|
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message link.net... "Len Over 21" wrote: (snip) All of the information is from ARRL's own website under QST Circulation. There are some apparent discrepancies on that, probably due to "creative rearrangement" of the data. For example, the "average monthly paid circulaion" (six months, ending at end of June) was only 142,992. Between that and the indicated membership is 12,140 unaccounted for and not explained by sales to library/institution subscriptions (only 891) or net single copy sales (only 1,784). (snip) While I obviously cannot be certain, most of those 12,140 issues are probably free handouts, Len - sent to current advertisers, potential advertisers, staff, those who wrote articles or sent pictures for each issue, executives of various companies, industry insiders, news organizations, politicians, and so on. It's a fairly common practice in the publishing industry. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ Also keep in mind that there are members who will not show up under the paid circulation number. In my home, both I and the OM are members. We only get one magazine as he is a family member under my main membership. So there is only one paid circulation but two ARRL members. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Subject: Why You Don't Like Ham's Who Can't Accept Change.
From: (Brian) Date: 12/23/03 6:01 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: "But, but, but.... I snipped the rant. Caps and all. Welp, Len, see where knowledge and facts will get ya? Neither you nor Lennie have expressed ANYthing here that resembles "knowldege" or "facts", Brain. Lennie's manipulating of ARRL membership numbers is interesting, but just as much "theory" as his "Extra Lite" excuses. Try again, Brain...It's almost Christmas and I am sure you'd like to have that warm, fuzzy feeling again before then. Steve, K4YZ |
Subject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL
From: "Dee D. Flint" Date: 12/23/03 8:41 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: om Also keep in mind that there are members who will not show up under the paid circulation number. In my home, both I and the OM are members. We only get one magazine as he is a family member under my main membership. So there is only one paid circulation but two ARRL members. Good point, Dee...I forgot that, and my XYL and I have the same arrangement. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message news:20031223110945.14309.00001469@mb- Total magazines printed minus wasted copies minus library subscriptions minus complimentary copies equals "EXACT" number of ARRL members (Guess that new math really confounded ya, Huh BRAIN? What an idiot. Steve, K4YZ You forgot to add in members who don't receive their own magazine, such as those on the family membership. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Dee D. Flint wrote:
"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message news:20031223110945.14309.00001469@mb- Total magazines printed minus wasted copies minus library subscriptions minus complimentary copies equals "EXACT" number of ARRL members (Guess that new math really confounded ya, Huh BRAIN? What an idiot. Steve, K4YZ You forgot to add in members who don't receive their own magazine, such as those on the family membership. Might as well add the memberships for blind hams that don't want to get QST. - Mike KB3EIA - |
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 14:41:24 GMT, Dee D. Flint wrote:
Also keep in mind that there are members who will not show up under the paid circulation number. In my home, both I and the OM are members. We only get one magazine as he is a family member under my main membership. So there is only one paid circulation but two ARRL members. I would suspect that in this computers-r-us era of acccounting, the Membership Department can furnish the exact number of members-in-good- standing (i.e. paid up to date) in every category as of the last database entry. After all, the ARRL -is- a membership organization and any member is entitled to that information. Getting it may be another story, however. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane |
In article .net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes: "Len Over 21" wrote: (snip) All of the information is from ARRL's own website under QST Circulation. There are some apparent discrepancies on that, probably due to "creative rearrangement" of the data. For example, the "average monthly paid circulaion" (six months, ending at end of June) was only 142,992. Between that and the indicated membership is 12,140 unaccounted for and not explained by sales to library/institution subscriptions (only 891) or net single copy sales (only 1,784). (snip) While I obviously cannot be certain, most of those 12,140 issues are probably free handouts, Len - sent to current advertisers, potential advertisers, staff, those who wrote articles or sent pictures for each issue, executives of various companies, industry insiders, news organizations, politicians, and so on. It's a fairly common practice in the publishing industry. Dwight, with all due respect, I think I know a bit about the periodicals industry and Publisher's Sworn Statements. :-) The seed of this particular sub-thread was the EXACT number of ARRL membership. According to Katherine A. Capodicasa, Circulation Manager of QST, given on ARRL's own web page, the ARRL membership as of the end of June 2003 was 155,132. Also, on the same ARRL page was the statement of the "average monthly paid circulation" (for previous 6 months). That is 142,992. It is also a difference of 12,140 from the June membership number. That difference MIGHT account for the "family membership" single copies and other things. Might, that is, trying to infer anything from insufficient data is pure speculation such as others have been doing. In item 3 on the Circulation page is "average unpaid and sample copy circulation per month" of 1,140. That would be freebies, sample copies, stuff sent to potential advertisers, and so forth. [others have tried to imply higher numbers for this as rationalizing other differences but that is more speculation without facts and also - obviously - not going to the "official" ARRL pages...:-) ] Now, connecting the dots to other notable numbers, one who longs for the olden days keeps putting up others' database values to show that U.S. amateur radio licenses are increasing. [they are, but only slightly and don't follow the overall population increase] Yet, on the Circulation page of QST, ARRL membership shows a slight but definite DECREASE in paid circulation...from 143,904 at end of January 2003 to 142,311 at end of June 2003, a difference of -1,593. Connecting more dots farther apart, clicking on ARRL publications and QST yields a table of contents of January 2004 issue. On there is a link to a "Micro Keyer" (CW keyer) which is viewable, but no other viewable link to more general amateur radio articles such as making nice front panels for homebuilt equipment. This is just another subtle bit of business on ARRL's continuing push for morse code related over and above all other modes. ARRL may take a "neutral" stance on morse code testing regulations but one can only take away their code key from their cold, dead fingers... In truth, a "Publishers Sworn Statement" is SOLELY for the benefit of potential ADVERTISERS. QST subsists almost entirely on the income of advertising to pay for printing, author compensation (miniscule by comparison to other periodicals), "fulfillment" (publishing-speak for subscriptions), and QST direct staff. Note that QST has used a heavier-weight glossy paper than most periodicals (which costs more) but has gone to slightly lower-weight glossy paper. Anyone can go through any issue, count column-inches, and determine the issue's Real income within 20% or so just from QST's rates (also on the web site, different page). Advertising pays the bills at a periodical. Advertising revenue is finite so all periodical publishers will condense and "tailor" the Publisher's Sworn Statements as much as they can...so that potential advertisers are convinced to pay them instead of any competition. Since advertising budgets are finite, some periodicals just don't get as much income...and some may have to quit when there isn't enough income to pay bills. There's bound to be someone who shows "exceptions" to the rule that advertising pays the bills. I'm familiar with that. As one who gets a number of trade periodicals (EDN, Electronic Design, RF Design, Microwaves & RF, PET, etc.) entirely without any monies from me ("controlled circulation" magazines), that's proof enough of my statement. There are MORE "free" trade publications in the USA than there are subscription-fee publications. Parishoners at the Church of St. Hiram have been busy rationalizing and speculating on the "reason" for differences that I noted. :-) They are all wrong, but are convinced they Know...ARRL can do no wrong. All that can be gleaned from the QST Circulation page is the number (and EXACT number) of ARRL membership at any one time. ARRL is basically three organizations in one: A membership club; a political-action special interest group; a publishing business. Members try to rationalize others' negative criticsm by using only one or two of the triad as "justification." In truth, ARRL tries to be too many things under one roof and that, if too inflexible, may be its eventual undoing. Merry Christmas to you and yours, Dwight. Len Anderson |
In article ,
(Brian) writes: (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian) writes: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL From: (Brian) Date: 12/20/03 9:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... ubject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL From: (Len Over 21) Date: 12/20/03 2:50 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: So, give us an EXACT number of ARRL members. Check their annual postal statement. It's a violation for them to purjure that, and it delineates the number of "paid subscriptions" (ie: paid-up members) Steve, K4YZ I was a member of the ARRL prior to earning my Novice ticket. What was my call sign then? I am sure there was a point ot your asking this question, Brain, even though it was not part-and-parcel of the quoted item above. Regardless of your licensure status when you joined the ARRL, the only 'relevence' would have been your voting staus. You were STILL a member. Now...the point? Steve, K4YZ Let me think it through for you. A non-member, me, receives QST. I am included in the annual postal statement. Every library is included in the postal statement. Every club that subscribes is included in the postal statement. Every foreign subscriber non-member is included in the postal statement. Now would you mind answereing the question: "So, give us an EXACT number of ARRL members." He cannot, so, as his "representative" in here, I will. :-) According to the ARRL's own information, their last Publisher's Sworn Circulation Statement was end of June, 2003. At that time ARRL membership was 155,132. Of those, 19,180 were Life Members. All of the information is from ARRL's own website under QST Circulation. There are some apparent discrepancies on that, probably due to "creative rearrangement" of the data. For example, the "average monthly paid circulaion" (six months, ending at end of June) was only 142,992. Between that and the indicated membership is 12,140 unaccounted for and not explained by any sales to library/institution subscriptions (only 891) or net single copy sales (only 1,784). In the "average monthly paid circulation by type," the number of issues to associations and members (including Life Members) was 140,317 and, with libraries and single copy sales, adds up to 142,311. That's off of Cathy's statement of 142,992 by 681. ? If there were 682 thousand total U.S. amateur radio licensees at the end of June, 2003, then ARRL membership is only 22.79% and LESS than a quarter. LHA "But, but, but.... YOU DON'T HAVE A LICENSE! YOU SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO READ THOSE FIGURES ON THE ARRL WEB SITE. YOU SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO MATH AND CREATE A RATIO OF MEMBEERS TO NON-MEMBERS. YOUR RESEARCH DOESN'T COUNT. YOU CAN'T HAVE AN OPINION. ...blah, blah, blah." Welp, Len, see where knowledge and facts will get ya? Merry Christmas. I know. Isn't it awful? :-) It's so comforting to know that one can read and repeat Cathy's Circulation page on ARRL's website as a "LIE!" :-) There are other little gems from da Wundermarine in here, such as its impossible for a First Phone to be used in U.S. civil aviation band radio communications since a Restricted 3rd Class "must" be used...which was nonsense in 1962...and later when the Commercial licenses got converted to the General Radiotelephone. He could not give exact figures on QST circulation for any issue (despite being only a few key- presses away from the main web page) but he "Knows" the exact costs in certain years for student flying lessons. The circulation for QST is very much amateur radio related but the student pilot costs are not. [he might have been hit by a couple of close isobars once and had an adiabatic lapse rate decrease...:-) ] Stebe thinks that the "majority" of U.S. amateur radio activity is above HF. That must mean that he never listens below 30 MHz. Probably true since all he can do is transmit over- modulated shouting and hollering about close-order drill below 30 MHz. Hup too tree foah, ya lie, ya lie, ya lie! :-) The ONLY way one can be "interested in radio" is to get a ham license and be proficient in morse code...with extra gold stars if one was once a member of da murine corpse. Doesn't hurt if one was a purchasing agent for a small modem and set-top box company in the "south" for a few months...that counts as "being in radio engineering!" :-) Amateur radio FUN is only "ancilliary" to the U.S. amateur radio SERVICE. Ham radio is all about wearing a Lifestyle mental uniform, marching in ranks to the morse drumbeat of the 1930s, and being ready, willing, able to "take over communications" when all the commercial/professional infrastructure FAILS in an emergency? That's the thoughts I see expressed in here. There can be no fun in the ham SERVICE. It is all about duty, dedication, close-order drill on the proper and correct jargon and prosigns. [why the name "prosigns" when there is so much hatred of the pros?] Hupp, too, tree, foah! Beep, beep, beep! It's a wonderful life. [but all the cast players are mentally SK] Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays, Brian, all the best to you and your family. Len Anderson |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Bill Sohl wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message snippage Two questions... 1. What "other members" (I presume you mean Board Members), other than W5YI, do NOT support retention of technical acumen? They don't have to be Board members, Bill. And I don't have their names off the top of my head. If you like, I can retract the "members" statement, and substitute "member" or "prominent member". Although I think that's almost like saying a person's argument is invalid because they made a typo. Bottom line, without names, the statement is grossly misleading as you apear to try and broaden your claim to NCI in general... which is absolutely false. Bottom line, I have never accused NCI of having any particular opinion. I wrote: Instead, some members express "unofficial opinions that scare the bejabbers out of me. That's the point. "Unofficial opinions". That alone, regardless of what you say, creates an impression that there is an "unofficial 'NCI' opinion". If a person has their own opinion about something, that isn't "official" or "unofficial" by itself. Adding the "unofficial opinion" label in talking about an NCI member DOES create a different perception than simply saying John Doe has an opinion that scares me. Back to now: Who is broadening any claim? I even put unofficial opinions on my sentence. Your trying to pin me down on this is amusing, since the membership rolls of NCI are a closely guarded secret. The only way we know is if the member outs him or her self. Then how can you even make the statement that some "members" have opinions that scare you IF you can't even identify them. I don't like Han's entry level license requirement either. He's a member. BUT, his NCI membership doesn't tie NCI to Han's personal support for an entry level license. Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
"Bill Sohl" wrote BUT, his NCI membership doesn't tie NCI to Han's personal support for an entry level license. Are you saying that NCI does not reciprocate my support for their goals? That would certainly be a strange sort of membership-organization. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
|
Mike Coslo wrote in message et...
