Morse is History

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (G0MZS @ Sep. 13 2003,14:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I found this for you to read. Guess you know best though.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Nobody knows best. That has been the problem with this
thread. Everybody sticks in their tuppenceworth and that represents their opinion and nothing else. Some may agree but it is still their opinion. The success or failure of the retention of cw as a requirement will not be determined by a majority but by the most vocal and the 'no coders' seem to be very good at that. I accept that the code will  probably go (as it has in your country and several others),  but that does not mean that I have to like it. The arguments from the 'nocoder in chief' seem to imply that retention of the code is retrogressive, in a longwinded and specious argument.

I have to say, though, in my final contribution to this debate, that the posts both anti and pro code have been of a better quality than previous incarnations of this topic.

73 and see you all at the lower end of the bands
Ed    

PS I have read all the articles on high speed cw records, but thanks anyway. Ed

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KQ6XA @ Sep. 13 2003,17:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Don't use it to divide us.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Dear mother of The Mother Of All Threads,
1.  It's a bit late for that.
2.  YOU let the genie out of the bottle.
3.  No harm done.  Less than a tenth of a percent of U.S. hams have contributed to this love-in, and of those, only a handful care to wallow in this day after day.
4.  Congrats on a nice article.

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KQ6XA @ Sep. 13 2003,17:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">About 90% of the private email has been overwhelmingly positive and genuine[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Probably a selection effect.  Of the posts that take a side, about 60% are running in your favor.  One possibility is that more of those who differ with you, especially those who also want to disparage you personally, wish to tell the world.

 

Another day goes by without hf privileges. Maybe tomorrow.

 

Well, as long as we're all setting down our wine glasses, dabbing our mouths with our napkins and pushing away from the banquet table ...

Just a few after-dinner observations of my own:

1.) Be careful with statistics. Sure, it's easy to think that because 30 percent of a ham radio class doesn't get licensed, Morse code is the reason. The problem is, no one can prove these same folks would have gotten a license anyway (and by the way, haven't they ever heard of a Technician license?). The second problem is, there can be any number of reasons for a given outcome -- not just the one you'd prefer to use as the scapegoat. See Item 2.

2.) Be careful with logical arguments. The fact that fewer young people seem interested in ham radio may or may not have anything to do with the code. Last time I checked, the Internet was fairly popular, no? Or maybe we simply haven't done a good enough job of making ham radio visible to teenagers. Or maybe it's all of the above ... or something none of us has thought of yet.

I've said this before, but one might also conclude that: 1. The number of Shriners is dwindling. 2. They wear funny red hats. 3. Therefore, if they eliminated the funny red hats, their membership would increase dramatically. Point being: Many of the logical arguments against code, including some of those that started this thread, go no deeper than this: 1. Fewer licensees. 2. Code exists. 3. It must be the daggone code.

I'm not a code extremist -- if it truly is a major drag on our membership, let's consider eliminating it -- but if you want to win me over, you'll have to show me better research than what's been presented in here.

3.) We've kicked around the possibility that some people simply have no "talent" for learning code, no matter how hard they study. Inherent in this argument is the assumption that if this is indeed the case, we should make it easier for them to obtain a ham license.

But let me throw this monkey wrench at the premise: So what if people truly "can't" learn code? Ham radio is a privilege, not a right. And while we're all guaranteed equal opportunity to earn a license, we should never expect equal outcome. Not every 16-year-old kid passes his driver's test, either, but that doesn't mean we spend time fretting about people who "can't" learn to drive, and how we should change the driver's test to make it easier for them. And before you argue that driving involves life-and-death matters, substitute "CPA exam" or "bar exam" for "driver's test." Same deal.

Fact is, there are many privileges in life that have to be earned ... and that some people will never earn. I'm not saying, "Screw the people who can't earn a ham ticket"; I'm merely pointing out that even if a few people truly can't do something, that's not a slam-dunk argument for changing the exam to suit everyone's needs.

4.) In the time we've spent hashing out the pros and cons of a no-code exam, many of us could have already learned Morse code at 5 wpm and upgraded. Seriously.

5.) Morse code is history, all right. It's OUR history. And before we axe it from the exam, let's be sure it'll make a real difference. I'd hate to be back here a year or two from now, scratching our heads over the same problems we currently face and hearing fellow hams say, "But gosh, I was so sure that if we just eliminated the code ..."

Time to file out of the banquet hall, folks. It's been a fun, lively debate.

73 to all, and hope to meet you on the air someday.
Brian, W9IND

 

This topic is like the fable "Fox without a Tail". The fox loses his tail in a trap (I equate this to no-coders except they never had the code in the first place). This fox goes to the council of foxes and presents his case that foxes having a tail is a burdon for life, and that it is much more fashionable to have their tails removed (I equate this to no-coders promoting the elimination of code testing). A wise old fox told the group "If you had not encountered your bad fortune and lost your tail in a trap, you would not be so keen to encourage others to lose their tails (no-coders would not be so quick to seek elimination of the code test).

If you no-code proponents would be honest with yourselves, I would bet that 90%-95% of you would not be so quick to seek the elimination of the code test if you had already passed your code test. Think about it...

Jim (K6VB)

 

I would hate to see the code requirement eliminated for an entirely different reason. I am guessing that with the code requirement gone there will be fewer CW ops. This would be a loss to Ham Radio for the following reason. In tunning across anyone of the HF ham bands, you will notice any number of stations calling CQ on CW. As you move across the phone portion not a single CQ is to be heard. Phone contacts are mostly scheds and nets, not impromptude converstions. I think this takes a lot away from the hobby. At least some exposure to CW will help keep the opportunities for communications open.

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W9IND @ Sep. 15 2003,07:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">2.) Be careful with logical arguments. The fact that fewer young people seem interested in ham radio may or may not have anything to do with the code. Last time I checked, the Internet was fairly popular, no? Or maybe we simply haven't done a good enough job of making ham radio visible to teenagers. Or maybe it's all of the above ... or something none of us has thought of yet.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Ah, Brian. Don't rush off. Stay a while. The thread is young yet. Let me get you a fresh napkin. I'll open another bottle. Pass me your glass...

1.  I agree 100%.
2.  I think it indeed likely that competition from other tech hobbies like 'puters/video games and the endless stuff you can do on the internet, the routine of wireless communication, and the routine of cheap and easy global communication--which has made talking to the other side of the planet much less exotic--have all made ham radio much less of a draw.  And maybe alien implants.  But probably not 5 wpm code.

 

If morse is history, why is testing still being done?  Another  day is about to go by without hf privileges for technicians.

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K6VB @ Sep. 15 2003,08:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you no-code proponents would be honest with yourselves, I would bet that 90%-95% of you would not be so quick to seek the elimination of the code test if you had already passed your code test. Think about it...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
This and similar threads, and the QRZ database should yield a rich harvest of data on that question.  Start counting.

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kn6z @ Sep. 15 2003,16:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W9IND @ Sep. 15 2003,07:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">2.) Be careful with logical arguments. The fact that fewer young people seem interested in ham radio may or may not have anything to do with the code. Last time I checked, the Internet was fairly popular, no? Or maybe we simply haven't done a good enough job of making ham radio visible to teenagers. Or maybe it's all of the above ... or something none of us has thought of yet.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Ah, Brian.  Don't rush off.  Stay a while.  The thread is young yet.  Let me get you a fresh napkin.  I'll open another bottle.  Pass me your glass...

1.  I agree 100%.
2.  I think it indeed likely that competition from other tech hobbies like 'puters/video games and the endless stuff you can do on the internet, the routine of wireless communication, and the routine of cheap and easy global communication--which has made talking to the other side of the planet much less exotic--have all made ham radio much less of a draw.  And maybe alien implants.  But probably not 5 wpm code.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Hehe. Well, since you offered to open another bottle ... perhaps we can at least hang around the parking lot, sit on the curb and pass the sack around until security ushers us off the grounds.

