Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

"N2EY" wrote in message
om...

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message

...

Leadership is
when one has the courage and wisdom to make a sound judgement
and then "do the right thing."

Who decides what "the right thing" really is?


That's what "leadership" is *supposed* to be there for ... to make
the tough calls when the answer isn't necessarily obvious (or may
be right, but not overwhelmingly popular).

Sure. In one group I was the director of, I directly defied a board
decision, reinstating something that they revoked. But even then, I
relied on the input of the people that were affected by the board's
decision. They were displeased by the decision, and appealed to me to do
something. They were right, so I did it. Then offered my resignation to
the board for the defiance. (being a leader does not give you unlimited
power)

Oddly enough, my offer was unanimously rejected. I think the rest of the
BOD was actually relieved.

But the occasional and very uncomfortable times that you have to stick
your neck out does not releas you from a obligation to listen as often
as possible.


For example, look at
that "21st century" paper (CQ published it, btw, and it was in their
mill before I evder saw it, so don't give me a hard time about it). Is
the "Communicator" idea "the right thing"?


No ... we need more people who understand radio, not more appliance
operators.

and we are headed in the opposite direction.


Otherwise, they could just do a web vote
popularity contest on every issue and wouldn't need Directors ... the
staff could handle the whole thing ...

And if that vote runs opposite to what you think is "the right thing"?


I wasn't advocating a popularity contest ... just saying that if nobody in
"leadership" has the cajones and good judgement to make the right call,
then it might as well devolve to that ...

Must be pretty good to always know what the "right call" is.


It sounds to me like you're saying the ARRL Directors should sometimes
go against what the majority of members say they want. Do you really
think that's a good idea?


Yes ... the leadership should, theoretically at least, have superior
knowledge,
insight, and experience and should be there to guide, not simply be a bunch
of political "yes men" to a majority who may/may not necessarily make the
best
choices in terms of what's in the best interests of ham radio long term.

Of course not. But they still have to represent their constituents. In
our locale, we have had a number of County commissioners that believed
they had the right ideas, to the point of ignoring what a large majority
of the citezenry wanted, and with their "leadership" saddled the county
with a huge new and unnesesary project and the billing therof.
Commisioner 1 was the lowest vote-getter in the next election, and
commisioner two was smart enough to not run again for that office. THe
only one re-elected was the sole commissioner who voted against the project.

These people displayed your kind of "leadership". Once.

- Mike KB3EIA -