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: <[email protected]> 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 [email protected], "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: [email protected] >> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf >> > > Of Bob M. >> > > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:30 AM >> > > To: [email protected] >> > > 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 > > > > > > 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/
