[Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, JOHN MACKEY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It has been said that you aren't a REAL HAM until you have passed a 20 WPM > morse code test & have the license to prove it. A lot of things have been said. Some of them are true. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
It has been said that you aren't a REAL HAM until you have passed a 20 WPM morse code test & have the license to prove it. -- Original Message -- Received: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 01:26:50 PM CST From: "Coy Hilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. > OH, I JUST HAVE TO REPLY TO THISAs a technician..(Yes I > checked before starting) The way that I see it is that If you wanted > to get on HF enough, you would what ever it takes to get there even > if you do have to learn the simple 5 words a minute to get there. > Therefore I must assume that you don't care enough to study a few > days to do it. > I studied long enough to pass the 20 WPM to get my Extra ticket. > Why you ask well, because I wanted to be an EXTRA. Not to be better > than anybody else but to show my self what I had learned or what I > am capable of not what I had memorized from a Q&A manual. > > As for explaining technical concepts...well I'm sure that there are > people on this board that have been here for years that could smoke > you. It's obvious that you think that you are above the rest of us > in knowledge well may be you are well above me but, you don't know > me nore the rest of us or what we know. So your communications > skills leave much to be desired from my point of view. > > Sorry, goes out to the rest of the gang for my soap box stand and > ignorent rambelings. > > AC0Y > Coy Hilton > > > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > This is where the rubber meets the road as to the "problem with Ham > > Radio" > > > > As it has been stated before, Ham Radio seems to gather the most > > self-centered, egotistical, elite minded group of people who are > the > > poorest of communicators.. > > > > Each one should have been required to take a Semantics course in > order > > to not only understand the concept of word meaning, but how > delivery > > affects the message. If you can't get the concept from you brain to > > words, and deliver those words without clouding them so much with > your > > own bias that they are received poorly at the other end; you simply > > can't communicate. This is the most rudimental communications > model > > there is, and nowhere is it included in the testing material. > > > > There are a lot of truly great folks involved in Ham radio. > However, > > those who have the worst attitudes are often the ones chosen to > > interface with potential hams either on the Cram-Course or testing > > level. This is precisely where we need the best communicators > amongst > > us, ass well as those who understand the testing rules and don't > > introduce their own bias as fact. > > > > The CW issue in an emotionally driven one. There are few among us > that > > can address it rationally in conversation with someone having an > opinion > > that is counter to our personal one. This isn't likely to change. > > > > When I hear of a VE changing the rules to meet his/her own personal > > bias, I am again reminded of the very reason we aren't attracting > the > > young, technically competent minds that are available - to the > Amateur > > Radio Service. > > > > I would be willing to set up a digital station, build a data > slicer, > > explain serial communications hardware, IRQ priorities, discuss the > > importance of proper ground potential when operating logic-based > > equipment, talk about haw communications theory (of delivering the > > spoken or written word) is more important in getting the message > through > > the mental QRM. Any of these things other than CW to advance > from > > Tech Lite to a "higher" class. However, that isn't an option. > > > > I am smart enough to repair their rigs (sometimes), but not > qualified to > > check them out on the air when they are working. > > > > Helluva Concept; this communications thing... > > > > David > > KD4NUE > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave VanHorn > > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 8:36 AM > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. > > > > > > >Yup, a sheet full of dots and > > > dashes. Then she went back and transl
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
It IS INDEED legal per the FCC. -- Original Message -- Received: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 07:37:01 AM CST From: "Dave VanHorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Yup, a sheet full of dots and > > dashes. Then she went back and translated each Morse > > character to it's appropriate letter, number, or > > punctuation. > > As far as I'm aware that's legal per the FCC. > It's not up to the VE groups to arbitrarily tighten the requirements or > change the testing procedures. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: OT Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
as a VE I will say if they can pass their element 1 thru 4 they have a license, and the IARU, passed the resolution so its already sitting in Washinton, DC at the FCC and the ARRL as to what the fine print says. All I do is the VEC 605 's and grade the exams just a paper processor. mark ab8ru Stephen Rice wrote: I guess I will have to say something on this subject as it is coming down to the same arguments! Everyone in ham radio has an interest and for some that interest is CW, some it is SSB,FM,RTTY,PACTOR, Building, Operating, contesting, Sat work, Volunteers, and the list goes on and on! Stop beating a dead horse! If someone gets a license they at least had to put an effort forward and should be applauded for that! When it comes to jerks there are jerks in every walk of life. You ignore them and move on! Heck, I seldom pick up a microphone as I like to build and Repeaters is something I enjoy building and learning from other builders. I could care less how long someone is a ham or what class they are as its their actions that count! Oh that's right this is the repeater builders group isn't it? hmm , Guess I will have to go back to trying to get these darn M/A Panthers to work on 440 so I can make a mobile repeater ! 73's Steve N4YZA K - Original Message - From: "mch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:08 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. Actually, that's how I passed my tests (which was in front of the FCC - pre VEC days). I knew the test would be nothing to do with the 'small words', so when they sent "My name is Henry and I'm in Grand Forks, SD. The temperature is 78 degrees and sunny. ..." My paper had the following: Henry Grand Forks, SD 78 sunny And I had all the answers for the test. After all, how important is exact copy? I can even mis-spell wodrs and you can still understnad the meaning of waht I said. (did you catch all three 'typos'?) Why should the code be any different? As long as the message is understood, who cares about the medium? Joe M. numberone5call wrote: As the VEC for the local ARRL affiliated VE team. All we are required to grade is the written test of ten questions given to the applicant. You cannot grade someones test by what they have on their copy sheet unless the failed the test and your are looking for 1 minute of solid copy. I've had people copy it in their head and pass the test. Nowhere is it required that you have to write something down on the copy sheet. All you have to do is get 7 or more of the 10 questions on the exam correct. Doesn't matter what is on the answer sheet. You can set a time limit for completing the exam once it is passed out. A hour is plenty of time. Some of these folks sound like they are wanting to be BIG BROTHER!! Dennis no5c ( former ki5fw ) --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Bob M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm not sure the FCC regs require 100% solid copy, but that's how I had to earn my code test, and I think it was done by listening to a 7.5 wpm ARRL transmission too. The transmitting portion is optional and I haven't heard of anyone doing a transmit test in a long while. Bob M. == --- Mike Perryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We have a local examiner who not only requires 100% solid copy... he also requires you to send as well. The part 97 reg regarding this is pretty vague... so I guess it is open to interpretation. mike -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Bob M. Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:30 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. I do believe it IS an area that a local VE group can control, as long as they state that before the test begins, which was not done in the particular cases I was at. VEs can over-rule an answer sheet on a written test, and they can interpret some other things as well. If a potential test taker doesn't like the rules set up by the VEs, that person can choose to go elsewhere. It IS probably legal per the FCC, but do you think they'd give you all that time to decipher the dots and dashes if you went to an FCC office 30 years ago for a code test? They'd laugh you right out of your chair. If the intent is to show knowledge of the code, and/or fluency in using it, then you can't copy dots and dashes for 5 minutes and spend the next hour decoding it. Bob M. == --- Dave VanHorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yup, a sheet full of dots and dashes. Then she went back and translated each Morse
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
--- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Perryman K5JMP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have to side with Joe on this one. Having spent time as an Army > communicator in some of the worst $#*!-holes on earth with lives on the > line... it is the content of the message that has to be communicated. Not > punctuation and grammar. It is not a complex mathematical formulae that you > are sending... it is communication. There are many different dialects, but > the message is the same. Regardless of how it is conveyed. To illustrate the point of keying, waiting, then talking, we came up with this nice and simple test message: "DONT SHOOT!" You really want to make sure that first word dosen't get dropped! Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: OT Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
That is the great thing about ham radio... so many modes, so many projects to pursue! We have such a diverse hobby that there is something for everyone. I try to practice the old "live and let live" philosophy... to each his own. I just enjoy building devices, testing them... and refining the design until something else catches my eye. Most of my old projects sit on the shelf gathering dust until field day, or a demonstration event. Then you get to show off your work, and let the new guys (we work hard to interest the young folks) have a peek of just how much this hobby has to offer!! I have ATV gear that hasn't been powered-up in over 3 yrs, but I keep it because I built it from scratch and the kids need to know that you can do anything you want to in life. All you have to do is be willing to work for it. For the most part, ham radio and project building instills these values.. values that seem to be dwindling in our society these days. Build away.. learn all you can. Just don't forget to pass a little along to the new guys. Not ranting, or preaching... Just happy I found the hobby! Although, my wife likens it to an addiction.. ;-) 73 Mike K5JMP www.k5jmp.us -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Stephen Rice Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 11:26 