Wilson I am getting old (64) and over the years have developed increasing hostility to the league. Today I view it as nothing more than a caretaker of a couple of overpriced paper rags called QST and QEX. If you examine 1950's editions of QST they included technical articles. Each month there was a plethora of one and two tube designs for antenna switches etc and usually a full tilt rig design such as transceivers, superhets etc.. Initially it appeared QEX was going to fill that void but even now QEX carries few technically challenging articles on rf. The last change was it. I will not renew my subscription for QEX with the switch to cheap news print. Enough already. The day of an amateur license carrying any prestige relative to the technical competency of the operator was tossed with the FCC divesting the examination responsibility as well as the watering down of the Q&A pools. Why would I want to contribute to a group who maintained watched during the evolution of this mess? I am not saying to stay in the past but at least move into the future with a viable construct. 73 Chuck WD4HXG
On 11/29/15, Wilson<info...@embarqmail.com> wrote: I think we should all belong to and support ARRL. Agree with everything or not, they are far and away our best lifeline and guardian. Dropping out over an issue is petty. They can't please everyone all the time! Pactor may have some EMCOMM use, but I consider its boater use a scourge and antithetical to "real" ham operation. Routine use on boats (or anywhere) is contrary to all stated ham principles. There's no techie involvement and no goodwill generation. The exam is a joke and everyone on the boat will likely use it, ham or not. Just buy it, pay someone to install it, and use "our" spectrum. Sure, it can be another digi mode for hams, but pushing it out to consumers is nuts. So let's get some cards and letters going to the right places. Wilson W4BOH Also getting old -----Original Message----- From: Glen Zook via Boatanchors Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 9:14 PM To: [1]bcarl...@cfl.rr.com Cc: [2]boatanchors@puck.nether.net ; [3]tetr...@googlegroups.com ; [4]novice-r...@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] [Glowbugs] I agree The ARRL has been, seemingly, pushing for more WINLINK / PACTOR availability for some time. One speculation is that they hope to increase membership through more boat, and yacht, owners getting licenses specifically for operating using those modes because they do not want to have to pay for Internet access using considerably more expensive commercial links. Of course, being able to afford, and to operate, such watercraft usually requires a substantial investment and yet those same people don't want to spend any money to be able to use the Internet while on the water. Then, again, amateur radio operators also have a reputation as to being "cheap" and, I suppose, boat / yacht owners are no different where money is concerned! Although the ARRL does not normally make the actual number of members public, if one takes a look at the mailing notice that has to be published, periodically, that is in small print in the back of QST, it is pretty easy to get a pretty good idea as to the number of members. For some time, the ARRL has "pushed" EMCOMM to get new members to replace other members who have abandoned the ARRL and, it seems, that they are doing the same thing with boat owners. I abandoned the ARRL some time back because they have long stopped supporting what I believe the direction that amateur radio should take. Since I am not an ARRL member, I do not comment on the internal workings of that organization. However, when the ARRL submits petitions to the FCC, or even when they are proposing such, that affects the entire amateur radio population then I definitely do have the right to comment! Several years ago, the ARRL submitted a request for an NPRM that expanded WINLINK / PACTOR operations that they retracted after quite an uprising within the membership. It appears that they might be trying it again. I realize that thing are changing and have been changing for some time during the over 56-years that I have been licensed and some of those changes have been for the good of amateur radio and some have not been good for amateur radio. However, I definitely believe in doing everything possible to stop changes that are definitely not in the best interests of the Amateur Radio Service. Glen, K9STH Website: [5]http://k9sth.net _______________________________________________ Boatanchors mailing list [6]Boatanchors@puck.nether.net [7]https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors References 1. mailto:bcarl...@cfl.rr.com 2. mailto:boatanchors@puck.nether.net 3. mailto:tetr...@googlegroups.com 4. mailto:novice-r...@mailman.qth.net 5. http://k9sth.net/ 6. mailto:Boatanchors@puck.nether.net 7. https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors _______________________________________________ Boatanchors mailing list Boatanchors@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors