Date: Sat, 3 Sep 94 04:30:09 PDT 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 #418 To: Ham-Policy Ham-Policy Digest Sat, 3 Sep 94 Volume 94 : Issue 418 Today's Topics: 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, 1 Sep 94 23:45:35 -0500 From: news.delphi.com!usenet@uunet.uu.net To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu References , <343flu$lum@abyss.West.Sun.COM>, Subject : Re: More Code. C. C. (Clay) Wynn, N4AOX writes: >1. Don't want to become an RF engineer. I don't see anybody demanding that. >2. Don't want to major in traffic handling, NTS is obsolete anyway. Or that either. ("Major" meaning more emphasis on that subject than any other.) >3. Don't want to devalue my current license that I earned. The only thing that "devalues (your) current license" is a reduction in the operating privileges available to you, such as happened to the General and Conditional licenses in the late 1960s. >4. The tests needs to be entrance exams not final exams. Entrance, yes. Sham, no. >5. CW is the basic non-voice mode and proficiency should be demonstrated. Why? Code knowledge is not needed for any other mode. The TWO basic modes below 29 MHz are CW and SSB, but it's not credible to say that either is the SINGLE dominant mode. ------------------------------ End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #418 ******************************