"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Dan/W4NTI"
w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Dan/W4NTI"
w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com writes:

The point I have is the ARRL has proven beyond a doubt they are a
bunch
of world class hypocrites.

And who elected the directors, Dan?

I don't know who 'elected' the directors. I know I didn't.

Every member with a license gets a ballot. If you didn't vote...



I researched the question. It seems that Frank Butler the SE Director has
run un-opposed for the last several elections. Which explains why I don't
remember having voted for a Director recently.

Also since I have NOT seen the results of his voting I don't know how he
stands.


They trash ham radio with 'Incentive Licensing' to
FORCE hams to upgrade and 'improve'.

How did "incentive licensing" trash ham radio? btw, it was FCC's idea,
and they made it clear they weren't going to leave the system alone.

It trashed ham radio by creating a CLASS system in our ranks, forcing
seperation by license class, making one feel superior and others thus
inferior. This was NOT THERE before Incentive Licensing.

There were "class distinctions" before IL, Dan. I heard folks say, way
back
then,
that Novices and Techs weren't "real hams".

People who look down on others because of license class usually look down
for
other reasons too. There were the Collins owners who looked down on the
Drake
folks, etc. The SSB-vs-AM stuff. The appliance ops vs, the homebrewers. DX
vs.
traffic handlers, contesters vs. ragchewers, etc. That sort of thing comes
from
the
person, not the system.


Totally different situation compaired to mandatory class difference based on
license.



The FCC did not propose Incentive Licensing. It was the ARRL back about
1963 or so. The FCC followed up on it and 'modified' it and it was
implemented beginning November of 1968.

Why do I know this? Because I read QST cover to cover while stateside in
the military. And when I went overseas I lost track due to military
activities. I returned to the USA in 1968.

I was a ham back then, too, Dan, and I read the same mags.

We're not going to agree on who started it, but I think we can agree on
these
things:

1) Whoever started it, the ARRL BoD pushed IL from 1963 onwards
2) What the FCC finally enacted in 1967 was very different from what
ARRL proposed in 1963
3) ARRL claimed that a majority of hams at the time supported IL. Others
claim a majority opposed it. Nobody *really* knows, just as nobody
knows what would have happened otherwise.
4) There's still a lot of bad feeling about the whole thing.
5) The present ARRL BoD and Hq folks are a completely different lot
than was there in the '60s


True....but the bottom line on this particular commentary is the ARRL
initiated the incentive stuff. If not for that....the FCC would have not
done what they did. Period.


I operated on 7.010 and received
a notice of violation from the Cleveland Ohio FCC monitor. I was out of
band for my class of license.

And if the original 1963 ARRL proposal had been enacted, you would not
have
been in violation.

Then 40 years later they totally
reverse themselves.

Who? I don't think there's a single person at Hq or in the Board of
Directors today who was a League official of any kind back in the
'60s. Most of the '60s BoD and Hq folks are dead.

So it's a completely different bunch that reversed the policies.

So what *should* be done, Dan? Do you support Hans' 2-level idea?

73 de Jim, N2EY




It makes no difference what I support. The ARRL and the FCC will do as they
please. But I DO RESERVE my RIGHTS to bitch about it.

Dan/W4NTI

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message link.net...
"N2EY" wrote in message

How did "incentive licensing" trash ham radio? btw, it was FCC's idea,
and they made it clear they weren't going to leave the system alone.

It trashed ham radio by creating a CLASS system in our ranks, forcing
seperation by license class, making one feel superior and others thus
inferior. This was NOT THERE before Incentive Licensing.

That's incorrect Dan. I was an early '50s kid Novice. The OFs of those
days more than just occasionally bent over backwards to make sure that
I knew that I was at the bottom of the totem pole. In retrospect no
doubt some of it involved the usual compulsive cocky male
pubescent/male adult conflict which had nothing to do with ham radio.
But it was also obvious that those OFs were also ticked off about the
recent emergence of the 5 wpm code test which allowed us weenies to
get on the air without having to go thru the same pushups they had to
go thru to get on the air. There were neighborhood radio clubs which
didn't allow full voting memberships to Novices and Techs.

It's all just cycles Dan and the 1968 maneuver was not the first cycle
by any means and welcome to the current cycle. There will be others.

w3rv

Dan/W4NTI wrote:

I operated on 7.010 and received
a notice of violation from the Cleveland Ohio FCC monitor. I was out of
band for my class of license.


