N2EY wrote:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:


In article ,
(Brian) writes:


(N2EY) wrote in message
le.com...


Ah, there's where your logic fails, Dave. You're working on a false
premise.

You're *assuming* that everyone who has an opinion on amateur radio
policy issues is interested in amateur radio having the best possible
future. And in most cases that's true - but not when Mr. Anderson is
involved. His behavior here, and his comments to FCC, indicate that
he's *not* interested in what's best for amateur radio. He's just
interested in stirring up division, discord and hostility between
amateurs, diverting them from other issues, and denying amateur
traditions and contributions to society and the radio art.

Inventive Licensing comes to mind as the big divider.

:-)


;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)

Suppose someone really hated amateur radio and wanted to damage it as
much as possible without being obvious about what they were doing.

Wouldn't one way to do that be to try to maximize internal bickering
and arguing among hams, thereby diverting them from useful discussion?

One could propose to the FCC a licensing structure with multiple
levels, multiple exams, and multiple privelege slices and power
levels.

Another way is to have everyone believe in the same thing...as is
published every month in a certain membership magazine.


What magazine is that, Ellsworth...err, Leonard?

As a single "authoritative voice," a New England membership
group DEFINES everything in amateurism for all amateurs. No
bickering, no dissension, no arguing. All do as They say.
No problems. Everyone happy in Nirvana.


Which group and which magazine? ham radio and 73 magazines were New England
based, but they're both defunct.

Your description of a membership organization that does not tolerate dissent
sounds exactly like NoCode International. Right in their bylaws it says that
any member who publicly disagrees with their stated position on code testing is
subject to expulsion. They also require that all members agree to their prime
directive goal as a condition of membership. No one who disagrees with their
core policy can be a member of NoCode International.

I'm not saying that's right or wrong, just stating facts.

And now some puzzle pieces fit together. I can now reconcile Carl's
vision of how leaders are supposed to lead and his organization. Strong
leadership, independent from member opinion, and if you don't like it,
you're out.

Umm, no thanks.

- Mike KB3EIA -

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

Steve, I think it has to do with the disincentive of Morse Code
testing. You might want to check with Len on this.

Why?

Morse Code is only required for access to less than 3% of all Amateur
allocations, none of which is above 30MHz.

Lennie keeps asserting that the future of Amateur Radio is in the new
technologies, none of which is occuring below 30Mhz.

Lennie ALSO keeps insisting Amateur Radio is "stuck" in the 1930's
somewhere, yet evidence in every media indicates he's grossly mistaken. Also,
the fact that the majority of Amateur Radio activity takes place above 30Mhz
further exposes Lennie's rants for the silliness and antagonistic fodder they
are.

Ask Lennie? I could, but that would just amke the heap of unanswered
questions that much higher.

Steve, K4YZ

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

You're probably right. Everyone who holds an amateur ticket likely had
some incentive. Len had none.

The ONLY way to have incentive is to get a ham license.

The radio god has spoken.

No gods needed. Simple observation will show that someone who proclaims
a decades-long interest in amateur radio and who has never bothered to
attempt even the easiest license exam has no incentive to obtain an
amateur radio license. See "intertia".

It won't bother me if you never obtain an amateur radio license, Len.
Just don't feign interest and then attempt to tell me how you think
amateur radio should be regulated.

Dave K8MN

Brian wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Brian wrote:

(N2EY) wrote in message . com...

You're *assuming* that everyone who has an opinion on amateur radio
policy issues is interested in amateur radio having the best possible
future. And in most cases that's true - but not when Mr. Anderson is
involved. His behavior here, and his comments to FCC, indicate that
he's *not* interested in what's best for amateur radio. He's just
interested in stirring up division, discord and hostility between
amateurs, diverting them from other issues, and denying amateur
traditions and contributions to society and the radio art.

Inventive Licensing comes to mind as the big divider.

You're probably right. Everyone who holds an amateur ticket likely had
some incentive. Len had none.

Dave K8MN

Of course I'm right! ;^)

Len, like any Americans who've shown an interest in the ARS, have a
disincentive. It is the Morse requirement for HF access.

Your claim might ring true if Len had bothered to obtain a code-free
ticket at some point. He hasn't.

Dave K8MN

Brian wrote:

Steve, I think it has to do with the disincentive of Morse Code
testing. You might want to check with Len on this.


You'll pardon our confusion. You've been acting as Len's representative
for a few posts now in speaking of his motivations or lack thereof. I
wasn't aware that you'd turned the controls over to him.

Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Brian wrote:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...
Brian wrote:

(N2EY) wrote in message
.com...

You're *assuming* that everyone who has an opinion on amateur radio
policy issues is interested in amateur radio having the best possible
future. And in most cases that's true - but not when Mr. Anderson is
involved. His behavior here, and his comments to FCC, indicate that
he's *not* interested in what's best for amateur radio. He's just
interested in stirring up division, discord and hostility between
amateurs, diverting them from other issues, and denying amateur
traditions and contributions to society and the radio art.

Inventive Licensing comes to mind as the big divider.

You're probably right. Everyone who holds an amateur ticket likely had
some incentive. Len had none.

Dave K8MN

Of course I'm right! ;^)

Len, like any Americans who've shown an interest in the ARS, have a
disincentive. It is the Morse requirement for HF access.

Your claim might ring true if Len had bothered to obtain a code-free
ticket at some point. He hasn't.

Of whom are you speaking, old man?

I've had HF access several times in the last half century, all legal,
all involving actual communications. No amateur license was
required at any time. No morse skill needed whatsoever.

The discussion should be about the federal regulations for an amateur
radio license regulation, not the individual "motivations" of any
aspirant to an avocational radio activity.

You constantly insist on personalizing everything about those who do
not share your holy and illustrious viewpoints. That is your problem
and you continually foul this newsgroup with arrogant remarks against
the person of those of opposite opinions. Not my problem but
certainly yours in attitude.

Amateur radio is supposed to be a recreation, a fun activity involving
radio, licensing required only because of physics of EM waves and
federal regulation. Instead, you've turned it into a battleground of
your own, arrogantly demanding adherence to your personal view-
points. You join several others in here in so doing, some past, some
present. That's counter to the original purpose of "the service," isn't
it? Or is it?

Perhaps you embody modern amateur radio, a constant striving for
leading the pack in competitive activity? A competition complete
with taunts and jibes and outright insults against those who
"challenge" your arrogant expertise? If so, there is no wonder that
amateur radio has not increased in number commensurate with
the growth in population.

Enjoy your little clique of morse code uber alles in amateur radio
where the "bands" are only on HF. Feel superior that you've met all
the criteria and standards established by long-gone amateurs of past
times. You are important, superior, vital, and that is all that matters.

You should be demanding that ALL test for high rates of morse in
order to become fully FDA licensed as a ham. Condemn all those
who cannot learn, will not learn, nor share your opinions.

May Santa bring you an irrepairable intermittent in your favorite HF
transceiver along with a truckload of dusty, high-sulphur-content
coal in your stocking. Merry Christmas.

LHA

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article ,

(Len Over 21) writes:



As a single "authoritative voice," a New England membership
group DEFINES everything in amateurism for all amateurs. No
bickering, no dissension, no arguing. All do as They say.
No problems. Everyone happy in Nirvana.

Which group and which magazine? ham radio and 73 magazines were New England
based, but they're both defunct.

Your description of a membership organization that does not tolerate dissent
sounds exactly like NoCode International. Right in their bylaws it says that
any member who publicly disagrees with their stated position on code testing
is
subject to expulsion. They also require that all members agree to their
prime
directive goal as a condition of membership. No one who disagrees with their
core policy can be a member of NoCode International.

I'm not saying that's right or wrong, just stating facts.

And now some puzzle pieces fit together. I can now reconcile Carl's
vision of how leaders are supposed to lead and his organization. Strong
leadership, independent from member opinion, and if you don't like it,
you're out.

Jimmie isn't stating any "facts." He is simply manufacturing an
argument for the sake of something to argue about. SOP for Jimmie.
[he seems to need something, anything, to argue about every day]

No Code International is most of all a political special interest group.
It asks for no dues, does not demand a license of any kind in order
to belong.

Unlike the ARRL...which IS a dues-asking, amateur license required,
membership organization and political special interest group and a
publishing business, NCI does not pretend to represent "all" amateurs.

ARRL pretends to "represent all amateurs" yet they still haven't
gotten close to a majority of all licensed U.S. amateurs to belong
to them. They've not been able to do that for years past.

ARRL refuses to take a stand on code testing in the USA yet the
International Amateur Radio Union long ago came out for eliminating
the code test internationally. Once that happens, NCI has stated
that it will dissolve, cease to exist as a special interest entity.

NCI is a very small group, has no law firm on retainer in DC, nor
does it have another group on retainer to lobby the FCC. ARRL does.
NCI directors get out and personally lobby for action on elimination
of code testing, including all the way to Geneva and WRC-03...and
not on a multi-million annual budget available to the ARRL.

ARRL is your shepherd, you shall not want...

Amen

LHA