wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
Dee Flint wrote:

"Senior moment . . . "

This thread was started by Hans who stated in so many words that Techs
are under-represented by the ARRL because they don't join in the
quantities other class licensees join that some changes need to be
made, etc., etc. ~Half the hams in this country are Techs.

Change to:

If, as you state, *half the ARRL members are Techs* then what's the
point to this whole thread?? Or is it me again?

w3rv


If Hans is correct about the scarcity of Techs in the ARRL membership, he
proposes a way to attract them is all. I simply indicated that his original
premise may or may not be true. Thus it should be checked. I don't know
what the numbers are. I simply thought I saw something on it but haven't
checked it. It is my point of view that the ARRL ought to try to get the
involvement of more hams of all classes.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE