Date: Wed, 9 Feb 94 04:30:12 PST From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup Errors-To: Ham-Policy-Errors@UCSD.Edu Reply-To: Ham-Policy@UCSD.Edu Precedence: Bulk Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V94 #46 To: Ham-Policy Ham-Policy Digest Wed, 9 Feb 94 Volume 94 : Issue 46 Today's Topics: Exams are Trivial? Send Replies or notes for publication to: Send subscription requests to: Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu. Archives of past issues of the Ham-Policy Digest are available (by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-policy". We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 3 Feb 1994 19:45:19 GMT From: emba-news.uvm.edu!griffin!gdavis@uunet.uu.net Subject: Exams are Trivial? To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu I've noted for some time, since the ham exams are written and administarted by the VEC rather than the FCC, the whole level of difficulty has shifted. Now, not only can all of the questions be memorized, the entire exam can be passed without even knowing the most simplistic application of Ohm's law. I have a friend who recently passed his Advanced ticket who asked me, afterward to explain Ohm's law to him and also what exactly an antenna tuner might be good for. Since the exams do not test for technical ability or knowledge, then they are a sham. We should either return to the "secret" pools that were used during the FCC examiner period or drop all exams for amateur licenses. The study needed to memorize the material is very easy for bright people and easily done with more effort by bulbs of lessor wattage. The exams as they now exist are a joke and a waste of time. Who do we think we are kidding when we suggest that amateur radio is a technical person's hobby? Now, all the family, including those not too far out of the diaper, can pass at least the NOCODE test. Anything gotten with little or no work will not be long valued and I predict this will be the general course of the NOCODER. Yes, some have upgraded and some are girl-geneses, but most will ho-hum their HT away for the next toy in a year or so. Let's be honest when it comes to the exams. They are a trivial pursuit for most average IQs and a joke for brighter bulbs. WQ1F Gary Skunk Hill, Vt " Not only does the truth hurt, it smells bad too." -- ******** Gary E. Davis***** WQ1F ***** The most common of all follies is to believe passionately in the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind.-H.L.Mencken ------------------------------ Date: 3 Feb 1994 14:36:52 -0600 From: mvb.saic.com!unogate!news.service.uci.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!menudo.uh.edu!uuneo.NeoSoft.com!sugar.NeoSoft.COM!not-for-mail@network.ucsd.edu To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu References , , <2irhk2INNbna@abyss.west.sun.com>com Subject : Re: Guns and O2 (was Re: Antenna Lawsuit In article <2irhk2INNbna@abyss.west.sun.com>, Dana Myers wrote: > >Now, back to amateur radio concerns... > * This Extra supports the abolition of the 13 and 20 WPM tests * Why not abolish ALL testing. It seems to me that's what most of the whiners want anyway, right? -- Radiographers who are able to use a radiographic machine well are great assets to the health care facility in which they are employed. --Dianne C. DeVos, "Basic Principles of Radiographic Exposure" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 7 Feb 1994 21:20:08 GMT From: unix.sri.com!headwall.Stanford.EDU!Csli!paulf@hplabs.hp.com To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu References , <10@ted.win.net>, <1994Feb7.173011.5041@ke4zv.atl.ga.us> Subject : Re: I just HAD to. Really: Goodwill, contesting and DXing gary@ke4zv.atl.ga.us (Gary Coffman) writes: >Since most of our international spectrum is "worthless" anyway, >the cost of this "goodwill" is small. But the bulk of HF operation >doesn't promote "goodwill". Mostly it's obnoxious contest and DX >operating with no real meaningful exchange of views between citizens >of different nations. First of all, both DXing and Contesting belong to a limited set of nonathletic international competitive activites, such as chess. Historically, they've transcended politics (the Oblast Awards come immediately to mind) to allow participation in competition worldwide. Both activities have large, international communities, which are fairly closeknit, communicating on and off the air. As an example, the Stanford Radio Club is fairly well known in both communities, and each year we get at least a dozen requests from foreign visitors to tour and use the shack. We also supply a large number of Japanese Class 4 operators with their first US QSL. Far and away, however, the most important factor is that Contesting and DXing are simply the best emergency communications trainers available. In order to really use HF in an emergency, you need a well worn set of basic skills, including a knowledge of propagation and operating practices (pileup management and fast logging) that are required for successful Contest/DX operation. I'm beginning to get the distinct impression that you don't spend much time on HF. In the past, you've repeatedly proclaimed that those who operate on the low end of the bands are merely a bunch of old coots (it's about 50-50 these days, given the influx of QRP enthusiasts, who tend to be much younger), and now you're crusading against contesting and DXing. What gives? -- -=Paul Flaherty, N9FZX | "Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make ->paulf@Stanford.EDU | history." -- Jake Grafton ------------------------------ End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #46 ******************************