RadioBanter - You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)

- Policy (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/)

- - You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life. (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/102577-youll-probably-never-have-use-cw-save-life.html)

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.

From: on Sat, Sep 9 2006 5:22 pm

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

The ARRL's rules regarding candidacy for elected ARRL positions existed
decades before Carl's run.

They go all the way back to the very beginning of the League. They're
really very basic conflict-of-interest rules. Someone whose employment
is tied to parts of the radio industry that conflict with amateur
radio, or could conflict with amateur radio, are not allowed to hold
policy-making ARRL positions, such as Director and Vice-Director.

[to Jimmy the M:]
What "radio industry" "conflicts with amateur radio," Mr.
Professional in the Transportation Industry?

Yaesu? Kenwood? Icom? JRC? Harris? :-)

Seems to me that the ARRL has featured lots of nice news
squibs of radio industry folks GIVING equipment to ARRL
and W1AW. [not too long ago Harris unloaded a bunch of
TXs to W1AW]

How does WiFi "conflict" with ARRL interests? [Carl's
main work right now...on WiFi and WiMax Standards]

Since Carl Stevenson is Executive Director of No Code
International and the ARRL is against giving up any
morse code test for radio amateur license applicants,
I'd say that's a bona fide built-in CONFLICT of interest
right there.

[wait for the SPIN from the League Believers...]

["Heah come de spin, heah come de spin...:-) ]

It's not about whether someone is a "professional" or not, but whether
the person's "pecuniary interest" could present a conflict.

The problem is in the interpretation of those rules. The committee
which decides such things decided there could be a
conflict-of-interest. The BoD agreed with the committee.

Right...their conflict of interest with NCI... :-)

Carl's excellent work on interference-from-BPL speaks for itself.

WHAT is that "interference-from-BPL?"

Seems to me that Carl's work on WiFi was a lot more.

Wireless communications is allocated to different bands than
amateur bands, operating well above 30 MHz where "the bands"
exist for hams.

Director terms are not for life. The board, committees and officers
change over time. There will be other elections.

But why is it that the judicial system relies upon people seeing that
they have a conflict of interest and recuse themselves, but amateurs
cannot?

The judicial system does not rely primarily on people recusing
themselves. In fact, that's pretty much a last resort.

Yet, if the judge doesn't recuse him/herself where a conflict of
interest occurs, or a potential conflict of interest exists, then what
do you call it?

Funny!

On Friday I finished my 5th "tour of duty" as a jury member in
the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles. Surrounded by
legal beagles of all types and hearing much barking in court,
the word "recuse" was not spoken. "Excuse," yes, on the
challenges of both prosecution and defense to jury panel
members (each can have a particular juror excused without
stating the full cause, up to 10 or 12 or whatever). A jury
panel member can excuse themselves (and should, by law here)
if they are on friendly or social or otherwise involved with
a defendant, an attorney, member of the court, etc.

Newspaper accounts have only lately featured "recuse" as a
fancy word and lots of folks have picked up on it to show
how much smarts they think they have. :-)

Take jury selection. Here in Pennsylvania, there are lots of
occupations and associations that will get someone eliminated from
different types of cases.

In L.A. Superior Court you CANNOT be a jury member if you
are in law enforcement or several other occupations
all spelled out in state LAW. There is no "excusing" there
if one isn't even in the jury pool. :-)

two paragraphs DELETED from J.M, LLd

OTOH, a potential jury member cannot recuse themselves. They can give
the jury commission reasons to not choose them, but ultimately it is
not their decision.

Bull****, sweetums. Not in this state which outnumbers
"EPA" (Eastern Pennsylvania, which NEEDS the other EPA)
considerably. Selected jury panel members here MUST
EXCUSE (not recuse) themselves if they find out they
know a defendant or members of the court.

In a jury case, it is ultimately the jury who decide the outcome, just
as in the ARRL BoD, it is the directors and vice directors who decide
policy. Neither depends on self-disqualification (recusing) to prevent
conflict of interest.

