Why You Don't Like The ARRL
 

This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis

Subj: [REPEATER] Off List: ARRL
Date: 12/11/2003 5:43:47 AM Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply-to:
To:
CC:

Hi all,

This is directed only to those who are NOT currently ARRL members. I
have
agreed to help compile a survey which seeks answers for these two
questions:

1: If you are not a member of the ARRL, why not?

2: If you were a member of the ARRL and quit, why?

Please respond by December 18th. * Please answer only OFF list to
in order keep the clutter on the remailer down.

Thank-you for assisting in this survey.

Bill Pasternak, WA6ITF

Louis C. LeVine wrote:
This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis

I do like the ARRL. Do I agree with everything they do? Nope. I don't
agree with everything everyone does.

Expensive? A bit, but only for those that think they are just taking out
a magazine subscription.

Love their website, I've mined enough out of that to justify the
membership dues.

And the alternitive is?

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote

:
: And the alternitive is?
:

DARC works good for us.

73/88 BGO
--
"All persons, living or dead, are purely coincidental, and should not be
construed."

In article , hamop_62
@hotmail.com says...
This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis


"snip"

Bill Pasternak, WA6ITF




I *am* a member of ARRL, but do find the membership a little
steep... I'd go $25,, but will think long and hard about renewing at
$40.

I think a lot of the long gray vanity call lists of DX and contest
results should be moved out of QST and onto some sub menu web page where
the three people who give a damn could look them up. QST is a pretty
good rag; it can still be improved.

I object to ARRL's position that we should not be discussing sex,
politics or religion on the bands...what else is left worth talking
about? BUT I wish ARRL or *someone* could act effectively to make
these discussions a bit more civil.

I don't think ARRL is doing enough of the "right stuff" to attract
newcomers, particularly youngsters, to the hobby. Often the emphasis is
too much on technolgy and equipment and not enough on the social
exploration that's possible with our radios.

On positive side I think ARRL is still doing a pretty decent job
representing our interests to the Beltway Bandits.


73 KC2LVQ

Mike Coslo wrote:
And the alternitive is?

- Mike KB3EIA -

N8WWM's favorite.

http://www.rara.org/

"William Mutch" wrote

I think a lot of the long gray vanity call lists of DX and contest
results should be moved out of QST and onto some sub menu web page where
the three people who give a damn could look them up.

You must have been distracted by a passing bimbo or something, but DXCC
listings were removed from QST several years ago and moved to the DXCC
Annual Report which goes only to DXCC participants.

The contest result listings similarly have been removed from QST and now can
be accessed on the web.


I object to ARRL's position that we should not be discussing sex,
politics or religion on the bands...what else is left worth talking
about? BUT I wish ARRL or *someone* could act effectively to make
these discussions a bit more civil.

ARRL makes no regulations whatsoever. You can talk about what ever you deem
proper, and only Riley Hollingsworth will challenge you if he thinks you're
over the line.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Sir, if you are so interested in having a magazine dedicated to the free
banding people why don't you start one. With 15 million, seems that you
would end up as a financial wizard.

The ARRL isn't going to print anything about free banding when they
operate on frequencies they are not permitted. "Licensing" is the name
of the game. "Legal" operation is the name of the game. Maybe you should
go back to printing a "CB" magazine, something like there was back in
the 60's-70's.

Jose wrote:

I don't lilke the ARRL, because QST does not print
any articles on Freebanding. Freebanding IS more popular
than ham radio, and we represent almost 15 million new
potential ARRL members. Too bad the ARRL Yankees
can't figure this out.

Jose

"Louis C. LeVine" wrote:

This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis

I neither approve of or disapprove of the ARRL.

Yes, the dews are high. If they where lower they could attract more
potential members. With the majority of hams being senior citizens, the
ARRL needs to take that into consideration when it comes to dews. WE all
know that seniors are on a fixed income. Members should be given a
choice of what magazine they would like when joining the ARRL.

I showed a copy of QST to a new ham friend and ash him if he was
interested. His comment after looking over the magazine was: The
magazine is to technical for him and most likely other new hams, the
cost for membership is to high.

For me, the ARRL reminds me of the Federal Government. We elect the
officials who are supposed to be working for the membership, but they do
as they darn well please once they are in office. Who is in bed with
whom.

I dropped my membership for the reasons I have stated above.

Alfa-Tango International is the
licensing authority.


LMFAO!!!!

