I am with the poster who sed:

-- I have a completely different opinion!

Join the ARRL today! \

73 From The Wilderness Keyboard



I won't join the ARRL because full membership now requires a frontal
lobotomy. If you see your section manager or Division director at a meeting
or Hamfest, ask them how their surgury went, then slap the **** out of them
for me.

Screw'em

"Screw'em" wrote in
news:c1%Qb.118600$5V2.616514@attbi_s53:

I am with the poster who sed:

-- I have a completely different opinion!

Join the ARRL today! \

73 From The Wilderness Keyboard



I won't join the ARRL because full membership now requires a frontal
lobotomy. If you see your section manager or Division director at a
meeting or Hamfest, ask them how their surgury went, then slap the
**** out of them for me.



I'm afraid you *will* need to slap them in order to get their attention.
The BOD doesn't listen to members or hams like me anymore.

If the ARRL leadership had cared about the state of amateur radio and the
quality of its operators, they never would have made the proposals that
they've made over the last 11 years. To them its let us get more morons
licensed so we can get more money in the ole bank account. The ARRL
leadership doesn't care for quality, capable operators. But their plan
will back fire on them and ham radio has and will suffer. When you hand
free licenses to everyone, those people don't appreciate it and probably
won't buy a membership. You always appreciate something more when you
had to work harder to get it and you'll take care of it. But to the ARRL
it's all about money and I'll bet anyone in this group that if they get
their way with their proposal they will offer a 12 dollar discount to new
ham non-members like they did at the last restructuring. "Take a ham
test, and we'll discount new membership on the price of your VEC test
fee!"

Oh well, Nuff said. Most of you don't care anyway. Back to listening to
the lids and CBer type behavior on the bands. 73


KB7ADL

Heres something better: From the ARRLs FAG:

"Did ARRL poll its members on this proposal? How was it formulated?

Because ARRL is a representative democracy, ARRL Directors listened to members
in their respective divisions while considering these issues. Directors heard
from many amateurs in their divisions, and some directors conducted their own
surveys. The final proposal represents the Board's best effort at changes to
the Amateur Radio licensing structure needed to carry us through the next 10 to
15 years."

Now this makes one wonder how many members did they get Info from. Was it 5,
10, 20, or even 100. The point being before the ARRL puts forth such a
proposal, it would be well Advised to determine what a Majority of there
MEMBERSHIP was thinking. Untill the ARRL provides actuall figures, I can no
longer see where they represent there MEMBERS WISHES.
As for me, with 25 Years as a Member, they will never get 1 more RED PENNY
from me for anything.

"WA8ULX" wrote

| Because ARRL is a representative democracy, ARRL Directors listened to
members
| in their respective divisions while considering these issues.
Directors heard
| from many amateurs in their divisions, and some directors conducted
their own
| surveys. The final proposal represents the Board's best effort at
changes to
| the Amateur Radio licensing structure needed to carry us through the
next 10 to
| 15 years."

I, for one, suggest that popularity polls and beauty contests are not a
particularly good method for influencing and guiding the evolution of
the Amateur Radio service.

This is particularly true for the National Association for Amateur
Radio, which in my not-so-humble-opinion is abdicating its
responsibility to show leadership and vision, but has cobbled together
an unimaginative proposal lacking both, and copping out by passing it
off as "listened to members"

An example of an alternative is at http://tinyurl.com/wce9

73, de Hans, K0HB

"KØHB" wrote:

"WA8ULX" wrote

| Because ARRL is a representative democracy, ARRL Directors listened to
members
| in their respective divisions while considering these issues.
Directors heard
| from many amateurs in their divisions, and some directors conducted
their own
| surveys. The final proposal represents the Board's best effort at
changes to
| the Amateur Radio licensing structure needed to carry us through the
next 10 to
| 15 years."

I, for one, suggest that popularity polls and beauty contests are not a
particularly good method for influencing and guiding the evolution of
the Amateur Radio service.

This is particularly true for the National Association for Amateur
Radio, which in my not-so-humble-opinion is abdicating its
responsibility to show leadership and vision, but has cobbled together
an unimaginative proposal lacking both, and copping out by passing it
off as "listened to members"

Ah, but directors do listen to members. Roanoke Division Director
Bodson read my e-mail concerning the removal of "Section News" and
contest line scores from QST. He listened at Jackson's Mill during the
state ARRL convention as I outlined my views and the reasons for them.
Then he himself introduced the motion to bring the changes about.
"Listening to" is not the same as "acting on the views held by"
members.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote in message ...

Ah, but directors do listen to members. Roanoke Division Director
Bodson read my e-mail concerning the removal of "Section News" and
contest line scores from QST. He listened at Jackson's Mill during the
state ARRL convention as I outlined my views and the reasons for them.
Then he himself introduced the motion to bring the changes about.
"Listening to" is not the same as "acting on the views held by"
members.

Dave K8MN

So you have a history of having your views ignored.

bb