Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
From: Peter Markavage [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pick up a 50's QST and count the monthly ads. Pick up a current QST and count the ads. Most likely, you'll find that given the total number of magazine pages in each one, there will be a higher percentage of ads per month in the 50's mag. But look at the content of those ads. Probably as many of those pages of ads are for components and other material useful for building, experimenting and modifying, as for finished products by major equipment manufacturers like Collins and EF Johnson. National company used to run a full-page every month in QST that was very informative, usually a technical description of the workings and design of one of their products explaining why the company built it as they did. I sometimes find the ads in old QST's, CQ's and RADIO's just as interesting as the articles. The in depth technical minutia was all moved over to QEX back in the 80's. No reason to keep it in QST. That's one of my biggest gripes about the League. QST has been BASTARDIZED. bas·tard·ize /'bæstər·daiz/ verb, -ized, iz·ing. –verb (used with object) 1. to lower in condition or worth; debase (from Dictionary.com) That definition describes PRECISELY what moving the in-depth technical articles to a separate publication did to QST. QST has been turned into an appliance operator's journal aimed primarily at new licensees. I think it's a ripoff off that as a full member I would have to pay $24 a year extra for QEX on top of the $39 for membership dues/QST subscription in order to have access to articles on the facet of amateur radio that interests me the most, while QST, which used to be filled with plenty of good technical information and construction articles, is now filled with nauseating human interest drivel crammed in between glossy multi-page display ads. If it was practical to include in-depth technical articles in QST 28 years ago, why would it not be practical to-day? As for the reports on League organisational happenings, FCC and other amateur radio news, and operating events that appear in QST, 99% of that information is already stale news by the time it arrives in the mail with the magazine, because I have already read it on the ARRL website, QRZ.com, e-Ham, Newsline, This Week in Amateur Radio, or found out about it on the AM Forum or this reflector, or one of the numerous other amateur radio websites WEEKS before QST was even delivered to the post office by the printer. Lacking any significant quantity of technical information that interest me, or amateur radio related news that is useful to me, QST is wasted paper that contributes to the clutter in my house, nearly indistinguishable from the rest of the junk mail that piles up on my kitchen table Since QEX is a much thinner magazine than QST and only comes out every two months, it would not add to QST that much additional printing cost or weight, to put half of the content that goes into QEX, into QST every month. Who knows, some of the newbies just might be curious enough to READ some of that technical content and actually learn something , and expand their amateur radio horizon beyond buying the latest and greatest plastic plug 'n play appliance. I suspect there lies a profit motive behind having two separate publications, each with its own paid subscribers, so it is unlikely that QST would ever again be combined with QEX into one publication. Since nearly all the League happenings and amateur radio news that it printed in QST is freely and abundantly available over the internet, as a paid member I should at least be given a choice between receiving QST or QEX as my membership journal. When my current membership expires, I am seriously considering letting it lapse, and instead subscribing to QEX as a non-member, and I would urge anyone else who is as disgusted as I am by what QST has become, to do the same. Don k4kyv __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
On 24th April, Kim wrote: ...P.S.: You want some real fun? Organize an AM-only contest! * Kim, It's odd that you should mention this point... Back in the early 90's, when I was still a stalwart ARRL member, I petitioned the League --- by way of letters mailed to both the Contest Advisory chairman, as well as to my regional representative on the committee --- to give consideration to incorporating AM phone in the annual Straight Key Night activity, as an adjunct to those Hams who either (A) were never fond of CW in the first place, or, (B) were physically unable to send code manually anymore due to age, physical disability, etc. I never received a response from ANYONE in the matter...however, some months later, there was a summary printed in QST of one of the regular general ARRL meetings which are held on a regular basis: the CAC had its input therein, alright...the notion of incorporating AM was laughingly referred in passing in it. Now, what was that you were saying again about bringing change from within...? Pretty tough nut to crack when the forces within don't listen...and no, it was NOT any ...real fun, either... ~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
Good for you, Ed! But no change comes without a struggle. Had Jefferson given up when he saw the markups on his first submission of the Declaration of Independence, well... Where would we be? As for tacking AM on to SKN: I'm a CW fan and SKN is about CW. I, too, would have resisted any dilution of SKN with anything not CW. Besides, that would have relegated AM to an alternative mode and if it's an AM event you want, it needs to stand alone as AM. But there are surely historic events that could be commemorated with an AM Night. What about Fessenden's first audio transmission? Yes, I know, it's not well documented and is being challenged, it was possibly on Dec 20 and again on Dec 24th, but what of it? If not that, then how about the first broadcast transmission by Frank Conrad, 8XK. That was November 2, 1920. Imagine sponsorship by KDKA! You probably couldn't use that exact date, as there's no holiday associated with it, but you're a resourceful lot: improvise. There are other historical events that you could use. How about something around Sept 26, 1919, when the Director of the Naval Communications Service lifted all restrictions on radio amateurs, opening up ham radio after its ban (and near annihilation) after WWI? That would make a nice, Fall event. Or, you could simply declare an event date and do it then. Do you need an official sanction by the League? While that would be nice, it isn't a necessity. If not KDKA, maybe Electric Radio could sponsor the event; maybe some other body. The point is, ladies and gentlemen, this is yours only if you want it badly enough. 73, Kim Elmore, N5OP At 05:50 AM 4/25/2008, you wrote: On 24th April, Kim wrote: ...P.S.: You want some real fun? Organize an AM-only contest! * Kim, It's odd that you should mention this point... Back in the early 90's, when I was still a stalwart ARRL member, I petitioned the League --- by way of letters mailed to both the Contest Advisory chairman, as well as to my regional representative on the committee --- to give consideration to incorporating AM phone in the annual Straight Key Night activity, as an adjunct to those Hams who either (A) were never fond of CW in the first place, or, (B) were physically unable to send code manually anymore due to age, physical disability, etc. I never received a response from ANYONE in the matter...however, some months later, there was a summary printed in QST of one of the regular general ARRL meetings which are held on a regular basis: the CAC had its input therein, alright...the notion of incorporating AM was laughingly referred in passing in it. Now, what was that you were saying again about bringing change from within...? Pretty tough nut to crack when the forces within don't listen...and no, it was NOT any ...real fun, either... ~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body. __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Peter Markavage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: **Not my problem. You're the one that dropped your membership. I can still vote when the time comes to elect a Director. Which made it no longer my problem either. It seems the story for many others as well, as in 'large percentage of licensed amateurs'. ** I'm not sure what junk you're talking about. Or is junk things that you're not interested in reading? QEX is a viable magazine for people who want in depth technical articles and it is generating additional revenue for them. Makes no sense to bring those types of technical articles back into QST. You missed the point, Pete. Why does the League publish two magazines for a shrinking amateur population? Some of the junk I refer to includes the rows of contest results. There are articles and other things of no interest to me in ER as well as other places, but I don't see that as junk - just something of no interest to me. **I became a member to support an organization; I didn't become a member because I wanted a magazine subscription. I would have become a member even if they didn't have a monthly magazine. I'd agree with that, except QST was always represented to me as the face or voice of the ARRL, to its membership and by its membership. Guess that says also says a lot about remaining members, save those who bought life memberships years ago not knowing what lay ahead. But again, I suspect many would do the same - join an organization to support it - it it actually represented all it claims to, not just some fraction thereof. ** You're behind the times. Full contest results haven't been in QST for years. They're in the members only part of the web site. In May 2008 issue, a total of 7 pages devoted to some type of contest activity including one for contest calendar and one for upcoming Field Day. That's 7 pages out of 168 pages. You do the math. Once again, Pete - you missed or perhaps avoided the point. Compare the 7-8 pages of contest results to other modes of amateur radio, keeping in mind that contesting is an activity, not a mode. Even at the 'reduced level', it's still clear where their focus is. ** Maybe you just haven't given them a convincing argument as a member to make some specific changes. Nor have the hundreds of thousands of others who choose not to participate in a mute organization. They seem to hear at least one or two groups clearly. The rest, well ** II think they only sponsor about 12 or 13 contests (phone and/or CW and/or RTTY) in a year. Lots of amateur interest in contests based on the number of participants. Some bad apples are bound to pop up. What's that have to do with ARRL membership? Not lots of interest based on numbers, more based on noise. It seems to me (I'm sure I'm not alone) that the League prefers to focus on the groups that best represent their advertisers - be it contesting, digital, and so on. In my opinion, they should focus on representing all of amateur radio, not focus on only what they deem is marketable and likely to bring them more $. They were founded as an organization to represent US amateurs, not as a publishing house. They shouldn't forsake the former for the latter. ** Membership is up; you should read the BoD meeting minutes. Actually, I don't think the ARRL has lost their way. I think there are some amateurs who resist change, like it the way it was back in the good old days, and believe they are being short-sheeted because their interest doesn't command a high visibility as it once did. You're certainly free to think that, Pete. But I don't see AM or classic tube gear as being the only things short-sheeted over the years by the ARRL. A good many CW folks have left as well. Sure - you can point at the implied minorities as being the real problem, but the some of the 'small parts' is what creates the big picture. I bet if you add up the AM, CW, SSB rag chewers, DXers, RTTY and a number of other groups, you'd find the contesters badly outnumbered. Yet they are allowed to take over the bands for days at a time. A few bad apples? More like a really bad idea. But it feeds egos, and egos buy more new radios from the advertisers. BTW - I tried to send this reply yesterday afternoon but our network was down. So if it seems a bit dated compared to the current conversation, that's why. ~ Todd KA1KAQ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
The in depth technical minutia was all moved over to QEX back in the 80's. No reason to keep it in QST. If you don't like the technical article content, write one and submit it. TAs (technical advisors) perform the peer review for submissions to all League publications. Are you a TA? Have you seen the nature of what gets submitted? I am, and I do. snip i use to write about the hf antennas i build back in the 70's the ARRL would not print any of them never really gave me a reason just they did not have any need for hf quad ,160 mt helicoil vertical or 40 mt delta loops. Ham Radio grabbed each one of them up. then about 2 years later i got a letter from the arrl asking permission to reprint my taming the monster quad . lol.. of course they wanted to print it for free as it had already ran in Ham Radio. some of my work was carried by the RSGB ,WIA and SARA. I received many letters over the years about them. my good friend Rich N8UX and i were talking about all the 2mt ants. which qst had and when the last ant issue came out it made me sick. all the same crap. Rich send in a write up on an antenna he build for hf and also on a voice EQ and digital keyer . guess what qst turned him down flat on all of them. said they were too tech. for the readers. and that he could send them to the qex boys they might be interested. jezz. what use to take me hours to read (qst) now takes me less then 10 mins same review of another 2 mt rig or another 2 mt pvc ant. i have seen a couple reviews of new hf rigs that were interesting but they are far and few between. i called the arrl once and asked them to stop sending me qst it was worthless and in stead send me qex in its place they laughed at me as if i was a nut case and were rude and told me to sub to qex if i wanted it hi hi.. 73 Tony QBE ZUT DE WA4JQS ANTHONY W. (Tony) DePrato WA4JQS EXTRA - HEAVY Since 1962 CQ DX HALL OF FAME # 35 A1-OP FISTS # 10573 SKCC #1227 F.O.P. LODGE 68 DXCC PHONE- DXCC CW- DXCC RTTY- DXCC MIXED DXCC 40, 20, 15, 10 METERS South Sandwich Island Dxpedition Group CALLS HELD: WA4JQS/ZS1, WA4JQS/KC4, WA4JQS/4K1 ZD8JQS, V31SS, VP8BZL, VP8SSI, 3Y0PI __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
Don et al: I can maybe see a few problems in what you propose? 1. I am not currently subscribed to QEX but did so for many years when I was interested in mainly VHF/UHF and Microwaves. They did a good job providing articles there. 2. My latest QEX is Winter 1999 so things may have changed since then but there was only one article that I think would interest most AM builders(?) Page 39. What percent of its content (other than theory) applies to AM today?? 3. I recall previously that there was a good AM article published in QEX and that prompted several of its membership to threaten subscription cancellation!!! I like your idea of an option to supply QEX or QST with membership. 73, Charlie, K0NG __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
At 09:48 AM 4/25/2008, you wrote: On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Kim Elmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I generally sit on my hands, but I'm feeling waggish so... Sorry, I don't have a Milkbone for you. (o: Well, it's the thought that counts A false premise. The same ratios roughly hold for the overall US electorate (I'm not talking only registered voters, I'm talking the eligible electorate). Given the premise made here, are we to assume that the large majority of the electorate that doesn't bother to vote feels the same way about? Actually, it's not. Turnout for the 2004 national election was over 60 percent according to the US Census Bureau: http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/p20-556.pdf 50% or higher most of the time in national elections, far better than the ARRL (a national organization) can claim of licensed amateurs. You're right, my bad. Still, the same principle holds. When people feel their vote actually matters, they vote. How many times have you heard someone lament that 'politicians' who do whatever they want, regardless of what their constituents ask of them? Sounds a lot like the complaints about ARRL officials. Not to make too fine a point of it, but you're not a constituent of the ARRL because you aren't a member. Even so, you *are* a licensed ham and so what the ARRL does affects you, even if you aren't a member. And no, it's not merely a case of sour grapes as you and Pete seem to be implying. I've been told the same thing by ARRL officials as by local politicians, when asked why they clearly go against the will of the people at times: I was elected to do what I feel is best, to use my judgement, to vote my conscience etc, not to necessarily do what the people ask. In some sense, they're right: it's a representative organization. Although, if shown evidence of a representative going against a strong majority, I expect a darned good answer. Otherwise, that representative gets booted. If you don't like the technical article content, write one and submit it. TAs (technical advisors) perform the peer review for submissions to all League publications. Are you a TA? Have you seen the nature of what gets submitted? I am, and I do. You apparently missed this part Kim, but like many others, I'm one of the folks who got sick of banging my head against the wall so fondly known as the ARRL. No, I didn't miss it. I get that part: you don;t like the fact that, for whatever reason, the ARRL doesn't see things eye to eye with you. I did request more diversified content of my director, even volunteered to submit some myself. I was told in pretty clear terms that it is not the 'vision' the ARRL has for the future. Not that I couldn't submit it, just that I shouldn't expect to see it printed (in so many words). I'mnot going to hunt witches here, though there may be some to catch. Submit your article and let it stand or fall to the TA's peer review. That's where all the technical articles go and, believe me, there are some shining examples of the highest in our art submitted there along with some real dogs. But, I keep hearing that It's all those Yaecomwood ads that ruined QST. Or the vast, rice-box conspiracy to manipulate us into appliance operating zombies. Which is it? You're really pushing the 'straw man' to the limit here, Kim. I've not made that argument and I don't see that anyone else has. I wasn't referring to you, and I admit that wasn't clear. My point is that I see both arguments presented by various contributors and I don't see anything constructive come from either one. As AMers we welcome anyone to the mode with whatever gear they can muster. We help them to properly set up their rigs to get the most out of them in the mode. It's then up to them whether they're content with what they have or want something more or different. The highest ideal, and I do commend it. The issue of ads in QST relates more to what the magazine once was vs what it has become, tracking with the ARRL leadership's handling. This predates the perceived 'need' for a separate technical publication. My argument was, and is - with the declining amateur population and continued whining by the League in recent years about costs, income, and the rest, why produce a monthly catalog/contest results and separate technical publication along side? I can only guess that they figure the technical types will thin out enough to drop QEX and leave the glossy QST catalog as the only regular publication available to the membership. I don't believe in conspiracies and that's how this reads. Hence, I dismiss it out of hand. Besides, the TAs reviews often make recommendations about where particular articles should go, not necessarily the QST or QEX editor. Hmmm... The same holds for PSK-31, or RTTY, or MFSK16, or (gasp!) slopbucket! Red herring, methinks. Okay, you're definitely not getting your doggy treat for that silly remark. :D It was
[AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
Hi Paul et al, Yes, the argument that if you're ...not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem simply does not wash with me, either... I honestly HAVE tried to engage the folks in Newington in the matter of League policy on several occasions, before ultimately letting my membership lapse --- and all I ever got back for my efforts was the proverbial stonewall, or the usual party line. The truth of the matter is, they have a pre-set course of action they're following, and that is that --- irregardless of what you, I, or others might think, or may advance forward which might be contrary to the chosen route. To change direction in any way, based upon subsequent outside input, would be an admission of error on their part...and big organizations (be they governments, manufacturers, whatever) I've found, do NOT like to admit to having made mistakes. Yes, I accept the fact that there are no other replacements anywhere on the horizon to pick up on the good deeds that the ARRL has done --- and indeed, CONTINUES to do on behalf of Amateur radio, everywhere --- still, to sit back and to say do NOTHING is wrong, too. I personally tried, failed, and ultimately decided to vote with my feet, by simply leaving...I could not accept the ...my country/League, right or wrong! mantra that so many apparently have... ~73~ Eddy VE3CUI - VE3XZ * - Original Message - From: VJB [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: amradio@mailman.qth.net Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 