"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
Leadership is
when one has the courage and wisdom to make a sound judgement
and then "do the right thing."

Who decides what "the right thing" really is?

That's what "leadership" is *supposed* to be there for ... to make
the tough calls when the answer isn't necessarily obvious (or may
be right, but not overwhelmingly popular).

For example, look at
that "21st century" paper (CQ published it, btw, and it was in their
mill before I evder saw it, so don't give me a hard time about it). Is
the "Communicator" idea "the right thing"?

No ... we need more people who understand radio, not more appliance
operators.

Otherwise, they could just do a web vote
popularity contest on every issue and wouldn't need Directors ... the
staff could handle the whole thing ...

And if that vote runs opposite to what you think is "the right thing"?

I wasn't advocating a popularity contest ... just saying that if nobody in
"leadership" has the cajones and good judgement to make the right call,
then it might as well devolve to that ...

It sounds to me like you're saying the ARRL Directors should sometimes
go against what the majority of members say they want. Do you really
think that's a good idea?

Yes ... the leadership should, theoretically at least, have superior
knowledge,
insight, and experience and should be there to guide, not simply be a bunch
of political "yes men" to a majority who may/may not necessarily make the
best
choices in terms of what's in the best interests of ham radio long term.

What I was referring to were things like CW practice, bulletins, etc.
All
of that could
be provided (and much is) by the web site, and probably would reduce
operating
costs. (Though doing things by non-radio means is heresy to some ...)

IOW, you want to shut down the station.

No, I wasn't saying that ... I was just "thinking out loud" about what
things
might be more cost-effectively provided by other means.

The whole point of W1AW is to do those things by *radio*. If we're
going to use the website for bulletins and code practice, why not rag
chewing, traffic handling, DX chasing, contesting......

I've always said that the ampr.org domain should be come a much more
integrated, vibrant part of the internet as a whole ...

Carl - wk3c

"KØHB" wrote in message
link.net...

"N2EY" wrote


It sounds to me like you're saying the ARRL Directors should sometimes
go against what the majority of members say they want. Do you really
think that's a good idea?


Yes, sometimes I think it IS a good idea. That sort of activity is often
called leadership.

Other times I think it's NOT a good idea.

The mark of a good leader is determining the difference.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Hans,

You and I are on the same frequency on this one ... you said it
clearer than I did the first time, but hopefully my explanation was
better in response to Jim's question.

73,
Carl - wk3c

In article .net, "KØHB"
writes:

"Mike Coslo" wrote

Code test dissapears, nothing in it's place. I want to see something in
it's place, or else itis pretty hard to argue that it hasn't been made
much much easier to get a license.

Siince the Novice license was discontinued, it has become more difficult to
become an amateur.

That means passing the post-restructuring 35 question Tech test is "more
difficult" (YMMV on what constitutes "more difficult") than passing both the
pre-restructuring 30 question Novice test *and* the 5 wpm code receiving test.

Sunuvagun!

Not a filter, not a way of keeping people out. just a way
of ensuring that the amateur has some level of acumen.

I don't hold the opinion that the Morse test established that the applicant
has any "level of acumen" (check with Funk and Wagnalls before you respond).

Nor does the written test....

In the world of Amateur Radio there are users and tinkerers. We need more
tinkerers, not more users.

Have the changes of 2000 gotten us more tinkerers per unit time than before?

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote


That means passing the post-restructuring 35 question Tech test is "more
difficult" than passing both the pre-restructuring 30 question Novice
test *and* the 5 wpm code receiving test.


Yes. (But only barely, and it is woefully inadequate for the resultant
privileges.)


Have the changes of 2000 gotten us more tinkerers per unit time than
before?


What the hell are "tinkerers per unit time"? The generally accepted
language of rrap is English.

73, de Hans, K0HB

In article .net, "KØHB"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote


Last time a construction article with Nuvistors in it was when?
Probably 1965 or so. Almost 40 years.

The current issue of QST has some really up-to-date-technology in it, not
quite Nuvistors, but well beyond spark.

Yep. It's the annual "vintage radio" issue. Says so right on the cover.

For example, a full length article on how important the quartz crystal
industry was to winning the war. (WW-II, that is!)

Yep. It's the annual "vintage radio" issue. Says so right on the cover. Radio
grade quartz was mined back then - today it's grown.

Or another full length article on bringing a DX-100 AM transmitter (1955
era) up to factory spec.

Yep. It's the annual "vintage radio" issue. Says so right on the cover.

The DX-100 was basically a bargain version of the Viking 2/ 122 VFO combo in
one box. Not as good, though. YMMV.

The article tells how a ham bought an old Heathkit rig on eBay, fixed it up,
and put it on the air. Looks like he had fun doing it, too. Rig was actually
Made In USA, and the present owner actually worked on it hisself. Very
electro-politically incorrect.

Or how about the leading edge article on restoring a 1948 wooden-chassis
homebrew 2-tube transmitter?

Yep. It's the annual "vintage radio" issue. Says so right on the cover.

The DX-100 was basically a bargain version of the Viking 2/ 122 VFO combo in
one box. Not as good, though. YMMV.

The article tells how a ham bought an old homebrew rig on eBay, fixed it up,
made a few modifications and put it on the air. Looks like he had fun doing it,
too. Rig was actually home-built by a ham - not even a kit. Parts were all Made
In USA, and the present owner actually worked on it hisself. And it puts out a
perfectly clean signal. Very, very electro-politically incorrect, though.

How dare these hams actually work on their own rigs! Next thing you know,
they'll be turning their backs on Ikensu....

Hang around, and pretty soon -- perhaps within the decade -- we'll get up to
Nuvistor technology!

PS: I almost forgot to mention, there's also some tantalizing information
in this issue about panoramic reception, developed in 1932 by F3HM. Maybe
it'll catch on!

I recall about a decade ago when the IC-781 appeared how gaga some folks were
over the display. As if nobody had ever done it before. Shades of the QS-59
receiver....

Also in the same issue of QST:

- Article on using a transmitter-receiver modules to eliminate the key cable
(tail wagging the dog..)

- 5 page article on the K1B Baker Island DXpedition

- Article on contesting as a "little pistol"

- Article on "casual" RTTY contesting

- "Short Takes" column on MultiPSK freeware package (does several flavors of
PSK, SSTV, RTTY, AMTOR, Hellschreiber, and (oh yes) CW

- 3-1/2 page article on building an AC wattmeter

- 2 page "Hands On Radio" column. This is #12 in a series - subject is FETs.

- 2 page "Hints and Kinks" column.

- 5 page review of the Ten Tec Orion

- 2 page review of the SGC add on audio DSP unit (ADSP2)

- Correspondence from Members, Happenings, Technical Correspondence, Public
Service, DX, Exam Info, World above 50 MHz, At The Foundation, Old Radio, YL
News, SKs, New Products, 75/50/25 years ago in QST, Contest and hamfest
calendars, W1AW schedule...

- Microwavelengths (Part 1 of an article about microwave LNAs - no nuvistors in
sight)

- Results of June VHF contest, School club Roundup, August UHF contest.

- and more. 160 pages this issue.

How many articles of cutting-edge technology have you submitted?

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote


Yep. It's the annual "vintage radio" issue. Says so right on the cover.


Thank you, Thank You, THANK YOU!!! You make my point exactly!!!

I'm very much an ARRL supporter, but an "Annual Vintage Radio Issue" is a
pathetic statement about the technical leadership out of 225 Main Street.
Sorta validates LHA's persistent jeremiads about how backward amateurs seem
to him. How much nicer if there were an "Annual Future Systems Issue".

73, de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote


Code test dissapears, nothing in it's place. I want to see something in
it's place, or else itis pretty hard to argue that it hasn't been made
much much easier to get a license.


Siince the Novice license was discontinued, it has become more difficult to
become an amateur.

really? The most difficult thing for me in Amateur Radio was to learn
Morse code. It would have taken me just as long to get a Novice as it
would to get my General ticket.


Not a filter, not a way of keeping people out. just a way
of ensuring that the amateur has some level of acumen.


I don't hold the opinion that the Morse test established that the applicant
has any "level of acumen" (check with Funk and Wagnalls before you respond).

acumen: keenness and depth of perception, discernment, or discrimination
especially in practical matters.

Sounds good to me Hans, although it was from Merriam Webster, not Funk
and Wagnalls. Any other corrections to make to my posts?

I'm a firm believer that we need to ensure that the prospective amateur
is *interested* in the hobby. No question to me that the old Morse code
test went some way towards that. That's not a filter. Making a
prospective ham have to stand up against a tree while other hams throw
eggs at him/her before a license is issued is a filter.

The Morse code is almost certainly going away. I don't really give a
good rat's backside about it. So now we are arguing about whatever word
you want to use instead of acumen. I desire more, and you appear to
desire less.

In the world of Amateur Radio there are users and tinkerers. We need more
tinkerers, not more users.

Well we aren't heading that way!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

"Brian" wrote in message
om...

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message

...

"N2EY" wrote in message
...

In no particular order:

1) Representation of amateur radio (what other organization or

individual

would

do anyhting like the 121 page commentary on BPL?)

Representation of what the Board *perceives* to be the wishes of the
membership.
I don't believe that non-members get the same attention on issues as
members, but
that is reasonable, since member dues support the ARRL.

This member supports the ARRL. Also, this member did not receive a
questionare when the ARRL was conducting a poll of members and
non-members.


Perhaps they did a random survey of some percentage of the membership?


5) Elected officials (they listen even if they don't agree)

YMMV, depending on what area you live in, whether your Director is
open-minded and progressive, etc.

Apparently they think that they cannot present the needs or want of
both camps until they come to a concensus.


The "c-word" is an excuse to do nothing.

No it doesn't. I've used consensus building for years. I don't do it
unless a decision *needs* to be made. I even use it in situations where
I have absolute dictatorial power, such as on my Ice Hockey team. I find
out what the guys think on a lot of the issues. Then as long as it makes
sense, and is within the rules I'll decide what they like. You'd be
surprised how well they listen to you when they *need* to when you
listen to them when you *should*.

Other BOD activities I've been involved in are run the same way -
although I don't have absolute power there! 8^)

On some things there may
never be consensus - should the ARRL do nothing? Leadership is
when one has the courage and wisdom to make a sound judgement
and then "do the right thing."

Sure, ya have to do that sometimes. Problem is that if you use that
courage and wisdom in the wrong way, you can find yourself on the
outside pretty quickly. Then you're a leader with no flock. No leader at
all.

Otherwise, they could just do a web vote

familiar with web voting?

popularity contest on every issue and wouldn't need Directors ... the
staff could handle the whole thing ...

Leaders get usually get elected or appointed or whatever because they
have some values that appeal to those who are to be governed. The most
successful leaders I know ask for and get as much input as they can when
faced with decisions. Figuring that you know the answers and what you
know is right regardless is hubris.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
et...

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 16:12:40 -0000, Carl R. Stevenson wrote:


QST has gotten better, with the dropping of a lot of the contest data
and more focus on a range of articles from beginner to expert level.
I'd like to see more technical focus on modern stuff and fewer
articles on building regen receivers with tubes, though.

Yeah, Nuvistors are getting hard to get.


And even half-a**ed decent transistors can blow their performance away,
with better ones being worlds better.

My point is essentially that, IMHO, there is too much "nostalgia" and
"let's go back to the past" content in QST. I'd prefer a more bleeding
edge "let's push into the future" approach myself.

I really enjoy the old timey stories. And I'm not an old time ham,
being first licensed in fall of 1998.

And you might think of writing some articles. (forgive if you already
have, I've only read QST for a short time now)

I'd love to see cutting edge stuff, although I would prefer emphasis on
RF instead of digital.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...


Bill Sohl wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
. ..

Dee D. Flint wrote:

"Brian" wrote in message
e.com...

Carl, you should see the NCI bashing being done by Dee and Jim on the
other ARRL thread.

73, Brian


I have never bashed the NCI. I've stated that I disagree with their
goal

but that does not constitute bashing them.

I have! I think that they have recieved what they wanted, but as yet
don't really offer anything of substance to fill the gap.


What GAP?

Code test dissapears, nothing in it's place.

Why should there be anything in its place? This isn't about
some mystical quantification of effort, dedication, yada yada....
The morse tests have completely disappeared for General
and Extra without anything taking its place. If 5 wpm is dropped
for tech, why should there be something to replace it?

I want to see something in
it's place, or else itis pretty hard to argue that it hasn't been made
much much easier to get a license.

Ending a requirement that no longer has a rational need
does not translate into a search for some "replacement".
If you had the opportunity to state what the replacement
should be, what would you suggest?

You may want it made much easier to get a license, but I don't. Not a
filter, not a way of keeping people out. just a way of ensuring that the
amateur has some level of acumen.

Ending morse doesn't change the level of written tests.

Otherwise, those who want little or no testing are just encouraged.

Encouraged about what?

Instead, some
members express "unofficial opinions that scare the bejabbers out of me.

"Some members"? Who? It is always easy to make non-speciifc
accusations against unidentified "some members".

W5YI for one. I trust you have read his work?

W5YI's comments as to testing issues beyond the elimination
of code testing are NOT, in any way, shape or form,
the position or opinion of NCI.

As to other NCI members, assuming you can ID someone,
they too may have a personal belief as to how testing should go...
but that does NOT make their opinions or beliefs NCI
doctrine.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK