Mike, I agree. We ought to sell the "fun" part of Morse Code. Because the requirment is going away eventually, doesn't mean that the mode has to go away. Some hams want to keep it around because they enjoy using it and because there are times that it is the only reliable mode to communicate. Let's convey the enthusiasm back. At the same time we need to realize that some people don't care to operate code. So be it. Amateur radio is so diverse, let people go where their interests take them. The end of the code requirement is not the end of amateur radio! - Bill N3LLR AR>Well, the Morse requirement is going to go sooner or later. We might as AR>well face it, AR>and tell our members that that's how it's going to be. I think we should AR>expend our efforts in AR>areas where we may ultimately prevail, like spectrum protection. AR>What we might do is roll out some programs for the preservation of Morse. AR>We do some of this AR>already - code practice runs and so forth. We should be creating or beefing AR>up some voluntary AR>certifications. We should be developing programs for the encouragement of AR>its use. And we should AR>have some of these in the works BEFORE we announce an official Board AR>position. Since we ought AR>to have that position prepared by the time the July meeting is complete, we AR>have about 3 weeks to AR>get this all together. Waiting until December to establish a position would AR>be more of the "reactive AR>rather than proactive" stuff for which we have become so famous. AR>Mike AR>K1TWF AR>----------------------------------- AR>Law Office of Michael N. Raisbeck AR>Phone: (978) 250-1236 AR>Fax: (978) 250-0432 AR>Web: www.mraisbeck.com AR>Email: k1twf@arrl.net AR>CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain privileged and confidential AR>information intended only for the above-named recipient. If you have AR>received this in error, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, AR>or copying is strictly prohibited. In such case, please notify us by reply AR>email and delete this message. AR> -----Original Message----- AR> From: W5JBP@aol.com [mailto:W5JBP@aol.com] AR> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 10:26 AM AR> To: arrl-odv AR> Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8991] Re: Morse requirement AR> Yes, Dave, tomorrow we would not. I do have a question however, when did AR>you "abstain" on a vote regarding 25.5? I was not aware of such a vote at AR>the WRC. AR> The question is to each of you on the board, what do you want to do? You AR>know as well as I, come Monday there will be a number of petitions submitted AR>to the FCC for elimination of element 1. AR> This is another opportunity to be as popular as we were during the AR>implementation of incentive licensing. Damned if we do, damned if we don't. AR>Those who will be petitioning the FCC know that we will be having a board AR>meeting in a few weeks, and will have to deal with the issue one way or the AR>other. AR> Time to put on the kevlar. AR> Jim Haynie, W5JBP