-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In Klystron writes:

The world of ham radio seems to have left the ARRL behind. It was
inexcusably slow to accept the obsolescence of Morse code and, in the
process, its curmudgeonly foot dragging alienated most of its potential
future members. Its web site suggests that it has no vision of any
future beyond the preservation of the status quo. In short, it is so
mired in the past that it has no future.
That said, it seems imperative that hams have some sort of
functioning and EFFECTIVE membership organization. Is there some
existing organization that could serve as the nucleus of a new
membership organization or would it make more sense to form a new
association from scratch?

--
----
A recent, no-code Amateur Extra

This is a quite well-trodden subject. I refer you to many, many threads
on the subject in the past in the newsgroups archives. Go to Google
Groups at http://groups.google.com and search for:

ARRL "new organization"

for a start.

Many past efforts at a replacement organization have been tried, and
failed. Most notably was an organization led by "73" Magazine Editor
Wayne Green, W2NSD (the "Institute of Amateur Radio"). Sometimes the
leadership was just too controversial or confrontational. In the case
of Glenn Baxter, K1MAN (American Amateur Radio Association,
International Amateur Radio Network), it's hard to set a good example,
and encourage those to follow you, when you're constantly in trouble
with the FCC and hiding behind the alleged endorsements of many people
who want nothing to do with you, and repeatedly disavow such endorsement
(e.g., Walter Cronkite KB2GSD and Leo Meyerson W0GFQ).

Some organizations are very worthwhile, such as QCWA, AMSAT, TAPR, etc.,
but are too specialized to have very large membership rolls. Some
organizations are for the purpose of seeking specific changes or
political reforms, and lose traction once those reforms have been
achieved (e.g., NCI).

It's been pointed out that many ARRL Director and Section Manager
elections run unopposed. Why go to the trouble to build a new
organization from the ground up, if getting involved with the ARRL and
changing from within might be a better strategy?

It might also be reasonable to assume that those who find fault with the
ARRL would find as much, or worse, fault with a new organization. Such
an organization can never be perfect, and will not be able to avoid
disagreeing with someone on some point of view. Practical
administration of such an organization, particularly if it encompasses a
large cross-section of amateurs, will likely involve some negotiation
and compromises. Organizations also have to be for things, in addition
to just being against things. Are the complainers and non-joiners up to
the task?

Part of taking the lead in any new effort, whether it be a new
newsgroup, a new local club, or a new national organization, is to step
up, introduce yourself, and try to build others' trust, such that they
would want to follow you. One good first step for such a leader or
leaders would be to step out of the shadows of anonymity and identify
themselves, IMHO.

- --
73, Paul W. Schleck, K3FU

http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/
Finger for PGP Public Key
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (SunOS)

iD8DBQFGfwDy6Pj0az779o4RAt8SAKCgNHG/oV6xK09bIzcnnBCPN7026ACgh5Hm
2owUCBl4QkLRb+cgGQdU00o=
=E+Ia
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----