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: OT Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. I guess I will have to say something on this subject as it is coming down to the same arguments! Everyone in ham radio has an interest and for some that interest is CW, some it is SSB,FM,RTTY,PACTOR, Building, Operating, contesting, Sat work, Volunteers, and the list goes on and on! Stop beating a dead horse! If someone gets a license they at least had to put an effort forward and should be applauded for that! When it comes to jerks there are jerks in every walk of life. You ignore them and move on! Heck, I seldom pick up a microphone as I like to build and Repeaters is something I enjoy building and learning from other builders. I could care less how long someone is a ham or what class they are as its their actions that count! Oh that's right this is the repeater builders group isn't it? hmm , Guess I will have to go back to trying to get these darn M/A Panthers to work on 440 so I can make a mobile repeater ! 73's Steve N4YZA K - Original Message - From: "mch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:08 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. > Actually, that's how I passed my tests (which was in front of the FCC - > pre VEC days). I knew the test would be nothing to do with the 'small > words', so when they sent "My name is Henry and I'm in Grand Forks, SD. > The temperature is 78 degrees and sunny. ..." My paper had the > following: > > Henry > Grand Forks, SD > 78 > sunny > > And I had all the answers for the test. After all, how important is > exact copy? I can even mis-spell wodrs and you can still understnad the > meaning of waht I said. (did you catch all three 'typos'?) Why should > the code be any different? As long as the message is understood, who > cares about the medium? > > Joe M. > > numberone5call wrote: >> >> As the VEC for the local ARRL affiliated VE team. All we are >> required to grade is the written test of ten questions given to the >> applicant. You cannot grade someones test by what they have on their >> copy sheet unless the failed the test and your are looking for 1 >> minute of solid copy. I've had people copy it in their head and pass >> the test. Nowhere is it required that you have to write something >> down on the copy sheet. All you have to do is get 7 or more of the >> 10 questions on the exam correct. Doesn't matter what is on the >> answer sheet. >> You can set a time limit for completing the exam once it is passed >> out. A hour is plenty of time. Some of these folks sound like they >> are wanting to be BIG BROTHER!! >> >> Dennis no5c ( former ki5fw ) >> >> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Bob M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > >> > I'm not sure the FCC regs require 100% solid copy, but >> > that's how I had to earn my code test, and I think it >> > was done by listening to a 7.5 wpm ARRL transmission >> > too. >> > >> > The transmitting portion is optional and I haven't >> > heard of anyone doing a transmit test in a long while. >> > >> > Bob M. >> > == >> > --- Mike Perryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > > We have a l
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
I have to side with Joe on this one. Having spent time as an Army communicator in some of the worst $#*!-holes on earth with lives on the line... it is the content of the message that has to be communicated. Not punctuation and grammar. It is not a complex mathematical formulae that you are sending... it is communication. There are many different dialects, but the message is the same. Regardless of how it is conveyed. CW is just one operation mode, there are many others that are just as efficient. Just my 2 cents Tech-class licensee by choice, 26yrs of communications in many formats. BTW... semaphore still works, but it is still not my first choice... nor is CW. Mike -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of mch Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:08 PM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. Actually, that's how I passed my tests (which was in front of the FCC - pre VEC days). I knew the test would be nothing to do with the 'small words', so when they sent "My name is Henry and I'm in Grand Forks, SD. The temperature is 78 degrees and sunny. ..." My paper had the following: Henry Grand Forks, SD 78 sunny And I had all the answers for the test. After all, how important is exact copy? I can even mis-spell wodrs and you can still understnad the meaning of waht I said. (did you catch all three 'typos'?) Why should the code be any different? As long as the message is understood, who cares about the medium? Joe M. numberone5call wrote: > > As the VEC for the local ARRL affiliated VE team. All we are > required to grade is the written test of ten questions given to the > applicant. You cannot grade someones test by what they have on their > copy sheet unless the failed the test and your are looking for 1 > minute of solid copy. I've had people copy it in their head and pass > the test. Nowhere is it required that you have to write something > down on the copy sheet. All you have to do is get 7 or more of the > 10 questions on the exam correct. Doesn't matter what is on the > answer sheet. > You can set a time limit for completing the exam once it is passed > out. A hour is plenty of time. Some of these folks sound like they > are wanting to be BIG BROTHER!! > > Dennis no5c ( former ki5fw ) > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Bob M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > I'm not sure the FCC regs require 100% solid copy, but > > that's how I had to earn my code test, and I think it > > was done by listening to a 7.5 wpm ARRL transmission > > too. > > > > The transmitting portion is optional and I haven't > > heard of anyone doing a transmit test in a long while. > > > > Bob M. > > == > > --- Mike Perryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > We have a local examiner who not only requires 100% > > > solid copy... he also > > > requires you to send as well. The part 97 reg > > > regarding this is pretty > > > vague... so I guess it is open to interpretation. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf > > > Of Bob M. > > > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:30 AM > > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to > > > communicate. > > > > > > > > > I do believe it IS an area that a local VE group can > > > control, as long as they state that before the test > > > begins, which was not done in the particular cases I > > > was at. VEs can over-rule an answer sheet on a > > > written > > > test, and they can interpret some other things as > > > well. If a potential test taker doesn't like the > > > rules > > > set up by the VEs, that person can choose to go > > > elsewhere. > > > > > > It IS probably legal per the FCC, but do you think > > > they'd give you all that time to decipher the dots > > > and > > > dashes if you went to an FCC office 30 years ago for > > > a > > > code test? They'd laugh you right out of your chair. > > > > > > If the intent is to show knowledge of the code, > > > and/or > > > fluency in using it, then you can't copy dots and > > > dashes for 5 minutes and spend the next hour > > > decoding > > > it. > > > > > > Bob M. > > > == > > > --- Dave VanH
OT Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
My point in this was the VE team arbitrarily changing the testing standards. We had one here who wouldn't allow farnsworth. The FCC determines what the questions will be, and what is and is not "legal" to pass the test. NOT the VEs. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
OT Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
I guess I will have to say something on this subject as it is coming down to the same arguments! Everyone in ham radio has an interest and for some that interest is CW, some it is SSB,FM,RTTY,PACTOR, Building, Operating, contesting, Sat work, Volunteers, and the list goes on and on! Stop beating a dead horse! If someone gets a license they at least had to put an effort forward and should be applauded for that! When it comes to jerks there are jerks in every walk of life. You ignore them and move on! Heck, I seldom pick up a microphone as I like to build and Repeaters is something I enjoy building and learning from other builders. I could care less how long someone is a ham or what class they are as its their actions that count! Oh that's right this is the repeater builders group isn't it? hmm , Guess I will have to go back to trying to get these darn M/A Panthers to work on 440 so I can make a mobile repeater ! 73's Steve N4YZA K - Original Message - From: "mch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:08 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. > Actually, that's how I passed my tests (which was in front of the FCC - > pre VEC days). I knew the test would be nothing to do with the 'small > words', so when they sent "My name is Henry and I'm in Grand Forks, SD. > The temperature is 78 degrees and sunny. ..." My paper had the > following: > > Henry > Grand Forks, SD > 78 > sunny > > And I had all the answers for the test. After all, how important is > exact copy? I can even mis-spell wodrs and you can still understnad the > meaning of waht I said. (did you catch all three 'typos'?) Why should > the code be any different? As long as the message is understood, who > cares about the medium? > > Joe M. > > numberone5call wrote: >> >> As the VEC for the local ARRL affiliated VE team. All we are >> required to grade is the written test of ten questions given to the >> applicant. You cannot grade someones test by what they have on their >> copy sheet unless the failed the test and your are looking for 1 >> minute of solid copy. I've had people copy it in their head and pass >> the test. Nowhere is it required that you have to write something >> down on the copy sheet. All you have to do is get 7 or more of the >> 10 questions on the exam correct. Doesn't matter what is on the >> answer sheet. >> You can set a time limit for completing the exam once it is passed >> out. A hour is plenty of time. Some of these folks sound like they >> are wanting to be BIG BROTHER!! >> >> Dennis no5c ( former ki5fw ) >> >> --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Bob M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> > >> > I'm not sure the FCC regs require 100% solid copy, but >> > that's how I had to earn my code test, and I think it >> > was done by listening to a 7.5 wpm ARRL transmission >> > too. >> > >> > The transmitting portion is optional and I haven't >> > heard of anyone doing a transmit test in a long while. >> > >> > Bob M. >> > == >> > --- Mike Perryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > > We have a local examiner who not only requires 100% >> > > solid copy... he also >> > > requires you to send as well. The part 97 reg >> > > regarding this is pretty >> > > vague... so I guess it is open to interpretation. >> > > >> > > mike >> > > >> > > -Original Message- >> > > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com >> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf >> > > Of Bob M. >> > > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:30 AM >> > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com >> > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to >> > > communicate. >> > > >> > > >> > > I do believe it IS an area that a local VE group can >> > > control, as long as they state that before the test >> > > begins, which was not done in the particular cases I >> > > was at. VEs can over-rule an answer sheet on a >> > > written >> > > test, and they can interpret some other things as >> > > well. If a potential test taker doesn't like the >> > > rules >> > > set up by the VEs, that person can choose to go >> > > elsewhere. >> > > >> > > It IS probably legal per the FCC, but do you think >> > > they'd give
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
Actually, that's how I passed my tests (which was in front of the FCC - pre VEC days). I knew the test would be nothing to do with the 'small words', so when they sent "My name is Henry and I'm in Grand Forks, SD. The temperature is 78 degrees and sunny. ..." My paper had the following: Henry Grand Forks, SD 78 sunny And I had all the answers for the test. After all, how important is exact copy? I can even mis-spell wodrs and you can still understnad the meaning of waht I said. (did you catch all three 'typos'?) Why should the code be any different? As long as the message is understood, who cares about the medium? Joe M. numberone5call wrote: > > As the VEC for the local ARRL affiliated VE team. All we are > required to grade is the written test of ten questions given to the > applicant. You cannot grade someones test by what they have on their > copy sheet unless the failed the test and your are looking for 1 > minute of solid copy. I've had people copy it in their head and pass > the test. Nowhere is it required that you have to write something > down on the copy sheet. All you have to do is get 7 or more of the > 10 questions on the exam correct. Doesn't matter what is on the > answer sheet. > You can set a time limit for completing the exam once it is passed > out. A hour is plenty of time. Some of these folks sound like they > are wanting to be BIG BROTHER!! > > Dennis no5c ( former ki5fw ) > > --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Bob M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > I'm not sure the FCC regs require 100% solid copy, but > > that's how I had to earn my code test, and I think it > > was done by listening to a 7.5 wpm ARRL transmission > > too. > > > > The transmitting portion is optional and I haven't > > heard of anyone doing a transmit test in a long while. > > > > Bob M. > > == > > --- Mike Perryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > We have a local examiner who not only requires 100% > > > solid copy... he also > > > requires you to send as well. The part 97 reg > > > regarding this is pretty > > > vague... so I guess it is open to interpretation. > > > > > > mike > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf > > > Of Bob M. > > > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:30 AM > > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to > > > communicate. > > > > > > > > > I do believe it IS an area that a local VE group can > > > control, as long as they state that before the test > > > begins, which was not done in the particular cases I > > > was at. VEs can over-rule an answer sheet on a > > > written > > > test, and they can interpret some other things as > > > well. If a potential test taker doesn't like the > > > rules > > > set up by the VEs, that person can choose to go > > > elsewhere. > > > > > > It IS probably legal per the FCC, but do you think > > > they'd give you all that time to decipher the dots > > > and > > > dashes if you went to an FCC office 30 years ago for > > > a > > > code test? They'd laugh you right out of your chair. > > > > > > If the intent is to show knowledge of the code, > > > and/or > > > fluency in using it, then you can't copy dots and > > > dashes for 5 minutes and spend the next hour > > > decoding > > > it. > > > > > > Bob M. > > > == > > > --- Dave VanHorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > >Yup, a sheet full of dots and > > > > > dashes. Then she went back and translated each > > > > Morse > > > > > character to it's appropriate letter, number, or > > > > > punctuation. > > > > > > > > As far as I'm aware that's legal per the FCC. > > > > It's not up to the VE groups to arbitrarily > > > tighten > > > > the requirements or > > > > change the testing procedures. > > > > > > __ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > > > protection around > > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
> It IS probably legal per the FCC, but do you think > they'd give you all that time to decipher the dots and > dashes if you went to an FCC office 30 years ago for a > code test? They'd laugh you right out of your chair. The rules were different then, and they don't apply now. However, I have seen it explicitly stated that the technique described here is legal. > If the intent is to show knowledge of the code, and/or > fluency in using it, then you can't copy dots and > dashes for 5 minutes and spend the next hour decoding > it. There is a time limit. Something like 5 mins IIRC.. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
As the VEC for the local ARRL affiliated VE team. All we are required to grade is the written test of ten questions given to the applicant. You cannot grade someones test by what they have on their copy sheet unless the failed the test and your are looking for 1 minute of solid copy. I've had people copy it in their head and pass the test. Nowhere is it required that you have to write something down on the copy sheet. All you have to do is get 7 or more of the 10 questions on the exam correct. Doesn't matter what is on the answer sheet. You can set a time limit for completing the exam once it is passed out. A hour is plenty of time. Some of these folks sound like they are wanting to be BIG BROTHER!! Dennis no5c ( former ki5fw ) --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Bob M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm not sure the FCC regs require 100% solid copy, but > that's how I had to earn my code test, and I think it > was done by listening to a 7.5 wpm ARRL transmission > too. > > The transmitting portion is optional and I haven't > heard of anyone doing a transmit test in a long while. > > Bob M. > == > --- Mike Perryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We have a local examiner who not only requires 100% > > solid copy... he also > > requires you to send as well. The part 97 reg > > regarding this is pretty > > vague... so I guess it is open to interpretation. > > > > mike > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf > > Of Bob M. > > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:30 AM > > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to > > communicate. > > > > > > I do believe it IS an area that a local VE group can > > control, as long as they state that before the test > > begins, which was not done in the particular cases I > > was at. VEs can over-rule an answer sheet on a > > written > > test, and they can interpret some other things as > > well. If a potential test taker doesn't like the > > rules > > set up by the VEs, that person can choose to go > > elsewhere. > > > > It IS probably legal per the FCC, but do you think > > they'd give you all that time to decipher the dots > > and > > dashes if you went to an FCC office 30 years ago for > > a > > code test? They'd laugh you right out of your chair. > > > > If the intent is to show knowledge of the code, > > and/or > > fluency in using it, then you can't copy dots and > > dashes for 5 minutes and spend the next hour > > decoding > > it. > > > > Bob M. > > == > > --- Dave VanHorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >Yup, a sheet full of dots and > > > > dashes. Then she went back and translated each > > > Morse > > > > character to it's appropriate letter, number, or > > > > punctuation. > > > > > > As far as I'm aware that's legal per the FCC. > > > It's not up to the VE groups to arbitrarily > > tighten > > > the requirements or > > > change the testing procedures. > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
LMAO!! In a message dated 2/17/2006 2:22:50 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://webpages.charter.net/k4hal/license.htm YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "Repeater-Builder" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
On Friday 17 February 2006 02:22 pm, hwingate wrote: > Perhaps we need a special license class for the 'really advanced' > amateurs. Click here: (author unknown) Well we have this now, it's called a GROL/w radar. It's a 150 question test out of a pool of like 1450 or so. Some times you just need to pull rank when some one is stupid in public. Works well, I've only done it once though. -- Bryan Fields, KB9MCI 15:04:36 up 4 days, 14:28, 3 users, load average: 1.06, 1.18, 1.13 I owe the public nothing. -- J.P. Morgan Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
Perhaps we need a special license class for the 'really advanced' amateurs. Click here: (author unknown) http://webpages.charter.net/k4hal/license.htm > It's sad they believe that Techs are going to be the downfall of ham radio. > They'll probably never realize that it's attitudes like their's that turn > people away. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] RE Failure to Communicate
Last week end I attended Hamcation in Orlando. We had a discussion about ARRLs proposed NEW Entry level license. They said that they wanted more questions on operationa and procedures. My response was that technician ticket was the perfect entry level license..We had just had a ten year old pass his tecnician test at the VE session that we had completed. They said that there should be a easier way to get on HF..I told them that there was,...get them a CB. I spent 25 minutes the other day convencing a new ham that they didn't need to attach their "amplified microphone " to their new 2 meter rig AND that they shouldn't have went inside and "turned up their modulation level". I think that I will start a new class on operating a repeater and other radios for new hams. If it's your repeater, then you have the right to "instruct" thoes on your machine to the proper use of it. "They" who ever they are will never correct the problem. We, the hams that hear the things that make us cring need to help thoes who need it by saying something at the time that we hear it. Is that clear as mud? AC0Y Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
Right you are Bob! We, at our VE sessions, state up front that you are not allowed to copy dots and dashes and then go back and decode them. YES you/We can dis-allow this kind of thing and any VE worth his or her weight will do it. Copying dots and dashes only prove that you can hear. --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, "Bob M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I do believe it IS an area that a local VE group can > control, as long as they state that before the test > begins, which was not done in the particular cases I > was at. VEs can over-rule an answer sheet on a written > test, and they can interpret some other things as > well. If a potential test taker doesn't like the rules > set up by the VEs, that person can choose to go > elsewhere. > > It IS probably legal per the FCC, but do you think > they'd give you all that time to decipher the dots and > dashes if you went to an FCC office 30 years ago for a > code test? They'd laugh you right out of your chair. > > If the intent is to show knowledge of the code, and/or > fluency in using it, then you can't copy dots and > dashes for 5 minutes and spend the next hour decoding > it. > > Bob M. > == > --- Dave VanHorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >Yup, a sheet full of dots and > > > dashes. Then she went back and translated each > > Morse > > > character to it's appropriate letter, number, or > > > punctuation. > > > > As far as I'm aware that's legal per the FCC. > > It's not up to the VE groups to arbitrarily tighten > > the requirements or > > change the testing procedures. > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
OH, I JUST HAVE TO REPLY TO THISAs a technician..(Yes I checked before starting) The way that I see it is that If you wanted to get on HF enough, you would what ever it takes to get there even if you do have to learn the simple 5 words a minute to get there. Therefore I must assume that you don't care enough to study a few days to do it. I studied long enough to pass the 20 WPM to get my Extra ticket. Why you ask well, because I wanted to be an EXTRA. Not to be better than anybody else but to show my self what I had learned or what I am capable of not what I had memorized from a Q&A manual. As for explaining technical concepts...well I'm sure that there are people on this board that have been here for years that could smoke you. It's obvious that you think that you are above the rest of us in knowledge well may be you are well above me but, you don't know me nore the rest of us or what we know. So your communications skills leave much to be desired from my point of view. Sorry, goes out to the rest of the gang for my soap box stand and ignorent rambelings. AC0Y Coy Hilton --- In Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is where the rubber meets the road as to the "problem with Ham > Radio" > > As it has been stated before, Ham Radio seems to gather the most > self-centered, egotistical, elite minded group of people who are the > poorest of communicators.. > > Each one should have been required to take a Semantics course in order > to not only understand the concept of word meaning, but how delivery > affects the message. If you can't get the concept from you brain to > words, and deliver those words without clouding them so much with your > own bias that they are received poorly at the other end; you simply > can't communicate. This is the most rudimental communications model > there is, and nowhere is it included in the testing material. > > There are a lot of truly great folks involved in Ham radio. However, > those who have the worst attitudes are often the ones chosen to > interface with potential hams either on the Cram-Course or testing > level. This is precisely where we need the best communicators amongst > us, ass well as those who understand the testing rules and don't > introduce their own bias as fact. > > The CW issue in an emotionally driven one. There are few among us that > can address it rationally in conversation with someone having an opinion > that is counter to our personal one. This isn't likely to change. > > When I hear of a VE changing the rules to meet his/her own personal > bias, I am again reminded of the very reason we aren't attracting the > young, technically competent minds that are available - to the Amateur > Radio Service. > > I would be willing to set up a digital station, build a data slicer, > explain serial communications hardware, IRQ priorities, discuss the > importance of proper ground potential when operating logic-based > equipment, talk about haw communications theory (of delivering the > spoken or written word) is more important in getting the message through > the mental QRM. Any of these things other than CW to advance from > Tech Lite to a "higher" class. However, that isn't an option. > > I am smart enough to repair their rigs (sometimes), but not qualified to > check them out on the air when they are working. > > Helluva Concept; this communications thing... > > David > KD4NUE > > > > -----Original Message- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave VanHorn > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 8:36 AM > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. > > > >Yup, a sheet full of dots and > > dashes. Then she went back and translated each Morse character to > >it's appropriate letter, number, or punctuation. > > As far as I'm aware that's legal per the FCC. > It's not up to the VE groups to arbitrarily tighten the requirements or > change the testing procedures. > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
I'm not sure the FCC regs require 100% solid copy, but that's how I had to earn my code test, and I think it was done by listening to a 7.5 wpm ARRL transmission too. The transmitting portion is optional and I haven't heard of anyone doing a transmit test in a long while. Bob M. == --- Mike Perryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We have a local examiner who not only requires 100% > solid copy... he also > requires you to send as well. The part 97 reg > regarding this is pretty > vague... so I guess it is open to interpretation. > > mike > > -Original Message- > From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf > Of Bob M. > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:30 AM > To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to > communicate. > > > I do believe it IS an area that a local VE group can > control, as long as they state that before the test > begins, which was not done in the particular cases I > was at. VEs can over-rule an answer sheet on a > written > test, and they can interpret some other things as > well. If a potential test taker doesn't like the > rules > set up by the VEs, that person can choose to go > elsewhere. > > It IS probably legal per the FCC, but do you think > they'd give you all that time to decipher the dots > and > dashes if you went to an FCC office 30 years ago for > a > code test? They'd laugh you right out of your chair. > > If the intent is to show knowledge of the code, > and/or > fluency in using it, then you can't copy dots and > dashes for 5 minutes and spend the next hour > decoding > it. > > Bob M. > == > --- Dave VanHorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >Yup, a sheet full of dots and > > > dashes. Then she went back and translated each > > Morse > > > character to it's appropriate letter, number, or > > > punctuation. > > > > As far as I'm aware that's legal per the FCC. > > It's not up to the VE groups to arbitrarily > tighten > > the requirements or > > change the testing procedures. > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
