On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:36:13 +0900, "Brenda Ann"
wrote:


"Al Klein" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 11:15:03 -0500, "Brian Hill" wrote:

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be gone
sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys but it's
just the sign of the times.

The sign reads, "Instant Gratification". Buy the equipment and be
able to put it on the air immediately.

It wouldn't surprise me if, in the not too distant future, one will be
able to buy a ham transceiver, create call letters out of one's
initials or something and legally be on the air while waiting for the
real "ask for it and you get it for a fee" license.

Ahh.. the 1977 solution.. first, middle and last initials followed by your 5
digit zip code....

And remember how that "improved" things?

Al Klein wrote:
On 24 Jul 2006 16:42:15 -0700, "
wrote:

after all I can do even EME

I sincerely doubt that. You probably couldn't even figure the loss on
an EME path.
doubt it all you like

figure the path with any precison no, but I am can use the various
charts to know know I need to contact various types of stations


theseday 100w a 13b2 a preamp and you are able to pick up the larger
stations, and they can hear you

why do Ineed to be figure the path loss when I can determine the
parameters for sucess.

I honestly don't care how much of the signal islost along the way

I care wether a readble signal reach the otherside

Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:37:53 -0400, "clfe"
wrote:


ago or better. How did the rep act like a snob? He turned to his bud who was
with him behind the table and ignored others "trying" to gain his attention
and talk to him about whatever. Oh - he may look and say Hi, but god forbid
you interrupt his conversation with his buddy. So much for the "MEET YOUR
ARRL REP HERE"


Instead of canceling your membership you should have complained to
Newington. I've known a lot of League reps - some are great, some are
so-so and some are terrible. About the same mix as any large group of
human beings. Canceling your membership didn't make the situation any
better.


Remember also that most reps are elected by the few who bother to vote
for them. Most are unopposed. Sort of like politicians.

Dave WD9BDZ

David G. Nagel wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:37:53 -0400, "clfe"
wrote:


ago or better. How did the rep act like a snob? He turned to his bud who was
with him behind the table and ignored others "trying" to gain his attention
and talk to him about whatever. Oh - he may look and say Hi, but god forbid
you interrupt his conversation with his buddy. So much for the "MEET YOUR
ARRL REP HERE"


Instead of canceling your membership you should have complained to
Newington. I've known a lot of League reps - some are great, some are
so-so and some are terrible. About the same mix as any large group of
human beings. Canceling your membership didn't make the situation any
better.


Remember also that most reps are elected by the few who bother to vote
for them. Most are unopposed. Sort of like politicians.

Dave WD9BDZ
anyone that thinks you jion the ARRL and stand for office should
inquire of Carl Stevenson

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:05:27 -0500, "David G. Nagel"
wrote:

Remember also that most reps are elected by the few who bother to vote
for them. Most are unopposed. Sort of like politicians.

And, like politics, those who don't vote deserve the representatives
they get.

On 25 Jul 2006 09:31:14 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

anyone that thinks you jion the ARRL and stand for office should
inquire of Carl Stevenson

Or Steve Mendelson?

Al Klein wrote:
On 25 Jul 2006 09:31:14 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

anyone that thinks you jion the ARRL and stand for office should
inquire of Carl Stevenson

Or Steve Mendelson?
sorry don't know his story

I Know Carl stried to stand for ARRL director (midalantic) and was
refused a place on the ballot

"Dee Flint" wrote in
:


"Slow Code" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Brian Hill" wrote in :


"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:52 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once

But you don't now, and it's now now, it's not once.

proving that one has little to do with the other.

And that you have little to do with this conversation.

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be
gone sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys
but it's just the sign of the times.

BH


We have to keep trying to save Ham radio while we still can because
once it's all the way in the ****ter it will be even harder to pull
back out & clean up.

A Ham who'll stand for nothing will sit for anything. I won't accept
more dumbing down.


Help save Ham radio:


1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all
elements required for their license class every ten years.


No reason to. This has never existed in the history of amateur radio
and there is no reason to think it would improve things.


Yah friggen right, NOT! Continuing to stay knowledgable and re-testing
won't improve things? Sheesh!! What's your problem then, If licensees
remembered what was on their exams ten years ago passing the exams again
should be a breeze. Of course, if they don't rememeber, they'll have to
study again. This will make better hams. And the fact that this
requirement has never existed in the history of ham radio doesn't make it
a bad idea. You're just Lazy.



2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%.


Might be OK.


Thank you.



3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.


Probably wouldn't make a real difference either way.


It DOES make a difference. It maintains the number of ways we can
exchange information, and as a filter to keep out some of the riff-raff
allowing you better enjoyment of the service.



4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.


Probably wouldn't make any difference.

Of course it WILL make a difference! It creates an incentive to keep
studying and building on radio knowledge & skill by requiring an upgrade
after a year. And we end up with more knowledgable hams. How can that be
bad?



5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve
things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB.


Terrible idea. The only way to get ARRL to change is to get involved in
the politics of ARRL and work to try to effect the changes that you
want.


