RadioBanter - View Single Post

November 10th 05, 01:58 AM

wrote:
From: on Nov 9, 4:04 pm
wrote:
From: on Nov 8, 5:55 pm
On 8 Nov 2005 17:18:20 -0800, wrote:

Carl Stevenson was elected Member at Large of the IEEE Standards
Association in IEEE news e-mailed to members today.

Many of us have sent him our congratulations.

What do you mean "we?"

Those of us who know about his election.

You wouldn't have known about an IEEE
election without a notice from an IEEE member.

And yet I know about it. Fancy that!

YOU are NOT an IEEE member.

So? Membership is not required to offer congratulations.

WE don't know where or what YOUR "professional" electronics
activity is/involves.

Are you the Pope, Len?

I thought it terribly IRONIC that long-time radio amateur
Carl Stevenson, WK3C, who WAS REFUSED A NOMINATION FOR OFFICE
AT THE ARRL (an AMATEUR organization), managed to not only
GET ON a ballot of the IEEE (a PROFESSIONAL association), and
WIN! :-)

Not ironic at all.

WRONG. INCORRECT.

Says who?

The standards of amateurism are different. Ask Jim Thorpe.

Dead a long time ago. Do you talk to the dead?!?

Other than the BoD that is...

Carl had more than enough signatures on his nomination papers.
But the Executive Committee that decides such matters though there
was a conflict of interest between his professional duties and being
an ARRL Director, and declared him ineligible to run. That decision
was not reversed by the BoD.

We've all seen your parroting of ARRL-is-god spin in here
before on that matter.

ARRL isn't 'god', Len. Neither are you.

Put a cork in it and go to your seance. Ask Jim Fixx.

Ah, another one of your "shut up" phrases.

Some members of ARRL, particularly in the Atlantic Division, did not
agree with that decision, and made their disagreement known to the
BoD, the other officers of ARRL, and anybody else involved. Those
efforts to get him on the ballot were, unfortunately, not successful.

One cannot argue with the dead.

One cannot argue with morsemen.

Hard to tell the difference there...

I'm quite alive, Len.

You might be surprised to know who some of those who
supported WK3C's candidacy for ARRL director are, Len.

btw, it is interesting to note the name of Carl's firm.

Why? Because he has one and you do not?

No.

Do you know the name of his firm?

You know damn well that Carl got tossed off the nomination sheet
due to his being Executive Director of No Code International.

No, I don't know that at all. You don't either, you just take any
excuse to
bash ARRL.

ARRL doesn't want no-coders.

Really? Many of the directors support the elimination of the code test.
So does much of the membership. The ARRL proposal to keep the test
for Extra only is a compromise meant to give the diverse ARRL
membership
some of what they want.

Compromise - do you know what that is, Len?

ARRL wants only those "acceptible" to the BoD hierarchy.

"Acceptible"?