On Sep 26, 12:49*pm, AJ Lake wrote:
"JB" wrote:
Perhaps it is your hope that Amateur Radio not be represented or supported?

ARRL is just one ham organization that tries to influence the FCC.

It's the biggest and oldest one in the USA.

There are others.

Such as?

I'm sure that they would be happy to step in should
my personal boycott of ARRL become successful...

I don't think so. Without ARRL there'd soon be no amateur radio. Not
as we know it, anyway.

What would happen is that there would be a little change here and a
little change there until there was essentially nothing left.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:

But what mode are the using when they offend on 75 meters?
It's not Morse Code.

The code test didn't keep the whackos out of the hobby. If that were
true there would be no code-tested offenders on *any* mode.

maybe W3OVV [9 years old] didn't understand every subtlety
of every question, but she did well enough to satisfy the FCC examiner.

You could pass the exam without knowing the material even back then.
The current Bash like study materials make it lots easier now though.

Without ARRL there'd soon be no amateur radio.

Lots of other countries still have amateur radio. No ARRL there...

Not as we know it, anyway.

That might be a good thing.

AJ Lake wrote:

"JB" wrote:


a lot of third world countries still use CW for distress calls,


Some 3rd world countries also still use animals for plowing.

Perhaps that includes the USA? There is a robust draft-horse farming
movement here in Minnesota.

Michael

AJ Lake wrote:

"JB" wrote:

a lot of third world countries still use CW for distress calls,

Some 3rd world countries also still use animals for plowing.

Some "third world" countries can't spell /ploughing/

Bob wrote:

Some "third world" countries can't spell /ploughing/

When the Brits were kicked out 'pluffing' was outlawed... ;-)

"AJ Lake" wrote in message
...
"JB" wrote:

Perhaps it is your hope that Amateur Radio not be represented or
supported?

ARRL is just one ham organization that tries to influence the FCC.
There are others. I'm sure that they would be happy to step in should
my personal boycott of ARRL become successful...

Why haven't they already stepped and displaced the ARRL then. They should
already be working to take their place so that more people will boycott the
ARRL.

Perhaps because they simply can't handle more than a single issue at a time
(NCI comes to mind).

"Dee Flint" wrote:

Why haven't they already stepped and displaced the ARRL then.

I don't know of any ham organization that wants kill the ARRL. My
supposition is that if there had been no ARRL, another group or groups
would have been lobbying in it's place.

They should already be working to take their place so that
more people will boycott the ARRL.

Let me try one more time (3rd try). My boycott is purely a *personal*
one to make *me* feel better. I really am not trying to get converts.

"Michael Black" wrote in message
ample.org...
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, AJ Lake wrote:

[snip]
You have no history here, yet you pounce the minute someone posts
about CW, someone who has been here a long time. And then a bunch
of others suddenly appear, even though they don't post about building
amateur radio equipment here.

There is rec.radio.amateur.policy and rec.radio.amateur.misc and
even rec.radio.amateur.moderated where you can have your debates
to your heart's content.

rec.radio.amateur.policy has become unusable for any type of discussion due
to the single handed take over by one individual. He has so many user names
that blocking him becomes a chore in itself. The hundreds of posts that he
makes in a day on every thing else that is posted was the reason that
rec.radio.amateur.moderated was formed.

"Scott" wrote in message
.. .
Bryan wrote:
Tim Shoppa wrote:
[snip]
The controversy in the 70's was the Technician license, a ticket that
required no code, as a way to get some CB'ers to take notice. I myself
came to ham radio in the 70's but had no interest in anything having
to do with Technician privileges. I know many other hams who did come
in that way in the 70's, 80's, etc.

Tim N3QE

The original Technician license required passing of a 5wpm receiving &
sending Morse test.

73,
Bryan WA7PRC

I concur from experience in 1982 when I got my Tech license. I had to
take the 5WPM code test at the FCC office. We had the same HF privileges
as Novices and could operate on any frequency above 50.000 MHz. I can't
recall, but I "THINK" the first code-free Tech licenses did not have HF
privileges. Now that there is no code requirement for any class, I think
Techs have some HF privileges again...a bit confusing

Scott
N0EDV

The original no code Tech had no HF privileges since international treaties
required code for frequencies below 30 MHz.

Today's Technician now has all the HF privileges of the Novice class. Those
privileges have now been expanded also. On 40m, 15m, and 10m, their CW
privileges now cover the same spectrum as the General class license.

Dee
N8UZE

"AJ Lake" wrote in message
...
"Dee Flint" wrote:

They [B&N] are not a library but a business.

B&N is a very successful business. When they think the 'library'
chairs are losing them money, the chairs will be removed.

The chairs and atmosphere are so you can SAMPLE the reading
material not spend the day reading.

I *sampled* QST and *bought* another magazine or book. The bottom line
$$ for B&N was the same or more. Your tears are for the wrong entity.
B&N made money because I was drawn to their 'free sample' QST
magazine. QST is the one who lost money, but then that's what voting
with your wallet is all about...

Reading QST at B&N is not "sampling". It is hypocritical. Since you are
boycotting the ARRL by not being a member, your "sampling" of the magazine
in the book store is absolute hypocrisy. You want the benefits of the
organization without paying for them. If you are going to boycott the ARRL,
do it right. Don't read their magazine.