More bull**** from the self-proclaimed chief justice...

The ARRL is a PRIVATE ORGANIZATION. They are NOT bound
tightly to some government agency laws and restrictions
IN THE SAME WAY. If the ARRL wants to oust someone or
keep them off the private organization's ballot they CAN
and DO.

The jury pool contains a large number of potential jurors who remain in
the pool, eligible for duty on numerous other trials.

People who are eliminated from the ballot never get that chance.

TRUE. In the L.A. Superior Court all selected for the
"jury pool" are referred to as jurors or jury members.
We are selected to go to a particular courtroom by a
small random-chance tumbler machine holding our ID
numbers (names are not used, Superior Court assigns
individual ID numbers ahead of time). This forms what
L.A. calls the "jury pool" and in each courtroom the
court clerk selects ID numbers from a similar random-
chance machine to be on a jury (here 12 regular plus
3 alternates). Only after the selection from the pool
do jurors find out about a case. At that point the
judge recites the law on jury members associations
with the case which requires that affected jurors must
excuse themselves, giving reasons to the court. The
jury pool has to remain until prosecution and defense
are finished with their challenges since, if jurors
are excused, one from the pool takes their place.

All of that is for the criminal court. Civil court
has a carbon copy of the LAW, only certain terms
changing from criminal to civil cases.

Elections in a PRIVATE ORGANIZATION are NOWHERE NEAR
having to obey that same, established long ago LAW!

Anyone trying to equate legal court actions to some
private organization elections is way TOTALLY CONFUSED.

Similar rules apply to judges. Usually a judge will recuse himself or
herself if there is an apparent conflict of interest, because to not do
so makes the judge look incompetent.

Do the ARRL BoD not concern themselves with looking incopetent?

Perhaps the ARRL BoD consider themselves as SUPERIOR?

They are the "superior court" of US amateur radio? :-)

The judges all know that the
various sides in a case will make a lot of noise about such a conflict,
too, and have legal recourse. The methods of deciding which judge gets
which case are another safeguard against conflicts of interest.

On top of all this, a judge doesn't usually have any other job, while
directors and vice directors often do.

Or they're retired.

What are the FULL-TIME JOBS of the ARRL BoD members?
Anyone know?

The point of all this is that the judicial system does not depend
primarily on self-disqualification to prevent conflicts of interest.
Nor should it!

Then you advocate that the judicial system take away the ability of a
judge to recuse him or herself?

Hardly. Its an important safeguard that is absolutely needed.

Jimmy is trying to equate apples and oranges and getting
fruity there. He wants to make a DIRECT COMPARISON of
the ARRL to some government judicial organization and that
DOES NOT EQUATE!

Carl may be top-notch in his specific technical fields. But whether he
is top-notch in dealing with the issues of the ARRL BoD is another
matter, and open to opinion.

We'll never know.

Brian, in a way we DO know. Carl Stevenson is exec director
of NCI. ARRL is still plugging for code testing. DIRECT
CONFLICT OF INTEREST within the ARRL right there. There
wasn't a snowball's chance in hell of Carl getting on an
ARRL ballot.

Some make the mistake of assuming that a person who is technically
knowledgeable in one area is automatically knowledgeable in all related
areas.

Some make the mistake of assuming that a person who has no technical
knowledge is automatically knowledgeable in all technical areas because
they hold an Extra license.

Brian, Jimmy is still walking wounded from other industry
professionals pummeling his textual hide in here. :-)
Especially the no-code-test advocates. :-)

None of that is a given - in
fact, it's an extreme rarity. We've seen examples of how
self-proclaimed "PROFESSIONALS" can behave very poorly on newsgroups...

Yes. I understand that you are in the industry.

We only know that it's the "transportation industry." :-)

In Carl's case, I think the ARRL BoD erred on the side of caution.

I think they erred on the side of self-preservation.

I vote with you, Brian, the Good 'ol Boys of the BoD
and offices within the ARRL want "company men" who
think like they do. None of this brash upsetting of
their traditional applecart.

btw, the ARRL BoD is a widely varied group, not just a bunch of retired
guys.

Working guys not from industry (and probably lacking in technical
knowledge), and retired guys from industry (whose retirement plans and
401ks couldn't possibly present a conflict of interest).

One can research the TRUE facts of the conclave of
wirepullers in the ARRL but it really isn't worth the
time and trouble. The ARRL will deny any negative
charges, however slight, and SPIN the hell out of it
to make them all Knights in Shining Wonderwear. :-)

Their opinions are all over the map - that's why their proposals
are obviously compromises between the various groups.

Regardless of all of the maps and all of the compromises, when their
opinions are distilled into policy, they always advocate the Morse Code
Exam.

That's the final distillate, Brian. :-) Sort of the
"kickapoo joy juice" that keeps US amateur radio
retrograde to the days of H.P.M.

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.

Long time no hear, Len. Good to see that you are out and about and
belaboring Usenet with your tripe.
I'm sure that you feel much relieved after posting a ten paragraph
diatribe...you oldsters seem to feel like youngsters after passing a few
cubic feet of natural gas.
Did you rattle your Rely diapers while so doing?
You didn't "brit your ****ches", did you? I hate it when Flatulent Old Men
play their tunes while pretending they are not the fartee....

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.

Dave Heil wrote:

[snip of Len's "blah, blah, blah"]

Censorship?

Summary of Len's comments:

Len is still suspicious of the ARRL. Len believes Carl should have been
allowed to run. Len believes that Carl would have brought change, even
if he would have been one of many ARRL Directors if elected.

Len is still not a radio amateur and not an ARRL member. Len is not a
participant in amateur radio and his views of what is best for amateur
radio and what is best for the ARRL are still irrelevant.

Dave K8MN

Perhaps Carl would have championed the reciprocol frequency rule. You
can't talk to people on frequencies where they're not allowed. You
can't be the other half of an illegal QSO.

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.

From: Dave Heil on Sun, Sep 10 2006 12:35 pm

wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

[snip of Len's "blah, blah, blah"]

Tsk, most of Herr Robust's "blah, blah, blah" is ignored. :-)

Believers in the Church of St. Hiram go "bahh, bahh, bahh" like
sheep. shrug

Censorship?

Summary of Len's comments:

Tsk, Herr Robust thinks he can call a Summary court martial.

Len is still suspicious of the ARRL.

Why would anyone be "suspicious" of a private organization
that pretends to be a religious organization? I.e., the
Church of St. Hiram...or imagine they are a part of
the US government with their "free elections?" :-)

Len believes Carl should have been allowed to run.

Tsk. That is NOT what I wrote. It would be a snowball's
chance in hell for a no-code-test advocate to be even
considered for getting on any ARRL ballot. :-)

Can't you get ANYTHING right?

Len believes that Carl would have brought change, even
if he would have been one of many ARRL Directors if elected.

You still did NOT get anything right.

NOBODY new can change the "minds" of the ARRL good 'ol
bouys club. They are afloat in a sea of retrograde.

Membership in the ARRL is still a minority of all licensed
US radio amateurs. It never reached a quarter of all of
them, yet the ARRL does its PR BS about "representing" ALL
of [US] amateur radio.

Len is still not a radio amateur and not an ARRL member.

No and yes. I have a hobby of electronics homebrewing
which sometimes includes radio. Since that activity is
paid for solely by myself, it is considered "amateur."

I am a professional in electronics engineering, have long
held a Commercial radio operator license, and am a Life
Member of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic
Engineers (IEEE), a professional organization.

Baaaad summary, Davie boy, bad, bad...go sit in corner.

Len is not a
participant in amateur radio and his views of what is best for amateur
radio and what is best for the ARRL are still irrelevant.

Oh, wow, did Herr Robust get THAT bs WRONG!

Poor baby, let me repeat: I am an advocate of eliminating
the morse code TEST for US radio amateurs. That is it.

I could not possibly hope to tell Herr Heil "what to do!"
:-) Herr Heil KNOWS ALL and doesn't hesitate to slam
anyone who does not love, honor, and obey the ARRL.

Dave K8MN

Perhaps Carl would have championed the reciprocol frequency rule.

"Reciprocal"

Oooo! Oooo! Herr Heil has worked up a rage, "signed" his
post, then HAD to try to rub all eyes in the dirt of his own
spreading!

I'm sure that a highly competent guy like Carl Stevenson would have no
problem running that by what he calls, "

Davie is a composer. Up there is his opus, "The Unfinished
Insult." :-) [it is in Be Flat]

Herr Heil had to pause, go and search Google for quotes,
making sure to take only those that could be isolated out of
their message context...

Carl would be aided in his efforts by the warmth and comraderie he has
genererated with statements like:

"The ARRL is like a corrupt dictatorship ... out of control and yet
with all the power of control (and money from its publishing empire)
... the only viable way to save ham radio is to overthrow the ARRL
and kick them out as the "representative" of ham radio to the FCC ...
given a chance, they'll do the wrong thing practically every time, it
seems."

ARRL *is* a virtual monopoly on United States amateur radio
publications. Having that means they can influence all of
their readership to ARRL viewpoints. They can brainwash
opinions very easily...and have appeared to do just that.

As a private organization they are NOT bound to rules and
regulations that apply to REAL government...yet they
pretend to be a "representative" of ALL US radio amateurs.

Tsk, ARRL still hasn't achieved a membership as large as
a quarter of all US amateur radio licensees. Yet.

"Almost anything would be better ... they're WORSE THAN NOTHING because
they do the wrong, destructive thing more often than not."

NOT a "company man" attitude. Carl was already to be
excluded from the coterie of coders that makes up the
conclave of wirepullers in the ARRL.

"Get screwed, Herman .. the ARRL is NOT "the savior" ... they're Nero
fiddling merrily while Rome burns all around them."

More non-company-man statements...even if an accurate quote.

['Herman' is a morse zealot-bigot in Hawaii who is a
junior college math instructor but bills himself as a
"mathematics LECTURER." :-) ]

BELIEVERS in the Church of St. Hiram cannot accept the
statements of non-believers even if they are TRUE.

"...I have so little faith in the ARRL's ability to
lead ham radio into the next century that I beleive almost anyone could
do a better job".

True enough. ARRL membership hasn't grown past the
under-one-quarter of all licensed US radio amateurs.

"I don't see the ARRL as being 'effective' AT ALL ... I see it as
being/having been the single largest impediment to the
modernization, growth, and future security of the Amateur Radio Service."

True enough. ARRL membership hasn't grown past the
under-one-quarter of all licensed US radio amateurs.

Those are just a few of Carl's gems. There are many, many more.

And Google is full of Herr Heil's own personal insults
levelled at any "heretic" not worshiping at the Church of
St. Hiram. Heil is BELIEVER and may want to be a deacon
when he should be a beacon.

Tsk, Davie's derring-do on behalf of the Church elders
has turned out to be herring doo-doo. Yuck.

Poor guy can't realize that is NOT a good attitude to
get others INTO US amateur radio. He is a RULER.
["give a ham an inch and he thinks he is a ruler"]

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.

"Unit 200" anon@anon wrote in :

Long time no hear, Len. Good to see that you are out and about and
belaboring Usenet with your tripe.
I'm sure that you feel much relieved after posting a ten paragraph
diatribe...you oldsters seem to feel like youngsters after passing a few
cubic feet of natural gas.
Did you rattle your Rely diapers while so doing?
You didn't "brit your ****ches", did you? I hate it when Flatulent Old
Men play their tunes while pretending they are not the fartee....

ROFLMAO

That was good.

Sc

You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life.

wrote in message
ups.com...

[snip]

There is a reason that the ARRL membership numbers are so abysmal even
though they are the only national amateur radio organization of any
consequence.

Yeah the same reason that 75% of the people I know don't belong to
organizations of whatever hobby they do participate in. They're just not
"joiners".

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE