Exactly. As well as writing to their elected officials as well.



--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...
Though I've been a member of the ARRL longer than I've been a ham, I
often find that it is wiser to represent myself than let the ARRL do
it. We often have differing viewpoints.

Those who are not ARRL members can simply represent themselves to the
FCC.

Brian

That wasn't directed at your survey for the most part, more of a general
statement...... Again, I still stand by my statement as that is at least
what was learned a statistics class in high school.



--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:

Show me a truly impartial survey and I might actually consider joining
the
Anti-Radio Relay League. ALL surveys are slanted in some direction or
another, as to prove some point or theory.

Was my survey slanted? If so, how?

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
y.com...

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message
...
14. The ARRL leadership should take the following role in the code
test issue:

E. Stay the hell out of it until they truly represent all of the amateur
radio community.

Right now they are the only organization who represents us at all. If you
want to control their policies, become a member and climb the political
structure.


No... they only represent their membership. (as that has been dictated to
me time and time again.) There in lies the real root of the problem, it is
a "political" organization, i.e. bureaucracy.


Those who are not members of the ARRL have chosen to remain unrepresented
since they have done nothing to form a lobyy to take the place of the
ARRL.

I can self-represent for the time being. It's better that what the has been
done to amateur radio since my involvement since 1988. I write letters on a
regular basis to not only the FCC, as well as the elected officials from my
area that serve in congress and the senate. Not only do issues come up that
they might have an opportunity to vote on, they "have friends" in other
parts of the goverment as well I am sure.

Instead of lazily waiting for the arrl to act on matters, I can just imagine
the response if at least 20-30 wrote letters on a regular basis to there
congress and senator persons. Our districts for each up north here contain
*at least* 1,000 hams a piece.

That was another question I also had.....WHO are the arrl lobbyists? WHAT
exactly are they doing? WHO exactly are they talking to? WHAT is their
budgets?? I have asked this before but with no response. If it is not for
the magazine subscription (QST is actually a fairly decent magazine even
though content is forever dwindling over the years due stuff being pushed to
the website) then the other argument by some is for some type of
protectionist/mafioso scheme as to why to join the arrl.

I do not consider the arrl the equivalent of christianity, nor will I be
brainwashed to think that arrl can do no wrong or preach/recite some
mantra's.





--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message
...

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
y.com...

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message
...
14. The ARRL leadership should take the following role in the code
test issue:

E. Stay the hell out of it until they truly represent all of the
amateur
radio community.

Right now they are the only organization who represents us at all. If
you
want to control their policies, become a member and climb the political
structure.


No... they only represent their membership. (as that has been dictated to
me time and time again.) There in lies the real root of the problem, it
is
a "political" organization, i.e. bureaucracy.


Those who are not members of the ARRL have chosen to remain
unrepresented
since they have done nothing to form a lobyy to take the place of the
ARRL.

I can self-represent for the time being. It's better that what the has
been
done to amateur radio since my involvement since 1988. I write letters on
a
regular basis to not only the FCC, as well as the elected officials from
my
area that serve in congress and the senate. Not only do issues come up
that
they might have an opportunity to vote on, they "have friends" in other
parts of the goverment as well I am sure.

Instead of lazily waiting for the arrl to act on matters, I can just
imagine
the response if at least 20-30 wrote letters on a regular basis to there
congress and senator persons. Our districts for each up north here
contain
*at least* 1,000 hams a piece.

That was another question I also had.....WHO are the arrl lobbyists? WHAT
exactly are they doing? WHO exactly are they talking to? WHAT is their
budgets?? I have asked this before but with no response. If it is not
for
the magazine subscription (QST is actually a fairly decent magazine even
though content is forever dwindling over the years due stuff being pushed
to
the website) then the other argument by some is for some type of
protectionist/mafioso scheme as to why to join the arrl.

I do not consider the arrl the equivalent of christianity, nor will I be
brainwashed to think that arrl can do no wrong or preach/recite some
mantra's.

