The New York TimesMuch better of an article than I expected.  Thanks for the
tip!

What I don't understand, though, is this:  Why is the dropping of the code
element for testing automatically seen by so many as the imminent demise of
our use of the code?  Yes, testing will no longer be required, and yes, the
exclusive CW bands have shrunk, and I'm sure in time the number of CW
operators MAY drop... but then again, it may not...

About 2 months ago, when I was struggling with a temporary vertical
(wouldn't load on 30, that's another story), a friend, a recent Extra,
called on the phone.  Told him I was trying to work a particular DX station
on 30; he tuned in and worked him in 2 calls, the stinker.  Anyway, when we
got back to talking, I told him I'd heard both ends of the QSO, so it was
good; Randy asked me what software I was using to decode the signals, and I
told him it was the organic one between my ears.  He was totally astounded
that I was able to copy "really fast" code in my head!  (It was about 25 wpm
or so, but that too is another story!)

We talked about this again at the club christmas party 2 weeks ago.  Randy
stopped using the computer as a crutch; now that he knows it can be done,
he's starting to do it.  And he's finding out that he enjoys operating code
even more!

So... there's hope.  So why all the doom and gloom?

Yes, the FCC handed us a lemon.  Want to make lemonade out of it?  (Me?
Nah, find me some tequilla and salt instead... <g>)

73
  -----Original Message-----
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
harris_ruben
  Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 8:44 AM
  To: dx-chat List
  Subject: [DX-CHAT] The New York Times


  Well, we've made today's New York Times


  n2ern

Reply via email to