Dee D. Flint wrote: "Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message news:20031223110945.14309.00001469@mb- Total magazines printed minus wasted copies minus library subscriptions minus complimentary copies equals "EXACT" number of ARRL members (Guess that new math really confounded ya, Huh BRAIN? What an idiot. Steve, K4YZ You forgot to add in members who don't receive their own magazine, such as those on the family membership. Might as well add the memberships for blind hams that don't want to get QST. - Mike KB3EIA - And all the SK's out there who forgot to terminate their memberships. |
"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message ...
If one were to...well, waste time...reviewing many, if not all, of Dave's posts; all Dave is about is posting replies that have no content other than to pontificate and humor himself. There's nothing, *nothing* of any substance whatsoever in a thing he writes...he's like a lawyer... Dave's posting are an RRAP universal constant. Nobody knows why the constant is there, but it always is. |
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Why You Don't Like Ham's Who Can't Accept Change. From: (Brian) Date: 12/23/03 6:01 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: "But, but, but.... I snipped the rant. Caps and all. Welp, Len, see where knowledge and facts will get ya? Neither you nor Lennie have expressed ANYthing here that resembles "knowldege" or "facts", Brain. Lennie's manipulating of ARRL membership numbers is interesting, but just as much "theory" as his "Extra Lite" excuses. Try again, Brain...It's almost Christmas and I am sure you'd like to have that warm, fuzzy feeling again before then. Steve, K4YZ So how many members does the ARRL have? |
Subject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL
From: (Brian) Date: 12/23/03 4:38 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: And all the SK's out there who forgot to terminate their memberships. Brain, do you think there's ANY "membership" organization that has a 100%, real-time accounting of thier membership? I don't. Steve, K4YZ |
Subject: Why You Don't Like Ham's Who Can't Accept Change.
From: (Brian) Date: 12/23/03 4:55 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Why You Don't Like Ham's Who Can't Accept Change. From: (Brian) Date: 12/23/03 6:01 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: "But, but, but.... I snipped the rant. Caps and all. Welp, Len, see where knowledge and facts will get ya? Neither you nor Lennie have expressed ANYthing here that resembles "knowldege" or "facts", Brain. Lennie's manipulating of ARRL membership numbers is interesting, but just as much "theory" as his "Extra Lite" excuses. Try again, Brain...It's almost Christmas and I am sure you'd like to have that warm, fuzzy feeling again before then. Steve, K4YZ So how many members does the ARRL have? Enough, I am sure. I showed you how to find out. You do the math. You CAN "do the math", can't you, "BRAIN"...?!?! Steve, K4YZ |
"Brian" wrote in message m... Mike Coslo wrote in message et... Dee D. Flint wrote: You forgot to add in members who don't receive their own magazine, such as those on the family membership. Might as well add the memberships for blind hams that don't want to get QST. - Mike KB3EIA - And all the SK's out there who forgot to terminate their memberships. However, the latter is a somewhat self correcting situation for the most part as, except for life members, the membership must be renewed on an annual basis. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Brian wrote:
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Why You Don't Like Ham's Who Can't Accept Change. From: (Brian) Date: 12/23/03 6:01 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: "But, but, but.... I snipped the rant. Caps and all. Welp, Len, see where knowledge and facts will get ya? Neither you nor Lennie have expressed ANYthing here that resembles "knowldege" or "facts", Brain. Lennie's manipulating of ARRL membership numbers is interesting, but just as much "theory" as his "Extra Lite" excuses. Try again, Brain...It's almost Christmas and I am sure you'd like to have that warm, fuzzy feeling again before then. Steve, K4YZ So how many members does the ARRL have? At least 2, you and me. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Bill Sohl wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Bill Sohl wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message snippage Two questions... 1. What "other members" (I presume you mean Board Members), other than W5YI, do NOT support retention of technical acumen? They don't have to be Board members, Bill. And I don't have their names off the top of my head. If you like, I can retract the "members" statement, and substitute "member" or "prominent member". Although I think that's almost like saying a person's argument is invalid because they made a typo. Bottom line, without names, the statement is grossly misleading as you apear to try and broaden your claim to NCI in general... which is absolutely false. Bottom line, I have never accused NCI of having any particular opinion. I wrote: Instead, some members express "unofficial opinions that scare the bejabbers out of me. That's the point. "Unofficial opinions". That alone, regardless of what you say, creates an impression that there is an "unofficial 'NCI' opinion". If a person has their