We have a local examiner who not only requires 100% solid copy... he also requires you to send as well. The part 97 reg regarding this is pretty vague... so I guess it is open to interpretation. mike -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bob M. Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:30 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. I do believe it IS an area that a local VE group can control, as long as they state that before the test begins, which was not done in the particular cases I was at. VEs can over-rule an answer sheet on a written test, and they can interpret some other things as well. If a potential test taker doesn't like the rules set up by the VEs, that person can choose to go elsewhere. It IS probably legal per the FCC, but do you think they'd give you all that time to decipher the dots and dashes if you went to an FCC office 30 years ago for a code test? They'd laugh you right out of your chair. If the intent is to show knowledge of the code, and/or fluency in using it, then you can't copy dots and dashes for 5 minutes and spend the next hour decoding it. Bob M. == --- Dave VanHorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Yup, a sheet full of dots and > > dashes. Then she went back and translated each > Morse > > character to it's appropriate letter, number, or > > punctuation. > > As far as I'm aware that's legal per the FCC. > It's not up to the VE groups to arbitrarily tighten > the requirements or > change the testing procedures. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
I do believe it IS an area that a local VE group can control, as long as they state that before the test begins, which was not done in the particular cases I was at. VEs can over-rule an answer sheet on a written test, and they can interpret some other things as well. If a potential test taker doesn't like the rules set up by the VEs, that person can choose to go elsewhere. It IS probably legal per the FCC, but do you think they'd give you all that time to decipher the dots and dashes if you went to an FCC office 30 years ago for a code test? They'd laugh you right out of your chair. If the intent is to show knowledge of the code, and/or fluency in using it, then you can't copy dots and dashes for 5 minutes and spend the next hour decoding it. Bob M. == --- Dave VanHorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Yup, a sheet full of dots and > > dashes. Then she went back and translated each > Morse > > character to it's appropriate letter, number, or > > punctuation. > > As far as I'm aware that's legal per the FCC. > It's not up to the VE groups to arbitrarily tighten > the requirements or > change the testing procedures. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
RE: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
This is where the rubber meets the road as to the "problem with Ham Radio" As it has been stated before, Ham Radio seems to gather the most self-centered, egotistical, elite minded group of people who are the poorest of communicators.. Each one should have been required to take a Semantics course in order to not only understand the concept of word meaning, but how delivery affects the message. If you can't get the concept from you brain to words, and deliver those words without clouding them so much with your own bias that they are received poorly at the other end; you simply can't communicate. This is the most rudimental communications model there is, and nowhere is it included in the testing material. There are a lot of truly great folks involved in Ham radio. However, those who have the worst attitudes are often the ones chosen to interface with potential hams either on the Cram-Course or testing level. This is precisely where we need the best communicators amongst us, ass well as those who understand the testing rules and don't introduce their own bias as fact. The CW issue in an emotionally driven one. There are few among us that can address it rationally in conversation with someone having an opinion that is counter to our personal one. This isn't likely to change. When I hear of a VE changing the rules to meet his/her own personal bias, I am again reminded of the very reason we aren't attracting the young, technically competent minds that are available - to the Amateur Radio Service. I would be willing to set up a digital station, build a data slicer, explain serial communications hardware, IRQ priorities, discuss the importance of proper ground potential when operating logic-based equipment, talk about haw communications theory (of delivering the spoken or written word) is more important in getting the message through the mental QRM. Any of these things other than CW to advance from Tech Lite to a "higher" class. However, that isn't an option. I am smart enough to repair their rigs (sometimes), but not qualified to check them out on the air when they are working. Helluva Concept; this communications thing... David KD4NUE -Original Message- From: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave VanHorn Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 8:36 AM To: Repeater-Builder@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate. >Yup, a sheet full of dots and > dashes. Then she went back and translated each Morse character to >it's appropriate letter, number, or punctuation. As far as I'm aware that's legal per the FCC. It's not up to the VE groups to arbitrarily tighten the requirements or change the testing procedures. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[Repeater-Builder] Re: Failure to communicate.....
>Yup, a sheet full of dots and > dashes. Then she went back and translated each Morse > character to it's appropriate letter, number, or > punctuation. As far as I'm aware that's legal per the FCC. It's not up to the VE groups to arbitrarily tighten the requirements or change the testing procedures. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
