"Jack Erbes" wrote in message
...
L. wrote:


A CHEAT SHEET???????????????

Buddy, if you're not ready for an exam, you're going to fail. Come to my
exams and be caught and the exam is OVER and YOU FAIL. And that is the
least
you can expect. Being turned into the FCC for any possible action will
be up
to them.

L.

Calm down, I thought maybe it was okay to have one.


Calm down? First of all, I'm not "upset". But - you are kidding, right? You
"thought" it was ok to have one? Cheat sheets are NEVER allowed. You weren't
allowed them in school, you surely aren't now either. IF any team EVER let
anyone use one, then it was a fraudulent exam session - pure and simple. ANY
"honest"' VEC and the FCC would stand by that.

They seemed to give a lot of latitude when I took mine about 3-4 years
ago. I was told I could answer some questions and "gist" the QSO if I
could not or did not want to copy it all down.


See my comments above...... regarding the cheat sheets - if you were given
"latitude"..... Be careful what you admit to, the FCC could make you RETEST.
AND if they find you failed, then you and the VEs are also subject to
punishment. The CW tests USED to be either Fill in the blanks OR Multiple
choice or whatever the team chose to use. FIB and MC were the two most
widely used. NOW they are ONLY "Fill in the blanks". You needed then AND
NOW, to pass 7 out of 10 in answers to pass the exam. IF you failed the code
exam written, they could look at your code copy and IF you had the
prescribed number of characters "straight"' in a row with NO MISTAKES, they
could pass you on that. THAT is how it is SUPPOSED to be done.

As it was, I probably had the best Morse skills in the room (including
the volunteers giving the test) when I took mine. The volunteers
running the test were having a lot of trouble getting the playback
system to work (about 10 headsets ganged up to a cassette player) and in
getting the tape rewound and staged to where they wanted it.


Then if you were that good, you shouldn't have needed a "cheat sheet". THEY
should have been General class or above. I don't know.... faulty equipment
still doesn't give "latittude" towards "answers". WE would have started it
over - PERIOD. What you had copied would have been passed off as a "warm
up".

And their Morse skills were either poor or very rusty. So they said,
this is the test, get ready, go! But wound up starting the test with
the last quarter or so of the final practice QSO still going on and none
of the volunteers had a headset on at that point. I did not want to
raise a disturbance for the other (5-6?) testees so I simply started
copying down everything I heard and turned it in at the end.


Then they should have stopped the test and got the tape qued and started
over. That was not a good example of testing.....

After I took the written test they said I had passed the theory and code
tests and I was a Technician with Code.


Congradulations - if you did it "honestly".

It is another issue but I am a real bone head on theory and have some
trouble recalling tabular data that pretty much has to be memorized so I
did not pass high enough for the General. But I didn't whine about how
hard that was for me.


ALL exams have ALL the answers in books widely available. If you had
trouble, then you need to study more. Memorizing answers A, B, C, D - just
doesn't cut it. One does NOT get the proper understanding of it. If you KNOW
the stuff, then the test will come easier. The only thing is, when you read
one of the "widely available" study guides, though the answers are the same,
the alignment - IE; A, B, C, D - may not be. I know a guy who tried
memorizing that way once and failed. The book was shown to us after, and the
answers were in a different order.

Maybe after we get done throwing away the Morse requirement we can throw
away all the info in the test that is not needed by people who buy
radios instead of building them. What about that?


WHY? Then when all the electronics goes to hell, who then goes on in
interest to become those who design and manufacture your stereos, tvs, play
stations, computers, etc. ? MANY who get licensed as hams, go on to be
broadcast engineers, etc. Especially if they're young with the hobby at
heart. The old farts, well, that is another story. SOMEONE has to "learn"
electronics. HAM is usually a stepping stone. Man, they once said this is
the dumbing down of America..... IT SURE IS. With the "I don't want to learn
it" attitude, in a few years, this country won't be worth a good ****. ANY
country who strives for excellence will beat us hands down then........
We'll have a bunch of dumb asses who won't know how to do anything.

