|
"Brian" wrote in message
om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... It probably was no longer cost effective to sell it on newstands. If the ARRL is making money (a no-no for a non-profit corp) then report them to the IRS. If they are not making money, then no matter how big they are, it is not about money since no one is making a profit. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Un-friggin-believable. Non-profits aren't about profit. They're about salaries. If the salaries are too high, get on the board and get them reduced. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Who said they were too high? They have to balance their books somehow (to avoid the appearance of profit), and the salary is the most convenient place to dump the excess. It's about your ignorance of what a non-profit really is. Oh yeah...non-profit is the best place to be...And, the greates exploiter of human emotion, etc. With little effort, the dollars churn in--most people don't file for the donation they are entitled to (only large donations whose contributors are also playing the non-profit game). That's why I'd like to see the tax structure change to some kind of percentage across the board. The *only* entity that would not have to pay any would be a church--and that only for the church building, its parking lot, and its parish. If they've got a private school, nursing home, etc., they pay. And, no deductions for *anyone* or *anything* across the board. Colgate, Mr. Bates, and me all pay the same percentage of tax out of our income; that's it--end of game. Kim W5TIT Kim W5TIT |
"Kim W5TIT" wrote:
(snip) The *only* entity that would not have to pay any would be a church-- and that only for the church building, its parking lot, and its parish. If they've got a private school, nursing home, etc., they pay. (snip) Why limit any exclusion to just the church building, parking lot, and parish? Since churches have been running schools, colleges, homeless shelters, women and youth shelters, food kitchens, youth camps and sports activities, hospitals, nursing homes, and so on, for many years (some long before this country was created and each requiring buildings, land, or equipment), such a limit would have a serious impact on many traditional church activities. The newsgroup "rec.radio.cb" deleted from this message. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
Brian wrote:
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... "Brian" wrote in message om... Dee got on early supporting the status quo; hook,line and sinker. She is a perfect mouth-piece for the ARRL, and I've heard her repeating, word for word, the policies of this organization. She is, more or less, an official ARRL spam-bot. Wonder if she is an official bulletin station? Not hardly. I disapprove of some of the policies but I do not expect it to change when my view doesn't represent the majority view. I do not consider differences of opinion on some policies to be reason to stop supporting them. Also I merely state that non-members shouldn't think they can change the policies. The ARRL policies, as with any organization, will reflect the opinions of the majority of members. Someone with a minority opinion in any organization will have to work very hard to get the majority to adopt it. Organizations have no obligation to reflect the opinion of non-members. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Oh, BS, Dee. You just got through saying that if you don't belong, if you don't rise to the top of the food chain, blah blah, horse crap, blah blah. You've become a particularly rude little electrolyte of late, Brian. You can't expect to change those things which you happen to dislike about the ARRL from outside it. If you are on the inside, your task is to convince others to adopt your point of view. I've been a member of the League for most of my forty years as a ham and a life member for nearly thirty of those years. The League takes some positions and actions of which I approve. It also takes positions and actions of which I disapprove. If one of those seems important enough to me, I make noise to HQ, to my Director and to other members. Sometimes enough members make enough noise to change an ARRL position. Sometimes they don't. The ARRL wants to be the -ONE- voice for the ARS. The ARRL is the biggest and most influential voice within the Amateur Radio Service. There is clout in numbers. If you've not yet figured this out, it is time that you learned it. I suggest that they start with forward thinking leadership representing all, not just their CW-centric membership. Or get out of the way. Get out of whose way--yours? I don't see you as any kind of progressive steamroller with any followers at all. Who are you leading? Dave K8MN |
Brian wrote:
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... It probably was no longer cost effective to sell it on newstands. If the ARRL is making money (a no-no for a non-profit corp) then report them to the IRS. If they are not making money, then no matter how big they are, it is not about money since no one is making a profit. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Un-friggin-believable. Non-profits aren't about profit. They're about salaries. If the salaries are too high, get on the board and get them reduced. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Who said they were too high? They have to balance their books somehow (to avoid the appearance of profit), and the salary is the most convenient place to dump the excess. Sounds like one of Len's typical conspiracy/dishonesty rants aimed toward the ARRL. I interviewed for a League position years back. The salary offered wasn't enough to cover a move and life in the greater Hartford area. While I'm sure that salaries are now better, I don't think any League staffers are putting up gold-plated Rohn tower and 80m yagis at their palatial estates. It's about your ignorance of what a non-profit really is. *Guffaw!*. Her ignorance? I see some gaping holes in your own database. With all the dissatisfaction you've expressed, why not start your own organization for like-minded hams? I'm sure you'd amass a following in no time. Dave K8MN |
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article et, "KØHB" writes as if he just had a colorectal examination with a fully warmed-up 100 W American Beauty soldering iron: "Brian" wrote She is, more or less, an official ARRL spam-bot. Wonder if she is an official bulletin station? And you are, more or less, the official LHA junior-Unabasher. OLD one, Brian Burke is his own man. He states an opposite opinion from the "official" Newington spin on how amateurism in radio is "supposed to be." ....as compared to your own "unofficial" west coast spin on how amateurism in radio is "supposed to be"--That in your "unofficial" capacity as non-participant in amateur radio and non-member of the ARRL. Therefore, you, as a Devout Believer in the glory and honor and mysticism of amateurism, must chastise the UNbelievers...and call them "unabashers" for not accepting the legends, mythos, and religious traditions of radio as "officially" stated by ARRL publications. The above is just one example of the type material which sets you apart as a flake beyond compare. Somewhere in the past you were often saying "gentlemen can disagree without being disagreeable." You, sir, are being terribly disagreeable, ergo you are NO gentleman. Len, meet Len. I want you to be fully aware of your role in rrap, Brian. Tsk, tsk, tsk, you should be "aware" of how others see you, OLD man, and that others are quite aware you are NOT the CNO of any rrap party. Maybe