If that's what you believe then I believe you need to go look up how "skill" is defined. There's lot's of skills one can express in Amateur radio, Morse code is just one of many.
Why should getting a license require "effort and practice"? Some things just come naturally to people. And how does Morse code test for anything other than Morse code? Do we need people that know Morse code to be safe, courteous, and effective operators? It appears that the FCC believes we do not. We don't need the tests to be difficult for the sake of making them difficult. What we need is testing relevant to the operating privileges granted. I believe that has not been the case since "incentive licensing" came to be.
1. What people attain too easily they esteem too lightly. Requiring some effort over a period of time makes people invested and engaged and way less likely to cause problems. (Not totally so, of course - just less.) 2. How does Morse Code test for anything other than code? HUH? It doesn't. Who the heck said it did? 3. Of course not - but it doesn't matter if it's code, or essay questions, or whatever. Some things should be at least a bit difficult because being difficult makes them better. 4. The FCC doesn't "believe" anything - it's an agency. And the people who run it seem to only "believe" the one universal truth of politics - money talks. I believe we do indeed, precisely so, need the tests to be difficult (to some degree - I don't mean requiring Herculean effort of course) precisely for the sake of being difficult I will say explicitly here what others believe but beat around the bush about and won't come out and say. They should be at least somewhat difficult, with more privileges for increasing difficult, precisely for being difficult. The more effort one puts forth, the more engaged in an activity one is likely to be. There is a balance there of course - too difficult and people won't bother. Too easy and they may do it, but forget about it, laugh it off, or just not care how they act or what they do on the air and in the community. There is even a term for a closely related (it's basically a different manifestation of the same part of human nature) effect in marketing, "the Ikea Effect" : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IKEA_effect "The IKEA effect is a cognitive bias in which consumers place a disproportionately high value on products they partially created." Very true, and more generally, people place a higher value on things that take effort to acquire and understand. "That which we attain too easily we esteem too lightly."
I believe you are mistaking an FCC license for some kind of membership in a club. This license should be nothing more than a contract between the government and the person granted the license. The government gives the rules, makes reasonably certain the person understands the rules with a test, and so long as the person holds up their end with good behavior the government holds up their end with access to bandwidth. You did. Maybe you didn't say it outright but it's not hard to connect the dots. You made it clear that those that passed the Morse code exam placed more "ownership" in Amateur radio. Let's say I agree with you, that a more difficult test is needed. The FCC has made it clear in the past that the testing is largely in the hands of the Amateur radio community. They aren't going to make the test more difficult without some specific means by which this is to be attained. The testing is relatively simple, there's FCC rules, some standards of operating practice, a bit of ohm's law, some RF propagation theory and "rules of thumb", and a few other odds and ends. The knowledge needed to operate a radio safely and effectively just isn't that hard. I'd pose the same challenge as the FCC, what exactly would it take to make the difficulty of the testing meet your standards? If you cannot specify this in a way someone can act upon then you are just making noise. I know what you are talking about. It's called a "rite of passage". For military recruits it's "hell week". For high school students it's their final exams, followed by graduation. For musicians it's their first performance before an audience. I can go on. This is the event that defines a person entering into a something new, becoming more than what they were. That's not what a government issued license should be. If we take what should be a rite of passage to the point of being difficult for the sake of being difficult then it is nothing more than hazing. Is that what you want people to go through? A hazing to enter your club? Perhaps I'm mistaken. Maybe it's not a hazing you want. I would like to see something specific proposed or, again, you are just making noise.
I have been taking the survey as long as I have known about it. I do not know what good the survey will do to drive change. It will just put a spot light on what we already know. The amateur population is aging. There is not enough younger hams to replace the hams that will become a SK, therefore the hobby will experience a drastic drop off in activity once the baby boomers die off. That fact the HOA/CC&R issue that stifles our hobby still exists. The divide between the code and the no-coders. The overall lowering of license standards debate. The divide between the ARRL zealots and the NEVER ARRL crowd. 73 de Robert KB6QXM (Silicon Valley)
