LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #14   Report Post  
Old September 25th 03, 01:22 AM
Dee D. Flint
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

Given that:

1) the ARRL's membership represents 25% of US licensees

and

2) that the membership is HEAVILY stacked with long-time
hams (Techs have stayed away in droves - in my view because
they correctly have viewd ARRL's Morse policy as designed
to keep them off of HF)


OK print the demographic DATA that shows that the ARRL membership is
deficient in Technician class licenses. Right now you are presenting an
unsupported opinion. The policy was never designed to keep them off HF.
The policy was intended to require what the membership believed to be a
valuable communications tool. Based on the Techs I know, just as many (or
just as few) join the ARRL as is typical of holders of other license
classes.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1402 ­ June 25, 2004 Radionews Dx 0 June 25th 04 07:28 PM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1402 ­ June 25, 2004 Radionews Dx 0 June 25th 04 07:28 PM
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1384 February 20, 2004 Radionews Dx 0 February 27th 04 09:41 AM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1366 ­ October 17 2003 Radionews General 0 October 17th 03 06:52 PM
Some comments on the NCVEC petition D. Stussy Policy 13 August 5th 03 04:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017