Good comments. And a good laugh out of yours truly for your initial remarks. Thanks on both counts.

Brian, W9IND

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W9IND @ Sep. 15 2003,21:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hehe. Well, since you offered to open another bottle ... perhaps we can at least hang around the parking lot, sit on the curb and pass the sack around until security ushers us off the grounds.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Glenn

 

I know it's been said before but things change and usually for the better.

I was a LAN Analyst for State Farm Insurance and was certified by Microsoft, Novelle, and CompTia.
In the early days DOS and win 3.1 for work groups was a MS course requirement and even after Windows 95 came out they where still part of the Microsoft Certification courses. So DOS is no longer used in the newer MS platforms and Win 3.1 is pretty much done, does it seem logical to require passing courses in DOS and Win 3.1 in the days of XP and windows 2003? I believe they dropped the DOS requirement and probably the Win 3 requirement when they developed the Windows 2000 MCSE courses, and if they haven't dropped the Win 3 requirement they will very soon. Oh and remember IRC?

I got my first drivers license in 1969, and in those days you had to back and take the test every 4 years. Now unless you really mess up with the law it's just a matter of sending in the cash for a license renewal.

I remember the days when you had to take a test simple test and pay to get a C.B. license. Now no license or even the $5.00 fee is required for use of the 11-meter band.

When I was in Boot Camp they used to knock the crap out of people for making mistakes or sometimes to make an example of someone. Today there is no touching of the recruits at all. I really thought that the change was a mistake because knocking someone on their butt once in a while seemed an effective way to insure the recruits were giving it 110% at all times and ensured that only those that really wanted to made it through the training and helped bond the recruits.

No one is saying that the areas designated for C.W. be given over to techs or even phone only, or any such idea. I would say it would be a good idea to leave those areas alone and if someone wants to access these areas then they should demonstrate their ability to use code, but changes happen and code does not indicate someone's ability to use phone on H.F.

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kg6pog @ Sep. 17 2003,14:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I was a LAN Analyst for State Farm Insurance and was certified by Microsoft, Novelle, and CompTia.
In the early days DOS and win 3.1 for work groups was a MS course requirement and even after Windows 95 came out they where still part of the Microsoft Certification courses. So DOS is no longer used in the newer MS platforms and Win 3.1 is pretty much done, does it seem logical to require passing courses in DOS and Win 3.1 in the days of XP and windows 2003?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Has the MS Cert gone totally to hell because some obsolete requirements were dropped? I'll defer to you on that, but I suspect the answer is no. The requirements for all sorts of licenses, certifications, degrees, memberships, merit badges, etc. constantly evolve and change.

 

To all the folks on this and other threads dealing with the code,

My wife has been reading some of these posts and other threads on the code/no-code debates. She's a non-technical person by nature. She enjoys watching what I do when I make a contact on HF, either by voice, digital or CW. Especially when they’re overseas. These code/no-code debates have had her wondering if it's as hard as the no-coders have said. So she asked me to write this and post this on several threads.

She feels, after watching me do CW and hearing how fast 5 WPM sounds, that she can pass the 5 WPM..... By Oct 25th, 2003 (next testing session). That's only a little more than a month away. Too top it off, she wants to get her General as well. She also wants to challenge those, who don't have the code, to see if you can beat her before she passes.

She sounds very determine, but she always loves a challenge.

By the way, let me thank those who debated this issue. It did something I couldn't do, convince my wife to become a Amateur Radio Operator. It kinda shocked me that she ask me to teach her the code and the theory. And I will!!

I plan to start a website here soon to show how she is progressing. I'll post the link on my profile here on QRZ. The link will be up in a week for those who are interested.

I think her challenge is a good challenge to those who are against the code. If she can pass it, there will be no excuse for those who say they can't. And those are the ones who are against it the most.

Chris N0TTW