Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/13/2011 11:16 PM, Scott wrote:
I re-joined ARRL a few years back after having let my membership lapse because of what I considered a lack of technical articles in QST. I was primarily a member to get QST. After my membership expired again, I got boatloads of mailings from ARRL, begging me to come back and even offering a choice of a book to get me to come back. I mailed back their letters with a hand written note saying I wasn't interested. They asked me why. I said QST isn't nearly technical enough for me anymore. They suggested I get QEX. So I made a "counter-offer"...I asked them to substitute QEX for QST. They basically laughed and said they couldn't do that. Seems it would have saved them some money as QEX only comes out 6 timers per year versus 12 for QST. So, now they get NO money from me... N0EDV I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's not just the magazine(s). Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the FCC. 73, Joe |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4-14-2011 12:51, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On 4/13/2011 11:16 PM, Scott wrote: I re-joined ARRL a few years back after having let my membership lapse because of what I considered a lack of technical articles in QST. I was primarily a member to get QST. After my membership expired again, I got boatloads of mailings from ARRL, begging me to come back and even offering a choice of a book to get me to come back. I mailed back their letters with a hand written note saying I wasn't interested. They asked me why. I said QST isn't nearly technical enough for me anymore. They suggested I get QEX. So I made a "counter-offer"...I asked them to substitute QEX for QST. They basically laughed and said they couldn't do that. Seems it would have saved them some money as QEX only comes out 6 timers per year versus 12 for QST. So, now they get NO money from me... N0EDV I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's not just the magazine(s). Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the FCC. 73, Joe Yes, I understand that very well. However, they should have more money to spend to fight for ham radio if they would let me substitute the 6 issues per year of QEX versus the 12 issues of QST. N0EDV |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/14/2011 5:18 PM, Scott wrote:
On 4-14-2011 12:51, Joe from Kokomo wrote: I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's not just the magazine(s). Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the FCC. 73, Joe Yes, I understand that very well. However, they should have more money to spend to fight for ham radio if they would let me substitute the 6 issues per year of QEX versus the 12 issues of QST. N0EDV I'm basing this opinion on the ARRL budgets that were published in QST about 20 years ago. They currently (still) claim they are there for mainly 2 things, protecting our rights and privileges as operators and adding new operators through education and other methods. Unless they have gotten rid of all the bits they used to have that they didn't need, they are still spending between 2 and 5% of the money they collect on what's supposed to be the main goal. Where does all the rest go? Read the budgets if they still make them available. Charlatans then, are they now? I don't know. And don't care. They lost me. tom K0TAR |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , news4792
@taring.org says... I'm basing this opinion on the ARRL budgets that were published in QST about 20 years ago. They currently (still) claim they are there for mainly 2 things, protecting our rights and privileges as operators and adding new operators through education and other methods. Unless they have gotten rid of all the bits they used to have that they didn't need, they are still spending between 2 and 5% of the money they collect on what's supposed to be the main goal. Where does all the rest go? Read the budgets if they still make them available. Charlatans then, are they now? I don't know. And don't care. They lost me. tom K0TAR Pretty well identical with the UK situation. The RSGB have lost many, many members for these reasons - including me. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On 4/14/2011 5:18 PM, Scott wrote: On 4-14-2011 12:51, Joe from Kokomo wrote: I would respectfully suggest that you are missing the big picture. It's not just the magazine(s). Like them or not, the ARRL is the ONLY organization that supports ham radio on a national level, going to bat for us before Congress and the FCC. 73, Joe Yes, I understand that very well. However, they should have more money to spend to fight for ham radio if they would let me substitute the 6 issues per year of QEX versus the 12 issues of QST. N0EDV On 4/14/2011 9:47 PM, tom wrote: I'm basing this opinion on the ARRL budgets that were published in QST about 20 years ago. They currently (still) claim they are there for mainly 2 things, protecting our rights and privileges as operators and adding new operators through education and other methods. Unless they have gotten rid of all the bits they used to have that they didn't need, they are still spending between 2 and 5% of the money they collect on what's supposed to be the main goal. Where does all the rest go? Read the budgets if they still make them available. Charlatans then, are they now? I don't know. And don't care. They lost me. tom K0TAR tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad you don't care. I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national organization. 73, Joe |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4-15-2011 12:27, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad you don't care. I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national organization. 73, Joe Why? If every ham just wrote to their elected officials (for the cost of a stamp, or free by email), they would get the message just as well, if not better than, if they got 1 letter or a personal visit from the ARRL "lobbyist". |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On 4-15-2011 12:27, Joe from Kokomo wrote: tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad you don't care. I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national organization. 73, Joe On 4/15/2011 6:41 PM, Scott wrote: Why? If every ham just wrote to their elected officials (for the cost of a stamp, or free by email), they would get the message just as well, if not better than, if they got 1 letter or a personal visit from the ARRL "lobbyist". Just my personal opinion, but I believe it is quite naive to think that if "every ham just wrote". Extremely unlikely...and oh, if not the ARRL, just who do you think is going to tell the hams to write and what to write about? Finally, it's quite naive to think that a national lobbying organization is not helpful -- just look at how successful the NRA is. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 04/15/2011 08:31 PM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On 4-15-2011 12:27, Joe from Kokomo wrote: tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad you don't care. I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national organization. 73, Joe On 4/15/2011 6:41 PM, Scott wrote: Why? If every ham just wrote to their elected officials (for the cost of a stamp, or free by email), they would get the message just as well, if not better than, if they got 1 letter or a personal visit from the ARRL "lobbyist". Just my personal opinion, but I believe it is quite naive to think that if "every ham just wrote". Extremely unlikely...and oh, if not the ARRL, just who do you think is going to tell the hams to write and what to write about? Finally, it's quite naive to think that a national lobbying organization is not helpful -- just look at how successful the NRA is. All of you are also forgetting that the ARRL (for better or worse) is now the 'back bone' of the system that handles testing for ham licenses. Without them it would be almost impossible to find where you can locally take the test to apply for or upgrade your ham ticket. The ARRL also publishes most of the test guide material (though I would be surprised if it wasn't also available on line). Finally they have a good line of excellent technical publications on radio and electronics technology. Also they DO offer membership without QST, for additional members of a family. Maybe the price of that will give you an idea of what they think the membership itself is worth. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/15/2011 7:40 PM, Kenneth Scharf wrote:
On 04/15/2011 08:31 PM, Joe from Kokomo wrote: On 4-15-2011 12:27, Joe from Kokomo wrote: tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad you don't care. I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national organization. 73, Joe On 4/15/2011 6:41 PM, Scott wrote: Why? If every ham just wrote to their elected officials (for the cost of a stamp, or free by email), they would get the message just as well, if not better than, if they got 1 letter or a personal visit from the ARRL "lobbyist". Just my personal opinion, but I believe it is quite naive to think that if "every ham just wrote". Extremely unlikely...and oh, if not the ARRL, just who do you think is going to tell the hams to write and what to write about? Finally, it's quite naive to think that a national lobbying organization is not helpful -- just look at how successful the NRA is. All of you are also forgetting that the ARRL (for better or worse) is now the 'back bone' of the system that handles testing for ham licenses. Without them it would be almost impossible to find where you can locally take the test to apply for or upgrade your ham ticket. The ARRL also publishes most of the test guide material (though I would be surprised if it wasn't also available on line). Finally they have a good line of excellent technical publications on radio and electronics technology. Also they DO offer membership without QST, for additional members of a family. Maybe the price of that will give you an idea of what they think the membership itself is worth. Yes, and the blind can get a membership without QST for $8, same as a family member without QST. That was where I got my number from in another post in this thread. Again, I am not suggesting anyone give up their membership in the ARRL. |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/15/2011 7:27 AM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
tom, just my personal opinion, but too bad you left the ARRL and too bad you don't care. I don't know about your "2 to 5%" figure, but even if it is true, it's exactly 2 to 5% more than any other organization is spending to go to bat for ham radio...and IMHO, we NEED (and should support) a national organization. 73, Joe The ARRL seems to have little to do with the most important part of getting new hams, licensing. The National VEC page, http://www.ncvec.org, apparently doesn't even acknowledge the ARRL. You have to search the site and get to Question Pool 3 to find the first hint of the ARRL, and it's an email address for WY1O, who seems quite dedicated and appears several more times. And he's all there is. So much for making new hams. tom K0TAR |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Cleaning out QEX magazines | Homebrew | |||
Cleaning out QEX magazines | Shortwave | |||
Cleaning out QEX magazines | Antenna | |||
Cleaning out QEX magazines | Antenna | |||
Cleaning out QEX magazines | Antenna |