you'll agree to stand as a candidate opposing Hans' role here. We can take an informal r.r.a.p. vote. I think the poll will surprise you, kindly old gent. It goes like this: LHA is the organ grinder, playing a song called "I Left My Heart in ADA, and Newington Won't Give It Back". "Newington" had absolutely nothing to do with ACAN or ADA, super chief. ARRL had NOTHING to do with any other places I worked in the last half century nor the people I worked WITH from DoD and other branches of the U.S. government. By golly, I think we're starting to make some progress. Your frank admissions reveal you as a man whose path toward enlightenment has begun. The BoD of a small town club in New England would be lost trying to carry even half the traffic load of the third largest U.S. Army transmitter site in the world 50 years ago. We haven't been discussing the board of a small town club in New England. We've been discussing the largest organization of American radio amateurs. Did ADA have a board of directors elected by members of the Army? All that the League seems to know is that on-off keying code is the ultimate "art" of radio because that is what they spin off on their membership, covertly and overtly. You're fabricating, Leonard. You are the little monkey in a bright red hat hopping up and down and acting silly for our amusement. You are being truly a contentious OLD fart in here, trolling desperately for someone to despise...and then doing a poor job of denigration. Len, meet Len. With all best wishes for the recovery of your missing T5 logs, And here's "best wishes" for some education that might penetrate a code-warped psyche housing in regards to: (1) voice modulated transmitters of 1906; (2) cell phone differences between power-up and first cell-connect; (3) so-called "one-way" ionospheric radio propagation paths; (4) assorted little gems of radio disinformation that you haven't recognized in the past nor admit to making mistakes on in public. I seem to recall you getting blown out of the water on items one through three. I have no idea of what item four means. I've not commented in this subject thread before, only on the 14 petitions before the FCC thread (as its origininator). The NPRM or whatever as a result of those petitions will decide the FUTURE of radio amateurism in the USA. While the REGULARS in the jolly little chatroom of morseaholics are busy puffing themselves up about their marvelous experience and tenure in on-offing the radio waves, the future is sneaking up on everyone. All you are doing lately is just behaving like one of your iceholes in the wintertime. What is any of this to you? You aren't a radio amateur. You aren't a member of the ARRL. That hasn't stopped you from huffing and puffing. Dave K8MN |
Gray Shockley wrote in message s.com...
Are you also wondering what the ARRL has to do with swling? Perhaps it is time to add "ARRL" to "syphilis" and "Hal Turner" in my "social disease" killfool. Gray Shockley Sorry, I should have known this topic would have been spammed across multiple newsgroups. Future replies on .policy only. |
RHF wrote:
WHAT I DO NOT UNDERSTAND IS . . . = = = The 'same' People Who Want Total Separation of Church and State. = = = Want to Tax Churches and Any Religious Charitable Activities. I For One Believe That: There Should be Separation of Organized Church and Organized State. But that there IS the 'personal' FREEDOM to be a Religious Person 'within' the State Setting. NO Taxation of ANY Religious Activities or Properties. The Simple Fast Is: For about 150 Years before the Personal Income Tax and the Creation of the IRS by the Government of the USofA. The were NO Laws establishing Taxation of Religious Properties and Charitable Giving (Restricting Religious Freedom). God Bless America ~ RHF If you don't understand it, then allow me to help. The term "separation of church and state" does not appear in the US Constitution, nor the Declaration of Independence. The closest thing to it is in the First Amendment, which starts with my favorite five words: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ..." Only a lawyer could claim not to understand the plain meaning of those words. Dave |
|
garigue wrote:
"JEP" wrote in message m... I don't like ARRL because: 1) Membership price too high 2) Can't separate QST from membership 3) QST only counts as $15 of the $39 membership fee 4) Incentive licensing from the 60's 5) Ham radio is a dying hobby 6) 5wpm Extras 7) No value given for the money invested 8) No accountability of the board and Executive staff 9) Really doesn't represent the majority of hams (majority don't belong) 10) Really no different than 'NRA', 'AARP', 'NAACP'. Take your money and use it for their own agenda, NOT yours! That is enough for a start. Sorry to see '73' and Wayne Green exit publishing. Sorry to see 'Ham Radio' exit publishing. ex ARRL member Shouldda added "and a cheap whiner" after member. I am not going to waste space replying to each of the above as that would mean that there was some merit or better yet thought there. I run into the same rants from many of the other organizations I belong to when it comes to membership and dues. These people spout off their big mouths which have no shortage of hot air ...but part with a buck or two ....Katie bar the door .... I can take and listen to criticism regarding any organization if the person was a member and not a sap sucking leach-parasite. And yet the ARRL is for all hams. Show me an organization anywhere that operates without funds and I'll show you one that the few work their collective asses off for the benefit of the remainder of the membership i.e. the parasites. So I guess ham radio should collectively ask these tight-wad, freebie seeking, selfish, greedy and non-sharing hams ......WHAT HAVE YOU DONE FOR ME LATELY ????.....expect moan about crap that went under the bridge a long time ago, squeezing that nickel till the Buffalo defecates and hide behind some initial name in the newsgroup. Take care, don't share and keep on spewing hot air ... Heheh, what you said, Tom. Good one! I never cease to be amazed by the disgruntled and their whining. Especially when they whine about number 7 in the list. Perhaps the ARRL deos not represent the majority view, (though I believe ARRL does) so if the whiners who supposedly represent the majority of licensed hams really want to change things, all they would have to do is join en mass, elect exactly who they want, and then the ARRL would be "made right" in one fell swoop. But then that means they would have to part with that precious money, eh? But that means they would have to get off their keisters and do something, eh? And finally, and what I think is the most important thing, they would be running the show. Now they the man! Oh oH! One big thing I've learned in life is that it is a lot easier to *bitch* about something than it is to *do* something about it. It's also a great way of absolving one's self of any guilt or responsibility. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Brian wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote I think this is one of those cases where some people think that their membership is a subscription to QST. Its a lot more than that. ARRL does a lot for Amateurs, even those who hate the organization. - Mike KB3EIA - Fair enough. I dislike some of the policies that the ARRL has promoted in the past, and felt as if the ARRL did not represent me even though I have been a member since 1986. Well, there you go! As a member, I'll pay a lot more attnetion to what you have to say. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Groups trimmed....
