Dave Heil wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an_old_friend wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:


cut

Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced
the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of
the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been
going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they
would have been none the wiser.

Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected.
What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't
a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected


Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they
try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some
kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of
group.

Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world
can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply
for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for
foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio
can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and
democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who
can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for
the ARRL Board of Directors.


certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the
ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are

Contribute? Yes, folks may contribute of their money or of their time.
One doesn't contribute for membership though. One pays for membership.
Any full League member may stand for office if he receives the requisite
number of nominations and has no potential conflicts of interest.


obviously not

It isn't obvious at all, Mark. There are still unknowns. We have
Carl's side of things. We don't yet know what the committee at ARRL
discussed and exactly how they came to their conclusions.

and it is clear we will not hear from the ARRL any reasons certainly
not with attitudes like yours



Free Elections held are to be held when?

You'll want to check at http://www.arrl.org


I was looking for the truth not propaganda

Never mind. You are free to reject my advice. It comes with a
guarantee. If you don't like it, you receive double your old problems back.

Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way
info propagates these days


I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy
as "controversial."

That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read
this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about
the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified
him for candidacy though.


hard to say that with any real assurance

Is it? I don't see it that way.


of course you don't that would require you to think for yourself

That's exactly what I've done, Mark. I've not arrived at the same
conclusions.

no you have have made statements based on assumtions indeed you have
drawn conclusion based on facts you have already noted are in evidence

You have no bassis in fact to claim "That's quite possible. Someone
who sits on the Board may have even read this newsgroup and might have
seen some of Carl's choice comments about the League and about
Directors. His words would not have disqualified him for candidacy
though." your conclusion "His words would not have disqualified him
for candidacy though" has no basis in the facts it may or may not be
true

But indeed we don't know exactly what was going through the minds of
the comitte for state security

There is no ARRL "committe" for state security.

sure is they are just not honest enough to call it that

Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch
supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president.
Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen.

...or so you've been told.


so we have SEEN

You've seen the core membership of the ARRL and you know for a fact what
its view is?


yes I have it is why I am no longer a member

You've actually seen the core membership? Really? When? Were they all
gathered in one place?

Yes I have no they were not

Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what
they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the
code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is
concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has
to rankle.

People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section
Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude
Carl Stevenson.


just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as
other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that

So you know all of the circumstances and can say, without a shadow of a
doubt, that Carl Stevenson was dealt with in a way that is different
from a current Board member? Can you supply the details?


Carl does that better

No, he hasn't. He has presented some information. There is nothing in
the material present by Carl to indicate that he has been treated
differently. We have only Carl's side of things.

sure is esp when added to the staments of Hans

Carl has provided assurance NO ARRL director has ever offered

To my knowledge, the League has never accepted "because I vow that I won't".

Carl has been declared disquailified for reasons that applied a former
Vicedirector (according to that Vice Director, hans one of our regs)
therefore I know for a fact he has had a different standard than at
least one other canidate for ARRL office

If you've been reading along, you'll note that I asked Hans for
particulars. I wanted to know if the circumstances were the same. Hans
indicated that they are not the same.

in what way?

You're setting us up for some wild conspiracy theory.

no I am not seting you up

Dave K8MN