7:00 PM Subject: [AMRadio] Re: Getting on the Air - May 2008 QST There's a difference in articles published in the club's magazine, QST, when they're written by subscribers compared to articles that are written by club staff at the ARRL. The difference is that the articles carrying a staff byline represent official League policy to some degree. All other views are those of outsiders -- those outside the political environment in Newington. So, regardless of the $65/page the club magazine might pay for outside freelance articles about AM, vintage gear, homebrewing, or the category we favor here on this reflector, the value of that story does not carry the same weight as the implied endorsement reflected in an article on AM presented by a League staffer. That's just the way it is. And it's why you won't see anything positive written by them, about AM. It's not their prevailing mood to accommodate us. Ask me if you need detailed proof. --Paul/VJB Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body. __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 6:39 AM, EP Swynar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Paul et al, I honestly HAVE tried to engage the folks in Newington in the matter of League policy on several occasions, before ultimately letting my membership lapse --- and all I ever got back for my efforts was the proverbial stonewall, or the usual party line. My experience as well, Eddy. Tried membership when I was first licensed in the early 80s, got discouraged and dropped it after a few years. A decade or so later, some big promises about the League listening and acting on the member's wishes were promoted (you need to be a member to have a voice and other BS), gave in another try for 3 years. Ended up feeling like I'd been lied to in order to raise membership numbers. Not only were my reps not listening, they were openly hostile to anything involving tubes, AM, and so on. When asking one Tom Frenaye why they wouldn't run some basic articles on a simple 1 or 2 tube 40m CW transmitter or such to teach newcomers the basics and offer them a means beyond buying a new Yaecomwood to get on the air, I received the ARRL official eye-roll, explanations about no one being interested in 'that stuff', new rigs being too complex for users to maintain themselves, and so on. This happened on several occasions, generally accompanied by the 'oh, great - another one of them' comments between the ARRL rep and the guy at the table selling ARRL books. They just shook their heads in disgust and talked down to me, apparently hoping to discourage me from pursuing my current interest in amateur radio. It had the exact opposite result, of course: it made me see just how broken and backwards the ARRL had become, and made clear to me why some 80% of licensed hams opt *not* to be members. As Irb used to say, That's quite a message! In all my years, I've never heard any AMer or classic gear user suggest or support the banning of any mode - SSB, CW, or otherwise. Not once. I have heard many complaints about the level of intelligence, sloppy operating habits, etc of some SSB users, but that issue is not mode-specific. We've all heard folks from other modes call for the banning of AM, and despite the occasional 'pay no attention to that man behind the curtain' remarks from the ARRL, it's quite clear that they do not support the mode of AM to the same level as, say - SSB contesting - if at all. The fact that QST is no longer promoted as a technical publication is a clear indication of the path taken by the League, and no doubt helps explain why some of us refer to them as the Amateur Radio Retail Lobby. Not only do they not promote the basics of amateur radio like homebrewing (old or new technology), they downright discourage it. That is not an opinion, it is based on factual comments by the ARRL director for our area and others. IMO, it's not up to us to go back and give them yet *another* opportunity to kick us in the teeth. It's up to them to demonstrate to us that they clearly support all modes and interests in the amateur radio theater equally, regardless of numbers involved or advertising revenue. Only then will they get my support and membership again. Lip service won't cut it. ~ Todd, KA1KAQ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
snipped On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Todd, KA1KAQ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The fact that QST is no longer promoted as a technical publication is a clear indication of the path taken by the League, and no doubt helps explain why some of us refer to them as the Amateur Radio Retail Lobby. ~ Todd, KA1KAQ end snipped Hi Todd and all, You took the words right out of my mind! Great posting and I have seen the exact same thing living in two different states and two different callsign regions. I like AM, CW, Lighthouses, flying kites for 80 and 160 antenna skyhooks...so you guys already know, I'm old school. When attending a hamfest, convention, etc., I just walk right by the Amateur Radio Retail Lobby (thanks Todd, for the new name for the Newington club) and don't even bother to speak. I mainly just stare at them and they are quick to find someone else to try to spew their yibberish on! Y'all just made my daythanks! 73Walter - K5EST - Missouri __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
Come to think of it. I'm still Po'd at them for the incentive licensing malarky from the late 1960's Never have joined the ARRL. Probably never will.. 73's Greg WA7LYO Kinston NC - Original Message - From: Todd, KA1KAQ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of AM Radio in the Amateur Service amradio@mailman.qth.net Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 9:56 AM Subject: Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!! On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 6:39 AM, EP Swynar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Paul et al, I honestly HAVE tried to engage the folks in Newington in the matter of League policy on several occasions, before ultimately letting my membership lapse --- and all I ever got back for my efforts was the proverbial stonewall, or the usual party line. My experience as well, Eddy. Tried membership when I was first licensed in the early 80s, got discouraged and dropped it after a few years. A decade or so later, some big promises about the League listening and acting on the member's wishes were promoted (you need to be a member to have a voice and other BS), gave in another try for 3 years. Ended up feeling like I'd been lied to in order to raise membership numbers. Not only were my reps not listening, they were openly hostile to anything involving tubes, AM, and so on. When asking one Tom Frenaye why they wouldn't run some basic articles on a simple 1 or 2 tube 40m CW transmitter or such to teach newcomers the basics and offer them a means beyond buying a new Yaecomwood to get on the air, I received the ARRL official eye-roll, explanations about no one being interested in 'that stuff', new rigs being too complex for users to maintain themselves, and so on. This happened on several occasions, generally accompanied by the 'oh, great - another one of them' comments between the ARRL rep and the guy at the table