KØHB wrote:

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote

| It sounds to me like you view "leadership" as "Listen to Hans' point
of view
| and 'have the courage' to ignore the majority."

Not at all. I am but a single data point, and I could be wrong (but so
far I've only been wrong once and that was the time I thought I was
wrong but I wasn't grin).

"A leader takes people where they want to go. A great leader takes
people where they don't necessarily want to go but ought to be."
---R. S. Carter

Put differently, leadership is not conducting a popularity poll and
representing that as the best for Amateur Radio, but rather representing
the best for Amateur Radio on the conviction that your constituents
elected you to make good choices.


Well put, Hans.

It seems to me that NCI could easily have stuck to their initial
premise of only wanting to get rid of Element one and go from there. But
they are not. Must be disappointing for you.

But that is just how it is. NCI has new fields to plow now.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

"KØHB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Bill Sohl" wrote

|
| You are ONE member. You did take the survey I presume?
|

Indeed I did. And now I'm exercising my perogative to being the squeaky
wheel. Ain't democracy a damned fine thing!

Cheers,
de Hans, K0HB
--
SOC # 291 http://www.qsl.net/soc/
FISTS # 7419 http://www.fists.org
NCI # 4304 http://www.nocode.org/


Hans,

Squeak away ... your are entitled to your opinion, even if it is in an
extreme minority amongst the membership -

And Hans is no longer of any use to you and your agenda, eh?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...


KØHB wrote:


"Bill Sohl" wrote

|
| You are ONE member. You did take the survey I presume?
|

Indeed I did. And now I'm exercising my perogative to being the squeaky
wheel. Ain't democracy a damned fine thing!


Just so that you don't mind being a very small minority.

And remember, NCI isn't anywhere close to a Democracy


Mike,

I respectfully disagree with your assertion ... the whole reason NCI
surveyed US members on the issues involved in the ARRL and NCVEC petitions
was so that we would know their wishes and act in a representative manner.

And I respectfully thought that NCI was solely against the Element 1
test. But now NCI is coming out in favor of giving most hams priveleges
that they haven't been tested for.

And there is still that nasty "day after" thing, when th eetsting
regimin goes up again...... or does it?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

KØHB wrote:

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
arthlink.net...
|
| "KØHB" wrote in message
| k.net...
|
| "Bill Sohl" wrote
|
| | Neither ARRL nor NCVEC propose Tech level testing gor
| | General.
|
| The ARRL and NCVEC both propose that every individual (some 323,055
of
| them by todays numbers) who has currently passed Tech level testing
be
| eligible for advancement to General without further testing. That
| sounds to me like Tech level testing will get you a General ticket.
|
| That is a one-time adjustment/upgrade. It does not alter the testing
| requirements for General on a permanent basis. But enough, we
| can at best agree to disagree as I hold no prospect of changing
| your mind.
|
| Cheers,
| Bill K2UNK

Bill,

With all due respect, you have it bass-ackwards.

It's not your job to change my mind. It is my job to persuade you (a
director) to follow the wishes of me (the member).

You have it correct, Hans. But I'm afraid that isn't what they are all
about.



Mike ... are you suggesting that the NCI Board of Directors should have
ignored the wishes of an overwhelming majority of the membership and
listened only to Hans???

I don't think so ...

No, I think that NCI members have opinions about everything from
antenna covenants to BPL threats to abortion to pledge of allegiance and
on and on.

I just don't see where they have relevance to what was *once* NCI's
purpose - abolishment of Morse code testing as a requirement of licensing.

The instant upgrade of most amateurs to General is not related to code
testing as far as I can see. And the unfairness to the people the "day
after" that suddenly have to take a harder test.

Perhaps NCI should poll it's members about gay marriage? ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Hans' views/complaints about NCI and the ARRL and NCVEC
petitions ...
From: "KØHB"
Date: 4/24/2004 2:18 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net

"A leader takes people where they want to go. A great leader takes
people where they don't necessarily want to go but ought to be."
---R. S. Carter

A different Carter (Jimmy, to be specific...) tried this. He wound up
gutting the intelligence community, tied our hands in covert operations, ran
the inflation rate into double digits, left us humilated in world opinion for
444 days and got several of my friends killed.

When I vote for someone, I expect he will represent the majority...Not use
his election as a license to do what HE wants to do despite guidance from hbis
constituents to the contrary.

Steve, K4YZ

And I respectfully thought that NCI was solely against the Element 1
test. But now NCI is coming out in favor of giving most hams priveleges
that they haven't been tested for.

Did anyone really think thats what they were for, next step give away licenses.
face it your dealing with KARL

"Mike Coslo" wrote


| It seems to me that NCI could easily have stuck to their initial
| premise of only wanting to get rid of Element one and go from
| there. But they are not. Must be disappointing for you.

I don't have a problem with the NCI leadership (actually, let me make
that Leadership) taking a stand on any issue they wish. Hey, it's a
free country. (In fact, I was confident that Carl (and a few other
Leaders in several organizations including NCI) were forward looking
enough to vigorously OPPOSE actions which tended to dilute the technical
base of our hobby.)

But I have a real problem when the Leaders run a beauty-contest poll
instead of making responsible decisions based on what's best for the
Amateur Radio Service.

Asking the NCI membership, overwhelmingly Technicians, whether upgrading
Technicians to General without testing is a good idea is pretty much
akin to asking the cannibals of ZL whether the Christians should send
more well-fattened missionaries. The answer is a foregone conclusion!
Now they hide behind that "mandate" rather than taking a responsible
stand against the "Great ARRL Giveaway".

In addition to this ill-conceived notion of free upgrades, we have
looming another proposal for what amounts to an "Applicance Class"
license. NCI has polled it's members on that gem also, and heaven help
us if I'm again a "stark minority" in opposition!

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote

|
| I think there are two sides to every coin .... and there are subtle,
yet
| important, differences between "leadership" and "representation."
|

There are important differences between "leadership" and
"representation" but they are NOT subtle!

"Representation" says "Elect me and I will do whatever is the most
popular based on the last poll, regardless if it's in our best
interest."

"Leadership" says "Elect me and I will do whatever is our best interest,
regardless how unpopular."

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Steve Robeson K4CAP" wrote in message
...
Subject: Hans' views/complaints about NCI and the ARRL and NCVEC
petitions ...
From: "KØHB"
Date: 4/24/2004 2:18 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: . net

"A leader takes people where they want to go. A great leader takes
people where they don't necessarily want to go but ought to be."
---R. S. Carter

A different Carter (Jimmy, to be specific...) tried this. He wound
up
gutting the intelligence community, tied our hands in covert operations,
ran
the inflation rate into double digits, left us humilated in world opinion
for
444 days and got several of my friends killed.

When I vote for someone, I expect he will represent the
majority...Not use
his election as a license to do what HE wants to do despite guidance from
hbis
constituents to the contrary.

Steve, K4YZ

Steve,

Thanks for speaking up for the responsibilities of elected representatives
to BE representative of their constituents rather than using their position
as a platform for their personal views.

I particularly appreciate you comment in light of the fact that I know you
don't agree with me (or NCI) on some of the issues.

73,
Carl - wk3c

"KØHB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote

|
| I think there are two sides to every coin .... and there are subtle,
yet
| important, differences between "leadership" and "representation."
|

There are important differences between "leadership" and
"representation" but they are NOT subtle!

"Representation" says "Elect me and I will do whatever is the most
popular based on the last poll, regardless if it's in our best
interest."

"Leadership" says "Elect me and I will do whatever is our best interest,
regardless how unpopular."

73, de Hans, K0HB


Hans,

I disagree. The differences are more subtle - and much less cynical - that
you state.

Carl - wk3c