In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In no particular order:
1) Representation of amateur radio (what other organization or individual
would do anyhting like the 121 page commentary on BPL?)
It should be mentioned that Carl has done very significant work in fighting
BPL, both in the form of first-hand observations and measurement of the Emmaus
test site, and commentary to the FCC. But even he, an experienced professional
in the field, cannot equal the resources of an organization like ARRL. (And I
bet he'll agree with me on that.
Representation of what the Board *perceives* to be the wishes of the
membership.
What else can be expected?
I don't believe that non-members get the same attention on issues as
members, but
that is reasonable, since member dues support the ARRL.
Exactly! Just like NCI...
2) QST and other publications (only the RSGB Handbook is comparable)
QST has gotten better, with the dropping of a lot of the contest data and
more focus on a range of articles from beginner to expert level.
I think the contest info belongs in QST as well as the articles.
I'd like to see more technical focus on modern stuff
Such as?
Perhaps you could write some articles for QST. I did.
and fewer articles on building regen receivers
with tubes, though.
Unless I missed something in the index, in the past 47-1/2 years, QST has had
exactly two articles on building ham band regenerative receivers with tubes.
3) Contests and operating activities (particularly SS and FD)
I'm not a contester, but sponsoring such activities is fine (glad they're
not using valuable QST pages for data dumps of results, though ... the
website is a much better venue for that info).
I disagree. The mag is permanent, the website isn't. Part of being a journal is
to document things for posterity.
I think the contest results, BoD minutes, and Section News belong in QST. As do
technical articles.
4) Product reviews (much more in-depth than any other amateur publication)
The lab does a great job on product reviews.
And has been for more than 20 years now. If a Product Review saves a member
from making just one expensive mistake, a lot of dues are paid for.
Remember the "Maxxcomm Matcher" (sp?).
5) Elected officials (they listen even if they don't agree)
YMMV, depending on what area you live in, whether your Director is
open-minded and progressive, etc.
Every ARRL director and vice-director I've dealt with has been open-minded and
progressive. Including our present Atlantic division director and vice
director.
6) W1AW (been there and operated the station, too)
I have mixed views on the value of W1AW ... a good museum to "the Old Man,"
but perhaps its services could be provided by alternative means at lower
operating cost.
How would you suggest they be done?
While I've had, and may continue to have, disagreements on some aspects of
policy with the ARRL Board, I recognize that the ARRL does do a LOT of
good things for the ARS and, in addition to my previous contribution to the
BPL fund, I wanted to support the organization's good works (I can always
continue to fight with them on areas of disagreement :-)
I agree with all of that except for one small point. The ARRL is not "them" -
the ARRL is "us" (the members). We elect the policy-makers (Directors and Vice
Directors) and the Section Managers (who don't make policy, but are the top
field personnel in our sections).
73 de Jim, N2EY
"I'm the ARRL"
(and so is WK3C)
|