selling ARRL books. They just shook their heads in disgust and talked down to me, apparently hoping to discourage me from pursuing my current interest in amateur radio. It had the exact opposite result, of course: it made me see just how broken and backwards the ARRL had become, and made clear to me why some 80% of licensed hams opt *not* to be members. As Irb used to say, That's quite a message! In all my years, I've never heard any AMer or classic gear user suggest or support the banning of any mode - SSB, CW, or otherwise. Not once. I have heard many complaints about the level of intelligence, sloppy operating habits, etc of some SSB users, but that issue is not mode-specific. We've all heard folks from other modes call for the banning of AM, and despite the occasional 'pay no attention to that man behind the curtain' remarks from the ARRL, it's quite clear that they do not support the mode of AM to the same level as, say - SSB contesting - if at all. The fact that QST is no longer promoted as a technical publication is a clear indication of the path taken by the League, and no doubt helps explain why some of us refer to them as the Amateur Radio Retail Lobby. Not only do they not promote the basics of amateur radio like homebrewing (old or new technology), they downright discourage it. That is not an opinion, it is based on factual comments by the ARRL director for our area and others. IMO, it's not up to us to go back and give them yet *another* opportunity to kick us in the teeth. It's up to them to demonstrate to us that they clearly support all modes and interests in the amateur radio theater equally, regardless of numbers involved or advertising revenue. Only then will they get my support and membership again. Lip service won't cut it. ~ Todd, KA1KAQ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body. __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
And, after all these years, he's still the Director. Majority of the voting members in your Division must still like his representation. The in depth technical minutia was all moved over to QEX back in the 80's. No reason to keep it in QST. Pick up a 50's QST and count the monthly ads. Pick up a current QST and count the ads. Most likely, you'll find that given the total number of magazine pages in each one, there will be a higher percentage of ads per month in the 50's mag. Ads generate revenue to keep the business in the black. Books sales generate revenue to keep the business in the black. They have very few other options to generate revenue. Membership dues helps, but it's noise in comparison to the other revenue generators. Personally, I believe they've demonstrated support for all modes and interests as best as one can given all the modes and interests that prevail within the amateur radio fraternity. Backing away, i.e. let some other member put the fire of enlightenment upon them, and then I might return, is not the answer. But, it's an easy way to save $39 a year. Pete, wa2cwa http://www.manualman.com On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:56:05 -0400 Todd, KA1KAQ [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Not only were my reps not listening, they were openly hostile to anything involving tubes, AM, and so on. When asking one Tom Frenaye why they wouldn't run some basic articles on a simple 1 or 2 tube 40m CW transmitter or such to teach newcomers the basics and offer them a means beyond buying a new Yaecomwood to get on the air, I received The fact that QST is no longer promoted as a technical publication is a clear indication of the path taken by the League, and no doubt helps explain why some of us refer to them as the Amateur Radio Retail Lobby. Not only do they not promote the basics of amateur radio like homebrewing (old or new technology), they downright discourage it. That is not an opinion, it is based on factual comments by the ARRL director for our area and others. IMO, it's not up to us to go back and give them yet *another* opportunity to kick us in the teeth. It's up to them to demonstrate to us that they clearly support all modes and interests in the amateur radio theater equally, regardless of numbers involved or advertising revenue. Only then will they get my support and membership again. Lip service won't cut it. ~ Todd, KA1KAQ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Peter Markavage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And, after all these years, he's still the Director. Majority of the voting members in your Division must still like his representation. Which brings us back to the 20% membership of US licensed hams vs. 80% not members +/-. Less a case of so many liking him as so few left to vote for him. The in depth technical minutia was all moved over to QEX back in the 80's. No reason to keep it in QST. Could also be looked at as an additional expense which makes little sense in a world of declining hams. If the ARRL is truly concerned about being thrifty with the membership's dollars, wouldn't it make sense to cut maybe half the junk out of QST and add some technical content back into the publication that really started it all for them? Ads generate revenue to keep the business in the black. Books sales generate revenue to keep the business in the black. They have very few other options to generate revenue. Membership dues helps, but it's noise in comparison to the other revenue generators. I don't think anyone ever minded the ads so much as the overall lack of content since the 80s, or '75'76 when they went to the larger format. Personally, I believe they've demonstrated support for all modes and interests as best as one can given all the modes and interests that prevail within the amateur radio fraternity. Pick up any QST Pete, and compare the pages on, sayAM, or CW to the pages of contest results. In reality, the ARRL doesn't openly condemn other modes. More the 'benign neglect' approach mentioned a while back by Don, K4KYV. Backing away, i.e. let some other member put the fire of enlightenment upon them, and then I might return, is not the answer. Approximately 80% of the licensed amateur population appears to disagree with that statement, Pete. That doesn't say a lot for the organization that claims to represent the interests of US Amateurs. It's not a matter of enlightening them, for the most part they've made it clear that their minds are made up as to the path we all must follow. Don't get me wrong - I'd like nothing more than to have the ARRL become a representative organization for us and see the contesters in Newington replaced by more well-rounded hams. It shouldn't conflict with their publishing business and could only help the overall picture with increased revenues not only from dues, but additional book sales and an overall vibrant organization (what a concept!). There's just no way I can give my money to a group who's approach involves saying 'join if you want a voice, give me your money, so I can tell you how wrong you are'. I'm not looking for an organization or publication to cater specifically to my particular interest. Electric Radio does an incredible job there. All I expect is equal and fair treatment, not being ignored in favor of a segment that many see as creating intentional interference and behavior that goes against the amateur creed, sanctioned by the ARRL and rewarded through multiple pages of 'results'. From the ARRL, 'back in the day': Considerate...never knowingly uses the air in such a way to lessen the pleasure of others. Sounds like any contesters you know? I know you enjoy stirring the pot on this subject Pete, but it's pretty clear that the ARRL lost its way some time ago and has been going downhill since. Dismissing low membership as somehow being a small piece of the pie doesn't excuse the behavior or downward spiral. Particularly since they're supposed to serve at the pleasure of the membership. All 20%. But I guess when you're running a contest club Good luck in the corntest! ~ Todd, KA1KAQ (o: __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
