[BC] Re: No Code

[Cowboy]

On Monday 25 July 2005 13:30, Clay Freinwald wrote:

> Got my FCC licenses the hard way and still proud of it.  And - no - my
> Ham Call is not a vanity call.

 Clarification:
 The class of my license is not vanity.
 I'm a "real" extra, back when the FCC examiner watched you fill in
 the answer sheet, and tested your CW skill manually.
 ( twice in my case, as I took the amateur before the telegraph )
 I'm quite proud of that, but the extra class call sign, for me anyway, was vanity.
 I could have retained my novice call, and it wouldn't affect the class of license,
 or what it took to get it one whit, but ya gotta admit, KZ8Z as the last of the extra
 class K calls is kinda unique, and has a nice ring on CW.

 I'm equally proud of my commercial license, useless as they seem to be today.

 
On Monday 25 July 2005 19:32, Douglas B. Pritchett wrote:
> So, does that mean if, in a year or two, I get off my butt, study and 
> pass the General written exam and upgrade without code, that I am any 
> less of a person?

 Methinks that's not what was meant.

 BUT, you will have demonstrated a level of competence less than what
 was previously required. *I* do not hold that against *you,* but I do feel
 dismay that you are denied even the opportunity to even try, at the same
 levels previously tested.

> Any less of a ham?

 Well, in YOUR case...   :-)
 Oh, you mean THAT kind of ham.....

 For me, the class of license has nothing to do whatever with what
 kind of a HAM, as in amateur, one might be.
 That's determined entirely by how you conduct yourself.

 If I remember the quote, it was Marconi himself, who told one HAM
 who seemed awed by his person, "I too, am an amateur." 

> Who are you and your ensconced   
> brethren of the HF bands to judge my character? Like I stole my license? 
> If those of us who follow in the years to come are subject to hard 
> feelings and are not welcome in the ham community, why should we bother? 

 Perhaps not you, but those who would claim that they have demonstrated
 the same levels as Clay, myself, and others, by virtue of holding a new
 license of any class, then yes.
 I do believe that we are rightfully offended, for those who wish to take offense.

 Oh, and I'ld say the same about those with the older tickets, who got them
 by virtue of the "cheat" books.

> The hobby will die off with the old brass pounders and the Commission 
> will give the allocations to someone who will use them, and pay for them.

 Can't argue with that, and in that vein, anything that encourages amateur
 hobbiests, can be a good thing, with exception of calling all of us equals
 when we're not.
 
 I'ld have prefered allowing expanded privalege to the other classes, rather
 than the course that was taken.