And how about not having to memorize all the things that I would
normally and prudently look up on a wall chart or a handy reference?
I'm getting my first social Security check this month and it seems to be
affecting my memory. :)


MAN, that is PURE LAZINESS. For Christs sakes, they're not asking to recite
the Bill of rights! Just a "few" formulas. Why bother reading a "driver's
license manual" to learn how to drive, to pass the exams which require you
to know all the signs of the roads? WHY DO ANY STUDYING???? Why not just all
of us end up a bunch of morons because of laziness? Ohms law is one of the
most basic formulas you can be called on to remember and how to do it. When
I had trouble with it in school in shop class, I was made to write it 100
times. Believe me, I learned it fast. It was tough then - as a teen who was
rebellious against "hard work", doing all that writing, but ya know what????
I'm glad as hell it was drilled into me. Electronics became not only a great
hobby but my business.

But the bottom line is that when you have a structured group of people
that have learned something "the hard way" they expect everyone else to
go through the same hoops to join the group. And they are not always
wrong.


It is only as hard as you make it. ANY THING with work or hard earned money
put into it, makes it worth more. When you have something given to you,
you're more apt to abuse it. Had you not went to school to learn, you
wouldn't be anywhere near as far ahead.

I love the code and think everyone should know some. Maybe my 26 years
as a Navy cryptologist, with a good part of that involving the copying
of Morse code, is affecting my thinking. I still enjoy hearing "bens
best bent wire" sent in morse. Heaven forbid I should stumble off band
and hear a crusty old Radioman at NPL calling NPM with a "banana boat
swing" to his fist. I'd probably cry.


I bet the Navy made you study SOMETHING. And, if you had to do Morse in the
service, then why are you bitching about it now? Surely if you did it there,
you can do it here WITHOUT A CHEAT SHEET. If you were to use a cheat sheet
in the Navy to receive a message of a pending attack, by the time you got
done decoding using a cheat sheet, the message of a Bomb is headed your
way... the bomb has probably HIT.

Look, this isn't "personal".... but I DO disagree with you or that you've
experienced....... Any reference I've made as to a dumb ass and so on, is
not to you - personally. It is in general if things do end up going as you
seem to suggest.

Cheers!

--
Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com

L.

L. wrote:

Calm down? First of all, I'm not "upset". But - you are kidding, right? You
"thought" it was ok to have one? Cheat sheets are NEVER allowed. You weren't
allowed them in school, you surely aren't now either. IF any team EVER let
anyone use one, then it was a fraudulent exam session - pure and simple. ANY
"honest"' VEC and the FCC would stand by that.

Yes, as a matter of fact I was kidding. It was a sarcastic comment, not
based on fact, not a recommendation, just a comment. Don't take it too
seriously please.

See my comments above...... regarding the cheat sheets - if you were given
"latitude".....

The latitude I was referring to was in in the way the code test was (or
should have been?) administered and graded. That there were some
options for passing it other than to just copy the code on paper and
hand it in. When the FCC was giving the tests in the mid 60's it was
quite different than it is now. You copied the code and handed it in
and it spoke for itself as I recall it.

Be careful what you admit to... snip

Admit to? Am I on trial here? Do you want to read me my rights? I
passed the tests, code and theory, fair and square in a venue that was a
little disorganized maybe. And I guess my memory is still haunting me.
I remember taking the code test and then taking the written theory
test. You're saying there should be a written test on the stuff sent in
the code test? Maybe there was, I don't remember.

Then if you were that good, you shouldn't have needed a "cheat sheet".

I didn't have a cheat sheet. And I didn't need one, I knew the code.
Again, I said that sarcastically, it was a throw away remark.

Then they should have stopped the test and got the tape qued and started
over. That was not a good example of testing.....

You're right. But I didn't want to get up and stop it. I thought it
might bother the other people who were already copying it thinking the
test had started. Some of them were pretty apprehensive about the test
and being able to pass it.

Congradulations - if you did it "honestly".

