Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site uok.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uok!mpackard
From: mpackard@uok.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.ham-radio
Subject: Morse code stinks - (nf)
Message-ID: <2800003@uok.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 24-Jun-84 20:40:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uok.2800003
Posted: Sun Jun 24 20:40:00 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Jun-84 02:30:58 EDT
Lines: 27
Nf-ID: #N:uok:2800003:000:1187
Nf-From: uok!mpackard    Jun 24 19:40:00 1984

#N:uok:2800003:000:1187
uok!mpackard    Jun 24 19:40:00 1984

:-)

I would like to start an argument on net.ham-radio as it
seems there is no food for thought on this note.
  The subject is no-code on 50 Mhz and up.  I believe the
requirement for an amatuer to learn morse code for these
frequencys is pure hogwash.  The number of radios available
on these frequencys is more than enough to eliminate the
need.  When was the last time you saw a jack on a two-meter
handheld that said 'key' on it?  The poor users couldn't do
morse if they wanted too.  The above statement refers to the
fact that in this day and age the only concievable purpose
of morse would be for emergencys when your microphone broke
and for practice to maintain currency.  Wayne Green says if
hams want morse than by god they better be current and able
to operate with it.  A person should retest every year and
even be required to show a speed improvement also.  I believe
this would be fair.  My interest is in microwaves and I just
don't see where the ham community would benifit from my
knowing morse code.  Hell you guys don't use morse actively
up on these frequencys anyway.
   Don't send me any mail on this subject but go ahead and
start arguing (sp?).
uok!mpackard