RE: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
OK - just for the heck of it, try an experiment...won't cost you anything but a few seconds of your time. Instead of walking past the ARRL table at the next hamfest, make a point of saying something like - I sure wish the ARRL supported homebrewing and AM operation. Don't argue, don't get drawn into a discussion, just make your statement and walk away. And get every single one of your buddies at the hamfest to do the same thing. With apologies to Arlo Guthrie: You know, if one person, just one person says it they may think he's really sick and they won't listen to him. And if two people, two people say it, in harmony, they may think they're both AM'ers and they won't listen to either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking by saying Please support homebrewing and AM and walking away. They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day,I said fifty people a day walking by saying support homebrewing and AM and walking away. And friends they may think it's a movement. And that's what it is, the AMRadio movement, and all you gotta do to join is to say support homebrewing and AM the next time you see an ARRL guy. cheers, Nick KD4CPL -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Walter - K5EST Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 10:21 AM To: Discussion of AM Radio in the Amateur Service Subject: Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!! snipped On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Todd, KA1KAQ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The fact that QST is no longer promoted as a technical publication is a clear indication of the path taken by the League, and no doubt helps explain why some of us refer to them as the Amateur Radio Retail Lobby. ~ Todd, KA1KAQ end snipped Hi Todd and all, You took the words right out of my mind! Great posting and I have seen the exact same thing living in two different states and two different callsign regions. I like AM, CW, Lighthouses, flying kites for 80 and 160 antenna skyhooks...so you guys already know, I'm old school. When attending a hamfest, convention, etc., I just walk right by the Amateur Radio Retail Lobby (thanks Todd, for the new name for the Newington club) and don't even bother to speak. I mainly just stare at them and they are quick to find someone else to try to spew their yibberish on! Y'all just made my daythanks! 73Walter - K5EST - Missouri __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body. __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
With apologies to Arlo Guthrie: But who is going to pick up the garbage sorry I couldn't resist John __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
Come on now Todd, don't hold back, tell us what you really think! LOL Mack Rogers N4VGB --- Todd, KA1KAQ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 6:39 AM, EP Swynar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Paul et al, I honestly HAVE tried to engage the folks in Newington in the matter of League policy on several occasions, before ultimately letting my membership lapse --- and all I ever got back for my efforts was the proverbial stonewall, or the usual party line. My experience as well, Eddy. Tried membership when I was first licensed in the early 80s, got discouraged and dropped it after a few years. A decade or so later, some big promises about the League listening and acting on the member's wishes were promoted (you need to be a member to have a voice and other BS), gave in another try for 3 years. Ended up feeling like I'd been lied to in order to raise membership numbers. Not only were my reps not listening, they were openly hostile to anything involving tubes, AM, and so on. When asking one Tom Frenaye why they wouldn't run some basic articles on a simple 1 or 2 tube 40m CW transmitter or such to teach newcomers the basics and offer them a means beyond buying a new Yaecomwood to get on the air, I received the ARRL official eye-roll, explanations about no one being interested in 'that stuff', new rigs being too complex for users to maintain themselves, and so on. This happened on several occasions, generally accompanied by the 'oh, great - another one of them' comments between the ARRL rep and the guy at the table selling ARRL books. They just shook their heads in disgust and talked down to me, apparently hoping to discourage me from pursuing my current interest in amateur radio. It had the exact opposite result, of course: it made me see just how broken and backwards the ARRL had become, and made clear to me why some 80% of licensed hams opt *not* to be members. As Irb used to say, That's quite a message! In all my years, I've never heard any AMer or classic gear user suggest or support the banning of any mode - SSB, CW, or otherwise. Not once. I have heard many complaints about the level of intelligence, sloppy operating habits, etc of some SSB users, but that issue is not mode-specific. We've all heard folks from other modes call for the banning of AM, and despite the occasional 'pay no attention to that man behind the curtain' remarks from the ARRL, it's quite clear that they do not support the mode of AM to the same level as, say - SSB contesting - if at all. The fact that QST is no longer promoted as a technical publication is a clear indication of the path taken by the League, and no doubt helps explain why some of us refer to them as the Amateur Radio Retail Lobby. Not only do they not promote the basics of amateur radio like homebrewing (old or new technology), they downright discourage it. That is not an opinion, it is based on factual comments by the ARRL director for our area and others. IMO, it's not up to us to go back and give them yet *another* opportunity to kick us in the teeth. It's up to them to demonstrate to us that they clearly support all modes and interests in the amateur radio theater equally, regardless of numbers involved or advertising revenue. Only then will they get my support and membership again. Lip service won't cut it. ~ Todd, KA1KAQ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body. Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
I'll be at Dayton this year. Rather than just avoid the table as I've done in years past, I take up your suggestion. 73, Joe, N6DGY Pleasant Grove, UT Nick England wrote: OK - just for the heck of it, try an experiment...won't cost you anything but a few seconds of your time. Instead of walking past the ARRL table at the next hamfest, make a point of saying something like - I sure wish the ARRL supported homebrewing and AM operation. Don't argue, don't get drawn into a discussion, just make your statement and walk away. And get every single one of your buddies at the hamfest to do the same thing. __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
