wrote:
From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 11:40 am


wrote:

From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 3:01 am



Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced
the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of
the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been
going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they
would have been none the wiser.

Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected.
What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't
a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected


Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they
try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some
kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of
group.

Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world
can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply
for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for
foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio
can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and
democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who
can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for
the ARRL Board of Directors.


Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way
info propagates these days


I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy
as "controversial."

That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read
this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about
the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified
him for candidacy though.


Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch
supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president.
Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen.

....or so you've been told.

Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what
they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the
code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is
concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has
to rankle.

People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section
Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude
Carl Stevenson.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 11:40 am


wrote:

From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 3:01 am



Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced
the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of
the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been
going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they
would have been none the wiser.

Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected.
What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't
a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected


Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they
try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some
kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of
group.

Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world
can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply
for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for
foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio
can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and
democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who
can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for
the ARRL Board of Directors.

certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the
ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are

Free Elections held are to be held when?


Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way
info propagates these days


I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy
as "controversial."

That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read
this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about
the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified
him for candidacy though.

hard to say that with any real assurance


Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch
supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president.
Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen.

...or so you've been told.

so we have SEEN

Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what
they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the
code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is
concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has
to rankle.

People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section
Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude
Carl Stevenson.

just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as
other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that

Dave K8MN

From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 5:39 pm

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 11:40 am
wrote:
From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 3:01 am


Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they
try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some
kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of
group.

Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world
can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply
for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for
foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio
can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and
democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who
can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for
the ARRL Board of Directors.

certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the
ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are

Free Elections held are to be held when?

Doesn't really matter, Mark. Snarly Dave wants to make it appear
that the ARRL "is run just like the federal government." Ain't so,
no matter what he implies.

Snarly Dave is a BELIEVER and he HATES anyone that dares sass
his beloved League.



Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way
info propagates these days

I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy
as "controversial."

That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read
this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about
the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified
him for candidacy though.

hard to say that with any real assurance

Snarly Dave "KNOWS" that the ARRL is free, open, without blemish
and ultimately "fair" to the point of being a veritable nirvana.


Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch
supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president.
Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen.

...or so you've been told.

so we have SEEN

Absolutely! It is readily apparent to anyone in years of QST
editions, all the filings the League made at the FCC, and in
the general order of favored precedence in the ARRL publishings.

Snarly Dave wants everyone to believe the League is "benevolent"
to an absurdity insofar as modes are concerned. They are
"objective" only in their definitions of themselves; others see
them differently.


Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what
they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the
code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is
concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has
to rankle.

People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section
Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude
Carl Stevenson.

just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as
other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that

Snarly Dave "explained it all," Mark. All are supposed to TAKE
what they receive at the hands of the League. Period.

Snarly Dave ain't explained that the League simple left Carl OFF
the ballot. No word why from the League. The League "doesn't
have to explain anything," they just DO. That says it all.

Snarly Dave doesn't like Carl Stevenson. So, don't expect any
objectivity from Dave.

Snarly Dave doesn't like you, either. Don't expect any objectivity
on anything you write in here.

Snarly Dave just plain hates my guts from years back when I didn't
remove my hat, act obedient in his presence, and say "sir" a lot.
Might have been different if I'd slathered gratuitous praise and
admiration for his "government service" in the wilds of Africa,
especially his "synchronizing RTTYs with morsemanship" in the
1980s. :-) Sorry, I don't heap praise on bull**** artists.

Dave's "from the government and he's not here to help" (anyone but
himself). It's as simple as that.

wrote:
From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 5:39 pm

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 11:40 am
wrote:
From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 3:01 am


Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they
try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some
kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of
group.

Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world
can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply
for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for
foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio
can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and
democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who
can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for
the ARRL Board of Directors.

certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the
ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are

Free Elections held are to be held when?

Doesn't really matter, Mark. Snarly Dave wants to make it appear
that the ARRL "is run just like the federal government." Ain't so,
no matter what he implies.

No you are wrong in that I think he beleives the **** he is shoveling

Snarly Dave is a BELIEVER and he HATES anyone that dares sass
his beloved League.



Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way
info propagates these days

I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy
as "controversial."

That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read
this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about
the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified
him for candidacy though.

hard to say that with any real assurance

Snarly Dave "KNOWS" that the ARRL is free, open, without blemish
and ultimately "fair" to the point of being a veritable nirvana.


Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch
supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president.
Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen.

...or so you've been told.

so we have SEEN

Absolutely! It is readily apparent to anyone in years of QST
editions, all the filings the League made at the FCC, and in
the general order of favored precedence in the ARRL publishings.

Snarly Dave wants everyone to believe the League is "benevolent"
to an absurdity insofar as modes are concerned. They are
"objective" only in their definitions of themselves; others see
them differently.


Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what
they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the
code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is
concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has
to rankle.

People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section
Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude
Carl Stevenson.

just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as
other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that

Snarly Dave "explained it all," Mark. All are supposed to TAKE
what they receive at the hands of the League. Period.

Snarly Dave ain't explained that the League simple left Carl OFF
the ballot. No word why from the League. The League "doesn't
have to explain anything," they just DO. That says it all.

Snarly Dave doesn't like Carl Stevenson. So, don't expect any
objectivity from Dave.

Snarly Dave doesn't like you, either. Don't expect any objectivity
on anything you write in here.

I don't

Snarly Dave just plain hates my guts from years back when I didn't
remove my hat, act obedient in his presence, and say "sir" a lot.
Might have been different if I'd slathered gratuitous praise and
admiration for his "government service" in the wilds of Africa,
especially his "synchronizing RTTYs with morsemanship" in the
1980s. :-) Sorry, I don't heap praise on bull**** artists.

Dave's "from the government and he's not here to help" (anyone but
himself). It's as simple as that.

No he isn't from the Govt. thank god for that

an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 11:40 am



wrote:


From: an_old_friend on Sep 14, 3:01 am



Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced
the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of
the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been
going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they
would have been none the wiser.

Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected.
What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't
a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected


Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they
try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some
kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of
group.

Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world
can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply
for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for
foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio
can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and
democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who
can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for
the ARRL Board of Directors.


certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the
ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are

Contribute? Yes, folks may contribute of their money or of their time.
One doesn't contribute for membership though. One pays for membership.
Any full League member may stand for office if he receives the requisite
number of nominations and has no potential conflicts of interest.

Free Elections held are to be held when?

You'll want to check at http://www.arrl.org


Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way
info propagates these days


I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy
as "controversial."

That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read
this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about
the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified
him for candidacy though.


hard to say that with any real assurance

Is it? I don't see it that way.


Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch
supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president.
Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen.

...or so you've been told.


so we have SEEN

You've seen the core membership of the ARRL and you know for a fact what
its view is?

Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what
they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the
code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is
concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has
to rankle.

People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section
Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude
Carl Stevenson.


just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as
other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that

So you know all of the circumstances and can say, without a shadow of a
doubt, that Carl Stevenson was dealt with in a way that is different
from a current Board member? Can you supply the details?

Dave K8MN

RE the subject title
Then the world blew up
Later maybe

--
CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be !

Dave Heil wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

cut
Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced
the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of
the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been
going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they
would have been none the wiser.

Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected.
What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't
a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected


Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they
try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some
kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of
group.

Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world
can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply
for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for
foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio
can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and
democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who
can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for
the ARRL Board of Directors.


certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the
ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are

Contribute? Yes, folks may contribute of their money or of their time.
One doesn't contribute for membership though. One pays for membership.
Any full League member may stand for office if he receives the requisite
number of nominations and has no potential conflicts of interest.

obviously not

Free Elections held are to be held when?

You'll want to check at http://www.arrl.org

I was looking for the truth not propaganda


Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way
info propagates these days


I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy
as "controversial."

That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read
this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about
the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified
him for candidacy though.


hard to say that with any real assurance

Is it? I don't see it that way.

of course you don't that would require you to think for yourself

But indeed we don't know exactly what was going through the minds of
the comitte for state security


Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch
supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president.
Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen.

...or so you've been told.


so we have SEEN

You've seen the core membership of the ARRL and you know for a fact what
its view is?

yes I have it is why I am no longer a member


Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what
they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the
code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is
concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has
to rankle.

People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section
Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude
Carl Stevenson.


just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as
other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that

So you know all of the circumstances and can say, without a shadow of a
doubt, that Carl Stevenson was dealt with in a way that is different
from a current Board member? Can you supply the details?

Carl does that better

Carl has provided assurance NO ARRL director has ever offered

Carl has been declared disquailified for reasons that applied a former
Vicedirector (according to that Vice Director, hans one of our regs)
therefore I know for a fact he has had a different standard than at
least one other canidate for ARRL office

Dave K8MN

an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an_old_friend wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:


cut

Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced
the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of
the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been
going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they
would have been none the wiser.

Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected.
What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't
a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected


Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they
try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some
kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of
group.

Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world
can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply
for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for
foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio
can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and
democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who
can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for
the ARRL Board of Directors.


certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the
ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are

Contribute? Yes, folks may contribute of their money or of their time.
One doesn't contribute for membership though. One pays for membership.
Any full League member may stand for office if he receives the requisite
number of nominations and has no potential conflicts of interest.


obviously not

It isn't obvious at all, Mark. There are still unknowns. We have
Carl's side of things. We don't yet know what the committee at ARRL
discussed and exactly how they came to their conclusions.

Free Elections held are to be held when?

You'll want to check at http://www.arrl.org


I was looking for the truth not propaganda

Never mind. You are free to reject my advice. It comes with a
guarantee. If you don't like it, you receive double your old problems back.

Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way
info propagates these days


I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy
as "controversial."

That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read
this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about
the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified
him for candidacy though.


hard to say that with any real assurance

Is it? I don't see it that way.


of course you don't that would require you to think for yourself

That's exactly what I've done, Mark. I've not arrived at the same
conclusions.

But indeed we don't know exactly what was going through the minds of
the comitte for state security

There is no ARRL "committe" for state security.

Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch
supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president.
Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen.

...or so you've been told.


so we have SEEN

You've seen the core membership of the ARRL and you know for a fact what
its view is?


yes I have it is why I am no longer a member

You've actually seen the core membership? Really? When? Were they all
gathered in one place?

Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what
they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the
code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is
concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has
to rankle.

People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section
Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude
Carl Stevenson.


just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as
other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that

So you know all of the circumstances and can say, without a shadow of a
doubt, that Carl Stevenson was dealt with in a way that is different
from a current Board member? Can you supply the details?


Carl does that better

No, he hasn't. He has presented some information. There is nothing in
the material present by Carl to indicate that he has been treated
differently. We have only Carl's side of things.

Carl has provided assurance NO ARRL director has ever offered

To my knowledge, the League has never accepted "because I vow that I won't".

Carl has been declared disquailified for reasons that applied a former
Vicedirector (according to that Vice Director, hans one of our regs)
therefore I know for a fact he has had a different standard than at
least one other canidate for ARRL office

If you've been reading along, you'll note that I asked Hans for
particulars. I wanted to know if the circumstances were the same. Hans
indicated that they are not the same.

You're setting us up for some wild conspiracy theory.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an_old_friend wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:


cut

Actually, the League did NOT act openly. ARRL simply announced
the candidates for Divisions and Carl Stevenson was left out of
the list. For all those who haven't had an idea of what's been
going on elsewhere in radio, the Atlantic Division, or NCI, they
would have been none the wiser.

Forgive my inprecision I meant more openly than I would have expected.
What concerned me was playing florida like games with what is and isn't
a proper ballot. they have moved more openly than I would have expected


Well, the ARRL is a PRIVATE membership organization...even if they
try very hard to convince folks that they are "official" and some
kind of beneavolent "democratic principled, free election" kind of
group.

Oh yes, very PRIVATE, Leonard. Any radio amateur anywhere in the world
can becoming a voting member for 39 bucks per year (some discounts apply
for students and senior citizens and some surcharges are added for
foreign members). Any non-licensee with an interest in amateur radio
can become a non-voting Associate Member. Free elections are held and
democratic principles are employed. As there are restrictions on who
can run for the U.S. Congress, there are restrictions on who can run for
the ARRL Board of Directors.


certainly they are free to contribute, or is tha pay tribute to the
ARRL, just not free to run for office as other memebers of the BoD are

Contribute? Yes, folks may contribute of their money or of their time.
One doesn't contribute for membership though. One pays for membership.
Any full League member may stand for office if he receives the requisite
number of nominations and has no potential conflicts of interest.


obviously not

It isn't obvious at all, Mark. There are still unknowns. We have
Carl's side of things. We don't yet know what the committee at ARRL
discussed and exactly how they came to their conclusions.

and it is clear we will not hear from the ARRL any reasons certainly
not with attitudes like yours



Free Elections held are to be held when?

You'll want to check at http://www.arrl.org


I was looking for the truth not propaganda

Never mind. You are free to reject my advice. It comes with a
guarantee. If you don't like it, you receive double your old problems back.

Or perhaps as you say later they just lack an understanding of the way
info propagates these days


I doubt that. Carl Stevenson would be seen by the League hierarchy
as "controversial."

That's quite possible. Someone who sits on the Board may have even read
this newsgroup and might have seen some of Carl's choice comments about
the League and about Directors. His words would not have disqualified
him for candidacy though.


hard to say that with any real assurance

Is it? I don't see it that way.


of course you don't that would require you to think for yourself

That's exactly what I've done, Mark. I've not arrived at the same
conclusions.

no you have have made statements based on assumtions indeed you have
drawn conclusion based on facts you have already noted are in evidence

You have no bassis in fact to claim "That's quite possible. Someone
who sits on the Board may have even read this newsgroup and might have
seen some of Carl's choice comments about the League and about
Directors. His words would not have disqualified him for candidacy
though." your conclusion "His words would not have disqualified him
for candidacy though" has no basis in the facts it may or may not be
true

But indeed we don't know exactly what was going through the minds of
the comitte for state security

There is no ARRL "committe" for state security.

sure is they are just not honest enough to call it that

Remember that the ARRL has been a staunch
supporter of morsemanship ever since Maxim was their president.
Their core membership is made up largely of morsemen.

...or so you've been told.


so we have SEEN

You've seen the core membership of the ARRL and you know for a fact what
its view is?


yes I have it is why I am no longer a member

You've actually seen the core membership? Really? When? Were they all
gathered in one place?

Yes I have no they were not

Carl is ALSO executive director of NCI. The ARRL did NOT get what
they wanted in one of the past 18 Petitions, that of having the
code test retained for Amateur Extra. As far as the League is
concerned for their appearance to their core membership, that has
to rankle.

People get used to being rankled. The rules for running for Section
Director are what they are. Nothing was changed in order to exclude
Carl Stevenson.


just decided that that he wasn't entitled to same consideration as
other memebr of the current BoD nothing more than that

So you know all of the circumstances and can say, without a shadow of a
doubt, that Carl Stevenson was dealt with in a way that is different
from a current Board member? Can you supply the details?


Carl does that better

No, he hasn't. He has presented some information. There is nothing in
the material present by Carl to indicate that he has been treated
differently. We have only Carl's side of things.

sure is esp when added to the staments of Hans

Carl has provided assurance NO ARRL director has ever offered

To my knowledge, the League has never accepted "because I vow that I won't".

Carl has been declared disquailified for reasons that applied a former
Vicedirector (according to that Vice Director, hans one of our regs)
therefore I know for a fact he has had a different standard than at
least one other canidate for ARRL office

If you've been reading along, you'll note that I asked Hans for
particulars. I wanted to know if the circumstances were the same. Hans
indicated that they are not the same.

in what way?

You're setting us up for some wild conspiracy theory.

no I am not seting you up

Dave K8MN