The ARRL knew what it's members wanted before restructuring through
surveys of the membership, then did you read the proposal that came out
with? Totally opposite of the feeling of the membership. Google it, we
discussed it long and hard years ago when RRAP groupies actually argued
policy. The ARRL is only interested in padding the corporate bank
account, they don't care about the quality of amateurs getting licensed.
Our HF bands can sound like CB if means the ARRL can get more money. The
ARRL BOD stapped Hiram Percy Maxim in the back. The ARRL doesn't care if
you know anything about radio.

Slow Code wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote in
:



Terrible idea. The only way to get ARRL to change is to get involved in
the politics of ARRL and work to try to effect the changes that you
want.


The ARRL knew what it's members wanted before restructuring through
surveys of the membership, then did you read the proposal that came out
with? Totally opposite of the feeling of the membership. Google it, we
discussed it long and hard years ago when RRAP groupies actually argued
policy. The ARRL is only interested in padding the corporate bank
account, they don't care about the quality of amateurs getting licensed.
Our HF bands can sound like CB if means the ARRL can get more money. The
ARRL BOD stapped Hiram Percy Maxim in the back. The ARRL doesn't care if
you know anything about radio.
you mean the ARRL gave in and tired to make a grab for what it thought
it could get (coded extra) and failed opening to door for our final
victory

"Slow Code" wrote in message
ink.net...
"Dee Flint" wrote in
:


"Slow Code" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Brian Hill" wrote in :


"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:52 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once

But you don't now, and it's now now, it's not once.

proving that one has little to do with the other.

And that you have little to do with this conversation.

You can argue till your blue in the face but CW requirement will be
gone sooner or later. I fully understand the points of the pro CW guys
but it's just the sign of the times.

BH


We have to keep trying to save Ham radio while we still can because
once it's all the way in the ****ter it will be even harder to pull
back out & clean up.

A Ham who'll stand for nothing will sit for anything. I won't accept
more dumbing down.


Help save Ham radio:


1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all
elements required for their license class every ten years.


No reason to. This has never existed in the history of amateur radio
and there is no reason to think it would improve things.


Yah friggen right, NOT! Continuing to stay knowledgable and re-testing
won't improve things? Sheesh!! What's your problem then, If licensees
remembered what was on their exams ten years ago passing the exams again
should be a breeze. Of course, if they don't rememeber, they'll have to
study again. This will make better hams. And the fact that this
requirement has never existed in the history of ham radio doesn't make it
a bad idea. You're just Lazy.



Not hardly. Every time they change the pool, I get an up-to-date study
guide just to keep current and see what's new. Could pass the test any day
of the week and twice on Sunday. By the way the exam has changed in 10
years. There is some common stuff but there is also new stuff.

However, the biggest problem would be manpower for conducting the tests.
Based on the current number of hams, that would be over 60,000 people
retesting every year. The existing test system (and the prior systems when
things were administered by the FCC) were all designed around the single
testing concept. Essentially, it would mean almost every VE team would need
to conduct test sessions weekly or hold huge test sessions monthly. There
just aren't enough of us to do that. Plus many facilities now charge for
the use of the facility. And the bigger the room, the higher the fee.


2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%.


Might be OK.


Thank you.



3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra.


Probably wouldn't make a real difference either way.


It DOES make a difference. It maintains the number of ways we can
exchange information, and as a filter to keep out some of the riff-raff
allowing you better enjoyment of the service.


I believe in keeping a basic test simply because a person can't determine if
they will like code until they've tried it. Plus it is one of the basics of
radio. If they have the basics and have thus learned it is not a big, scary
hurdle, they will be willing to pursue it in the future since they already
know it at a basic level.

The filter argument, I consider totally bogus.

Code is either a basic part of ham radio or it is not. That should be the
criteria for determining if it should be tested.



4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable.


Probably wouldn't make any difference.

Of course it WILL make a difference! It creates an incentive to keep
studying and building on radio knowledge & skill by requiring an upgrade
after a year. And we end up with more knowledgable hams. How can that be
bad?


In today's climate, it will not be an incentive. Those who want to upgrade
don't need the non-renewability clause. The rest will simply let their
licenses lapse. Those who would let it lapse aren't on the air enough to
contribute anyway.



5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve
things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB.


Terrible idea. The only way to get ARRL to change is to get involved in
the politics of ARRL and work to try to effect the changes that you
want.


The ARRL knew what it's members wanted before restructuring through
surveys of the membership, then did you read the proposal that came out
with? Totally opposite of the feeling of the membership. Google it, we
discussed it long and hard years ago when RRAP groupies actually argued
policy. The ARRL is only interested in padding the corporate bank
account, they don't care about the quality of amateurs getting licensed.
Our HF bands can sound like CB if means the ARRL can get more money. The
ARRL BOD stapped Hiram Percy Maxim in the back. The ARRL doesn't care if
you know anything about radio.


So why don't you go run for office and promote your platform? Or form your
own lobbying group? Complaining here won't get it done. If you want your
platform to prevail, the YOU have to do the work to convince people. While
the ARRL proposal was not what I wanted, it did indeed reflect some of the
things that a significant percentage wanted.

As far as the ARRL padding the corporate bank account, if that is true, then
you need to report them to the IRS as non-profit organizations are not
allowed to do this.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE