Jerry,
Those days mean a lot to me too, since by understanding CW's past, I (who will be part of CW's future) can understand how to best be a positive force for directing it into posterity. I have the required sense of humor for membership (hell, I have a chicken on my right forearm), but I will get a bit abrasive when someone intimates inferior behavior as a QRQ operator simply because I felt like posting an email to "explain why I couldn't copy in QRM....etc." If you read my original email carefully enough, you would have seen that I posted to explain that those guys weren't copying me as I was trying to break, not vice versa. I, in fact, was copying just fine through QRM as I always tend to do these days. It's not true, by the way, that
people didn't discuss skeds off of the air in other forms of media in the old days. I have a 1/2 inch thick stack of photocopies from 1975 on Bill Eitel's stationary regarding 5-Star Club 80 wpm QRQ club skeds which proves otherwise. Highly interesting. You may not be aware of this, but I am also an amateur CW historian.
I will email you off list and let you know about the sked. John wanted others to join in from the start, but as I am still a relatively new operator, I do my best receiving when I am relaxed and at ease. I simply don't have the experience you guys have yet, but perhaps I can eventually make up for it with raw ambition. K0JVX and I have established a very good fast back and forth break in rhythm, interrupted only when one of us occasionally goes off on a tangent and winds up in a monologue, but then we usually both use Ten-Tecs, so breaking
is a simple matter of a dit or two. When it works well though, any rig will do, since a short pause indicates turn taking.....not the traditional non-fluid "BK." We also don't use a lot of abbreviation, we use our full vocabularies and spell out the words. You probably understand why this is, so I won't go on about it.
Make no mistake, most of the CW operators who have been instrumental in supporting my own success in the art have been 30 or 40 years my senior, and I am nearly 40 now. I have nothing but the utmost respect for the previous generation of telegraphers, but I won't take any chicken scat off of anyone, nor will I allow my face to be scratched, pecked or clucked loudly at in a derisive manner. I don't believe in authority, only expertise.
If there is going to be any QRQ 10-20 years from now, I will be one
of the people to maintain the inertia of the good ol' days' nostalgia, such as you read about in William Pierpont's "The Art and Skill of Radio Telegraphy", which I have read cover to cover 4 times. If it weren't for the old stories of the great days of telegraphy on the railroads, I wouldn't be writing this letter on the CFO list now, in a group whose organizers made me carry out several successful QSOs at 45 wpm last year in order to join.
I've said this before, but I see that it needs to be said again. I upgraded to General Class in 2004. During that time I went from 0 wpm to a shaky 40 wpm in 6 months. I knew about CFO from Pierpont and often heard the cluck on the air. Of course, when I started looking into joining I found that there was no organizer at the time and the group was not issuing numbers. Lots of stories about the old days, but no one
apparently able to overcome laziness to step up and actually make things happen. What a sad state of affairs. Now, in 2012, thanks to under appreciated guys like Andrew, Ben, Bob Carr, George, Joe, Chuck Vaughn, Me, Rick, Ralph, David Ring, and others, there is some activity.
Its great to be critical (if your end goal is change) but I will say that this group is certainly not what I thought it was going to be 8 years ago when I dreamed about being good enough at CW to become a member. Clearly, romance is not everything it's cracked up to be, and action trumps it every time. An example: Chuck Vaughn...the most tireless advocate of QRQCW and QRQ history I have ever known with the exception of maybe W3NJZ (SK). QRQ and in fact CW itself needs advocacy, since your very letter to me points out one of the reasons why. When you look into the past, activity was higher
and skills were greater. I want to turn the tide and start to bring that back as close to the old standard as possible, and we need guys like you who can still remember what that standard was! hihihi.
Most sincere 73,
Brett - KI4DBK
CFO#1017
PS: Oh, and I would like to say that taking the Rooster off of .PDF was the worst thing ever. I vote it goes back to a downloadable form, preferably a text file, comma or tab delimited, so that a person could import it into a database or spreadsheet of his/her choice. It should always be available in an up to date single downloadable file I can keep on my PC. Of course, a PDF would be 2nd choice after text.