"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article ,
ospam
(Larry Roll K3LT) writes:

Jim:

This new ARRL Proposal is pretty much what I would expect to come out of
Newington these days.

Except it didn't come out of Newington - it's the result of the BoD's
vote. And
the BoD are from all over the country, elected by the members.


True indeed. However, it would be interesting to see how much "membership"
actually participated a) in the election of the BoD and b) how much--because
of that--the ARRL's decisions are actually influenced by a majority of US
Amateur Radio Operators.

Nothing wrong with the concept that the BoD represents someone, but who they
represent is those members of whom decide to actually be active in the
goings-on of the ARRL; and I don't think many do. Any numbers on that?

"Kim

wrote in message ...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article ,
ospam
(Larry Roll K3LT) writes:

Jim:

This new ARRL Proposal is pretty much what I would expect to come out of
Newington these days.

Except it didn't come out of Newington - it's the result of the BoD's
vote. And
the BoD are from all over the country, elected by the members.

True indeed. However, it would be interesting to see how much "membership"
actually participated

a) in the election of the BoD

Every full member gets a ballot. If they don't bother to fill it out
and send it in, it's their loss.

The requirements to run for Director are pretty simple, too.

and b) how much--because
of that--the ARRL's decisions are actually influenced by a majority of US
Amateur Radio Operators.

Obviously not as much as we might like, because the majority of US hams
who bothered to express an opinion on code testing in comments to FCC
back in 98-143 times wanted at least 2 code test speeds. And the comments
to the various petitions now before the FCC on code testing (like
RM-10811) are majority-pro-code-test.

So the ARRL BoD is obviously taking some people's definition of "leadership"
(meaning do what you think is best regardless of majority opinion) in
proposing what they've proposed.

Nothing wrong with the concept that the BoD represents someone, but who they
represent is those members of whom decide to actually be active in the
goings-on of the ARRL; and I don't think many do. Any numbers on that?

You can look up the various BoD election results as to who got how many votes.

--

What will be really interesting is if/when FCC gives it an RM number, and
what the comments are. And what FCC will do.

I'm thinking that the free upgrade thing (which was
rejected back in restructuring time) will be rejected *again*, and that
the "21st Century Novice" idea will be adopted.

I recall Hans predicting a 15 wpm code test for Extra as part ot the ARRL
proposal.....

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote

I recall Hans predicting a 15 wpm code test for Extra as part ot the
ARRL
proposal.....

You recall wrong. To see my actual prediction, do a google group search
on "ARRL BoD platitudes" without the quotes.

With all kind wishes,

de Hans, K0HB

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article ,
ospam
(Larry Roll K3LT) writes:

Jim:

This new ARRL Proposal is pretty much what I would expect to come out
of
Newington these days.

Except it didn't come out of Newington - it's the result of the BoD's
vote. And
the BoD are from all over the country, elected by the members.


True indeed. However, it would be interesting to see how much
"membership"
actually participated a) in the election of the BoD and b) how
much--because
of that--the ARRL's decisions are actually influenced by a majority of US
Amateur Radio Operators.

Nothing wrong with the concept that the BoD represents someone, but who
they
represent is those members of whom decide to actually be active in the
goings-on of the ARRL; and I don't think many do. Any numbers on that?



Why single out the ARRL? Almost every organization and our national
political scene is the same way. A few active people get out and vote. A
few active people get out and do the work. These are the people who always
have and always will shape policy. Yet those who are unwilling to vote or
do the work continually whine about how they are not represented. It is the
same thing throughout our society. The ARRL is not unique.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

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

Why single out the ARRL? Almost every organization and our national
political scene is the same way. A few active people get out and vote. A
few active people get out and do the work. These are the people who always
have and always will shape policy. Yet those who are unwilling to vote or
do the work continually whine about how they are not represented. It is the
same thing throughout our society. The ARRL is not unique.

Gasp! You mean that the ARRL does NOT represent amateur
radio in the USA?

How can that be? Doesn't everyone write their Director/Section
Manager who will faithfully and honestly bring their views to the
Big Board?

Strange. LESS than a quarter of all licensed U.S. radio amateurs
belone to the League.

You mean that ARRL represents those three-fourths who aren't
members?!?

Does the ARRL represent any of those interested in becoming a
radio amteur?

LHA / WMD

Larry Roll K3LT wrote:


I don't see why the Extra-class code test requirement needs to be set at the
current 5 WPM level. A 12-wpm code test would be a better idea, and anyone
interested enough in achieving Extra could go from nothing to that level in a
matter of weeks. However, since Extra is already dumbed-down to 5 WPM, I
guess there's no putting the toothpaste back in the tube.



The medical wavier issue would pop up again. And the FCC doesn't want
to deal
with that. As I (mis)undestand it, all you had to do to get a wavier
was to tell your
family doctor you had this problem with the code, and all he had to do
was sign off
on it. Most doctors probably didn't understand the issue beyond that
there was no
safety issue involved ("What, you can't learn how to drive a bus, well,
here's a
wavier to take to the DMV to get a commercial driver's license") and it was
unlikely that anyone would question the doctor about it. So it was
easily abused,
and the FCC doesn't want to deal with it. And the FCC doesn't gain anything
out of requiring higher speed code (it's not a lid filter, as witness
14.313 before
restructuring).

"N2EY" wrote in message
m...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/01/19/1/?nc=1

Summary:

3 classes of license: Novice, General, Extra

5 wpm code test retained for Extra only

[ STUFF DELETED ]

73 de Jim, N2EY

Even though I support the removal of the CW requirement for any license, I
find this to be an acceptable compromise. The reduction to three license
classes has already happened, although the Novice license as proposed is
actually a new license. Perhaps a different name could be found for it to
reduce confusion with the current Novice license.

Dave, K3WQ

(N2EY) wrote in message om...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/01/19/1/?nc=1

Summary:

3 classes of license: Novice, General, Extra

Can we water it down any more?

5 wpm code test retained for Extra only

Why not just elminate the code requirement entirely. To me 5WPM code
is so awfully slow that it's painful.

Existing Advanceds get free upgrade to Extra, Techs
and Tech Pluses get free upgrade to General

This free ride stuff has got to stop. I'm a 20WPM Extra damn it - now
I can bitch and moan like the old farts. My friend KH6HZ is probably
getting a good laugh out of this.

Novice test to be 25 questions on "basics", General to be
derived from Tech and General, Extra pretty much as-is.

I suppose I can't complain much on this. Most of us are pretty much
appliance operators - when is the last time you played around with
SMT inside your radio?

In article ,
(Tony Pelliccio) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
. com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/01/19/1/?nc=1


I suppose I can't complain much on this. Most of us are pretty much
appliance operators - when is the last time you played around with
SMT inside your radio?

TAFKA Rev. Jim has both an MSEE and BSEE and has been a
40 WPM extra special for over 36 years. I doubt he has ever diddled
with any surface mount devices...that isn't operating morse code.

LHA / WMD

In article ,
(Tony Pelliccio) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
. com...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/01/19/1/?nc=1

Summary:

3 classes of license: Novice, General, Extra

Can we water it down any more?

There are some folks (not me!) who only want one class of license.

5 wpm code test retained for Extra only

Why not just elminate the code requirement entirely. To me 5WPM code
is so awfully slow that it's painful.

5 wpm is a minimum speed. Someone can always ask for a faster test as an
accomodation.

Existing Advanceds get free upgrade to Extra, Techs
and Tech Pluses get free upgrade to General

This free ride stuff has got to stop.

When was the last one?

I agree that the proposed free upgrades are not a good idea.

I'm a 20WPM Extra damn it - now
I can bitch and moan like the old farts. My friend KH6HZ is probably
getting a good laugh out of this.

yep.

Novice test to be 25 questions on "basics", General to be
derived from Tech and General, Extra pretty much as-is.

I suppose I can't complain much on this.

That's about the same test I took 37 years ago for my Novice...

Most of us are pretty much
appliance operators -

Not me!

when is the last time you played around with
SMT inside your radio?

No SMT in any of my ham gear. It's not necessary. And I have quite a bit of
homebrew ham gear.

73 de Jim, N2EY