Was there a fine or some other penalty involved? Or did they understand
that it was an oversight and told them you won't do that again? I once
did a
similar mistake (I was in band for my license but was a wrong mode,
i.e., SSB
in the CW/data segment answering some DX on 40) but soon spotted it
and stopped doing it. Haven't heard anything from the FCC, I think they
know people occasionally make such mistakes. But if someone keeps doing
it then watch out.

Brian Kelly wrote:




That's incorrect Dan. I was an early '50s kid Novice. The OFs of those
days more than just occasionally bent over backwards to make sure that
I knew that I was at the bottom of the totem pole. In retrospect no
doubt some of it involved the usual compulsive cocky male
pubescent/male adult conflict which had nothing to do with ham radio.


I would guess that most of those OFs had nothing better than their ham
license on their
resume. "I am big ham, you a worthless kid".... I don't expect kids
to kiss my ass
like some adults wanted me to when I was a kid. Respect is a 2 way
street.

"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...
Dan/W4NTI wrote:

I operated on 7.010 and received
a notice of violation from the Cleveland Ohio FCC monitor. I was out of
band for my class of license.


Was there a fine or some other penalty involved? Or did they understand
that it was an oversight and told them you won't do that again? I once
did a
similar mistake (I was in band for my license but was a wrong mode,
i.e., SSB
in the CW/data segment answering some DX on 40) but soon spotted it
and stopped doing it. Haven't heard anything from the FCC, I think they
know people occasionally make such mistakes. But if someone keeps doing
it then watch out.

Since you asked....I called the office in Cleveland that issued the notice.
During the conversation I was asked 'where have you been not to know of this
change?', or something to that effect. My response was that I had just got
back from Nam and wanted to play radio again. The notice was thrown out,
no fines or warnings other than to use a higher crystal..hi.

Dan/W4NTI

In article . net, "Dan/W4NTI"
w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Dan/W4NTI"
w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
"Dan/W4NTI"
w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com writes:

The point I have is the ARRL has proven beyond a doubt they are a
bunch
of world class hypocrites.

And who elected the directors, Dan?

I don't know who 'elected' the directors. I know I didn't.

Every member with a license gets a ballot. If you didn't vote...



I researched the question. It seems that Frank Butler the SE Director has
run un-opposed for the last several elections.

That's bad, IMHO.

Which explains why I don't
remember having voted for a Director recently.

Either he does such a good job nobody wants to oppose him, or nobody wants to
do the job in the first place.

Also since I have NOT seen the results of his voting I don't know how he
stands.

Email him and ask. That's how I find out how Bernie voted.

They trash ham radio with 'Incentive Licensing' to
FORCE hams to upgrade and 'improve'.

How did "incentive licensing" trash ham radio? btw, it was FCC's idea,
and they made it clear they weren't going to leave the system alone.

It trashed ham radio by creating a CLASS system in our ranks, forcing
seperation by license class, making one feel superior and others thus
inferior. This was NOT THERE before Incentive Licensing.

There were "class distinctions" before IL, Dan. I heard folks say, way
back then, that Novices and Techs weren't "real hams".

People who look down on others because of license class usually look down
for
other reasons too. There were the Collins owners who looked down on the
Drake
folks, etc. The SSB-vs-AM stuff. The appliance ops vs, the homebrewers. DX
vs. traffic handlers, contesters vs. ragchewers, etc. That sort of thing
comes
from the person, not the system.

Totally different situation compaired to mandatory class difference based on
license.

How is it totally different?

If anything, the license system was fairer because it was based on knowledge
and skill rather than how many $$ you could throw at the local radio store.

Heck, as a high school kid there was no way I could have had a Collins, Drake
or even a Heath/SB station. Even if by some miracle I'd gotten the money, it
was needed for other things. There was *no way* I could join some of their
ranks. But I could earn the highest class of license.

The FCC did not propose Incentive Licensing. It was the ARRL back about
1963 or so. The FCC followed up on it and 'modified' it and it was
implemented beginning November of 1968.

Why do I know this? Because I read QST cover to cover while stateside in
the military. And when I went overseas I lost track due to military
activities. I returned to the USA in 1968.

I was a ham back then, too, Dan, and I read the same mags.

We're not going to agree on who started it, but I think we can agree on
these things:

1) Whoever started it, the ARRL BoD pushed IL from 1963 onwards
2) What the FCC finally enacted in 1967 was very different from what
ARRL proposed in 1963
3) ARRL claimed that a majority of hams at the time supported IL. Others
claim a majority opposed it. Nobody *really* knows, just as nobody
knows what would have happened otherwise.
4) There's still a lot of bad feeling about the whole thing.
5) The present ARRL BoD and Hq folks are a completely different lot
than was there in the '60s

True....but the bottom line on this particular commentary is the ARRL
initiated the incentive stuff.

ARRL did make the first formal proposal - but only *after* asking what hjams
thought.

If not for that....the FCC would have not
done what they did. Period.

How does anyone know what would have happened if ARRL had left things alone?

I operated on 7.010 and received
a notice of violation from the Cleveland Ohio FCC monitor. I was out of
band for my class of license.

And if the original 1963 ARRL proposal had been enacted, you would not
have been in violation.

Then 40 years later they totally
reverse themselves.

Who? I don't think there's a single person at Hq or in the Board of
Directors today who was a League official of any kind back in the
'60s. Most of the '60s BoD and Hq folks are dead.

So it's a completely different bunch that reversed the policies.

So what *should* be done, Dan? Do you support Hans' 2-level idea?

It makes no difference what I support. The ARRL and the FCC will do as they
please.

If all we do is keep quiet, that could happen.

But I DO RESERVE my RIGHTS to bitch about it.

Of course!

So do I

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
hlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote in message

How did "incentive licensing" trash ham radio? btw, it was FCC's idea,
and they made it clear they weren't going to leave the system alone.

It trashed ham radio by creating a CLASS system in our ranks, forcing
seperation by license class, making one feel superior and others thus
inferior. This was NOT THERE before Incentive Licensing.

That's incorrect Dan. I was an early '50s kid Novice. The OFs of those
days more than just occasionally bent over backwards to make sure that
I knew that I was at the bottom of the totem pole. In retrospect no
doubt some of it involved the usual compulsive cocky male
pubescent/male adult conflict which had nothing to do with ham radio.
But it was also obvious that those OFs were also ticked off about the
recent emergence of the 5 wpm code test which allowed us weenies to
get on the air without having to go thru the same pushups they had to
go thru to get on the air. There were neighborhood radio clubs which
didn't allow full voting memberships to Novices and Techs.

And in the mid-60s there were still some who did similar things. Indeed, there
were Advanceds who looked down on Generals, Generals who looked down on
Conditionals, Conditionals who looked down on Techs, and Techs who looked down
on Novices. Etc.

And it wasn't just kids vs. adults, either.

Then as now, they were few - but noisy.

Maybe it was different where you were, Dan.

It's all just cycles Dan and the 1968 maneuver was not the first cycle
by any means and welcome to the current cycle. There will be others.

Circle Game.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dan/W4NTI" writes:

|
| I researched the question. It seems that Frank Butler the SE Director
has
| run un-opposed for the last several elections. Which explains why I
don't
| remember having voted for a Director recently.
|

There's a reason for that. Frank is, IMNSHO, is among the top 3 best
Director's who ever wore the red badge. He understands ham radio, he
understands that he was elected to be a leader, not a manager, and he
has the courage to look beyond the popularity surveys and support what
is best for Amateur Radio (which isn't always what is most popular with
the vocal minority).

The SE Division is a lucky bunch.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"N2EY" wrote

| I researched the question. It seems that Frank Butler the SE
Director has
| run un-opposed for the last several elections.
|
| That's bad, IMHO.
|

Then you don't know Frank Butler.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Robert Casey wrote in message ...
Brian Kelly wrote:




That's incorrect Dan. I was an early '50s kid Novice. The OFs of those
days more than just occasionally bent over backwards to make sure that
I knew that I was at the bottom of the totem pole. In retrospect no
doubt some of it involved the usual compulsive cocky male
pubescent/male adult conflict which had nothing to do with ham radio.


I would guess that most of those OFs had nothing better than their ham
license on their
resume. "I am big ham, you a worthless kid"....

Bad guess. A couple examples were EEs who were too old to serve in WW2
but who put in 70 hrs/week at the submarine communications lab here
"for the duration", another was an M.D. and some others of their ilk
who twisted me six ways from Sunday about being a Novice just to see
what would happen. Which I probably deserved quite frankly. Those were
also the days when the door prizes at company functions were cartons
of Luckies passed out by "the prettiest secretary". Check yer
extrapolaton methods Casey, some of of those curves are horizontal
lines (beasting on 5 wpm newbies in 1953 and in 2004 is one) and some
AIN'T.

I don't expect kids
to kiss my ass
like some adults wanted me to when I was a kid. Respect is a 2 way
street.

Yer lecturing the choir, I have three thirty-something daughters . .
Dunno if they're still card-carrying NOW members or not . .

Good night.

w3rv