation to the low numbers in the ham ranks and society in general being as bright as a box of rocks, so, go figure.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I think this is mostly a problem of what society- through its premiere representative, the collective media- is told to focus on as being important-- you know, stuff like reality TV shows, acquiring the latest model BMW, questing for a body like those you see on models in the Gap ads, and how to play a sport so well that you can get a free ride through college on an athletic scholarship (what an oxymoron that is). I'm not saying that we aren't entitled to sit down and veg out in front of the TV now and then, but some people in society seem to make a job out of avoiding anything that would require them to stretch their brain power just a little bit.

Being thought of as a &quot;geek&quot; is still equated to a social kiss of death. Yet it is the technical people among us who really move society- they come up with the ideas and the tools that make our society the high-tech, first-world place it is.

Not that this is really important or anything, but Time's &quot;Person of the Century&quot; wasn't an athlete, or a supermodel, or an actor. It was Albert Einstein.

More power to those who think different.

[N0FFA]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (w5alt @ June 17 2003,11:01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Personally I feel very sorry for anyone naive enough to believe most of what they see on internet message boards! I would never make an important decision based only on the ranting and raving that goes on here or most other boards. I think the problem is that people think that message boards are ham radio.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Message board content is so negative. It's nowhere near the positive influences I've been exposed to via e-mail. I've built an antenna tuner and a 40m CW transceiver while waiting to get rich quick, for my ding-a-ling to get bigger and my hair to grow back. The results have been a little slower than I had hoped though. Guess I'll have time to start on that K2 while waiting to morph into Gatsby. I just hope I don't get discouraged by some creep posting a thread about how impossible a K2 kit is. Hopefully those government folks with my best interests at heart will pass some legislation to protect me from message board ranting and raving.

[KB1GYQ]

That's what a VFO is for... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif Stop running to big daddy to protect you; I promiss you will not like the results! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

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

[KA8NCR]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MattBeer @ June 19 2003,19:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
I disagree. #Ham radio IS dying. #It's dying not because of fewer licensees - we have plenty of licensees. #It's dying because of the paucity of people actually on the air.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I agree, kinda.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
The livelihood of the hobby is not measured by the number of licensees, but by the average amount of on-the-air bandwidth that we are collectively using. #And that is far lower than 20 years ago.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Amateur radio needs to compete with many other technical hobbies. Many are centered on computers and the Internet, and many others are made accessible because of computers.

I know a couple ex-amateurs, once extremely active, now totally bitten by the astronomy bug. They do amateur radio astronomy with the knowledge gained as amateur radio operators, they are big into amateur astronomy photography and spend a lot of time sky watching.

Other operators maintain their amateur licenses only for the 6 meter remote control privileges. I see them often around town and they are very active in R/C models.

I think the bands are partially empty because of rudeness, but also because of the sheer boredom of RST+NAME+QTH+WX+TNX, 73's style QSOs. To get away from that, you have to find a niche group on the band and sometimes that's hard. Face it, a great majority of amateur radio operators would solve a methamphetamine addicts' insomnia.