own opinion about something, that isn't "official" or "unofficial" by itself. Adding the "unofficial opinion" label in talking about an NCI member DOES create a different perception than simply saying John Doe has an opinion that scares me. I have a question. There is no doubt that NCI is a political organization. So this is a fair question. Why don't you ask a good conservative Republican what they think of the new Govorner of California's stand on say, abortion, or say same sex marriages? So while his opinion doesn't really have that much to do with the national scene, therefore it isn't relevant to anything but himself, I do know that there are plenty of the above mentioned conservatives that don't think a whole lot of him or his opinion at all. Back to now: Who is broadening any claim? I even put unofficial opinions on my sentence. Your trying to pin me down on this is amusing, since the membership rolls of NCI are a closely guarded secret. The only way we know is if the member outs him or her self. Then how can you even make the statement that some "members" have opinions that scare you IF you can't even identify them. I just identified two. I don't like Han's entry level license requirement either. He's a member. BUT, his NCI membership doesn't tie NCI to Han's personal support for an entry level license. But he certainly serves as another data point. Why don't we go over some stuff. You (apparently) don't support any change in anything except the elimination of Element one. W5YI supports what to me seems to be a radical simplification and *******ization of the ARS requirements. Hans has a plan that I generally don't like. I must say that he does address the issue of needed change when element one disappears. So forgive me, but I think I can form an opinion and defend it. All I propose is strengthening the requirements of what exists now, and otherwise leaving things intact. I would really encourage going into the regulations and cleaning them up after the changover. And yes, since NCI sees itself as the vanguard of change, I see NCI as derelict in it's duties. To just say "eliminate the Code test" really isn't enough. - Mike KB3EIA - |
KØHB wrote:
"Bill Sohl" wrote BUT, his NCI membership doesn't tie NCI to Han's personal support for an entry level license. Are you saying that NCI does not reciprocate my support for their goals? That would certainly be a strange sort of membership-organization. Sorry Hans! Only elimination of the Test! And that is what bothers me about NCI. But it is a great way to dodge responsibility! 8^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL From: (Brian) Date: 12/23/03 4:38 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: And all the SK's out there who forgot to terminate their memberships. Brain, do you think there's ANY "membership" organization that has a 100%, real-time accounting of thier membership? I don't. Steve, K4YZ Now that I've lead you in a full circle, we're back to NCI's membership roster. |
|
Subject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL
From: (Brian) Date: 12/24/03 5:32 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL From: (Brian) Date: 12/23/03 4:38 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: And all the SK's out there who forgot to terminate their memberships. Brain, do you think there's ANY "membership" organization that has a 100%, real-time accounting of thier membership? I don't. Steve, K4YZ Now that I've lead you in a full circle, we're back to NCI's membership roster. I was never "AT" NCI's membership roster, Brain. ...And we are used to you going in circles. If it wasn't for the tail you're chasing, how would you know which end was your head? Steve, K4YZ |
|
|
"Len Over 21" wrote:
Dwight, with all due respect, I think I know a bit about the periodicals industry and Publisher's Sworn Statements. :-) Well, then by all means, you go at it. I'm not going to get into this discussion beyond what I've already done, and I'm certainly not going to write a detailed response to the long-winded message you wrote. ;-) Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message t... KØHB wrote: "Bill Sohl" wrote BUT, his NCI membership doesn't tie NCI to Han's personal support for an entry level license. Are you saying that NCI does not reciprocate my support for their goals? That would certainly be a strange sort of membership-organization. Sorry Hans! Only elimination of the Test! Essentually correct. NCI doesn't take positions on the wider scope of testing and opinions held by any individual member. Indeed, one could readily see where two members might have totally opposite opinions on written testing. And that is what bothers me about NCI. Why that bothers anyone makes no sense to me. Indeed, we are damned if we do, damn;ed if we don't. We formed as a "one issue" organization and now some folks are bothered by that...strange, truly strange. But it is a great way to dodge responsibility! 8^) Dodge responsibilities? So exactly what does that mean? What specific "responsibility" is NCI dodging? Did I miss some unstated responsibility of NCI and/or any other ham club or organization? Cheers, Bill K2UNK |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message t... Bill Sohl wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Bill Sohl wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message snippage Two questions... 