Carl WK3C: Not "Eligble" to Become a Menber of the ARRL Board of Directors
 

http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/

.. . . unbelievable . . !!

w3rv

wrote:
http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/

. . . unbelievable . . !!

w3rv

W1AW at it's finest.

wrote:
wrote:

http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/

. . . unbelievable . . !!

w3rv


W1AW at it's finest.

W1AW? The decision came from the HQ station?

Dave K8MN

wrote


http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/

. . . unbelievable . . !!


I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in amateur
radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
wrote


http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/

. . . unbelievable . . !!


I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in am=
ateur
radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Id Love to hear another side to this as well, but it astonding

"KØHB" wrote in message
link.net...

wrote


http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/

. . . unbelievable . . !!


I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB


But what is the existing or potential conflict of interest? That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't find
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:
"K=D8HB" wrote in message
link.net...

wrote


http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/

. . . unbelievable . . !!


I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but th=
is
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB


But what is the existing or potential conflict of interest?

Carl works as a consulting engineer for commercial firms which have
interests in the millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
conflict with our interests in the ham bands which are also in that
part of the spectrum. The ARRL bylaws state that anybody in that type
of position cannot become a member of the BoD. The problem is that the
League has conveniently winked that provision in the bylaws several
times in the past and has allowed others in Carl's position to become
Directors. hypocrisy taken to a new level.


That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't fi=
nd
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.
=20
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

On 14 Sep 2005 04:08:29 -0700, wrote:

Carl works as a consulting engineer for commercial firms which have
interests in the millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
conflict with our interests in the ham bands which are also in that
part of the spectrum. The ARRL bylaws state that anybody in that type
of position cannot become a member of the BoD. The problem is that the
League has conveniently winked that provision in the bylaws several
times in the past and has allowed others in Carl's position to become
Directors. hypocrisy taken to a new level.

That's not the only provision in the bylaws that's been winked in the
past, either.

73 de John, KC2HMZ
Tonawanda, NY

From: on Sep 14, 4:08 am

Dee Flint wrote:
"K=D8=88B" wrote in message
wrote


http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/


. . . unbelievable . . !!

I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but t=
his
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB

But what is the existing or potential conflict of interest?

Carl works as a consulting engineer for commercial firms which have
interests in the millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
conflict with our interests in the ham bands which are also in that
part of the spectrum.

What you mean "millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
'conflict with our interests' in the ham bands"?

Since WHEN has there been any "great interest" in the World
Above 30 MHz to the League? The core membership of the League
is interested only in "working DX on HF with CW." :-)

The core membership doesn't seem to care dink about any World
Above 30 MHz. They wanna play in the HF sandbox, same as they
did a half century ago. Nothing has changed. Status quo uber
alles.

Find me some articles of "great interest in millimeter bands"
allocated to amateur radio by the FCC. Who in here has EVER
worked up in the millimeter bands? Who in here has EVER worked
any ham bands above 70 cm? [besides using a 1 GHz cell phone
or 2.4 GHz cordless telephone?]

The ARRL bylaws state that anybody in that type
of position cannot become a member of the BoD. The problem is that the
League has conveniently winked that provision in the bylaws several
times in the past and has allowed others in Carl's position to become
Directors. hypocrisy taken to a new level.

It would be informative to see some resumes of the work experience
of the Directors and the BoD of the League. Pres. Jim Haynie was
a salesman. [should be a clue right there, ey?] How about the
"other" pres., Dave Sumner?

That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't f=
ind
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

I found it extremely EASY to obtain all the details on Carl's
website. Just a couple of mouse clicks while reading this in
Google. The same with checking out the League's web site to see
the "announcement" of the candidates for Division. At NIGHT,
when I first saw Carl's message on Google.

Well, let's get a membership drive going, right? "Join and
CHANGE THE LEAGUE FROM 'WITHIN'!" Free, open, democratic
principle stuff. Uh huh. :-)=20

wrote:
From: on Sep 14, 4:08 am


Dee Flint wrote:

"K؈B" wrote in message

wrote



http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/



. . . unbelievable . . !!

I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB

But what is the existing or potential conflict of interest?

Carl works as a consulting engineer for commercial firms which have
interests in the millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
conflict with our interests in the ham bands which are also in that
part of the spectrum.


What you mean "millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
'conflict with our interests' in the ham bands"?

Since WHEN has there been any "great interest" in the World
Above 30 MHz to the League? The core membership of the League
is interested only in "working DX on HF with CW." :-)

Plenty of League members operate the bands above 30 MHz. You must have
missed out on this past weekend's contest. It was sponsored by the
League. You're out of touch, old timer. :-) :-)

The core membership doesn't seem to care dink about any World
Above 30 MHz.

Please present any evidence that you've uncovered which outlines what
ARRL members think about the frequencies above 30 MHz. Any at all will do.

They wanna play in the HF sandbox, same as they
did a half century ago. Nothing has changed. Status quo uber
alles.

I'm sure that you have something solid on which to base your claim.
Please point us to it.

Find me some articles of "great interest in millimeter bands"
allocated to amateur radio by the FCC. Who in here has EVER
worked up in the millimeter bands?

I have, on numerous occasions from WA8ONQ.

Who in here has EVER worked
any ham bands above 70 cm? [besides using a 1 GHz cell phone
or 2.4 GHz cordless telephone?]

I have, on numerous occasions.


The ARRL bylaws state that anybody in that type
of position cannot become a member of the BoD.The problem is that the
League has conveniently winked that provision in the bylaws several
times in the past and has allowed others in Carl's position to become
Directors. hypocrisy taken to a new level.


It would be informative to see some resumes of the work experience
of the Directors and the BoD of the League.

It might be informative, if only to demonstrate that none were in jobs
which presented a conflict of interests.

Pres. Jim Haynie was
a salesman. [should be a clue right there, ey?] How about the
"other" pres., Dave Sumner?

There is no "other" pres.


That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't find
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


I found it extremely EASY to obtain all the details on Carl's
website. Just a couple of mouse clicks while reading this in
Google. The same with checking out the League's web site to see
the "announcement" of the candidates for Division. At NIGHT,
when I first saw Carl's message on Google.

Well, let's get a membership drive going, right? "Join and
CHANGE THE LEAGUE FROM 'WITHIN'!" Free, open, democratic
principle stuff. Uh huh. :-)

Off the top of my head, those who post here who cannot run for ARRL
Director:

1. Those with a potential conflict of interest.

2. Non-radio amateurs.

3. Non-ARRL members.

One of those snags your "old_friend" and two of them fit Leonard H.
Anderson.

Dave K8MN

"Dave Heil" wrote


It might be informative, if only to demonstrate that none were
in jobs which presented a conflict of interests.


I was a successful candidate (twice) for Vice Director, both times while
employed in the same industry segment as Carl.

What is particularly interesting (to me) is that the Executive Committee did not
reject Carl's candidacy because he HAS a conflict of interest, but because he
COULD (in the future) HAVE such a conflict. This, in spite of his sworn written
promise not to accept any client which might lead to a possible conflict.

As is well known around these parts, Carl and I have not always seen eye-to-eye
on every subject, but I have never doubted he was a person of integrity and a
true-to-his-word kind of guy. That the Executive Committee discounts that
solemn promise is very telling, and that the full BoD distanced themselves from
the issue by letting it be decided in committee diminishes their honor in my
eyes.

When I questioned my Director on the matter by email he declined to answer me
and passed the buck down to the Secretary, who blew me off with a scholarly
explanation/recital of Article 11 of the Articles of Association.

73, de Hans, K0HB
Chief Curmudgeon, Dakota Division

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: on Sep 14, 4:08 am
cut

Find me some articles of "great interest in millimeter bands"
allocated to amateur radio by the FCC. Who in here has EVER
worked up in the millimeter bands?

I have, on numerous occasions from WA8ONQ.

Who in here has EVER worked
any ham bands above 70 cm? [besides using a 1 GHz cell phone
or 2.4 GHz cordless telephone?]

I have, on numerous occasions.

as Have I



That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't find
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


I found it extremely EASY to obtain all the details on Carl's
website. Just a couple of mouse clicks while reading this in
Google. The same with checking out the League's web site to see
the "announcement" of the candidates for Division. At NIGHT,
when I first saw Carl's message on Google.

Well, let's get a membership drive going, right? "Join and
CHANGE THE LEAGUE FROM 'WITHIN'!" Free, open, democratic
principle stuff. Uh huh. :-)

cuting Daves gartuous insults
Dave K8MN

KØHB wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote


It might be informative, if only to demonstrate that none were
in jobs which presented a conflict of interests.



I was a successful candidate (twice) for Vice Director, both times while
employed in the same industry segment as Carl.

I'm not sure what you mean by "employed in the same industry segment",
Hans. Were you in a position to influence the outcome of issues before
the ITU or any similar body?

What is particularly interesting (to me) is that the Executive Committee did not
reject Carl's candidacy because he HAS a conflict of interest, but because he
COULD (in the future) HAVE such a conflict. This, in spite of his sworn written
promise not to accept any client which might lead to a possible conflict.

I don't know that a sworn promise ever cut any ice. It certainly
doesn't in governmental elected office. Blind trusts and divestitures
are the order of the day.

As is well known around these parts, Carl and I have not always seen eye-to-eye
on every subject, but I have never doubted he was a person of integrity and a
true-to-his-word kind of guy. That the Executive Committee discounts that
solemn promise is very telling, and that the full BoD distanced themselves from
the issue by letting it be decided in committee diminishes their honor in my
eyes.

I don't see it that way at all. By letting the committee's decision
stand, the Board is affirming the decision of the committee.

When I questioned my Director on the matter by email he declined to answer me
and passed the buck down to the Secretary, who blew me off with a scholarly
explanation/recital of Article 11 of the Articles of Association.

Interesting. I think I'll zap Dennis Bodson and note and see if I get
the same treatment.

Dave K8MN

an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

From: on Sep 14, 4:08 am

cut


Find me some articles of "great interest in millimeter bands"
allocated to amateur radio by the FCC. Who in here has EVER
worked up in the millimeter bands?

I have, on numerous occasions from WA8ONQ.


Who in here has EVER worked
any ham bands above 70 cm? [besides using a 1 GHz cell phone
or 2.4 GHz cordless telephone?]

I have, on numerous occasions.


as Have I

Tell Len. I didn't ask you.

That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't find
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


I found it extremely EASY to obtain all the details on Carl's
website. Just a couple of mouse clicks while reading this in
Google. The same with checking out the League's web site to see
the "announcement" of the candidates for Division. At NIGHT,
when I first saw Carl's message on Google.

Well, let's get a membership drive going, right? "Join and
CHANGE THE LEAGUE FROM 'WITHIN'!" Free, open, democratic
principle stuff. Uh huh. :-)

cuting Daves gartuous insults

I see that you continue to "cute" things. Perhaps you think that is
somehow making my words go away. I've never made a "gartuous" insult in
my life.

Look. I can make the words come back:

Off the top of my head, those who post here who cannot run for ARRL
Director:

1. Those with a potential conflict of interest.

2. Non-radio amateurs.

3. Non-ARRL members.

One of those snags your "old_friend" and two of them fit Leonard H.
Anderson.


Are you insulted because you aren't an ARRL member? Are you insulted
because Len is neither an ARRL member nor a radio amateur? If so, I
cordially invite you to live with it.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

wrote:

From: on Sep 14, 4:08 am

cut


Find me some articles of "great interest in millimeter bands"
allocated to amateur radio by the FCC. Who in here has EVER
worked up in the millimeter bands?

I have, on numerous occasions from WA8ONQ.


Who in here has EVER worked
any ham bands above 70 cm? [besides using a 1 GHz cell phone
or 2.4 GHz cordless telephone?]

I have, on numerous occasions.


as Have I

Tell Len. I didn't ask you.

get it throughyour thick head I can coment on ANY post I like and any
comments. If you can't handle that then shove off

That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't find
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


I found it extremely EASY to obtain all the details on Carl's
website. Just a couple of mouse clicks while reading this in
Google. The same with checking out the League's web site to see
the "announcement" of the candidates for Division. At NIGHT,
when I first saw Carl's message on Google.

Well, let's get a membership drive going, right? "Join and
CHANGE THE LEAGUE FROM 'WITHIN'!" Free, open, democratic
principle stuff. Uh huh. :-)

cuting Daves gartuous insults

I see that you continue to "cute" things. Perhaps you think that is
somehow making my words go away. I've never made a "gartuous" insult in
my life.

more heil lies

You have nothing to say so you slash out at any targets in
neighboorhood, never mind the Subject you don't need no stinking
subjects

wrote:
From: on Sep 14, 4:08 am

Dee Flint wrote:
"K=D8=88B" wrote in message
wrote


http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/


. . . unbelievable . . !!

I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but=
this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested =
in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB

But what is the existing or potential conflict of interest?

Carl works as a consulting engineer for commercial firms which have
interests in the millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
conflict with our interests in the ham bands which are also in that
part of the spectrum.

What you mean "millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
'conflict with our interests' in the ham bands"?

Since WHEN has there been any "great interest" in the World
Above 30 MHz to the League? The core membership of the League
is interested only in "working DX on HF with CW." :-)

The core membership doesn't seem to care dink about any World
Above 30 MHz. They wanna play in the HF sandbox, same as they
did a half century ago. Nothing has changed. Status quo uber
alles.

Find me some articles of "great interest in millimeter bands"
allocated to amateur radio by the FCC. Who in here has EVER
worked up in the millimeter bands? Who in here has EVER worked
any ham bands above 70 cm? [besides using a 1 GHz cell phone
or 2.4 GHz cordless telephone?]

I've operated on 908 Mhz.

The ARRL bylaws state that anybody in that type
of position cannot become a member of the BoD. The problem is that the
League has conveniently winked that provision in the bylaws several
times in the past and has allowed others in Carl's position to become
Directors. hypocrisy taken to a new level.

It would be informative to see some resumes of the work experience
of the Directors and the BoD of the League. Pres. Jim Haynie was
a salesman. [should be a clue right there, ey?] How about the
"other" pres., Dave Sumner?

Jack Welsh, Ross Perot and Harry Truman were also salesmen.

That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't=
find
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

I found it extremely EASY to obtain all the details on Carl's
website. Just a couple of mouse clicks while reading this in
Google. The same with checking out the League's web site to see
the "announcement" of the candidates for Division. At NIGHT,
when I first saw Carl's message on Google.

Well, let's get a membership drive going, right? "Join and
CHANGE THE LEAGUE FROM 'WITHIN'!" Free, open, democratic
principle stuff. Uh huh. :-)=20
=20


w3rv

K=D8HB wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote


It might be informative, if only to demonstrate that none were
in jobs which presented a conflict of interests.


I was a successful candidate (twice) for Vice Director, both times while
employed in the same industry segment as Carl.

You're one of the primary examples Carl has cited in his complaints.

What is particularly interesting (to me) is that the Executive Committee =
did not
reject Carl's candidacy because he HAS a conflict of interest, but becaus=
e he
COULD (in the future) HAVE such a conflict. This, in spite of his sworn =
written
promise not to accept any client which might lead to a possible conflict.

As is well known around these parts, Carl and I have not always seen eye-=
to-eye
on every subject, but I have never doubted he was a person of integrity a=
nd a
true-to-his-word kind of guy. That the Executive Committee discounts that
solemn promise is very telling, and that the full BoD distanced themselve=
s from
the issue by letting it be decided in committee diminishes their honor in=
my
eyes.

When I questioned my Director on the matter by email he declined to answe=
r me
and passed the buck down to the Secretary, who blew me off with a scholar=
ly
explanation/recital of Article 11 of the Articles of Association.

The whole deal was cooked from top to bottom. Our outgoing Director
Bernie Fuller N3EFN is backing our Vice Director Bill Edgar N3LLR for
the job. Then Carl popped up out of nowhere so "the boys" circled their
wagons and found a way to quash Carl's candidacy before it even got off
the ground.

Even the average banana republic military junta has more finesse than
this bunch.

I'm waiting to see how HQ responds publically to this nonsense. Or if
they stonewall it and hope it goes away.

73, de Hans, K0HB
Chief Curmudgeon, Dakota Division

w3rv

wrote

I'm waiting to see how HQ responds publically to this nonsense.

They won't.

Or if they stonewall it and hope it goes away.

If they don't talk about it, then it never happened. SOP.

My Director/Vice Director are not answering email, but "deferring" comment down
to the Secretary who gives a boilerplate answer about Article 11.

73, de Hans, K0HB
Chief Curmudgeon, Dakota Division

wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote


It might be informative, if only to demonstrate that none were
in jobs which presented a conflict of interests.


I was a successful candidate (twice) for Vice Director, both times while
employed in the same industry segment as Carl.

You're one of the primary examples Carl has cited in his complaints.

What is particularly interesting (to me) is that the Executive Committe=
e did not
reject Carl's candidacy because he HAS a conflict of interest, but beca=
use he
COULD (in the future) HAVE such a conflict. This, in spite of his swor=
n written
promise not to accept any client which might lead to a possible conflic=
t=2E

As is well known around these parts, Carl and I have not always seen ey=
e-to-eye
on every subject, but I have never doubted he was a person of integrity=
and a
true-to-his-word kind of guy. That the Executive Committee discounts t=
hat
solemn promise is very telling, and that the full BoD distanced themsel=
ves from
the issue by letting it be decided in committee diminishes their honor =
in my
eyes.

When I questioned my Director on the matter by email he declined to ans=
wer me
and passed the buck down to the Secretary, who blew me off with a schol=
arly
explanation/recital of Article 11 of the Articles of Association.

The whole deal was cooked from top to bottom. Our outgoing Director
Bernie Fuller N3EFN is backing our Vice Director Bill Edgar N3LLR for
the job. Then Carl popped up out of nowhere so "the boys" circled their
wagons and found a way to quash Carl's candidacy before it even got off
the ground.

Even the average banana republic military junta has more finesse than
this bunch.

Not always but the Banna republic junta normaly is at least honest to
say what they are doing, (overthrowing free elections) normaly claiming
they have to but they least don't pretend that they are still having
free and open elections when they act. Even Saddam never claimed to be
having "free elections" just "elections"

I'm waiting to see how HQ responds publically to this nonsense. Or if
they stonewall it and hope it goes away.

likely stone wall it
=20
73, de Hans, K0HB
Chief Curmudgeon, Dakota Division
=20
w3rv

From: Dave Heil snarling on Sep 14, 1:17 pm

wrote:
From: on Sep 14, 4:08 am
Dee Flint wrote:
"K?B" wrote in message
wrote


http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/

. . . unbelievable . . !!

I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

But what is the existing or potential conflict of interest?

Carl works as a consulting engineer for commercial firms which have
interests in the millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
conflict with our interests in the ham bands which are also in that
part of the spectrum.

What you mean "millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
'conflict with our interests' in the ham bands"?

Since WHEN has there been any "great interest" in the World
Above 30 MHz to the League? The core membership of the League
is interested only in "working DX on HF with CW." :-)

Plenty of League members operate the bands above 30 MHz.

Quantify "PLENTY," snarly Heil. Give us some NUMBERS.

You must have missed out on this past weekend's contest.

I could care less about "contests" or "radiosport." Especially
if "sponsored" by the League.

You're out of touch, old timer. :-) :-)

Har. Har. Har.

I was operating and maintaining multi-channel 1.8 GHz microwave
radio relay equipment in the fall of 1954. Where were you?

I was testing X-Band (8 to 12 GHz) airborne radar at Hughes
in 1957. Where were you?

I was doing lab tests on 4mm waveguide components in 1960 at the
STL research lab. Where were you?

I was testing microwave components and systems, including
designing part of an active air-coupled test set on Ku-Band
(18 to 24 GHz) for the A-6 Intruder at Micro-Radionics in the
early 1960s. Where were you?

I did the entirety of design of an L-band (1 to 2 GHz) Mode 4
capable transponder test set RF section at Teledyne
Electronics in '78. Where were you?

I and Al Walston (W6MJN) did all of the RF design work on the
latter two generations of the RCA SECANT aircraft collision-
avoidance R&D program plus the RF design of the RIHANS ship
positioning system in 1972 to 1975. Where were you?

[I've left out some because you'll get even more snarly if
you hear all of it]

Where WERE you, OLD TIMER? Still turning on the power switches
of satellite comm State Department radio gear and claiming you
"operated" it? Or was it all "synchronizing your RTTY with CW?"

The core membership doesn't seem to care dink about any World
Above 30 MHz.

Please present any evidence that you've uncovered which outlines what
ARRL members think about the frequencies above 30 MHz. Any at all will do.

How about over 2000 Comments on WT Docket 05-235?

How about over 2000 Comments on WT Docket 98-143?

How about QST having a magazine section entitled "The World Above
30 MHz?" [supposedly all about the latest, greatest ham stuff
at VHF and higher, but not even close to what the RSGB shows
in Radio Communication magazine]

They wanna play in the HF sandbox, same as they
did a half century ago. Nothing has changed. Status quo uber
alles.

I'm sure that you have something solid on which to base your claim.
Please point us to it.

Jim Kehler's acerbic comment "Gigahertz are for gigasquirts."
Right in here circa 1996-1997.

Find me some articles of "great interest in millimeter bands"
allocated to amateur radio by the FCC. Who in here has EVER
worked up in the millimeter bands?

I have, on numerous occasions from WA8ONQ.

Then "NUMER" them for us. WHICH BANDS? And WHEN?

You are beginning to sound as vague as Dudly the Imposter.

Who in here has EVER worked
any ham bands above 70 cm? [besides using a 1 GHz cell phone
or 2.4 GHz cordless telephone?]

I have, on numerous occasions.

Then "NUMER" them for us. WHICH BANDS? And WHEN?

You are beginning to sound as vague as Dudly the Imposter.



It would be informative to see some resumes of the work experience
of the Directors and the BoD of the League.

It might be informative, if only to demonstrate that none were in jobs
which presented a conflict of interests.

Then go argue with Brian Kelly. I'm just interested in INFORMATION.

YOU yield NO information, only vagueness and generality.


Pres. Jim Haynie was
a salesman. [should be a clue right there, ey?] How about the
"other" pres., Dave Sumner?

There is no "other" pres.

Sumner is listed as CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER and TREASURER. You
don't consider CEOs as being "president" level, do you? :-)

Dave used to run the "Residence Radio Club" with a club callsign.
He still do that? :-)

Dave Sumner is a regular editorial writer in QST. Has Jim Haynie
written anything worthy of an editorial?


That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't find
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

I found it extremely EASY to obtain all the details on Carl's
website. Just a couple of mouse clicks while reading this in
Google. The same with checking out the League's web site to see
the "announcement" of the candidates for Division. At NIGHT,
when I first saw Carl's message on Google.

Well, let's get a membership drive going, right? "Join and
CHANGE THE LEAGUE FROM 'WITHIN'!" Free, open, democratic
principle stuff. Uh huh. :-)

Off the top of my head, those who post here who cannot run for ARRL
Director:

"Off the top of your head" is just air.

You've said NOTHING about "join the League and work for change
from WITHIN!" :-)

What you do if the hierarchy doesn't let you?

Have YOU run for any League post? And why should we care?

Just like most of what you say in here is "off the top of your
head," it is merely AIR. Go fight with someone you think you
win message points from. That's YOUR style, mighty AMATEUR
radio warrior.

I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Hans,

I am somewhat surprised at your naivete. The power and authority
for the "executive committee" to screen and block any candidate "for the
good of the service" was vested in a few individuals in the ARRL a few years
back. Read the BOD minutes and the by-laws. This applies all the way
down to the SM, SCM, EC level. That was about the time that the BOD minutes
was removed from the QST mag. reason: to save on printing costs. I
specifically protested through channels and on this forum at the time that
there was no peer review, no appeals process, no redress, no system of
checks and balances to prevent a runaway "star chamber". When an
organization reaches this level of tyranny under the guise of legitimacy, no
reform is possible.

Clay N4AOX

From: Dave Heil on Sep 14, 8:44 pm


wrote:
From: Dave Heil snarling on Sep 14, 1:17 pm
wrote:
From: on Sep 14, 4:08 am
Dee Flint wrote:
"K?B" wrote in message
wrote


http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/


. . . unbelievable . . !!

I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

But what is the existing or potential conflict of interest?

Carl works as a consulting engineer for commercial firms which have
interests in the millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
conflict with our interests in the ham bands which are also in that
part of the spectrum.

What you mean "millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
'conflict with our interests' in the ham bands"?

Since WHEN has there been any "great interest" in the World
Above 30 MHz to the League? The core membership of the League
is interested only in "working DX on HF with CW." :-)

Plenty of League members operate the bands above 30 MHz.

Quantify "PLENTY," snarly Heil. Give us some NUMBERS.

"Snarly"=anyone who disagrees with Leonard H. Anderson.
I've worked hundreds of them over the past four years via SSB/CW/FM on
the VHF/UHF bands.

Tsk. Still VAGUE. "Hundreds" isn't quantified sufficiently well.

Also, the "millimeter" bands are not the centimeter bands such as
70 cm.


Perhaps you've heard of the monthly QST VHF/UHF column. It has been
around for decades. I have decades worth of QST Magazine and ARRL
Handbooks featuring construction articles on VHF/UHF antennas,
amplifiers and the like.

Goodie, you can be an "elmer" and teach all those newcomers
ALL ABOUT the MILLIMETER BANDS!! :-)

You have a virtual library all about MILLIMETER BANDS!


You're out of touch, old timer. :-) :-)

Har. Har. Har.

It isn't really funny. You don't have much of an idea what is going on
in the VHF/UHF ham bands, do you?

Anyone on the WEST coast would NOT know what is going on
on the east coast. MILLIMETER BANDS are rather line-of-sight.


I was operating and maintaining multi-channel 1.8 GHz microwave
radio relay equipment in the fall of 1954. Where were you?

Me? I was in kindergarten, prepping myself to take over from geezers
who'd be out of steam at some point.

Tsk, you've been out of steam for years. :-)

Did you have a pressing need for steam? Get a steam iron and
go to it on the ironing board...

I was testing X-Band (8 to 12 GHz) airborne radar at Hughes
in 1957. Where were you?

Second grade, Highlands Elementary School, Lake Worth, Florida, prepping
myself to take over from geezers who'd eventually run out of steam.

Ah, but you KNEW ALL ABOUT those MILLIMETER BANDS then, dincha?


I was doing lab tests on 4mm waveguide components in 1960 at the
STL research lab. Where were you?

I'd just finished the fifth grade or was starting the sixth at Harrison
School, Lexington, Kentucky and was still prepping from geezers like
you--guys who'd eventually run out of steam.

Oh, my, you sure MOVED around a lot? On the run? Someone
after you?


My late friend Lawrence
Evans W8CAL was on the ham bands from Moundsville begininng in 1931.

Tsk. All your friends are "late?" Too bad.


I was testing microwave components and systems, including
designing part of an active air-coupled test set on Ku-Band
(18 to 24 GHz) for the A-6 Intruder at Micro-Radionics in the
early 1960s. Where were you?

How early? In 1963 I was fourteen and was already a ham. We already
know what you weren't doing. You weren't a radio amateur.

I was a RADIO PROFESSIONAL. Had been one for 11 years by
1963. Got my First Phone in 1956.


I did the entirety of design of an L-band (1 to 2 GHz) Mode 4
capable transponder test set RF section at Teledyne
Electronics in '78. Where were you?

I was already a seasoned DXer at age 29.

Wowwwwwww. (big Ben Stein "wow")

Are you wanting some kind of medal? Certificate (suitable for
framing)?

How about your Life Story made into a motion picture? I know
a few over at the Writer-Producer's Guild in Burbank...should I
drop them a "treatment" or precis of your story?

I owned a home in Cincinnati, Ohio.

And that has WHAT to do with amateur radio, "seasoned old DXer?"


Well, in 1972 I was still in the Air Force.

Tsk. In 'Nam "in-country" working MARS radios? :-)


Snarly? I've not yet begun to be snarly, wizened one.

Tsk. You've been snarly since your fabulous "synchronizing
RTTYs with morse" from the wilds of Africa... :-)

I've left plenty
out too, so if you're ever in the mood to play another game of "mine's
bigger than yours", I'll happily oblige.

No doubt "yours" is "bigger." No doubt it can throw a lot
farther. :-) It's probably been "in" more things than
mine, too! :-)

You should use the royal "we" more. That way you can wave
your "we-we" at everyone to "prove your point."


I operated plenty of satellite gear, from large fixed installations to
suitcase TACSAT equipment.

Woweee...regular James Bomb sorta stuff, ey? I'll ask to see
if Steven Segal is available to play you in your Life Story
motion picture. Might take a while, though, agents wanna
have "lunch" and all that.


Please present any evidence that you've uncovered which outlines what
ARRL members think about the frequencies above 30 MHz. Any at all will do.

How about over 2000 Comments on WT Docket 05-235?

How about over 2000 Comments on WT Docket 98-143?

Please, break them down for us by ARRL member and non-ARRL member.

Larry Klose already did much of that on Docket 98-143.

I'm still doing that on Docket 05-235 (which won't close until
end of October and 14th November).

So far YOUR numerics are vague to "hundreds" but NOW you want
ME to be terribly, terribly specific as to membership? :-)

Thank you for your efforts in justifying your previously unqualified and
unquantified statement.

My my you really ARE ****ed off, aincha, snarly Dave? Tsk, tsk.

My bad...said unkind things about Big Brother in Newington. :-)


Snarly Dave, go to the grill and fork yourself. You're done. :-)

I've operated on 908 Mhz.

Goodie. Your pretty Certificate (suitable for framing)
is on its way. Too bad you couldn't get the MILLIMETER
BAND endorsement.

Yawn.

CCW N4AOX wrote:

I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Hans,

I am somewhat surprised at your naivete. The power and authority
for the "executive committee" to screen and block any candidate "for the
good of the service" was vested in a few individuals in the ARRL a few years
back. Read the BOD minutes and the by-laws. This applies all the way
down to the SM, SCM, EC level. That was about the time that the BOD minutes
was removed from the QST mag. reason: to save on printing costs. I
specifically protested through channels and on this forum at the time that
there was no peer review, no appeals process, no redress, no system of
checks and balances to prevent a runaway "star chamber". When an
organization reaches this level of tyranny under the guise of legitimacy, no
reform is possible.

It is possible but it involves many lawyers (and years of work) and
deep reasearch in the IRS Code esp in this case i should think 501 (c)
3 given the ARRL's nonprofit status

Clay N4AOX

wrote:
I've operated on 908 Mhz.

Goodie. Your pretty Certificate (suitable for framing)
is on its way. Too bad you couldn't get the MILLIMETER
BAND endorsement.

You're late for game, don't bother, I have the plaque for DXCCs on five
bands starting with 85000 millimeters and down.

Yawn.

Yawning eh? That's a messaage Sweetums, geezers like you should to
listen to your bodies. So go to bed, you've made enough of an ass of
yourself for one night.




w3rv

My League Director told me in public that only 4 Directors
voted to review the Executive Committee's ruling. He said
he told them that there was no "upside" to keeping Carl off
the ballot, and that as just one director, there was no
damage he could do anyway, even if he was as dangerous as
they thought.

But, seems to me the Board is hellbent on paybacks for
Carl's work with NCI. After all, he and the rest of the NCI
Board have beaten them at every turn on the code issue. If
it's not paybacks time, then the Board is scared to death of
what Carl might do to try to reform the organization. It's
one or the other.

Either way, this will stiffle future candidates who might
otherwise consider running for an ARRL office, but don't
want the public humiliation of being disqualified by the
Elections Committee if they don't like the way you part your
hair. And, of course if doesn't do much for League
recruiting, particularly of younger hams who tend to rebel
against such shenanigans when they see them in adults. I
agree that there is no upside to keeping him off the ballot,
but apparently, the Board would rather bring the house down
on their heads than have to deal with an outsider who
doesn't care much for the way the exclusive good ol' boys
club has been doing things.

Spread the word to your clubs around the country, and let's
let the Directors hear of our disgust over this blatant
abuse of power.

Rick Tannehill - W7RT
NCI Board Member
Life Member - ARRL


wrote:
Dee Flint wrote:

"KØHB" wrote in message
thlink.net...

wrote


http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/

. . . unbelievable . . !!


I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB


But what is the existing or potential conflict of interest?


Carl works as a consulting engineer for commercial firms which have
interests in the millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
conflict with our interests in the ham bands which are also in that
part of the spectrum. The ARRL bylaws state that anybody in that type
of position cannot become a member of the BoD. The problem is that the
League has conveniently winked that provision in the bylaws several
times in the past and has allowed others in Carl's position to become
Directors. hypocrisy taken to a new level.



That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't find
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Rick" wrote in message
...

Spread the word to your clubs around the country, and let's let the
Directors hear of our disgust over this blatant abuse of power.


Keeping the shennanagins related to the recent ARESCOM/WL2K scam in mind,
and that poor horse ( http://www.hamblog.com/?p=28 ) at ARRL HQ, I'd say
that the present board members should all be forced to squeeze ( or not )
through the eye of the same needle that Carl could not pass through.

I'm not saying that they were wrong to exclude Carl, but rather that it is
wrong for them to exclude themselves - from the same 'conflict of interest'
filter they have just ( correctly ) applied to Carl.

Let's see the WinLink and SCS connected board members out on the tiles, too.

- A refreshing administrative enema that should not be limited to the board,
but should encompass the ARRL executives as well.

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org
Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com
---------- HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com
---------- DigiBlog http://www.uspacket.org/digiblog/

wrote:
From: Dave Heil snarling on Sep 14, 1:17 pm

Off the top of my head, those who post here who cannot run for ARRL
Director:

"Off the top of your head" is just air.

You've said NOTHING about "join the League and work for change
from WITHIN!" :-)

What you do if the hierarchy doesn't let you?

Have YOU run for any League post? And why should we care?

Just like most of what you say in here is "off the top of your
head," it is merely AIR. Go fight with someone you think you
win message points from. That's YOUR style, mighty AMATEUR
radio warrior.



He forgot his own disqualifying virtue.

#4. Those who complain about the elimination of Section News from QST.

Rick wrote:
My League Director told me in public that only 4 Directors
voted to review the Executive Committee's ruling. He said
he told them that there was no "upside" to keeping Carl off
the ballot, and that as just one director, there was no
damage he could do anyway, even if he was as dangerous as
they thought.

I agree!

But, seems to me the Board is hellbent on paybacks for
Carl's work with NCI. After all, he and the rest of the NCI
Board have beaten them at every turn on the code issue.

No, they haven't.

It's clear that FCC was pushing for reductions in Morse Code testing
long before NCI existed. And there are strong no-code-test directors on
the ARRL BoD.

If
it's not paybacks time, then the Board is scared to death of
what Carl might do to try to reform the organization. It's
one or the other.

No, it isn't. There are other possibilities.

One is that Carl's manner *in the past* may have upset some people. Or
his *past* comments about ARRL and many aspects of ham radio.

There's also his leapfrogging over the field organization and going
straight for Director.

Personally I don't see any conflict between his present employment and
being an ARRL director. The commitees and Board see different.

Either way, this will stiffle future candidates who might
otherwise consider running for an ARRL office, but don't
want the public humiliation of being disqualified by the
Elections Committee if they don't like the way you part your
hair.

It might stifle some. But the alleged "humiliation" can be avoided by
not going public until the Board accepts your candidacy.

And, of course if doesn't do much for League
recruiting, particularly of younger hams who tend to rebel
against such shenanigans when they see them in adults. I
agree that there is no upside to keeping him off the ballot,
but apparently, the Board would rather bring the house down
on their heads than have to deal with an outsider who
doesn't care much for the way the exclusive good ol' boys
club has been doing things.

Seems that way. OTOH, there could be other factors.

Spread the word to your clubs around the country, and let's
let the Directors hear of our disgust over this blatant
abuse of power.

Can I be an NCI Board Member?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Open Letter to WK3C,

What a story. At a time when I've buried all my hard feelings as to
news according to ARRL, which has been public relations over the years,
your story emerges. It reinforces my opinion all along that the League
is in it for itself, not for ham radio. My plan to join has now been
scrapped.

Based on your writing, you shine with integrity. Any organization
should feel honored to put you on the ballot. I am truly sorry you've
run into what essentially is an utter lack of due process.

One remedial outlet you might survey is administrative. Is there any
argument that brings ARRL under the scrutiny of an administrative body
like the FCC is subjected to? Maybe you could argue -- admittedly a
big stretch -- that because they're the dominant ham radio group by
far, they occupy a monopolistic position, giving the federal
Administrative Procedure Act jurisdiction.

Now, that procedure you can handle yourself. Even if you don't
succeed, you might be able to get to the discovery stage, which would
be remedial. Not a licensed attorney, I offer my free help with this
procedure that I know so well. Oh yes, along with this offer, I must
add: "Contact a member of your jurisdiction's Bar."

Bob Sherin, W4ASX

wrote:
Rick wrote:

My League Director told me in public that only 4 Directors
voted to review the Executive Committee's ruling. He said
he told them that there was no "upside" to keeping Carl off
the ballot, and that as just one director, there was no
damage he could do anyway, even if he was as dangerous as
they thought.


I agree!

But, seems to me the Board is hellbent on paybacks for
Carl's work with NCI. After all, he and the rest of the NCI
Board have beaten them at every turn on the code issue.


No, they haven't.

It's clear that FCC was pushing for reductions in Morse Code testing
long before NCI existed. And there are strong no-code-test directors on
the ARRL BoD.


If
it's not paybacks time, then the Board is scared to death of
what Carl might do to try to reform the organization. It's
one or the other.


No, it isn't. There are other possibilities.

One is that Carl's manner *in the past* may have upset some people. Or
his *past* comments about ARRL and many aspects of ham radio.

There's also his leapfrogging over the field organization and going
straight for Director.

Personally I don't see any conflict between his present employment and
being an ARRL director. The commitees and Board see different.

Either way, this will stiffle future candidates who might
otherwise consider running for an ARRL office, but don't
want the public humiliation of being disqualified by the
Elections Committee if they don't like the way you part your
hair.


It might stifle some. But the alleged "humiliation" can be avoided by
not going public until the Board accepts your candidacy.


And, of course if doesn't do much for League
recruiting, particularly of younger hams who tend to rebel
against such shenanigans when they see them in adults. I
agree that there is no upside to keeping him off the ballot,
but apparently, the Board would rather bring the house down
on their heads than have to deal with an outsider who
doesn't care much for the way the exclusive good ol' boys
club has been doing things.


Seems that way. OTOH, there could be other factors.


Spread the word to your clubs around the country, and let's
let the Directors hear of our disgust over this blatant
abuse of power.


Can I be an NCI Board Member?

73 de Jim, N2EY


Have you been an NCI member for a year? If so, yes, you can
run, if you agree to the principles of the organization as
espoused on the web page.
Rick T.

CCW N4AOX wrote:
I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

73, de Hans, K0HB


Hans,

I am somewhat surprised at your naivete. The power and authority
for the "executive committee" to screen and block any candidate "for the
good of the service" was vested in a few individuals in the ARRL a few years
back. Read the BOD minutes and the by-laws. This applies all the way
down to the SM, SCM, EC level. That was about the time that the BOD minutes
was removed from the QST mag. reason: to save on printing costs. I
specifically protested through channels and on this forum at the time that
there was no peer review, no appeals process, no redress, no system of
checks and balances to prevent a runaway "star chamber". When an
organization reaches this level of tyranny under the guise of legitimacy, no
reform is possible.

WODR, folks, this is just how things work from top to bottom.

Deal with it.

- Mike KN3EIA -

"Michael Coslo" wrote


WODR, folks


WTF is "WODR", other than an FM station used to be down in SC playing funky shag
music?

an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

an_old_friend wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:


wrote:


From: on Sep 14, 4:08 am

cut



Find me some articles of "great interest in millimeter bands"
allocated to amateur radio by the FCC. Who in here has EVER
worked up in the millimeter bands?

I have, on numerous occasions from WA8ONQ.



Who in here has EVER worked
any ham bands above 70 cm? [besides using a 1 GHz cell phone
or 2.4 GHz cordless telephone?]

I have, on numerous occasions.


as Have I

Tell Len. I didn't ask you.


get it throughyour thick head I can coment on ANY post I like and any
comments. If you can't handle that then shove off

Oh? You're in the business of telling others to leave the newsgroup,
Colonel?

That piece of
information is necessary to get an insight into the problem. I didn't find
it on the web site. Of course I don't have a lot of time this morning.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


I found it extremely EASY to obtain all the details on Carl's
website. Just a couple of mouse clicks while reading this in
Google. The same with checking out the League's web site to see
the "announcement" of the candidates for Division. At NIGHT,
when I first saw Carl's message on Google.

Well, let's get a membership drive going, right? "Join and
CHANGE THE LEAGUE FROM 'WITHIN'!" Free, open, democratic
principle stuff. Uh huh. :-)

cuting Daves gartuous insults

Off the top of my head, those who post here who cannot run for ARRL
Director:

1. Those with a potential conflict of interest.

2. Non-radio amateurs.

3. Non-ARRL members.

One of those snags your "old_friend" and two of them fit Leonard H.
Anderson.



I see that you continue to "cute" things. Perhaps you think that is
somehow making my words go away. I've never made a "gartuous" insult in
my life.


more heil lies

Let's see. Where could the lie be? There is no word "gartuous" so I
could never had made such an insult. So, that coulnd't have been the
lie. Was it a lie that Leonard H. Anderson can't run for ARRL Director?
No, that couldn't have been the lie. Was it a lie that *you* can't
run for ARRL Director? No, that couldn't have been the lie. Maybe you
can't point it out instead of just writing "lies" at every opportunity.

You have nothing to say so you slash out at any targets in
neighboorhood, never mind the Subject you don't need no stinking
subjects

I had something to convey and I did so. That you didn't care for it
doesn't matter a whit.

Dave K8MN

KØHB wrote:

"Michael Coslo" wrote


WODR, folks



WTF is "WODR", other than an FM station used to be down in SC playing funky shag
music?


Sorry Hans, it was a typo. Should have bee WADR - "With All Due Respect".

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Dave Heil" wrote


I asked Hans if his work could have conceivably put him in a position to
influence items before the ITU. Maybe I missed it, but I haven't seen a
response to that yet.


Not directly, although during that period two of my employees sat on the T1E1
committee and did influence CCITT/ITU standards.

Further, Article 11 is not all about the ITU. (See below.) It is ambiguously
crafted and can be easily "lawyered" into excluding almost anyone whose paycheck
is remotely linked to RF spectrum matters, power lines (BPL?), publishing,
emergency communications, transmitter/receiver design/manufacturing, or any
other of the myriad things which the BoD might decide to be "affairs of the
League".

"No person shall be eligible for, or hold, the office of Director, Vice
Director, President or Vice President whose business connections are of
such nature that he could gain financially through the shaping of the
affairs of the League by the Board, or by the improper exploitation of
his office for the furtherance of his own aims or those of his employer.
The primary test of eligibility under this Article shall be the freedom
from commercial or governmental connections of such nature that his
influence in the affairs of the League could be used for his private benefit."


I'd like to know all the facts before I start blasting away at the League.


Me too. Unfortunately facts are not very forthcoming.

And I think it was Dr. Who who remarked "The very powerful and the very stupid
have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they
alter the facts to fit their views... which can be very uncomfortable if you
happen to be one of the facts that needs altering."

73, de Hans, K0HB
--
Homepage:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb
Member:
ARRL http://www.arrl.org
SOC http://www.qsl.net/soc
VWOA http://www.vwoa.org
A-1 Operator Club http://www.arrl.org/awards/a1-op/
TCDXA http://www.tcdxa.org
MWA http://www.w0aa.org
TCFMC http://www.tcfmc.org
FISTS http://www.fists.org
LVDXA http://www.upstel.net/borken/lvdxa.htm
NCI http://www.nocode.org

Dave Heil wrote:
wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Sep 14, 8:44 pm



wrote:

From: Dave Heil snarling on Sep 14, 1:17 pm

wrote:

From: on Sep 14, 4:08 am

Dee Flint wrote:

"K?B" wrote in message

wrote



http://home.ptd.net/~wk3c/



. . . unbelievable . . !!

I'm usually one who waits to "hear the other side of the story", but this
incident astounds me. For the first time since I became interested in
amateur radio, it's not clear to me why I should continue my ARRL
membership.

But what is the existing or potential conflict of interest?

Carl works as a consulting engineer for commercial firms which have
interests in the millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
conflict with our interests in the ham bands which are also in that
part of the spectrum.

What you mean "millimeter end of the spectrum which could be in
'conflict with our interests' in the ham bands"?

Since WHEN has there been any "great interest" in the World
Above 30 MHz to the League? The core membership of the League
is interested only in "working DX on HF with CW." :-)

Plenty of League members operate the bands above 30 MHz.

Quantify "PLENTY," snarly Heil. Give us some NUMBERS.

"Snarly"=anyone who disagrees with Leonard H. Anderson.
I've worked hundreds of them over the past four years via SSB/CW/FM on
the VHF/UHF bands.


Tsk. Still VAGUE. "Hundreds" isn't quantified sufficiently well.

Yet you've surmised that ARRL members aren't interested. You have no
facts, no figures, just a hunch.

No in truth I believe his point is the ARRL Ledaership isn't interested

Also, the "millimeter" bands are not the centimeter bands such as
70 cm.

There's one your familiar restatements of the obvious. I'll add my
thanks for all of those who weren't aware.

well you were going on and on about 70cm and down so...


Perhaps you've heard of the monthly QST VHF/UHF column. It has been
around for decades. I have decades worth of QST Magazine and ARRL
Handbooks featuring construction articles on VHF/UHF antennas,
amplifiers and the like.


Goodie, you can be an "elmer" and teach all those newcomers
ALL ABOUT the MILLIMETER BANDS!! :-)


Do you know that I haven't?

I know you can't. You lack the temperment to mentor almost anybody
therefore of course you can't realy elemer any one on the MM bands
cut
Anyone on the WEST coast would NOT know what is going on
on the east coast. MILLIMETER BANDS are rather line-of-sight.

Anyone on the West Coast who is not a radio amateur would likely not
know much about what hams were doing at any given time on the millimeter
bands.

again why must you waste BW reminding everyone that Len ins't a ham

cut
My my you really ARE ****ed off, aincha, snarly Dave? Tsk, tsk.

Not at all, Leonard. I accorded you much more civil treatment than I
received from you.

Bigg whooper you aren't civil to anyone that disagrees with you

My bad...said unkind things about Big Brother in Newington. :-)

That wasn't your error, Len. What you did was state unsubstantiated
things about League members.

Snarly Dave, go to the grill and fork yourself. You're done. :-)

There's a very well known profile which fits your behavior. Would you
like to see it?

see you grill yourself? Hmm might be accepatabl;e esp if you realy went
and did it, but personaly Id prefer you flambayed

Dave K8MN