Here is what the ARRL VEC Manager, Bart Jahnke said to the VEs on the VE
reflector, where several VEs expressed their dismay over this
petition...especially those of us affiliated with the ARRL VEC.
I hope that this makes some of you feel a little better about the ARRL's
position on the matter...obviously the VEs are upset about this as well, and
the petition did seem to drop out of the sky rather suddenly, in spite of
the fact that we knew this was going to eventually happen.
Meanwhile, however, I would suggest that we all start putting on our
elmering badges and get to work. We all know that whilst the WRC has the
word "World" in front of it, neither it nor many telecommunications
authorities have taken into account the fact that this hobby encompasses
countries where amateurs are still dependent on things outside of the
Ethernet for communication. This mode might have been deemed obsolete, but
we all know that it still seems to be the best mode for communication on
160m and is the most widely accepted mode deemed essential for weak signal
communication on 2m and above (JT44 is still very controversial).
I do both SSB and CW and think it's a bit unfair to categorize SSB operators
as lids...the same crap heard in the phone portion during a huge DXpedition
pileup is also heard in the CW portion now...even 160m has become a part of
the madness... All it takes is a keyboard or memory keyer.
We're going to have to give people a reason for getting on CW and we're
going to have to fight to keep the CW allocations that we've been given, but
I don't think that shooting the guy receiving the message is the way to do
this. I'm still not sure how to improve the concept of self policing, but
don't you notice to difference between the Extra and General class bands?
There was a night and day difference even during the days of the 20 wpm test
requirement.
You would probably be shocked to find out how many guys call me to ask about
our test sessions and also ask about CW preparation. When restructuring
came to fruition in April of 2000, many expressed disappointment that they
wouldn't be ready in time to complete a personal goal...that of passing
either the 13 wpm or the 20 wpm test. Because of this, we still offer these
tests (13, 20, and then in increments of 5 up to 45 wpm...haven't had anyone
ask for anything faster) to anyone who wants to take them.
Being an accomplished CW operator is a great thing, but CW is not what makes
one a great amateur...
Many VEs are now brainstorming about ways to have a "filtering" process in
place for a time when CW is no longer required...harder tests, operation
requirements, etc. Something to reflect the fact that the person is
genuinely interested in the hobby and will respect his/her privileges. From
my experience, a good deal of elmering takes care of lot of this, and I
think in this area we have fallen a bit short.
Meanwhile, however, you have the link below so that you can make your
comments to the ARRL. I hope that we keep a code requirement, but I don't
think the chances of that happening are all that favorable.
73,
Bridget, KS4YT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jahnke, Bart, W9JJ" <w9jj@arrl.org>
To: <usve@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 10:46 AM
Subject: RE: [usve] Petition to eliminate Morse code
> Norman,
>
> Thanks for writing.
>
> I was at this meeting in Gettysburg last week where the 12 VECs present
discussed the future of the Morse code examination requirement (not the
future of the use of Morse code) to gain access to frequencies below 30-MHz.
When the time came for a vote, I abstained--as ARRL has yet to develop a
position on this issue post WRC03. The Petition filed yesterday includes an
ARRL disclaimer. ARRL has for several years been on record in support of
the code examination requirement.
>
> Per http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/07/23/2/?nc=1 be sure to let
your ARRL Director know what you think on this issue.
>
> As always, ARRL (and us at the ARRL VEC) appreciates the ongoing generous
support we have from our accredited volunteer examiners and our members.
>
> 73,
>
> Bart J. Jahnke, W9JJ
> Manager
> ARRL VEC
>
> vec@arrl.org
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Norman Young [mailto:normany@mindspring.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 11:23 AM
> To: usve@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [usve] Petition to eliminate Morse code
>
>
> Was this petition supported by the ARRL VEC?
>
> The NCVEC may not be required to seek amateur or VE input before filing a
petition, but it seems to me that the ARRL VEC is absolutely obligated to
get ARRL approval before signing on to it as an NCVEC member. So, while I
have all the respect in the world for work that the ARRL VEC does, I want to
know (1) whether they supported this petition, (2) whether they consulted
with the ARRL leadership about it beforehand, and (3) why they did not
inform VE's and the ARRL membership of this move before the filing whether
they supported it or not.
>
> Bart, I know you and your crew read this reflector, and this is not meant
to be a personal attack on you or anybody else in the VEC office. However,
as an ARRL member and ARRL VE, I would very much like to know what role - if
any - the ARRL VEC played in this petition.
>
> For the record, I do not have a strong opinion on the code issue one way
or the other. I *do* have a strong opinion on ARRL action on such a broad
policy matter as this without consulting the membership!
>
> Norman
|