Brian wrote: "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... Several of us have already listed the numerous benefits of the ARRL. Well, there you have it. What benefits Dee must benefit all. Again how did you voice your dissent? Did you get actively and heavily involved? Doesn't sound like it. If you did get involved, you did not convince the majority of members to change to your point of view. Must one become El Supremo Commandant to have an organization that they belong to and pay dues to represent them? Must be so in this case. No - absolutely not! Instead you choose to have little to no impact on proposed changes by the FCC. Actually, the road the FCC took is closer to leadership of the ARS than the road that the ARRL took. Yes I know individuals can write letters but a decent sized lobby has a far greater effect. Lobby=Baksheesh. Necessary or not, it is an abomination. Which is the very saddest part of the whole episode. An organized body can much more effectively solicit the backing of other affected groups on questions like BPL. It is necessary for the ARRL to fight BPL - it threatens their very existence. Being "One voice in the maelstrom" is a waste of one's time as it will be completely obliterated by that maelstrom. Being in the minority doesn't necessarily make one wrong nor necessarily make ones efforts a waste of time. Galileo One of the greatest rules of parliamentary procedure, and a real cornerstone of representative democracy in gneral is that even though the majority rules, the minority is allowed to have it's say. I think waaaaaayyyy too many people these days seem to have forgotten that. The minority must have it's say. Dee, I think you are taking a wrong tack on this one. Brian needs his say, and should not be forced to be a person at a high level of power in an institution to have his opinion. Not everyone wants to be active or even *can* be active in an organization. There are only so many leadership positions. Now I do not say that everyone should be a member of ARRL. That is up to the individual. However if you are not, then don't complain about their policies. Don't complain when BPL makes HF useless in your area. Don't complain when VHF/UHF frequencies get reallocated to commercial uses. Don't complain if the government should choose to eliminate amateur radio entirely as it has tried to do twice in the past. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Yes, yes, Dee. Of course. Whatever you say. ARRL spam-bot. |
In article , Dave Heil
writes: What is any of this to you? You aren't a radio amateur. You aren't a member of the ARRL. That hasn't stopped you from huffing and puffing. I'm just campaigning for the elimination of morse code testing. What is that to you? You've already passed morse code tests. You are the ultimate amateur. You might have been a professional once, but you could not even get a job with an amateur organization. No wonder you are so bitter. LHA |
In article , Dave Heil
writes: Brian wrote: "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message digy.com... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... It probably was no longer cost effective to sell it on newstands. If the ARRL is making money (a no-no for a non-profit corp) then report them to the IRS. If they are not making money, then no matter how big they are, it is not about money since no one is making a profit. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Un-friggin-believable. Non-profits aren't about profit. They're about salaries. If the salaries are too high, get on the board and get them reduced. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Who said they were too high? They have to balance their books somehow (to avoid the appearance of profit), and the salary is the most convenient place to dump the excess. Sounds like one of Len's typical conspiracy/dishonesty rants aimed toward the ARRL. Quit trying to sound like a Ba'athist amateur, Klunk. The League (of Notions) MAKES MONEY on the publication side of their conglomerate of control. Ads in QST pay for everything in the QST staff and the cost of job printing and fulfillment (publication talk for mailing/distributing). The "non-profit" stuff and nonsense is for lowering their taxes. You need copies of their IRS forms from 2002 and previous years? Those are on the Internet. I interviewed for a League position years back. The salary offered wasn't enough to cover a move and life in the greater Hartford area. Translation: You were rejected. (boo hoo for you) While I'm sure that salaries are now better, I don't think any League staffers are putting up gold-plated Rohn tower and 80m yagis at their palatial estates. Rohn filed for bankruptcy on account of that? You can see the top five staffers' salaries given on their 2002 IRS forms. It's about your ignorance of what a non-profit really is. *Guffaw!*. Her ignorance? I see some gaping holes in your own database. Nooo, Klunk, "non-profit" is a status to claim for paying LESS taxes. If you are foolish enough to believe that W1AW's station, the "museum" and all the other paraphenalia came out of dues, you've got a database gap large enough to sail the USS Enterprise through. With all the dissatisfaction you've expressed, why not start your own organization for like-minded hams? I'm sure you'd amass a following in no time. Three-fourths of all licensed U.S. radio amateurs are NOT members. That should be evidenciary. To all but the minority who are members. Members "KNOW what is good for all the others" and therefore they are the elite. The League (of Notions) still holds on vainly to the idea that morse code is still the ultimate of amateur skills...long after the rest of the radio world has given it up, discarded it for communications. Continue to be the acidic spam-bot for the League (of Notions), old Klunk. You have taken a Ba'ath...but are yet unclean. LHA |
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil writes: What is any of this to you? You aren't a radio amateur. You aren't a member of the ARRL. That hasn't stopped you from huffing and puffing. I'm just campaigning for the elimination of morse code testing. Why? Can't or to lazy to learn the code? Is that the only way you will ever be able to get a ham license? I guess if they remove the code requirement you will campaign to get the written eleminated also so you won't have to do anything for a license. I haven't belonged to the ARRL in many years, but you have convinced me I need to join, thanks to you the ARRL will get a new member. |
"Brian" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... "Brian" wrote in message om... Dee got on early supporting the status quo; hook,line and sinker. She is a perfect mouth-piece for the ARRL, and I've heard her repeating, word for word, the policies of this organization. She is, more or less, an official ARRL spam-bot. Wonder if she is an official bulletin station? Not hardly. I disapprove of some of the policies but I do not expect it to change when my view doesn't represent the majority view. I do not consider differences of opinion on some policies to be reason to stop supporting them. Also I merely state that non-members shouldn't think they can change the policies. The ARRL policies, as with any organization, will reflect the opinions of the majority of members. Someone with a minority opinion in any organization will have to work very hard to get the majority to adopt it. Organizations have no obligation to reflect the opinion of non-members. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Oh, BS, Dee. You just got through saying that if you don't belong, if you don't rise to the top of the food chain, blah blah, horse crap, blah blah. The ARRL wants to be the -ONE- voice for the ARS. I suggest that they start with forward thinking leadership representing all, not just their CW-centric membership. Or get out of the way. There you show how out of date you are. In recent years, the ARRL has shifted to a neutral stand on CW. Their efforts have indeed been centered on more important issues. What policies do you think the ARRL should be focusing on? They have to pick and choose. And again they have to pick the issues that the majority of their members want not the minority and not non-members. If they don't, they'll be voted out of office and someone will be put in who will do it that way. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Brian" wrote in message om... Were you in the majority?? If not then why should everyone else change to suit you. The FCC spoke. And what they spoke was not ARRL majority opinion. What do you make of that, Dee? Very simple. The ARRL only has the power to lobby. They cannot force the FCC to go along with the ARRL opinion. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Brian" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... It probably was no longer cost effective to sell it on newstands. If the ARRL is making money (a no-no for a non-profit corp) then report them to the IRS. If they are not making money, then no matter how big they are, it is not about money since no one is making a profit. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Un-friggin-believable. Non-profits aren't about profit. They're about salaries. If the salaries are too high, get on the board and get them reduced. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Who said they were too high? They have to balance their books somehow (to avoid the appearance of profit), and the salary is the most convenient place to dump the excess. It's about your ignorance of what a non-profit really is. Ok where is the money going?? You said they dump it into salaries thus implying that said salaries are artificially inflated and then indicate that you don't think the salaries are too high. Which is it? Facts please, not emotional innuendo. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Groups trimmed.... One of the greatest rules of parliamentary procedure, and a real cornerstone of representative democracy in gneral is that even though the majority rules, the minority is allowed to have it's say. I think waaaaaayyyy too many people these days seem to have forgotten that. The minority must have it's say. Dee, I think you are taking a wrong tack on this one. Brian needs his say, and should not be forced to be a person at a high level of power in an institution to have his opinion. Not everyone wants to be active or even *can* be active in an organization. There are only so many leadership positions. Mike, I agree with what you have said. Everyone should be free to voice their opinion. But what we cannot forget that to get a change, someone has got to buckle down and do the work. That should fall upon the person or persons who want the change to either do the work themselves or to convince someone to lead this effort for them. Whining and complaining doesn't get the job done. Brian seems to think that his opinion as expressed in a couple of letters to the ARRL should have caused them to adopt the policies that he likes. That's totally unrealistic. If he's not willing to do the work, then he has no business slamming the ARRL. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
One of the greatest rules of parliamentary procedure, and a real cornerstone of representative democracy in gneral is that even though the majority rules, the minority is allowed to have it's say. I think waaaaaayyyy too many people these days seem to have forgotten that. The minority must have it's say. Dee, I think you are taking a wrong tack on this one. Brian needs his say, and should not be forced to be a person at a high level of power in an institution to have his opinion. Not everyone wants to be active or even *can* be active in an organization. There are only so many leadership positions. Mike, thanks for your comments. Its refreshing to hear that I don't have to carry the weight of the ARS on my back, and that my personal involvement in the national club, though significant, is not an absolute requirement to achieve change. I really don't think the "minority" that I belong to is much smaller than the other minority that claims to speak for all amateur radio. Notice the FCC comments during the NPRM with respect to the code. Notice the current debate about the number of license classes necessary to keep the ARS vibrant and healthy. There is no need for me to be a subversive within that other minority group for which I have supported and paid annual dues since 1986. There is no need for a hostile takeover. Hainey is not my president. The FCC has solicited my comments, and I gave them. I think Dee's demands are extreme. |
"Brian" wrote in message om... Mike Coslo wrote in message ... One of the greatest rules of parliamentary procedure, and a real cornerstone of representative democracy in gneral is that even though the majority rules, the minority is allowed to have it's say. I think waaaaaayyyy too many people these days seem to have forgotten that. The minority must have it's say. Dee, I think you are taking a wrong tack on this one. Brian needs his say, and should not be forced to be a person at a high level of power in an institution to have his opinion. Not everyone wants to be active or even *can* be active in an organization. There are only so many leadership positions. Mike, thanks for your comments. Its refreshing to hear that I don't have to carry the weight of the ARS on my back, and that my personal involvement in the national club, though significant, is not an absolute requirement to achieve change. I really don't think the "minority" that I belong to is much smaller than the other minority that claims to speak for all amateur radio. Notice the FCC comments during the NPRM with respect to the code. Notice the current debate about the number of license classes necessary to keep the ARS vibrant and healthy. There is no need for me to be a subversive within that other minority group for which I have supported and paid annual dues since 1986. There is no need for a hostile takeover. Hainey is not my president. The FCC has solicited my comments, and I gave them. I think Dee's demands are extreme. You are expecting changes out of all proportion to the effort that you are putting into it and you think my opinions are extreme?? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
