Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-athena.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!mit-athena!yba
From: yba@mit-athena.ARPA (Mark H Levine)
Newsgroups: net.ham-radio
Subject: Re: Morse code stinks
Message-ID: <187@mit-athena.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 2-Jul-84 11:41:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-athe.187
Posted: Mon Jul  2 11:41:21 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 3-Jul-84 04:43:53 EDT
References: <2812@ecsvax.UUCP>, <858@akgua.UUCP>
Organization: MIT, Project Athena, Cambridge, Ma.
Lines: 40

I was not a net reader when you (plural) were chewing over the codeless
license.  I have read parts of the rehash and would like to know how
people with my particular view were answered by the majority.

I know several people, most of whom are EEs, especially in microwave
engineering, who would apply for a code-less VHF-UHF license and bring
some of their expertise into amateur radio.  They cite the stumbling block
of the code as the reason they will not apply.

Now personally I agree that once in the ham fraternity such folks would
find incentives to learn the code.  I didn't really like it myself for
quite awhile, and then some friends at W2SZ took me on a moonbounce expedition.
There is nothing like trying a VHF/UHF contest for proving your new 1.2 GHz
amplifier either--not a whole lot of phone in that last I checked.

I don't think whether code is useful or not is at issue--I think it is,
and if I'm wrong we will all just plain stop using it and it will go
away.  The open question is whether to get people who will not learn
the code a novice type ham license so that we can benefit from the new
blood.

Not all of us took up this hobby to be operators.  Some are mainly
equipment builders, or interested in public service, or even chess.
I feel that it takes all kinds, and that we want the kind that will
contribute, even without the code.  We seem to have enough appliance
operators to go around.  I believe that making the codeless license
require a tough technical test and limiting privileges will make sure we get
good technicians, and not CBers.

Aside from the "No one gets into this club unless he passes the same initiation
I had to pass" arguments, what were the objections to the codeless
experimenter license?  Please feel free to use direct mail for
responses, and flame at me if you wish.  I'd really like to know what
drives League policy here, as the FCC seemed ready to go for this idea
before ARRL started lobbying--does anyone think that impression wrong?

WA2YBA/1

-- 
yba%mit-heracles@mit-mc.ARPA		UUCP:	decvax!mit-athena!yba