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