On 15 Dec 2003 12:58:30 GMT, N2EY wrote:
OK - who/what defines what a "church" is? "Rev Gene" (W.Eugene Scott), one of the first TV preachers in the 1970s, tried to claim that his radio and TV stations (licensed to House of Faith, at one time a real church but by that time merely a shell for his radio and TV operations) were his "church" and therefore immune from FCC and California Attorney General audit and investigation of claims of misappropriation of donated funds. The Supreme Court of the US disagreed with him and eventually he lost all the stations, some in outright license revocation and some in tax sales. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon |
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil writes: What is any of this to you? You aren't a radio amateur. You aren't a member of the ARRL. That hasn't stopped you from huffing and puffing. I'm just campaigning for the elimination of morse code testing. What is that to you? It effects me because I am an active radio amateur. You, on the other hand, are in no way involved. You've already passed morse code tests. Yes, I have. That is of no concern to you. You are the ultimate amateur. Thanks for the accolades, Len but I'm just one U.S. radio amateur among hundreds of thousands. You might have been a professional once, but you could not even get a job with an amateur organization. Yes, I was a professional in radio for quite a number of years. I don't use that as a pulpit from which to lecture radio amateurs. You do and you aren't even involved. If you've been paying attention, I was offered a job with the ARRL. I turned it down. Are you playing loose with facts again? No wonder you are so bitter. I think you must have me mixed up with you. I'm a radio amateur. You are a bystander. Dave K8MN |
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Dave Heil writes: Brian wrote: "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message digy.com... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... It probably was no longer cost effective to sell it on newstands. If the ARRL is making money (a no-no for a non-profit corp) then report them to the IRS. If they are not making money, then no matter how big they are, it is not about money since no one is making a profit. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Un-friggin-believable. Non-profits aren't about profit. They're about salaries. If the salaries are too high, get on the board and get them reduced. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Who said they were too high? They have to balance their books somehow (to avoid the appearance of profit), and the salary is the most convenient place to dump the excess. Sounds like one of Len's typical conspiracy/dishonesty rants aimed toward the ARRL. Quit trying to sound like a Ba'athist amateur, Klunk. There certainly weren't many of them, kindly old gent. Still, YI1BGD contacts weren't that hard to come by. Rarer still would be a QSL confirming a contact with you on the ham bands. The League (of Notions) MAKES MONEY on the publication side of their conglomerate of control. Ads in QST pay for everything in the QST staff and the cost of job printing and fulfillment (publication talk for mailing/distributing). The "non-profit" stuff and nonsense is for lowering their taxes. No kidding? Thanks for clearing this up for those of us who've only been members for three or four decades, Len. You're pretty up to date for a non-member, non-radio amateur. You need copies of their IRS forms from 2002 and previous years? Those are on the Internet. Thanks, but I have no need of them. I interviewed for a League position years back. The salary offered wasn't enough to cover a move and life in the greater Hartford area. Translation: You were rejected. (boo hoo for you) You've mistranslated. What part of "the salary offered" wasn't clear to you? Are you playing loose with the facts again? While I'm sure that salaries are now better, I don't think any League staffers are putting up gold-plated Rohn tower and 80m yagis at their palatial estates. Rohn filed for bankruptcy on account of that? No, I think they waited for decades for your business and it dawned on someone at the plant that it just wasn't going to come about. You can see the top five staffers' salaries given on their 2002 IRS forms. And? It's about your ignorance of what a non-profit really is. *Guffaw!*. Her ignorance? I see some gaping holes in your own database. Nooo, Klunk, "non-profit" is a status to claim for paying LESS taxes. Really? Can I see a show of hands for those here who weren't aware of that? If you are foolish enough to believe that W1AW's station, the "museum" and all the other paraphenalia came out of dues, you've got a database gap large enough to sail the USS Enterprise through. I've made no such statement. I know how a non-profit organization operates. I know how the ARRL operates. Sadly, I know how you operate. With all the dissatisfaction you've expressed, why not start your own organization for like-minded hams? I'm sure you'd amass a following in no time. Three-fourths of all licensed U.S. radio amateurs are NOT members. One fourth, a sizeable number, ARE members. There are also Associate Members who are not licensees. You aren't a Full Member nor are you an Associate Member. That should be evidenciary. To all but the minority who are members. So, to see if we have your latest yarn straight, ARRL members aren't aware that there are others who are not members? Members "KNOW what is good for all the others" and therefore they are the elite. Other than you, who issues such statements? What is any of this to you as an outsider to amateur radio and the ARRL? The League (of Notions) still holds on vainly to the idea that morse code is still the ultimate of amateur skills...long after the rest of the radio world has given it up, discarded it for communications. Maybe you can point us to some place on the ARRL web site where such a statement is made. Continue to be the acidic spam-bot for the League (of Notions), old Klunk. You have taken a Ba'ath...but are yet unclean. Sounds like the bilious rantings of some geezer who is on the outside of amateur radio, looking in. Dave K8MN |
Brian wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message t... Won't happen, Dan. People like that have selective memory. They'll rail about how QST doesn't have articles about what they want to see, and conveniently forget about the important jobs ARRL does for us. 1. That only a minority of hams belong to ARRL speaks much more about hams than it does the ARRL. Are you saying that I'm a sucker? Don't think so. I'm a member too. 2. I would challenge the ARRL haters to come up with scenario's of what the ARS would be like today (if it even existed) if there was no ARRL. - Mike KB3EIA - World peace? I prefer my peas boiled with butter, though I might like to try whirled peas some time. - Mike KB3EIA |
Mike Coslo wrote:
I prefer my peas boiled with butter, though I might like to try whirled peas some time. - Mike KB3EIA Finally something I can relate to in rec.radio.cb . Homegrown peas and butter. Mmmmm! Thanks for sharing this thread with us CBer's. |
Dee D. Flint wrote:
"Brian" wrote in message om... Mike Coslo wrote in message ... One of the greatest rules of parliamentary procedure, and a real cornerstone of representative democracy in gneral is that even though the majority rules, the minority is allowed to have it's say. I think waaaaaayyyy too many people these days seem to have forgotten that. The minority must have it's say. Dee, I think you are taking a wrong tack on this one. Brian needs his say, and should not be forced to be a person at a high level of power in an institution to have his opinion. Not everyone wants to be active or even *can* be active in an organization. There are only so many leadership positions. Mike, thanks for your comments. Its refreshing to hear that I don't have to carry the weight of the ARS on my back, and that my personal involvement in the national club, though significant, is not an absolute requirement to achieve change. I really don't think the "minority" that I belong to is much smaller than the other minority that claims to speak for all amateur radio. Notice the FCC comments during the NPRM with respect to the code. Notice the current debate about the number of license classes necessary to keep the ARS vibrant and healthy. There is no need for me to be a subversive within that other minority group for which I have supported and paid annual dues since 1986. There is no need for a hostile takeover. Hainey is not my president. The FCC has solicited my comments, and I gave them. I think Dee's demands are extreme. You are expecting changes out of all proportion to the effort that you are putting into it and you think my opinions are extreme?? I'm not so sure he is, Dee. I see a person that disagrees with some of what the ARRL is doing, yet still supports the basic objective. I mean if he's been a member since 86, that counts for something. Kind of like how I am with politics. The Dems are in shambles, and the Repubs are waaaaaayyyyy too liberal any more with their way out of line deficit spending. But I still vote, and try to pick the least awful candidate. |
|
|
|
I eat my peas with honey,
I've done it all my life. It makes the peas taste funny, But it keeps them on my knife. -SSB Mike Coslo wrote: Brian wrote: Mike Coslo wrote in message t... Won't happen, Dan. People like that have selective memory. They'll rail about how QST doesn't have articles about what they want to see, and conveniently forget about the important jobs ARRL does for us. 1. That only a minority of hams belong to ARRL speaks much more about hams than it does the ARRL. Are you saying that I'm a sucker? Don't think so. I'm a member too. 2. I would challenge the ARRL haters to come up with scenario's of what the ARS would be like today (if it even existed) if there was no ARRL. - Mike KB3EIA - World peace? I prefer my peas boiled with butter, though I might like to try whirled peas some time. - Mike KB3EIA |
In article , Dave Heil
writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , Dave Heil writes: Brian wrote: "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message digy.com... "Brian" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com... It probably was no longer cost effective to sell it on newstands. If the ARRL is making money (a no-no for a non-profit corp) then report them to the IRS. If they are not making money, then no matter how big they are, it is not about money since no one is making a profit. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Un-friggin-believable. Non-profits aren't about profit. They're about salaries. If the salaries are too high, get on the board and get them reduced. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Who said they were too high? They have to balance their books somehow (to avoid the appearance of profit), and the salary is the most convenient place to dump the excess. Sounds like one of Len's typical conspiracy/dishonesty rants aimed toward the ARRL. Quit trying to sound like a Ba'athist amateur, Klunk. There certainly weren't many of them, kindly old gent. Still, YI1BGD contacts weren't that hard to come by. Rarer still would be a QSL confirming a contact with you on the ham bands. Rarer still would be the Great Amateur Heil getting above 70 cm. So, your only "interest" in radio is contacting "rare ones?" Home Depot and Lowes have fine selections of tasteful wallpaper if you need some. Better than QSL cards for the esthetic senses of non-radio guests. [you DO have guests, don't you? or are all your social contacts of the ham variety?] The League (of Notions) MAKES MONEY on the publication side of their conglomerate of control. Ads in QST pay for everything in the QST staff and the cost of job printing and fulfillment (publication talk for mailing/distributing). The "non-profit" stuff and nonsense is for lowering their taxes. No kidding? Thanks for clearing this up for those of us who've only been members for three or four decades, Len. You're pretty up to date for a non-member, non-radio amateur. SOMEONE had to clue you in, ignorant one. You've been so busy worshipping at the Church of St. Hiram you never knew about the BUSINESS side of the League? Tsk, tsk, tsk. You need copies of their IRS forms from 2002 and previous years? Those are on the Internet. Thanks, but I have no need of them. You are AFRAID to look, aren't you? :-) You might find out some truth. You can't handle the truth. I interviewed for a League position years back. The salary offered wasn't enough to cover a move and life in the greater Hartford area. Translation: You were rejected. (boo hoo for you) You've mistranslated. What part of "the salary offered" wasn't clear to you? Are you playing loose with the facts again? What was the AMOUNT of the salary offering? You never gave any "facts," only some CLAIM that "you interviewed." YOUR facts are simply salesmanship doubletalk on "facts." You've not given any supportable facts. None. While I'm sure that salaries are now better, I don't think any League staffers are putting up gold-plated Rohn tower and 80m yagis at their palatial estates. Rohn filed for bankruptcy on account of that? No, I think they waited for decades for your business and it dawned on someone at the plant that it just wasn't going to come about. I've never gone to Rohn for any towers are antennas. Three other commercial firms, Andrew being the oldest (and still solvent). Why the sudden misdirection into FALSE CLAIMS about some company "waiting for my business?" You can see the top five staffers' salaries given on their 2002 IRS forms. And? It would give you a baseline for MORE creative lying in here about "interviewing with the ARRL." :-) It's about your ignorance of what a non-profit really is. *Guffaw!