1. What "other members" (I presume you mean Board Members), other than W5YI, do NOT support retention of technical acumen? They don't have to be Board members, Bill. And I don't have their names off the top of my head. If you like, I can retract the "members" statement, and substitute "member" or "prominent member". Although I think that's almost like saying a person's argument is invalid because they made a typo. Bottom line, without names, the statement is grossly misleading as you apear to try and broaden your claim to NCI in general... which is absolutely false. Bottom line, I have never accused NCI of having any particular opinion. I wrote: Instead, some members express "unofficial opinions that scare the bejabbers out of me. That's the point. "Unofficial opinions". That alone, regardless of what you say, creates an impression that there is an "unofficial 'NCI' opinion". If a person has their own opinion about something, that isn't "official" or "unofficial" by itself. Adding the "unofficial opinion" label in talking about an NCI member DOES create a different perception than simply saying John Doe has an opinion that scares me. I have a question. There is no doubt that NCI is a political organization. So this is a fair question. Why don't you ask a good conservative Republican what they think of the new Govorner of California's stand on say, abortion, or say same sex marriages? So while his opinion doesn't really have that much to do with the national scene, therefore it isn't relevant to anything but himself, I do know that there are plenty of the above mentioned conservatives that don't think a whole lot of him or his opinion at all. Who cares, so what? In any organization there will be a range of opinions regarding issues. NCI was formed as and still is a ONE issue organization. Why that fails to sink in to some folks still amazes me. The ONE area of universal agreement amongst NCI members is ending all code tests. If an NCI member does not support that goal, then he or she should really consider dropping NCI memebrship. Back to now: Who is broadening any claim? I even put unofficial opinions on my sentence. Your trying to pin me down on this is amusing, since the membership rolls of NCI are a closely guarded secret. The only way we know is if the member outs him or her self. Then how can you even make the statement that some "members" have opinions that scare you IF you can't even identify them. I just identified two. But neither of those people speak for NCI when offering their opinions on non-code test issues. THAT is the important aspect of my discussion here. I don't like Han's entry level license requirement either. He's a member. BUT, his NCI membership doesn't tie NCI to Han's personal support for an entry level license. But he certainly serves as another data point. Why don't we go over some stuff. Hans is a data point as to Han's...not any position for or against an entry level license by NCI. You (apparently) don't support any change in anything except the elimination of Element one. Now you are making things up. What I support overs a wide range of stuff. The distinction again is that if, for example, I were to support an entry level test, it would be as Bill K2UNK, and not as any official NCI position simply because I sit on the NCI board. If I go back to your Republican example above, if I support abortion and I am an NCI member, that anti-abortion folks should be worried about NCI members having pro-abortion opinions? Of couse NOT, because the issue is NOT on the NCI agenda. W5YI supports what to me seems to be a radical simplification and *******ization of the ARS requirements. And W5YI is free to expound his opinions. Has he ever done so and tried to claim NCI supported his viewpoints. Answer: NO. Hans has a plan that I generally don't like. I must say that he does address the issue of needed change when element one disappears. And Han's proposal is neither supported or opposed by NCI. So forgive me, but I think I can form an opinion and defend it. Never said you aren't free to do so. All I propose is strengthening the requirements of what exists now, and otherwise leaving things intact. I would really encourage going into the regulations and cleaning them up after the changover. What changeover? And yes, since NCI sees itself as the vanguard of change, I see NCI as derelict in it's duties. Pretty amusing. "Derilict" as determined by what yardstick? To just say "eliminate the Code test" really isn't enough. You are entitled to your opinion and I suspect, because of that opinion, NCI won't expect your membership application in the near future :-) Cheers and Merry Christmas to all. Bill K2UNK |