I do not consider the ARRL end all and be all either. But a strong,
organized group is more successful than random individuals writing to
elected and appointed officials. That is a political fact of life. Those
who do not care to admit that to themselves will have very limited success
in achieving their objectives.

Now as far as who the ARRL represents. Yes it is their members. These
members are a cross section of the ham community. The policy is based on
what the members want. If you wish the ARRL to change direction, then join
it and get a sufficient number of people with your views behind you and get
more people to join that have your views so that you have the support to
become an official and a policy maker. Those hams who say that they won't
join the ARRL because they have a different viewpoint than the current
membership of the ARRL are choosing to be less effective in getting their
viewpoints across to the ham community and the FCC.

The ARRL isn't some magic entity that exists out there that hams join. It
is the result of hams banding together. The views represented by the ARRL
will be those of the people who have decided to become active and push those
views.

While I do agree that individuals should write their elected officials and
so on, that does not negate the need for having an organized body to push
for changes.

The most effective way to change the system is to work from within not from
without.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

The pro-coder regulars in here have been sorely wounded by the
WRC-03 decision on S25 and they are vengeful, looking for blood
regardless of manner in which it is spilled. Are you one of those?

What is any of this to you, Leonard?

Colonel Klunk, you have NO authority to demand any such answer.

When was a demand issued, Leonora?

You are not Mike Coslo...to whom my remarks were aimed.

Why do you attempt to answer for another?

You must have forgotten how usenet works, kindly old gent. Perhaps
you'll want to engage in an e-mail exchange directly with Mike if it
bothers you when others comment on what you've written in this very
public place.

Do you have multiple personalities? Or is your psychosis a mild one
of simple hatred for anyone pointing out that you never did any
glorious government radio pioneering in the 1980s.

You've called a number of people crazy over the past week or so. You
know what they say about one who believes that a number of others are
insane?

You aren't involved in amateur radio in any way.

Not required.

You aren't a ham.

The FDA hasn't been around to stamp my beef. Why do you think
you can beef so much without such inspection?

from 9/5/96
Anderson: "Will I take a license exam? Probably. I'm a year from
retirement and it's only taken me two decades to achieve 3 WPM...
Will I recommend amateur radio as a hobby to a young person? Only
guardedly and only after explaining everything that I've observed over
the last four decades as a professional in the electronics/
communications industry."

Then there's that "Extra right out of the box". Apparently you aspire
to become a ham as soon as the requirements have been lowered
sufficiently. Perhaps you can obtain that Extra right out of the next
box.

You aren't a regulator.

NEITHER ARE YOU.

No kidding? I am involved in amateur radio. Since you aren't a
regulator and you aren't a ham, your presence here and your fixation
with amateur radio are a tad peculiar.

Quit trying to play Raddio Kop. Or did you get one of those nice
shields in the mail so that you can flip open your badge wallet and
pretend to be some kind of officer? Were your friends and neighbors
amazed and delighted at your "promotion?"

This isn't the "raddio" and I've not present myself as an enforcement
official in amateur radio. Even if I was, it wouldn't matter. You
aren't a part of amateur radio.

You aren't a budding neophyte.

I was a "neophyte" in radio a half century ago. That quickly passed.

You have yet to become a neophyte in amateur radio. You'll become a
beginner after passing a license exam. You'll have the opportunity to
be a neophyte all over again.

You're a guy who delights in pointing out
his past accomplishments in military and commercial radio.

Sorry, but you are LYING again. As I keep saying, the US Army quit
using morse code modes for long-haul primary communications on HF
in 1948. I began operating on HF in early 1953 as part of a team of four
to keep a very large Army radio station operating 24 hours a day, seven
days a week.

Let's look at a few Anderson quotes over a long period of time:

from 2/1/97

Anderson: "Ahem...as one who was _working_ in radio 40 years ago..."

from 9/13/96

Anderson: "Len - tested and passed Commercial 1st Radiotelephone 40
years ago."

from 9/13/96
Anderson: "Geoffrey, between 1953 and 1955 I was a fixed-station
repairman, then supervisor on one team (of 4) at U.S. Army station ADA
in Tokyo. With 27 transmitters (23 on HF bands), 108 TTY circuits, 7
voice circuits over the Pacific, 24 hours a day, I may have worked more
traffic on HF than the average Extra ham will work in a lifetime.
ADA pushed a quarter million TTY messages a month..."

from 12/10/96
Anderson: "In my case, I've already worked 24-hour-a-day "DX" on HF
as a member of the U.S. Army in the 1950s...took and passed a
Commercial Radiotelephone license in 1956...worked as a hands-on
electronics engineer in successful design..."

from 10/8/96
Anderson: "Recall that I've worn the Army uniform and moved
more traffic on the HF transmitters I operated and maintained in one
month than any Extra class amateur has sent in an entire lifetime."

Any of that familiar to you?

"It ain't braggin' if ya done it." I did it.

What is it you did in amateur radio, Len? You're more likely as a
candidate for an amateur radio "Who's He?" than "Who's Who".

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

Do you have multiple personalities? Or is your psychosis a mild one
of simple hatred for anyone pointing out that you never did any
glorious government radio pioneering in the 1980s.

You've called a number of people crazy over the past week or so. You
know what they say about one who believes that a number of others are
insane?

Like "laughing" at 10 or 15 lines of posts? He HAS gone over
the edge. Poor pogue still trying to figure out how he got here and
why hasn't President Nixon got us out of Viet Nam yet.....

That's OK, though...I am sure he's happy, where ever his mind
is...

Steve, K4YZ

Good point Jon. As I said when I tabulated the WT Docket 98-143 comments,
the amateur radio community is more or less divide on the Morse code exam
issue. The issue can not be decide consensus or polls. Commission will
dispose of this issue in due course. There is no good reason for the ARRL
to waste any more funds on the Morse code matter. At WRC 2003 not one radio
administration spoke in favor of retaining the mandatory international Morse
code requirement.

The ARRL did a lot of good work in getting a an agreement of the realigment
of 40 meters. I though it would be impossible.
But look what can be accomplished when ARRL spents it resource to solve a
problem that makes sense even to SW broadcasters. Kind of like a bandplan
for hams and broadcasters.

Larry


"Jon Bloom" wrote in message
news
People's minds are well made up on this issue, and nothing anyone does is
going to change that. Those who support Morse testing will be angry with
the ARRL if it comes out for elimination of the test no matter how that
decision was made. Those who favor elimination will be equally angry if
the ARRL supports continuation of testing. And those of us who think far
too much energy has already been wasted on this subject will groan yet
again if ARRL spends any more substantial resources on it.

In my opinion, because it's a waste of resources -- time and money -- that
would be better devoted to tackling the problems Amateur Radio faces that
are important -- a list that does not, in my mind, include anything to do
with Morse testing.

Jon

"lk" wrote in message
...
Good point Jon. As I said when I tabulated the WT Docket 98-143 comments,
the amateur radio community is more or less divide on the Morse code exam
issue.

Of course that was 5 years ago. Convential wisdom has it that, if anything,
the shift over time would result in less support for code testing today than
then.

The issue can not be decide consensus or polls.

The FCC was pretty clear in their assessment as stated in
the R&O. No reason for code testing other than the
former treaty.

Commission will
dispose of this issue in due course. There is no good reason for the ARRL
to waste any more funds on the Morse code matter. At WRC 2003 not one
radio
administration spoke in favor of retaining the mandatory international
Morse
code requirement.

Agreed.

The ARRL did a lot of good work in getting a an agreement of the
realigment
of 40 meters.

Agree also.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
...

"lk" wrote in message
...
Good point Jon. As I said when I tabulated the WT Docket 98-143
comments,
the amateur radio community is more or less divide on the Morse code
exam
issue.

Of course that was 5 years ago. Convential wisdom has it that, if
anything,
the shift over time would result in less support for code testing today
than
then.

IARU changed their position, and maybe ARRL will change their position.

At least they should stop wasting members funds trying to save a rule that
no
radio administration supported at WRC 2003.

Larry