*. Her ignorance? I see some gaping holes in your own database. Nooo, Klunk, "non-profit" is a status to claim for paying LESS taxes. Really? Can I see a show of hands for those here who weren't aware of that? Why? Can't you think for yourself anymore? Tsk, tsk, tsk. If you are foolish enough to believe that W1AW's station, the "museum" and all the other paraphenalia came out of dues, you've got a database gap large enough to sail the USS Enterprise through. I've made no such statement. I know how a non-profit organization operates. I know how the ARRL operates. Sadly, I know how you operate. I'm not a licensed MD. :-) With all the dissatisfaction you've expressed, why not start your own organization for like-minded hams? I'm sure you'd amass a following in no time. Three-fourths of all licensed U.S. radio amateurs are NOT members. One fourth, a sizeable number, ARE members. That's still a *MINORITY*. Hello? Are you rational yet? There are also Associate Members who are not licensees. NON-VOTING. They can't "decide" a damn thing in League things. You aren't a Full Member nor are you an Associate Member. So, everyone is not allowed to comment on anything if they are not a "member?" The League is a POLITICAL ENTITY. They lobby. The League is OPEN FOR COMMENTARY BY EVERYONE, senior. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution allows EVERY CITIZEN to comment. Except in your amateur universe... That should be evidenciary. To all but the minority who are members. So, to see if we have your latest yarn straight, ARRL members aren't aware that there are others who are not members? Bad attempt at editing and word cut-and-pasting, senior. TAKE THINGS IN CONTEXT. Members "KNOW what is good for all the others" and therefore they are the elite. Other than you, who issues such statements? What is any of this to you as an outsider to amateur radio and the ARRL? Does such statements upset you? See a real MD...or psychiatric specialist. You need one. The League (of Notions) still holds on vainly to the idea that morse code is still the ultimate of amateur skills...long after the rest of the radio world has given it up, discarded it for communications. Maybe you can point us to some place on the ARRL web site where such a statement is made. Maybe you can go to another Scientology office and get "clear" so that you can see years and years and years of propagandizing of and for morsemanship. I doubt you can. It is obvious to the rest of clear-thinking radio-interested folks. Continue to be the acidic spam-bot for the League (of Notions), old Klunk. You have taken a Ba'ath...but are yet unclean. Sounds like the bilious rantings of some geezer who is on the outside of amateur radio, looking in. Poor baby, still don't understand, do you? I've never been "outside radio" for a half century. You don't play fast and loose with facts. You just don't understand real facts. Not my problem. Go get "clear." LHA |
In article , Dave Heil
writes: If you've been paying attention, I was offered a job with the ARRL. I turned it down. Are you playing loose with facts again? What "facts" Ripley? You made a CLAIM. An UNSUPPORTED CLAIM. Get someone to vouch for your "job interview," someone in the League who was there at the time. I'll be generous and accept State Department notification (if on official letterhead stationery). :-) Or, knowing State, on their official stationary... No wonder you are so bitter. I think you must have me mixed up with you. I'm a radio amateur. You are a bystander. Nope. I've been IN RADIO longer than you have, done more in radio and electronics than you have. I'm a PROFESSIONAL. Been a professional in radio longer than you have, too. :-) Now, did you have some comment on morse code test retention and "how that so terribly affects your ability to perform as an amateur?" I'm sure that anyone daring to express the thought that the morse test should be eliminated gives you the terrible shivers as an amateur. We can't have Kolonel Klunk getting emotionally upset, can we? LHA |
In article om, "Dee D.
Flint" writes: I think Dee's demands are extreme. You are expecting changes out of all proportion to the effort that you are putting into it and you think my opinions are extreme?? Extremist to the point of acting like an evangelical believer in the nobility, glory, and efficacy of the League. [they are without reproach] Is that enough for you, Dee? LHA |
In article om, "Dee D.
Flint" writes: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Groups trimmed.... One of the greatest rules of parliamentary procedure, and a real cornerstone of representative democracy in gneral is that even though the majority rules, the minority is allowed to have it's say. I think waaaaaayyyy too many people these days seem to have forgotten that. The minority must have it's say. Dee, I think you are taking a wrong tack on this one. Brian needs his say, and should not be forced to be a person at a high level of power in an institution to have his opinion. Not everyone wants to be active or even *can* be active in an organization. There are only so many leadership positions. Mike, I agree with what you have said. Everyone should be free to voice their opinion. [except in amateur radio matters... :-) ] But what we cannot forget that to get a change, someone has got to buckle down and do the work. Fine. For my part, feel free to search the ECFS at the FCC for my name on 16 different NPRMs and NOIs. I agree with what you said. The Internet has finally allowed real and true democratic action of the citizenry of the USA. That should fall upon the person or persons who want the change to either do the work themselves or to convince someone to lead this effort for them. Or...what usually happens is that Big Brother in Newington is selected to do the job so as not to bother all the amateurs too busy playing on their radios. Whining and complaining doesn't get the job done. Neither does your parental-stance netiquete-nazi commentary. :-) Brian seems to think that his opinion as expressed in a couple of letters to the ARRL should have caused them to adopt the policies that he likes. That's totally unrealistic. If he's not willing to do the work, then he has no business slamming the ARRL. The League of Notions is beyond reproach, isn't it? :-) Thou Shalt Not Fault The League!!! Ever... :-) LHA |
In article om, "Dee D.
Flint" writes: The FCC spoke. And what they spoke was not ARRL majority opinion. What do you make of that, Dee? Very simple. The ARRL only has the power to lobby. They cannot force the FCC to go along with the ARRL opinion. Then what is the worth of being a League Believer? LHA |
In article , JJ
writes: I'm just campaigning for the elimination of morse code testing. Why? Can't or to lazy to learn the code? I can, I did learn morse. I don't see the need of it after being in radio communications for 50 1/2 years. Is that the only way you will ever be able to get a ham license? An AMATEUR license is not one of my life priorities. I've had a COMMERCIAL license for 47 1/2 years. I guess if they remove the code requirement you will campaign to get the written eleminated also so you won't have to do anything for a license. No. You are starting to show evidence of high irritation, anonymous one. Why is it imperative to have a license, especially an AMATEUR license? I took my FCC office test way back in March, 1956. I'd already been communicating in the HF Big Leagues for three years. Later on, I've communicated on LF, MF, HF, VHF, UHF, and microwaves without needing any amateur radio certificate. Never ever needed to use or understand morse code for any of that. Nobody involved in all that communicating complained about lack of morsemanship. I haven't belonged to the ARRL in many years, but you have convinced me I need to join, thanks to you the ARRL will get a new member. Go for it. They need warm bodies rather desperately. The League has yet to get membership from a majority of licensed U.S. radio amateurs. Hurry on getting your membership...wonder upon wonders, they are defraying shipping charges on items puchased from Newington right now! [of course, you pay the same price in a ham store for ARRL merchandise and there's no shipping charges to pay...] LHA Leonard H. Anderson |
sideband wrote:
I eat my peas with honey, I've done it all my life. It makes the peas taste funny, But it keeps them on my knife. -SSB I like it!! - mike KB3EIA - |
sideband wrote:
I eat my peas with honey, I've done it all my life. It makes the peas taste funny, But it keeps them on my knife. -SSB Yum Yum, I like it. |
Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , JJ writes: I'm just campaigning for the elimination of morse code testing. Why? Can't or to lazy to learn the code? I can, I did learn morse. I don't see the need of it after being in radio communications for 50 1/2 years. Is that the only way you will ever be able to get a ham license? An AMATEUR license is not one of my life priorities. I've had a COMMERCIAL license for 47 1/2 years. Then what's you problem? If you have no interest in an amateur license then why spout off hear? Go somewhere where someone cares. I guess if they remove the code requirement you will campaign to get the written eleminated also so you won't have to do anything for a license. No. You are starting to show evidence of high irritation, anonymous one. Doesn't irratate me, I have my license, code test and all. Why is it imperative to have a license, especially an AMATEUR license? If one wishes to operate on the amateur bands one needs an amateur license - DUH! I took my FCC office test way back in March, 1956. I'd already been communicating in the HF Big Leagues for three years. Later on, I've communicated on LF, MF, HF, VHF, UHF, and microwaves without needing any amateur radio certificate. Never ever needed to use or understand morse code for any of that. Nobody involved in all that communicating complained about lack of morsemanship. Great, then go back to your LF, MF, HF, VHF, UHF and microwaves with your commercial license. You obviously have no interest in amateur radio so it is obvious to the most casual of observers that your only reason to be hear is to see how big a jackass you can make of yourself. And you're doing a bang-up job of it. I haven't belonged to the ARRL in many years, but you have convinced me I need to join, thanks to you the ARRL will get a new member. Go for it. They need warm bodies rather desperately. The League has yet to get membership from a majority of licensed U.S. radio amateurs. Hurry on getting your membership...wonder upon wonders, they are defraying shipping charges on items puchased from Newington right now! [of course, you pay the same price in a ham store for ARRL merchandise and there's no shipping charges to pay...] It will give me a say in campainging to keep the code test, looks like that is what keeps you out of ham radio and that's a good thing for ham radio. |
"Dee D. Flint" wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" wrote: Why limit any exclusion to just the church building, parking lot, and parish? Since churches have been running schools, colleges, homeless shelters, women and youth shelters, food kitchens, youth camps and sports activities, hospitals, nursing homes, and so on, for many years (some long before this country was created and each requiring buildings, land, or equipment), such a limit would have a serious impact on many traditional church activities. If we are going all the way on separation of church and state, why should they get any special status beyond what other non-profit organization would get? There is very little special special status involved. Every non-profit organization can write off the costs for buildings, land, facilities, equipment, personnel, and so on. Any remaining special status, and again there is very little, is covered by the "free exercise thereof" clause of the First Amendment - "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free excercise thereof..." In my opinion, we cannot "go all the way on separation of church and state" without violating the "free excercise thereof" clause. If anyone were to argue to ignore the "free excercise thereof" clause, others could just as easily argue to ignore the "establishment of religion" clause. Luckily, both clauses exist and people who truly believe in the Bill of Rights should honor and defend both. Many people are not doing so today. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com