** My comments On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:23:52 -0400 Todd, KA1KAQ [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Peter Markavage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And, after all these years, he's still the Director. Majority of the voting members in your Division must still like his representation. Which brings us back to the 20% membership of US licensed hams vs. 80% not members +/-. Less a case of so many liking him as so few left to vote for him. **Not my problem. You're the one that dropped your membership. I can still vote when the time comes to elect a Director. The in depth technical minutia was all moved over to QEX back in the 80's. No reason to keep it in QST. Could also be looked at as an additional expense which makes little sense in a world of declining hams. If the ARRL is truly concerned about being thrifty with the membership's dollars, wouldn't it make sense to cut maybe half the junk out of QST and add some technical content back into the publication that really started it all for them? ** I'm not sure what junk you're talking about. Or is junk things that you're not interested in reading? QEX is a viable magazine for people who want in depth technical articles and it is generating additional revenue for them. Makes no sense to bring those types of technical articles back into QST. Ads generate revenue to keep the business in the black. Books sales generate revenue to keep the business in the black. They have very few other options to generate revenue. Membership dues helps, but it's noise in comparison to the other revenue generators. I don't think anyone ever minded the ads so much as the overall lack of content since the 80s, or '75'76 when they went to the larger format. **I became a member to support an organization; I didn't become a member because I wanted a magazine subscription. I would have become a member even if they didn't have a monthly magazine. Personally, I believe they've demonstrated support for all modes and interests as best as one can given all the modes and interests that prevail within the amateur radio fraternity. Pick up any QST Pete, and compare the pages on, sayAM, or CW to the pages of contest results. In reality, the ARRL doesn't openly condemn other modes. More the 'benign neglect' approach mentioned a while back by Don, K4KYV. ** You're behind the times. Full contest results haven't been in QST for years. They're in the members only part of the web site. In May 2008 issue, a total of 7 pages devoted to some type of contest activity including one for contest calendar and one for upcoming Field Day. That's 7 pages out of 168 pages. You do the math. Backing away, i.e. let some other member put the fire of enlightenment upon them, and then I might return, is not the answer. Approximately 80% of the licensed amateur population appears to disagree with that statement, Pete. That doesn't say a lot for the organization that claims to represent the interests of US Amateurs. It's not a matter of enlightening them, for the most part they've made it clear that their minds are made up as to the path we all must follow. Don't get me wrong - I'd like nothing more than to have the ARRL become a representative organization for us and see the contesters in Newington replaced by more well-rounded hams. It shouldn't conflict with their publishing business and could only help the overall picture with increased revenues not only from dues, but additional book sales and an overall vibrant organization (what a concept!). There's just no way I can give my money to a group who's approach involves saying 'join if you want a voice, give me your money, so I can tell you how wrong you are'. ** Maybe you just haven't given them a convincing argument as a member to make some specific changes. I'm not looking for an organization or publication to cater specifically to my particular interest. Electric Radio does an incredible job there. All I expect is equal and fair treatment, not being ignored in favor of a segment that many see as creating intentional interference and behavior that goes against the amateur creed, sanctioned by the ARRL and rewarded through multiple pages of 'results'. From the ARRL, 'back in the day': Considerate...never knowingly uses the air in such a way to lessen the pleasure of others. Sounds like any contesters you know? ** II think they only sponsor about 12 or 13 contests (phone and/or CW and/or RTTY) in a year. Lots of amateur interest in contests based on the number of participants. Some bad apples are bound to pop up. What's that have to do with ARRL membership? I know you enjoy stirring the pot on this subject Pete, but it's pretty clear that the ARRL lost its way some time ago and has been going downhill since. Dismissing low membership as somehow being a small piece of the pie doesn't
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
OK, it's loud noise, but add pub sales and ad rev. still exceed membership dues by about a million. So, in order to keep revenue viable, if membership goes down, in order to make up the difference, more push for ad and pub. revenue. Begging in other arenas is also a viable alternative but I think they tapped most of them. So, if you kill your membership, you're forcing them to extract revenue from these other sources. Of course, either way, they can draw some monies for certain projects from the contributions and support bucket. The over all point is that stopping your membership doesn't solve some of the issues that have been discussed here recently and in the past with ARRL/QST etc. Of course, just adding 8 more pages to QST each month (that's the increment) for ads, if the push was there, could add a nice monetary perk each month. You could also kill a column or two and not add any additional pages. It will be interesting to read the 2007 Annual Report which should be available for read on the ARRL web site in June. Pete, wa2cwa http://www.manualman.com On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:40:12 -0500 Robert Nickels [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Peter Markavage wrote: Membership dues helps, but it's noise in comparison to the other revenue generators. Sorry Pete, but that's simply not correct. Membership dues are the largest single source of ARRL income. From the 2007 Annual Report (the most recent one that is available for the Year Ended December 31, 2006): Revenues and Contributions: Membership dues $5,016,089 Net publication sales $3,435,316 Advertising revenue $2,541,503 Investment income (restricted and unrestricted) $415.288 Examination fees and other $328,694 Program and service fees $418,503 Government grant awards $122,397 Contributions and support (restricted and unrestricted) $1,368,399 I went back to the earliest report on the website, for FY 1995, and in that year Dues brought in $4.4M, Publications $4.3M and Ads $3.1M, so the shift toward dues as a larger share of ARRL income has been the case at least the past 12 years. 73, Bob W9RAN __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body. __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
