BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Louis Kim Kline <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Blind-Hams For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 15 Oct 2001 20:30:16 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (67 lines)
Of course there would be more people on the bands <sarcasm>.

Bean counters care about quantity rather than quality.
--Lou K2LKK
At 08:49 AM 10/15/01 -0400, you wrote:
>Hey gang.
>OK, here's my take on the CW.  We should keep the 5 words a minute.  This
>is crazy that they are trying to get rid of it.
>It is an open invitation for the 11 meter people to just come on to HF.  I
>have a major problem with that.
>The way i see it is that ham radio is a privillage that you earn.
>Many of us myself included had to work out but off to get where we are.
>I've heard all the excuses, and i'm sick of all of them.  When ever i hear
>i can't do it, that just makes me sick!
>The fact is that you can do it if you put your mind to it.
>Take the challenge, and just do the CW.  That's fine if you don't like it,
>but that's part of the price you pay for getting in to amateur radio.
>
>                 73 from Jed.n1jbc
>At 09:11 AM 10/14/01 -0400, you wrote:
> >I can agree with this,  but 5 words per minute is easy, I know not everyone
> >says that, it kept me out for a while, I procrastinated for about 3 years
> >before taking the test for that reason, didn't want to do the code, or I
> >didn't think I was going to do well in that is more the case so when I
> >finally went for it, I figured I'd go for the tech no code and if I liked it
> >then I would move up to a higher lisence. I did like it so I did upgrade and
> >now I am hooked. But now I think it is getting too easy. I know the object
> >is to get more people involved but  it is getting to be too easy lately.
> >JMO
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "JEFFREY MICHAEL KENYON" <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2001 1:03 AM
> >Subject: Re: radio
> >
> >
> >> Hi, I think it is because of a lack of awareness.  People think why go
> >> with radio communications now when I have the Internet that can do the
> >> exact same thing without all of the learning involved, but they are
> >> missing out on a lot of aspects they wouldn't get with the Internet, but
> >> would with ham radio.  What do you all think?  I think that one reason why
> >> they reduced the code requirements was so that they could keep ham radio a
> >> live and to  get more interested.  I think that  there are lot of people
> >> out there who wouldn't get into ham radio because of the  code
> >> requirements, and my understanding is that in some countries code is
> >> pretty much  done away altogether.  For example, in Afghanistan I have
> >> heard you can get a ticket for next to nothing.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, 13 Oct 2001, chuck lunkley wrote:
> >>
> >> > Fellow hams,
> >> >
> >> >      Do you think that the reason for the lack of activity on some of
> >the
> >> > ham bands is related to the popularity of computer technology?
> >> >
> >

Louis (Kim) Kline, A.R.S.  K2LKK
e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
Work e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
Work Tel.  (716) 697-5753

ATOM RSS1 RSS2