Bill Sohl wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message t... KØHB wrote: "Bill Sohl" wrote BUT, his NCI membership doesn't tie NCI to Han's personal support for an entry level license. Are you saying that NCI does not reciprocate my support for their goals? That would certainly be a strange sort of membership-organization. Sorry Hans! Only elimination of the Test! Essentually correct. NCI doesn't take positions on the wider scope of testing and opinions held by any individual member. Indeed, one could readily see where two members might have totally opposite opinions on written testing. And that is what bothers me about NCI. Why that bothers anyone makes no sense to me. Indeed, we are damned if we do, damn;ed if we don't. We formed as a "one issue" organization and now some folks are bothered by that...strange, truly strange. Well, I'm sorry about it Bill, but that is how it works. Spoils of success. In the world of politics, there is no such thing as a one issue organization. When agitating for the addition or removal of something, there must be some kind of plan for afterward. If there is no plan, then one of two things happened. Either there was an immense amount of naivety, or a concept of "no plan for the aftermath" was made". I'm bothered by it now because I'm new to the ARS and didn't even know about NCI in it's early years. I would have taken NCI members to task if I was a ham then. But it is a great way to dodge responsibility! 8^) Dodge responsibilities? So exactly what does that mean? What specific "responsibility" is NCI dodging? Did I miss some unstated responsibility of NCI and/or any other ham club or organization? Yes you did miss it, IMO! What other Morse code pro/con advocacy groups are there? NCI is the one standing around when the change happened, it happened their way, and now all we hear is some people's personal beliefs when they should be at least putting together a plan for the aftermath of the ARS, post Element one. The two I have seen I'm not overwhelmed with. So I will be yapping about what I percieve to be a *grave* error in omission. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Bill Sohl wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message t... Bill Sohl wrote: Well Bill, it looks like we will just have to remain at odds about this issue. Have a great Christmas! - Mike KB3EIA - |
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: The two I have seen I'm not overwhelmed with. Was this one of the plans you saw? 1) Three classes of license: Basic, Intermediate, Full (change the names if you don't like them - Third, Second, First, Novice, General, Extra, whatever) 2) HF/MF bands split into subbands by mode and split again by license class. Some bands (30 meters) may be split by mode only. Bottom of each band is CW only, middle is CW/digital, top is CW/phone/image. Percentage division about 20%/30%/50% (varies with band). "Digital" includes digital voice modes if bandwidth under 1 kHz. 3) "Basic" license test is simple 20-25 question exam on regs, procedures, and safety. Very little technical and RF exposure stuff. Main objective is to keep Basics out of trouble. Basics get 100-50 watts on HF/MF and 25 watts or so on VHF/UHF (power level is below the point where RF exposure evaluation required). Modes are CW, analog voice, PSK31, RTTY and many of the other common data modes like packet. Basics cannot be VEs, control ops for repeaters, or club trustees. Basics get most VHF/UHF and about half of HF/MF spectrum, including parts of all subbands-by-mode. Basic is meant as the entry level. Easy to get, lots of privs, yet there's still a reason to upgrade. 4) "Intermediate" license test is more complex 50-60 question exam on regs, procedures, safety and technical stuff. Intermediates get 300-400 watts on all bands, all modes. Intermediates can be VEs after qualification (see below), control ops for repeaters, and club trustees. Intermediates get all VHF/UHF and about three quarters (or more) of HF/MF spectrum. Intermediate requires at least one year experience as a Basic. 5) "Full" license test is quite complex 100-120 question exam on regs, procedures, safety and technical stuff. Mostly technical, with some regs to cover expanded privs. Fulls get all privileges, modes, bands, etc. except that Fulls can be VEs only after qualification (see below). Full license requires at least one year as an Intermediate. 6) All licenses are 10 year and fully renewable/modifiable. No age requirements or limits. 7) Basics have six-character calls, Intermediates have five- or six-character calls, and Fulls have four-, five-, or six-character calls. Nobody has to give up an existing callsign. 8) Separate 30-35 question test for VE qualification, open to Intermediates and Fulls, which allows them to be VEs. Existing VEs are grandfathered. 9) Existing Novices, Techs and Tech Pluses become Basics, existing Generals and Advanceds become Intermediates, and existing Extras become Fulls. Existing hams can continue to use their current privileges as long as they retain license documents showing their old license class. Existing Tech Pluses who can show proof of license before Mar 21, 1987 get Intermediates. 10) Change to new system is at least six months to one year after announcement to allow time for question pool reorganization and so existing hams can upgrade under present rules if they want. 11) Experience requirement is not waived for existing hams to upgrade, but their time in existing classes counts. End result is a system that is easy to get into (Basic is envisioned as a 21st century version of the Novice) and has reasonable but meaningful steps to reach full privileges. Testing matches the privs granted. Power levels are set about one S-unit apart. Nobody loses any privileges. There are only three license classes and four written tests, so FCC doesn't have more work. Example of new privileges: 80/75 meters 3500-3575 CW only 3575-3750 CW/data 3750-4000 CW/analog phone/image Basic: 3525-3625 and 3900-4000 Intermediate: 3525-3750 and 3850-4000 Full: entire band How's that? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Not in the Mid-Michigan area.....can't find any radio related magazine
anymore! (except for something like Popular Electronics) Heard some vicious rumor about the anti-radio relay league pulling magazines from "shelf sales" recently but I cannot confirm this. Ryan KC8PMX -- "The Pope has issued a proclamation on Michael Jackson. If he hears any more allegations about little boys, the Pope says he'll have no choice but to make him a priest." "JJ" wrote in message ... JEP wrote: 2) Can't separate QST from membership Check your local newstand or magazine rack in stores, many carry QST. You can purchase it without membership, or check you local library, they may carry it and you can read it for free. |
"N2EY" wrote 1) Three classes of license: Basic, Intermediate, Full (change the names if you don't like them - Third, Second, First, Novice, General, Extra, whatever) 2) HF/MF bands split into subbands by mode and split again by license class. Some bands (30 meters) may be split by mode only. Bottom of each band is CW only, middle is CW/digital, top is CW/phone/image. Percentage division about 20%/30%/50% (varies with band). "Digital" includes digital voice modes if bandwidth under 1 kHz. clip....clip.....clip Sames old disincentive licensing scheme we've had since the 60's warmed over a bit. Yawn. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
That would be true if they were selling only ONE copy of it, but when I
COULD find a copy of it locally, due to the fact that it almost ALWAYS sold out each month, I inquired as to how many copies they got at the closest store. They said 15 per issue. So your math would be in slight error. Multiply that number by 15 and you get $718.56. Not bad for only one magazine, and when you consider they usually have at least 100 or more magazines on their shelves. Ryan KC8PMX -- "The Pope has issued a proclamation on Michael Jackson. If he hears any more allegations about little boys, the Pope says he'll have no choice but to make him a priest." At $4.99/mo ($59.88/yr) plus tax, I'm sure it wasn't a high volume business for Barnes and Noble, since that's a 53% premium over the membership dues, and you don't get the other benefits which comes with membership. Only an idiot would regularly buy QST from a news stand! 73, de Hans, K0HB |
You do realize that the ARRL has the publication and distribution of QST contracted out, don't you? You should crab to them, not the league per se. Cop out excuse. A person's beef would be with the ARRL, not the contracted agency, and it would be the ARRL's responsibility to deal with the contracted agency. Ryan KC8PMX -- "The Pope has issued a proclamation on Michael Jackson. If he hears any more allegations about little boys, the Pope says he'll have no choice but to make him a priest." |
Moving it to the south is gonna do NOTHING more than change the location of
the headquarters..... "Ragchewer" wrote in message ... Why do I not like the ARRL? I will answer that with another question. Would you trust a gang of Yankee carpetbaggers, the same bunch who stole from the southerners at the end of the War Between The States? You would? Good! Sign up for life membership with the rest of the NewingtonYankee gang. As for me, the league can go f..k itself, since that is what it has been doing to the rest of us for decades. RC |
"KØHB" wrote in message hlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote 1) Three classes of license: Basic, Intermediate, Full (change the names if you don't like them - Third, Second, First, Novice, General, Extra, whatever) 2) HF/MF bands split into subbands by mode and split again by license class. Some bands (30 meters) may be split by mode only. Bottom of each band is CW only, middle is CW/digital, top is CW/phone/image. Percentage division about 20%/30%/50% (varies with band). "Digital" includes digital voice modes if bandwidth under 1 kHz. clip....clip.....clip Sames old disincentive licensing scheme we've had since the 60's warmed over a bit. Yawn. 73, de Hans, K0HB Sounds like what we've inherited today. Let's do something rational instead. Brian |
Subject: Why You Don't Like Ham's Who Can't Accept Change.
From: (N2EY) Date: 12/24/03 9:21 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: In article , (Len Over 21) writes: Amateur radio FUN is only "ancilliary" to the U.S. amateur radio SERVICE. Ham radio is all about wearing a Lifestyle mental uniform, marching in ranks to the morse drumbeat of the 1930s, and being ready, willing, able to "take over communications" when all the commercial/professional infrastructure FAILS in an emergency? That's the thoughts I see expressed in here. By whom? There can be no fun in the ham SERVICE. Says who? Say Sir Putzii the First. He's said it over and over so it HAS to be true, Jim. =) Thank God yet another "holiday" is only 7 hours from being over. Maybe we can get back to some semplence of sanity...But not until the "Day After" sakes are over, I guess..... 73 Steve, K4YZ |
Subject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL
From: "KØHB" Date: 12/25/03 10:47 AM Central Standard Time Message-id: .net clip....clip.....clip Sames old disincentive licensing scheme we've had since the 60's warmed over a bit. It's only a "disincentive" to those who want something for nothing, Hans. 73 Steve, K4YZ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:36 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com