(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian) writes:

Of this minority, the ARRL polled their little group in the mid-late
nineties, and came away with "no clear mandate." An even spilt within
the ranks of the true believers? So even at the time, something was
wearing away at the propaganda machine. I wonder what's happened
since then?

As I see it the schism is from the general attitude of long-timers
evolving into two main groupings: Those that mightily resist change
and those who can accept change.

You WOULD see a "schism", Lennie, but then since you are NOT a
part of Amateur Radio and do NOT have any experience in matters
pertaining TO Amateur Radio, yours is an uninformed opinion.

The first group wants a relatively inflexible hobby activity, generally
frozen...(SNIPPED)

You have yet to have this incessantly repeated assertion
validated by any substantial evidence, except for your own mindless
rantings, Your Scumminess.

The second group is accepting of change and they are not afraid of
it (although the constant advancement of all electronics does cause
some irritation). They are more interested in communicating and the
communication arts, are willing to try out new things. They have a
more realistic view of amateur radio as an avocational activity and
don't have it become their lifestyle. They don't mind the "fraternal
order" aspect (some enjoy that) but, at the same time, they are
into trying out new things of many kinds. Their emphasis is on
communicating, not the mode of communication.

You really do hate the "lifestyle" thing, don't you, Lennie?

It just irks the be-jeebers out of you that people do for
free-and-fun that which you only saw as a pecuniary pursuit.

Sucks to be you, Putz.

The first group...(SNIP)

"The first group" of "what", Lennie? From what poll or
demographics survey did you come up with ANY different "groups"...?!?!

A casual purusing of todays QST or CQ magazine compared with,
say, September 1955 will immediately shatter any more of your
assertions of "stuck" in past practices or technologies rants.

It should be clear that there will never be any "consensus" on
code testing as long as such beligerance remains rooted among
the self-styled elite morsemen of U.S. amateur radio.

So what you're saying is that until everyone sees it YOUR way,
there'll be no concensus, huh???

Arrogant Putz.

Steve, K4YZ

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian) writes:

Of this minority, the ARRL polled their little group in the mid-late
nineties, and came away with "no clear mandate." An even spilt within
the ranks of the true believers? So even at the time, something was
wearing away at the propaganda machine. I wonder what's happened
since then?

As I see it the schism is from the general attitude of long-timers
evolving into two main groupings: Those that mightily resist change
and those who can accept change.

You WOULD see a "schism", Lennie, but then since you are NOT a
part of Amateur Radio and do NOT have any experience in matters
pertaining TO Amateur Radio, yours is an uninformed opinion.

I have experience in matters pertaining to amateur radio.

And I see the same thing.

Both of our opinions are validated by your daily postings.

Subject: Why You Don't Like The ARRL
From: (Brian)
Date: 12/20/03 2:21 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message
.com...
(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Brian) writes:

Of this minority, the ARRL polled their little group in the mid-late
nineties, and came away with "no clear mandate." An even spilt within
the ranks of the true believers? So even at the time, something was
wearing away at the propaganda machine. I wonder what's happened
since then?

As I see it the schism is from the general attitude of long-timers
evolving into two main groupings: Those that mightily resist change
and those who can accept change.

You WOULD see a "schism", Lennie, but then since you are NOT a
part of Amateur Radio and do NOT have any experience in matters
pertaining TO Amateur Radio, yours is an uninformed opinion.

I have experience in matters pertaining to amateur radio.

BBBWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! ! ! ! !

OH YES, Brain! We have SEEN your "experience" in Amateur Radio! No
logs...Unsubstantiated claims...Inability to name even ONE person who may have
"worked" you from Somalia and have a T5/N0IMD card that could "validate" your
claims...?!?!

Yes Sir, I am soooooooooooooooo (un)impressed!

And I see the same thing.

No doubt you see a LOT of things, Brain!

Both of our opinions are validated by your daily postings.

Both of your opinions have the "support" of your years of failed rantings
in this forum, unsubstantiated claims, and YOUR acknowledged support and
admiration of a "man" who is a documented pathological liar!

So please....Tell me about your valued opinion again, Brain...?!?!

BBBWWWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA ! ! ! ! ! !

Steve, K4YZ

Len Over 21 wrote:

...written by many of the beligerant...

"belligerent"

...as long as such beligerance remains rooted

"belligerence"

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

...written by many of the beligerant...

"belligerent"

...as long as such beligerance remains rooted

"belligerence"

Dave K8MN

Dave, once again, takes the honors at the national spelling bee,
beating out 9 year old Mary Caldwell, who ran off-stage in tears.

Brian wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Len Over 21 wrote:

...written by many of the beligerant...

"belligerent"

...as long as such beligerance remains rooted

"belligerence"

Dave K8MN

Dave, once again, takes the honors at the national spelling bee,
beating out 9 year old Mary Caldwell, who ran off-stage in tears.

Actually, I took top honors from seventy-year-old Leonard "Atila"
Anderson, a PROFESSIONAL writer.

Dave K8MN

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 02:44:02 GMT, Dave Heil wrote:

You claim to know what is best for amateur radio. Your comments above
do not address morse testing; they address morse USE. What is it to
you, a fellow with no stake at all in amateur radio, if radio amateurs
continue to use morse?

Not only that, at a recent meeting, the ITU-T (Telecommunications
Group, which defines coding) put forth a definition for a _new_
character in International Morse - the "at" sign (@). It's
.__._. (_AC_).

So much for "Morse is dead".

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
(Who is in favor of deleting the Morse
test but continuing the use of Morse)

"Phil Kane" wrote in message . net...
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 02:44:02 GMT, Dave Heil wrote:

You claim to know what is best for amateur radio. Your comments above
do not address morse testing; they address morse USE. What is it to
you, a fellow with no stake at all in amateur radio, if radio amateurs
continue to use morse?

Not only that, at a recent meeting, the ITU-T (Telecommunications
Group, which defines coding) put forth a definition for a _new_
character in International Morse - the "at" sign (@). It's
.__._. (_AC_).

So much for "Morse is dead".

Hopefully they decided to define all the other characters and set the
timing for a dot, a dash, an intercharacter space, and an interword
space.

So much for, "Morse is alive."

"Dave Heil" wrote in message
...
Len Over 21 wrote:
[snip]
Three-fourths of all licensed U.S. radio amateurs "took that view"
and are NOT members.

You have no idea of the views held by those radio amateurs who are or
are not members of the ARRL, Leonard. You aren't a player from within
or without.


And there are simply a lot of people who are not joiners. What percent of
the seniors belong to AARP? What percent of gun owners belong to the NRA.
With 1/4 or so of the licensed amateurs belonging to ARRL, it would not be
surprising to if the ARRL were to rank quite high on the list of target
group people actually belonging to the organization.

[snip]
Three-fourths of all U.S. radio amateurs are NOT members.

Think on that, Klunk.

I've thought about it. One quarter of U.S. radio amateurs ARE members.
You are not in either camp.

Dave K8MN

It would be interesting to compare the ARRL membership percentage to groups
like AARP and NRA.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

In article om, "Dee D.
Flint" writes:

"Dave Heil" wrote in message
...
Len Over 21 wrote:
[snip]
Three-fourths of all licensed U.S. radio amateurs "took that view"
and are NOT members.

You have no idea of the views held by those radio amateurs who are or
are not members of the ARRL, Leonard. You aren't a player from within
or without.


And there are simply a lot of people who are not joiners. What percent of
the seniors belong to AARP? What percent of gun owners belong to the NRA.

What percentage of US hams belong to NCI? (Less than 1%)


With 1/4 or so of the licensed amateurs belonging to ARRL, it would not be
surprising to if the ARRL were to rank quite high on the list of target
group people actually belonging to the organization.

[snip]
Three-fourths of all U.S. radio amateurs are NOT members.

Think on that, Klunk.

I've thought about it. One quarter of U.S. radio amateurs ARE members.
You are not in either camp.

More than 99% are not NCI members, either.

It would be interesting to compare the ARRL membership percentage to groups
like AARP and NRA

Good point!

I would add this, though:

There are currently about 684,000 individuals with US amateur radio licenses.
Of these, at least 328,000 hold General, Advanced or Extra class amateur
licenses. (I mention this group because they have access to all amateur radio
HF/MF bands and modes, at full power). Novices and "Techs with HF" make up at
least another 100,000, but their privileges only cover two modes and small
parts of four bands.

Not including the five 60 meter channels and the Alaska emergency frequency,
the US amateur bands below 30 MHz amount to 3,750 kHz of spectrum.

So why aren't the bands filled to overflowing with amateur signals 24/7? If
even 1% of those 328,000 are on the HF/MF bands at any given time, that's 3,280
- a litle more than a kHz per ham, from the bottom of 160 to the top of 10.
And that's not counting DX or Novices and Tech-Pluses.

A similar situation exists on VHF/UHF.

The inescapable conclusion is that many of those listed in the database are
either totally inactive or only slightly active.

73 de Jim, N2EY