Thank you for pointing out the archive. I have read through all of this thread and I understand what you are saying. However, I stand by my original words. Please don't take me the wrong way, I am not angry, just disappointed that some hams would refuse to answer a sloppy CQ. I guess, realistically, this has been that way for a very long time. I just hope those are in the minority.
And thank you, I look forward to getting back on the air. 73, Lee On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Mike Morrow <[email protected]> wrote: > Lee wrote: > >> I have just signed up to this list, so I have not seen this whole >> thread, but I have to say that I am disapointed with what I am >> hearing. I agree that hams should take pride in their sending, but I >> also believe that hams should encourage new hams by helping them out, >> not by shunning them just because their code is sloppy. > > Relax, Lee. Relax. > > This is a classic case of one's needing to read all of the thread > before getting bent out of shape. The thread discussed in the main > the difficulties and "distinctive" Morse telegraphy that sometimes results > from use of a mechanical bug, like the classic Vibroplex keys. The > "interesting" Morse styles that may result from such key use is often > attributed to those having long and sometimes professional experience > as a Morse operator. This is a topic that has been discussed by operators > ever since bugs appeared more than 100 years ago (see the reference > in one post to a **1964** QST article). New operators were not once, > even in passing, a part or subject of this discussion. > > The list archives may always be reviewed in order to properly analyze > the content of a thread. See http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/elecraft . > >> I know I wasn't perfect when I first put my hand to the key and I >> would bet that most of you were not either. I wonder how many abandoned >> the hobby because nobody would answer their CQ. > > Back in the days when Morse testing was required, most classes held by > ham clubs tried to get students ready **only** to pass the five wpm > copy test. These classes invariably turned out hams who had no capability > to send at any speed Morse that could be deciphered. The only real > corrective measure required student work with an "Elmer" with some > patience. Sending **good** Morse is always more difficult than reading > good Morse. > >> Lee >> Currently Expired (was N4RKI) > > Welcome back, Lee. 73, > > Mike / KK5F > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[email protected] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
