"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

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...

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." 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.

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.

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.

"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. 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. 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 are being truly a contentious OLD fart in here, trolling desperately
for someone to despise...and then doing a poor job of denigration.

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'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.

It's too bad that your Xanax ran out and you switched from ran to rant.


Sometimes the pool-pah exceeds the ability of humans to comment......

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 -