Your suggestion that I might not have done it honestly ****es me off.
But for the record, I did. I copied the code, all of it (and maybe
answered some questions too?). Then I took the written theory test, and
got a license.

snip lecture

I bet the Navy made you study SOMETHING. And, if you had to do Morse in the
service, then why are you bitching about it now? Surely if you did it there,
you can do it here WITHOUT A CHEAT SHEET.

Yeah, it did. The taxpayers got their money's worth out of me. And I
am not bitching about learning the code. I was on the "leave the code
in the test" side of the argument. I like the code, remember. Try
rereading my post maybe.

..- .-.

--
Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com

"Jack Erbes" wrote in message
...
L. wrote:

Be careful what you admit to... snip

Admit to? Am I on trial here? Do you want to read me my rights? I
passed the tests, code and theory, fair and square in a venue that was a
little disorganized maybe. And I guess my memory is still haunting me.
I remember taking the code test and then taking the written theory
test. You're saying there should be a written test on the stuff sent in
the code test? Maybe there was, I don't remember.


NO you are not "on trial". "Some" could have taken your words of the testing
as it having been done improperly. Whether it was your fault or not. That
could result in a retest.

Then if you were that good, you shouldn't have needed a "cheat sheet".

I didn't have a cheat sheet. And I didn't need one, I knew the code.
Again, I said that sarcastically, it was a throw away remark.


Good..... but we're not all mind readers to know where you were going with
that remark.

Then they should have stopped the test and got the tape qued and started
over. That was not a good example of testing.....

You're right. But I didn't want to get up and stop it. I thought it
might bother the other people who were already copying it thinking the
test had started. Some of them were pretty apprehensive about the test
and being able to pass it.

Congradulations - if you did it "honestly".

Your suggestion that I might not have done it honestly ****es me off.
But for the record, I did. I copied the code, all of it (and maybe
answered some questions too?). Then I took the written theory test, and
got a license.


No, I'm not suggesting "YOU" didn't do it honestly. The whole thing the way
you wrote about it, just didn't sound good. If you earned it, YOU EARNED
IT.... Who am I to judge? You alluded to improper testing procedures, cheat
sheets be they off the wall remarks or whatever.... None of it sounded up
front. You lead to the conclusion of improprieties, not us. But I went over
the procedures as they are supposed to be. That is how we do it. We go by
the book, not someone's idea of what they "think" it should be.

snip lecture

I bet the Navy made you study SOMETHING. And, if you had to do Morse in
the
service, then why are you bitching about it now? Surely if you did it
there,
you can do it here WITHOUT A CHEAT SHEET.

Yeah, it did. The taxpayers got their money's worth out of me. And I
am not bitching about learning the code. I was on the "leave the code
in the test" side of the argument. I like the code, remember. Try
rereading my post maybe.

.- .-.

--
Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com

And I'm damned sure the country, or at least some of us are glad you were
part of the service to the country. To that, I say thank you.

No, basically all I'm saying is it is all in how it was presented......

L.

I think the discussion on code has been pretty much beat to death on
every forum I know of. Comments below.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

"Jack Erbes" wrote in message
...
L. wrote:

The latitude I was referring to was in in the way the code test was (or
should have been?) administered and graded. That there were some
options for passing it other than to just copy the code on paper and
hand it in. When the FCC was giving the tests in the mid 60's it was
quite different than it is now. You copied the code and handed it in
and it spoke for itself as I recall it.

Traditionally, code was graded based upon accuracy of copy. That is
because one was generally copying code that was then sent to the intended
recipient. The FCC finally realized that in ham radio, the only thing that
was
important was that the information contained in the message was all that
was important. If one could extract the information based upon context
then that was sufficient. Thus a quiz about the copied info was given.
The quiz was bypassed in the event that perfect copy was achieved.

I remember taking the code test and then taking the written theory
test. You're saying there should be a written test on the stuff sent in
the code test? Maybe there was, I don't remember.

There has been a test on the stuff in the code test for at least the last
20 years or so. That is unless you got perfect copy.

You're right. But I didn't want to get up and stop it. I thought it
might bother the other people who were already copying it thinking the
test had started. Some of them were pretty apprehensive about the test
and being able to pass it.

I'm sorry, I was under the impression that you were taking the test not
administering it.