"Jose" wrote in message
...
I don't lilke the ARRL, because QST does not print
any articles on Freebanding. Freebanding IS more popular
than ham radio, and we represent almost 15 million new
potential ARRL members. Too bad the ARRL Yankees
can't figure this out.

Jose


"Louis C. LeVine" wrote in message
om...
This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis

Subj: [REPEATER] Off List: ARRL
Date: 12/11/2003 5:43:47 AM Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply-to:
To:
CC:

Hi all,

This is directed only to those who are NOT currently ARRL members. I
have
agreed to help compile a survey which seeks answers for these two
questions:

1: If you are not a member of the ARRL, why not?

2: If you were a member of the ARRL and quit, why?

Please respond by December 18th. Please answer only OFF list to
in order keep the clutter on the remailer down.

Thank-you for assisting in this survey.

Bill Pasternak, WA6ITF





A troll of course. But to enlightnen the uneducated;

From the front cover of QST.

"Official Journal of ARRL The national association for AMATEUR RADIO"


Any questions JOSE?

Dan/W4NTI

wrote in message ...


"Louis C. LeVine" wrote:

This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis

I neither approve of or disapprove of the ARRL.

Yes, the dews are high. If they where lower they could attract more
potential members. With the majority of hams being senior citizens, the
ARRL needs to take that into consideration when it comes to dews. WE all
know that seniors are on a fixed income. Members should be given a
choice of what magazine they would like when joining the ARRL.

I showed a copy of QST to a new ham friend and ash him if he was
interested. His comment after looking over the magazine was: The
magazine is to technical for him and most likely other new hams, the
cost for membership is to high.

For me, the ARRL reminds me of the Federal Government. We elect the
officials who are supposed to be working for the membership, but they do
as they darn well please once they are in office. Who is in bed with
whom.

I dropped my membership for the reasons I have stated above.

A choice of magazines? Explain please.

Its a bureaucracy. And according to Doctor Peters, who wrote a book called
'Peters principle' many years ago:

"In a bureaucracy everyone will eventually arise to their level of
incompetence"

Dan/W4NTI

Grümwîtch thë Ünflãppåblê wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote

:
: And the alternitive is?
:

DARC works good for us.

So you went over to the DARC side?

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message

Its a bureaucracy. And according to Doctor Peters, who wrote a book
called
'Peters principle' many years ago:

I believe you meant the "Peter principal" named after the author Peter F.
Drucker.
He was a management guru!

"Roger Gt" wrote


I believe you meant the "Peter principal" named after the author Peter F.
Drucker. He was a management guru!

No, he meant the "The Peter Priciple", from the book by that title written
by Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull.

Peter Drucker had nothing to do with it.

Good luck on this one now!

73, de Hans, K0HB

Jose wrote:

I don't lilke the ARRL, because QST does not print
any articles on Freebanding. Freebanding IS more popular
than ham radio, and we represent almost 15 million new
potential ARRL members. Too bad the ARRL Yankees
can't figure this out.

Jose

Why should the ARRL or anyone else, support a bunch of illegal law
breaking operators?

Jose wrote:

You should really self-examine the hatred in your heart, especially
during this festive of seasons. Alfa-Tango International is the
licensing authority.

And it has no authority other than what it self subscribes. The FCC is
the only authority that can issue licenses to use the radio spectrum in
the U.S. and other countries have their own license structure.
Alfa-Tango International has no authority to issue licenses for any use
of the radio spectrum. It is just more "freeband" nonsense, and there is
no "freeband" in the U.S. as those frequencies you use as a "freeband"
are allocated to other services who have ligitimate licenses to use
those frequencies. You ATI license isn't worth the paper it is written
on and carries no authority whatsoever.

Thanks, I couldn't see a connection with Drucker!
So it is spelled "Priciple"? That would explain why I didn't find it!

This one?
-------------------------------
About the Author
Before Dr. Laurence Peter's death in 1988, he was a professor of education
at the University of Southern California and at the University of British
Columbia.
Raymond Hull lives in British Columbia.

This best-selling business classic of more than twenty-five years' duration
is a dead-on account of why boredom, bungling, and bad management are built
into every organization. Through hilarious case histories and cartoons
adapted from Punch, Dr. Peter shows how America's corporate career track
drives employees relentlessly upward -- until they get promoted into jobs
they just can't do and wind up desperately treading water, driving their
colleagues crazy, and dragging down productivity and profit.

-------------------------------

73 OM DE K7DUP



"KØHB" wrote in message n
"Roger Gt" wrote
I believe you meant the "Peter principal" named after the author Peter
F.
Drucker. He was a management guru!

No, he meant the "The Peter Priciple", from the book by that title written
by Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull.

Peter Drucker had nothing to do with it.
Good luck on this one now!
73, de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:

"William Mutch" wrote



I think a lot of the long gray vanity call lists of DX and contest
results should be moved out of QST and onto some sub menu web page where
the three people who give a damn could look them up.



You must have been distracted by a passing bimbo or something, but DXCC
listings were removed from QST several years ago and moved to the DXCC
Annual Report which goes only to DXCC participants.



What's that on page 94-99 of the August 2003 QST then?

Jose wrote:

I don't lilke the ARRL, because QST does not print
any articles on Freebanding. Freebanding IS more popular
than ham radio, and we represent almost 15 million new
potential ARRL members. Too bad the ARRL Yankees
can't figure this out.


What about the ARRL Red Sox? ;-)

Its a bureaucracy. And according to Doctor Peters, who wrote a book called
'Peters principle' many years ago:

"In a bureaucracy everyone will eventually arise to their level of
incompetence"



That "incompetence" is more usually a lack of sufficient office politics
skills than
technical skills. "Dilbert" is on target more often than you would
believe if you
never had to work for a large corporation. AT&T was the worst with this.
There you worked on stuff not because there was a chance that it might
make the
company any money, but because your boss thinks it will impress his
boss. Other
instances are when your department didn't spend all its allocated budget
for the
year, so the boss has people order equipment that might be useful in the
future.
Known as "Use it or lose it", as next year's budget would likely be
scaled back if
this year's isn't fully spent.

I have run across incompetent people in companies I've worked for, but it's
actually quite rare. One guy who didn't know what he was doing just
tried to
wing it. And his work was very faulty. But by far most incompetence is
found in management.

"Robert Casey" wrote

What's that on page 94-99 of the August 2003 QST then?

Honor Roll listings.

"KØHB" wrote:
"Robert Casey" wrote

What's that on page 94-99 of the August 2003 QST then?

Honor Roll listings.

Vintage Mopar muscle car fans too. (66-74)

"Jack" wrote in message
...
This could be relaxed a little bit. The rules that disallow
controversial topics sure don't stop arguing and ill-will on the
bands. :-(


There is no rule against controversial topics. However there is a
recommendation that one use common sense and remember that on the air we
should be ambassadors of good will. So it is considered inappropriate to
discuss such subjects with a stranger, especially those in other countries,
since you may inadvertently offend them.

On the other hand, discussing a controversial subject with someone you know
well is reasonable.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:
"Jack" wrote in message
...
This could be relaxed a little bit. The rules that disallow
controversial topics sure don't stop arguing and ill-will on the
bands. :-(


There is no rule against controversial topics. However there is a
recommendation that one use common sense and remember that on the air we
should be ambassadors of good will. So it is considered inappropriate to
discuss such subjects with a stranger, especially those in other
countries, since you may inadvertently offend them.

On the other hand, discussing a controversial subject with someone you
know well is reasonable.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

What Dee D said.

Kee Low Cycle wrote:
"JJ" wrote in message
...

Jose wrote:


You should really self-examine the hatred in your heart, especially
during this festive of seasons. Alfa-Tango International is the
licensing authority.

And it has no authority other than what it self subscribes. The FCC is
the only authority that can issue licenses to use the radio spectrum in
the U.S. and other countries have their own license structure.
Alfa-Tango International has no authority to issue licenses for any use
of the radio spectrum. It is just more "freeband" nonsense, and there is
no "freeband" in the U.S. as those frequencies you use as a "freeband"
are allocated to other services who have ligitimate licenses to use
those frequencies. You ATI license isn't worth the paper it is written
on and carries no authority whatsoever.




BBZZZZZZZZZT! Wrong answer Goofy.

And you just opened your No-Code Tech mouth and inserted your fat
foot into it. Although ATI is not recognized by the American FCC,
ATI is recognized by several foreign governments, especially in
South America & Central America. Go back to helping Ox chase
trucks. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAH
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Name those countries and show reliable documentation of your claim, and
BBZZZZZZZZT! Your are wrong Dumbo in assuming I am a no code tech. Been
licensed over 40 years.

JJ wrote:
Been
licensed over 40 years.

What's your call, JJ?

Too bad the ARRL Yankees can't figure this out.

What about the ARRL Red Sox? ;-)

Whoever heard of Connecticut Red Sox? G

Bill, K5BY

"Dit Dit Dah" wrote in message ...
"JJ" wrote in message
...
wrote:


I neither approve of or disapprove of the ARRL.

Yes, the dews are high.

Didn't know the ARRL was into dew. They do however have dues. ;)


Either way...why bother?
They ain't getting my money.

Good. Who wants money handled by idiots anyway?

Steve, K4YZ

Steve Robeson, K4CAP wrote:

(Louis C. LeVine) wrote in message . com...

This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis


And just exactly what do you expect that they could do for $10.00
a month?

Please name me ONE organization in ANY "hobby" activity that
provdes the scope of servcies and resources the ARRL offers to it's
target peer group.

Awaiting your informed response.

I think this is one of those cases where some people think that their
membership is a subscription to QST. Its a lot more than that. ARRL does
a lot for Amateurs, even those who hate the organization.

- Mike KB3EIA -

I don't like ARRL because:

1) Membership price too high
2) Can't separate QST from membership
3) QST only counts as $15 of the $39 membership fee
4) Incentive licensing from the 60's
5) Ham radio is a dying hobby
6) 5wpm Extras
7) No value given for the money invested
8) No accountability of the board and Executive staff
9) Really doesn't represent the majority of hams (majority don't
belong)
10) Really no different than 'NRA', 'AARP', 'NAACP'. Take your money
and use it for their own agenda, NOT yours!

That is enough for a start.

Sorry to see '73' and Wayne Green exit publishing.
Sorry to see 'Ham Radio' exit publishing.

ex ARRL member






Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Steve Robeson, K4CAP wrote:

(Louis C. LeVine) wrote in message . com...

This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis


And just exactly what do you expect that they could do for $10.00
a month?

Please name me ONE organization in ANY "hobby" activity that
provdes the scope of servcies and resources the ARRL offers to it's
target peer group.

Awaiting your informed response.

I think this is one of those cases where some people think that their
membership is a subscription to QST. Its a lot more than that. ARRL does
a lot for Amateurs, even those who hate the organization.

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 17:33:25 -0500, "Kee Low Cycle"
wrote:


"JJ" wrote in message
...
Jose wrote:

You should really self-examine the hatred in your heart, especially
during this festive of seasons. Alfa-Tango International is the
licensing authority.

And it has no authority other than what it self subscribes. The FCC is
the only authority that can issue licenses to use the radio spectrum in
the U.S. and other countries have their own license structure.
Alfa-Tango International has no authority to issue licenses for any use
of the radio spectrum. It is just more "freeband" nonsense, and there is
no "freeband" in the U.S. as those frequencies you use as a "freeband"
are allocated to other services who have ligitimate licenses to use
those frequencies. You ATI license isn't worth the paper it is written
on and carries no authority whatsoever.



BBZZZZZZZZZT! Wrong answer Goofy.

And you just opened your No-Code Tech mouth and inserted your fat
foot into it. Although ATI is not recognized by the American FCC,
ATI is recognized by several foreign governments, especially in
South America & Central America. Go back to helping Ox chase
trucks. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAH
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL




Recognized as what? Which foreign goverments?

Lancer wrote:

And you just opened your No-Code Tech mouth and inserted your fat
foot into it. Although ATI is not recognized by the American FCC,
ATI is recognized by several foreign governments, especially in
South America & Central America. Go back to helping Ox chase
trucks. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAH
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL





Recognized as what? Which foreign goverments?

I ask basicly the same thing, which foreign countries, and to provide
documented proof that those foreign countries recognized those
"licenses", so far nothing from mr. kreep low cycle (just more cb
bluster). The ATI is just an international club and any "license/call
signs" issued carries no more authority to transmit on any frequency
then if the ARRL issued licenses.

"JEP" wrote in message
m...
I don't like ARRL because:

1) Membership price too high

Really?? Many local clubs charge anywhere from $20 to $30 and can't do a
whole lot for their members except maintain the local repeater.

2) Can't separate QST from membership

Why would you want to?

3) QST only counts as $15 of the $39 membership fee

Actually you are lucky that it counts as little as that. These days typical
magazines generally cost $3 to $4 an issue so they must be getting a good
break on the publishing.

4) Incentive licensing from the 60's

That was the FCC's idea not the ARRL's.

5) Ham radio is a dying hobby

There are more hams than ever before in history.

6) 5wpm Extras

So what. The very earliest requirements for licensing hams were, guess
what, 5wpm.

