Dee Flint wrote:
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.

OK, I'll see if I can get the numbers.

It is my point of view that the ARRL ought to try to get the
involvement of more hams of all classes.

I don't think you'd find anybody around here who wouldn't agree. With
one probable exception of course.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

w3rv