"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.

2) QST and other publications (only the RSGB Handbook is comparable)

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.

Memory lane.

3) Contests and operating activities (particularly SS and FD)

I'm not a contester, but sponsoring such activities is fine (glad they're
not using valuable QST pages for data dumps of results, though ... the
website is a much better venue for that info).

The CQWW magazine regularly presents information on the modernizing of
the ARS, and even has space to present contest information.

4) Product reviews (much more in-depth than any other amateur publication)

The lab does a great job on product reviews.

Ditto.

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.

6) W1AW (been there and operated the station, too)

I have mixed views on the value of W1AW ... a good museum to "the Old Man,"
but perhaps its services could be provided by alternative means at lower
operating cost.

Commercial gear? Why?

Having said all of that, I'll now surprise some of you who have accused me
of being
an "ARRL-hater" (not saying that Jim has made that accusation).

I recently paid the $975 fee and am now a Life Member of the ARRL.

While I've had, and may continue to have, disagreements on some aspects of
policy with the ARRL Board, I recognize that the ARRL does do a LOT of
good things for the ARS and, in addition to my previous contribution to the
BPL
fund, I wanted to support the organization's good works (I can always
continue
to fight with them on areas of disagreement :-)

I don't disagree that the ARRL is a valuable organization in the US,
and I will continue to support it. However, when it comes to the
future of the ARS, I'd rather stand before the FCC and handle my views
all by myself.

73,
Carl - wk3c

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

73, Brian

"Brian" wrote in message
om...
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.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee D. Flint wrote:

"Brian" wrote in message
om...

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

Always have an encore ready.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
. ..
Dee D. Flint wrote:

"Brian" wrote in message
om...

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?

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".

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

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. 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.

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.

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





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?

- Mike KB3EIA -

"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.

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).

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

73, de Hans, K0HB

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

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 -

"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

Bill Sohl wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...


Bill Sohl wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
et...


Dee D. Flint wrote:


"Brian" wrote in message
gle.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....

You are kind of right there Bill. I can prove to you without a doubt
that a person can get on the air without ever taking a test. They can
get on the air and run relatively high power without doing harm to
themselves. There is no need for any yada yada at all.

It isn't mystical, it isn't yada yada. It is philosophy. And my
philosophy is that the amateur should want to be an amateur, and should
have some level of knowledge in order to be there.

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?

Now I'm a little confused. As far as I know, if you want a general or
above, you still have to take a Morse code test. And they don't do tech
plusses any more. My Tech license had no code test in 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?

I support strengthening the tests. In general, I want more questions on
theory, and more procedural questions. I wouldn't mind if there were a
ham etiquette section added to the test.

I want the new ham to come on board with some idea of what is expected
of him or her in the way of how to conduct themselves on the air. I want
them to have at least a rudimentary knowledge of electronics, and know
some basics on antenna theory, like our "quarter wave dipole" discussion
on rrap of a few months back proves is needed.


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.

No kidding! I want the level of the tests changed though. And not to the
level of the "average sixth grader" either.


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


Encouraged about what?

About little or no testing.


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.

Show me where I said it was!

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.

I'm not talking about NCI, I'm talking about NCI members. There is a
difference. As far as I know, NCI has no official opinions beyond ending
the Morse code test.

- Mike KB3EIA -