7) No value given for the money invested

Let's see. Ham radio would have remained closed after WWI if not for the
ARRL. They have managed to expand our HF and VHF frequencies. Battled,
athough sometimes unsuccessfully, to preserve our allocations. Have
lobbying power in Washinton. Convinced the FCC to come up with what is now
PRB-1, which gives hams some protection from restrictive city ordinances on
antenna height. They are now fighting BPL, which will tear up our HF bands
if implemented, and they are working on a bill in Congress to give hams
protection from restrictive covenants.

You have and will continue to benefit from the ARRL's work, all without
having contributed a dime.

8) No accountability of the board and Executive staff

They are accountable to the membership. Any member can challenge them. Any
member can get involved, run for a position, and work to change things.

9) Really doesn't represent the majority of hams (majority don't
belong)

That is not the ARRL's fault. They keep trying to recruit. That majority
of hams that don't belong don't belong to any other organization either nor
do they attempt to form an alternate organization.

10) Really no different than 'NRA', 'AARP', 'NAACP'. Take your money
and use it for their own agenda, NOT yours!

The agenda is set by the MEMBERS. Any time the MEMBERS do not like the
policies they can elect new officials. The agenda is based on what members
decide to push.


That is enough for a start.

Sorry to see '73' and Wayne Green exit publishing.
Sorry to see 'Ham Radio' exit publishing.

ex ARRL member


You obviously expected the ARRL to ignore all the other member's preferences
and expected them to have an agenda 100% tailored to your wants and
expectations. That doesn't happen in any organization. If you want them to
change, you have to get in there and work hard to get into the thick of the
action. Sitting on the sidelines and criticizing doesn't accomplish
anything.


Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

JEP wrote:


2) Can't separate QST from membership

Check your local newstand or magazine rack in stores, many carry QST.
You can purchase it without membership, or check you local library, they
may carry it and you can read it for free.

JEP wrote:

I don't like ARRL because:

1) Membership price too high
2) Can't separate QST from membership
3) QST only counts as $15 of the $39 membership fee
4) Incentive licensing from the 60's
5) Ham radio is a dying hobby
6) 5wpm Extras
7) No value given for the money invested
8) No accountability of the board and Executive staff
9) Really doesn't represent the majority of hams (majority don't
belong)
10) Really no different than 'NRA', 'AARP', 'NAACP'. Take your money
and use it for their own agenda, NOT yours!

That is enough for a start.

Sorry to see '73' and Wayne Green exit publishing.
Sorry to see 'Ham Radio' exit publishing.

ex ARRL member


Don't tell us. Send it to:
Reply-to:
with your real email addy.

"Louis C. LeVine" wrote in message
om...
This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis


I don't like them because the head bosses see themselves as self-appointed
gods of ham radio.... at least at one point in time they were trying to get
the FCC to hand over authority of the ham radio spectrum to them
entirely.

Clint

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Steve Robeson, K4CAP wrote:

(Louis C. LeVine) wrote in message . com...

This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis


And just exactly what do you expect that they could do for $10.00
a month?

Please name me ONE organization in ANY "hobby" activity that
provdes the scope of servcies and resources the ARRL offers to it's
target peer group.

Awaiting your informed response.

I think this is one of those cases where some people think that their
membership is a subscription to QST. Its a lot more than that. ARRL does
a lot for Amateurs, even those who hate the organization.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Fair enough.

I dislike some of the policies that the ARRL has promoted in the past,
and felt as if the ARRL did not represent me even though I have been a
member since 1986.

Luckily, the FCC went over the ARRL's head and showed a little
lesdership with respect to licensing issues.

73, Brian

"Brian" wrote in message
om...
Mike Coslo wrote in message
...
Steve Robeson, K4CAP wrote:

(Louis C. LeVine) wrote in message
. com...

This came from another radio group. They are doing a survey to find
out why some people do not like the ARRL. I don't like it because it
costs to much. If it were $10 a year I might consider joining.
Louis


And just exactly what do you expect that they could do for $10.00
a month?

Please name me ONE organization in ANY "hobby" activity that
provdes the scope of servcies and resources the ARRL offers to it's
target peer group.

Awaiting your informed response.

I think this is one of those cases where some people think that their
membership is a subscription to QST. Its a lot more than that. ARRL does
a lot for Amateurs, even those who hate the organization.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Fair enough.

I dislike some of the policies that the ARRL has promoted in the past,
and felt as if the ARRL did not represent me even though I have been a
member since 1986.

Did you get actively involved? Did you become a section director? Did you
campaign to sway the majority to your opinion? Or did you just write a
letter or two complaining and were disappointed because it didn't instantly
change the ARRL's policies? If you want your point of view to be policy
then you have to become very politically active in an organization.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE