Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#111
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 11:40 am wrote: From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 3:01 am Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they would have been none the wiser. Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected. What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of group. Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for the ARRL Board of Directors. certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are Contribute? Yes, folks may contribute of their money or of their time. One doesn't contribute for membership though. One pays for membership. Any full League member may stand for office if he receives the requisite number of nominations and has no potential conflicts of interest. Free Elections held are to be held when? You'll want to check at http://www.arrl.org Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way info propagates these days I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy as "controversial." That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified him for candidacy though. hard to say that with any real assurance Is it? I don't see it that way. Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president. Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen. ...or so you've been told. so we have SEEN You've seen the core membership of the ARRL and you know for a fact what its view is? Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has to rankle. People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude Carl Stevenson. just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that So you know all of the circumstances and can say, without a shadow of a doubt, that Carl Stevenson was dealt with in a way that is different from a current Board member? Can you supply the details? Dave K8MN |
#112
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
RE the subject title
Then the world blew up Later maybe -- CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! |
#113
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: cut Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they would have been none the wiser. Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected. What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of group. Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for the ARRL Board of Directors. certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are Contribute? Yes, folks may contribute of their money or of their time. One doesn't contribute for membership though. One pays for membership. Any full League member may stand for office if he receives the requisite number of nominations and has no potential conflicts of interest. obviously not Free Elections held are to be held when? You'll want to check at http://www.arrl.org I was looking for the truth not propaganda Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way info propagates these days I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy as "controversial." That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified him for candidacy though. hard to say that with any real assurance Is it? I don't see it that way. of course you don't that would require you to think for yourself But indeed we don't know exactly what was going through the minds of the comitte for state security Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president. Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen. ...or so you've been told. so we have SEEN You've seen the core membership of the ARRL and you know for a fact what its view is? yes I have it is why I am no longer a member Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has to rankle. People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude Carl Stevenson. just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that So you know all of the circumstances and can say, without a shadow of a doubt, that Carl Stevenson was dealt with in a way that is different from a current Board member? Can you supply the details? Carl does that better Carl has provided assurance NO ARRL director has ever offered Carl has been declared disquailified for reasons that applied a former Vicedirector (according to that Vice Director, hans one of our regs) therefore I know for a fact he has had a different standard than at least one other canidate for ARRL office Dave K8MN |
#114
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: cut Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they would have been none the wiser. Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected. What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of group. Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for the ARRL Board of Directors. certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are Contribute? Yes, folks may contribute of their money or of their time. One doesn't contribute for membership though. One pays for membership. Any full League member may stand for office if he receives the requisite number of nominations and has no potential conflicts of interest. obviously not It isn't obvious at all, Mark. There are still unknowns. We have Carl's side of things. We don't yet know what the committee at ARRL discussed and exactly how they came to their conclusions. Free Elections held are to be held when? You'll want to check at http://www.arrl.org I was looking for the truth not propaganda Never mind. You are free to reject my advice. It comes with a guarantee. If you don't like it, you receive double your old problems back. Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way info propagates these days I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy as "controversial." That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified him for candidacy though. hard to say that with any real assurance Is it? I don't see it that way. of course you don't that would require you to think for yourself That's exactly what I've done, Mark. I've not arrived at the same conclusions. But indeed we don't know exactly what was going through the minds of the comitte for state security There is no ARRL "committe" for state security. Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president. Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen. ...or so you've been told. so we have SEEN You've seen the core membership of the ARRL and you know for a fact what its view is? yes I have it is why I am no longer a member You've actually seen the core membership? Really? When? Were they all gathered in one place? Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has to rankle. People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude Carl Stevenson. just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that So you know all of the circumstances and can say, without a shadow of a doubt, that Carl Stevenson was dealt with in a way that is different from a current Board member? Can you supply the details? Carl does that better No, he hasn't. He has presented some information. There is nothing in the material present by Carl to indicate that he has been treated differently. We have only Carl's side of things. Carl has provided assurance NO ARRL director has ever offered To my knowledge, the League has never accepted "because I vow that I won't". Carl has been declared disquailified for reasons that applied a former Vicedirector (according to that Vice Director, hans one of our regs) therefore I know for a fact he has had a different standard than at least one other canidate for ARRL office If you've been reading along, you'll note that I asked Hans for particulars. I wanted to know if the circumstances were the same. Hans indicated that they are not the same. You're setting us up for some wild conspiracy theory. Dave K8MN |
#115
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: an_old_friend wrote: Dave Heil wrote: cut Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they would have been none the wiser. Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected. What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of group. Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for the ARRL Board of Directors. certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are Contribute? Yes, folks may contribute of their money or of their time. One doesn't contribute for membership though. One pays for membership. Any full League member may stand for office if he receives the requisite number of nominations and has no potential conflicts of interest. obviously not It isn't obvious at all, Mark. There are still unknowns. We have Carl's side of things. We don't yet know what the committee at ARRL discussed and exactly how they came to their conclusions. and it is clear we will not hear from the ARRL any reasons certainly not with attitudes like yours Free Elections held are to be held when? You'll want to check at http://www.arrl.org I was looking for the truth not propaganda Never mind. You are free to reject my advice. It comes with a guarantee. If you don't like it, you receive double your old problems back. Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way info propagates these days I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy as "controversial." That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified him for candidacy though. hard to say that with any real assurance Is it? I don't see it that way. of course you don't that would require you to think for yourself That's exactly what I've done, Mark. I've not arrived at the same conclusions. no you have have made statements based on assumtions indeed you have drawn conclusion based on facts you have already noted are in evidence You have no bassis in fact to claim "That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified him for candidacy though." your conclusion "His words would not have disqualified him for candidacy though" has no basis in the facts it may or may not be true But indeed we don't know exactly what was going through the minds of the comitte for state security There is no ARRL "committe" for state security. sure is they are just not honest enough to call it that Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president. Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen. ...or so you've been told. so we have SEEN You've seen the core membership of the ARRL and you know for a fact what its view is? yes I have it is why I am no longer a member You've actually seen the core membership? Really? When? Were they all gathered in one place? Yes I have no they were not Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has to rankle. People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude Carl Stevenson. just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that So you know all of the circumstances and can say, without a shadow of a doubt, that Carl Stevenson was dealt with in a way that is different from a current Board member? Can you supply the details? Carl does that better No, he hasn't. He has presented some information. There is nothing in the material present by Carl to indicate that he has been treated differently. We have only Carl's side of things. sure is esp when added to the staments of Hans Carl has provided assurance NO ARRL director has ever offered To my knowledge, the League has never accepted "because I vow that I won't". Carl has been declared disquailified for reasons that applied a former Vicedirector (according to that Vice Director, hans one of our regs) therefore I know for a fact he has had a different standard than at least one other canidate for ARRL office If you've been reading along, you'll note that I asked Hans for particulars. I wanted to know if the circumstances were the same. Hans indicated that they are not the same. in what way? You're setting us up for some wild conspiracy theory. no I am not seting you up Dave K8MN |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Headline: Brain Dead Woman Gives Birth To Baby Girl | General | |||
Breaker 1-9 good buddy! I got a Dead Leprechaun on my tail! | CB | |||
Wanted Dead or alive Communications receiver,s and radio equipment | Shortwave |