After reading all these replies.. I had an idea. I'm no fan of the ARRL, and perhaps, it is time for a second voice for us.. why dont we start something to compete with the league? -- Robert Johnson -- AIM:AlohaWulf Yahoo:RobertJohnsonJr ICQ:114040316 Telephone:562-286-4255 Email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Whoever has an opinion of his own, and honestly expresses it, will be guilty of heresy. Heresy is what the minority believe; it is the name given by the powerful to the doctrine of the weak. -- Robert G. Ingersoll __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
--- John Flood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With apologies to Arlo Guthrie: But who is going to pick up the garbage sorry I couldn't resist John __ John, The red VW microbus, of course! Bob Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
Be sure you do. I'm reviewing the 27 8x10 color glossy photos with circles and lines and a paragraph on the back of each one. Just another case of American blind justice. 73, Joe, N6DGY Pleasant Grove, UT On Apr 24, 2008, at 4:07 PM, bob mccully wrote: --- John Flood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With apologies to Arlo Guthrie: But who is going to pick up the garbage sorry I couldn't resist John __ John, The red VW microbus, of course! Bob Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body. __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
Good Luck!! If the ARRL had to depend on income from just AM and CW, even the CEO would starve. Besides, Wayne Green essentially tried to get a new organization going with little results. If he couldnt do it, no one can (IMHO). If ya wanna crab about sumpin, crab about the shipping cost for books. Something like 40% (?) of the cost of the book. I like their books but can no longer afford them without a loan. 73, Charlie, K0NG (sorry for the bw Conard). __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
How cosmic is this? I listened to that entire song today. 73... Bob de k2ki Joseph Bento wrote: Be sure you do. I'm reviewing the 27 8x10 color glossy photos with circles and lines and a paragraph on the back of each one. Just another case of American blind justice. 73, Joe, N6DGY Pleasant Grove, UT On Apr 24, 2008, at 4:07 PM, bob mccully wrote: --- John Flood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With apologies to Arlo Guthrie: But who is going to pick up the garbage sorry I couldn't resist John __ John, The red VW microbus, of course! Bob Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body. __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body. __ Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net AMRadio mailing list Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/ List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html Post: mailto:AMRadio@mailman.qth.net To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body.
Re: [AMRadio] My ARRL, Right or Wrong...!!!
I generally sit on my hands, but I'm feeling waggish so... At 01:23 PM 4/24/2008, you wrote: On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Peter Markavage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And, after all these years, he's still the Director. Majority of the voting members in your Division must still like his representation. Which brings us back to the 20% membership of US licensed hams vs. 80% not members +/-. Less a case of so many liking him as so few left to vote for him. A false premise. The same ratios roughly hold for the overall US electorate (I'm not talking only registered voters, I'm talking the eligible electorate). Given the premise made here, are we to assume that the large majority of the electorate that doesn't bother to vote feels the same way about? Imagine what could be done if everyone actually took the time and made the effort to make an informed electoral choice! The same applies to the ARRL. I find it difficult to sympathize with those complaining about something in which they refuse (despite eligibility) to participate. The in depth technical minutia was all moved over to QEX back in the 80's. No reason to keep it in QST. Could also be looked at as an additional expense which makes little sense in a world of declining hams. If the ARRL is truly concerned about being thrifty with the membership's dollars, wouldn't it make sense to cut maybe half the junk out of QST and add some technical content back into the publication that really started it all for them? If you don't like the technical article content, write one and submit it. TAs (technical advisors) perform the peer review for submissions to all League publications. Are you a TA? Have you seen the nature of what gets submitted? I am, and I do. Ads generate revenue to keep the business in the black. Books sales generate revenue to keep the business in the black. They have very few other options to generate revenue. Membership dues helps, but it's noise in comparison to the other revenue generators. I don't think anyone ever minded the ads so much as the overall lack of content since the 80s, or '75'76 when they went to the larger format. But, I keep hearing that It's all those Yaecomwood ads that ruined QST. Or the vast, rice-box conspiracy to manipulate us into appliance operating zombies. Which is it? Personally, I believe they've demonstrated support for all modes and interests as best as one can given all the modes and interests that prevail within the amateur radio fraternity. Pick up any QST Pete, and compare the pages on, sayAM, or CW to the pages of contest results. In reality, the ARRL doesn't openly condemn other modes. More the 'benign neglect' approach mentioned a while back by Don, K4KYV. Hmmm... The same holds for PSK-31, or RTTY, or MFSK16, or (gasp!) slopbucket! Red herring, methinks. Backing away, i.e. let some other member put the fire of enlightenment upon them, and then I might return, is not the answer. Approximately 80% of the licensed amateur population appears to disagree with that statement, Pete. That doesn't say a lot for the organization that claims to represent the interests of US Amateurs. It's not a matter of enlightening them, for the most part they've made it clear that their minds are made up as to the path we all must follow. Again, the same ratios roughly hold for the US electorate. And again, a false premise. This shows that there are only a few eligible voters interested enough to actually make the effort to vote and that such characteristics hold for the small majority of voters that are also hams. Don't get me wrong - I'd like nothing more than to have the ARRL become a representative organization for us and see the contesters in Newington replaced by more well-rounded hams. Actually, in my experience, some of the most well-rounded hams are the contesters. It shouldn't conflict with their publishing business and could only help the overall picture with increased revenues not only from dues, but additional book sales and an overall vibrant organization (what a concept!). There's just no way I can give my money to a group who's approach involves saying 'join if you want a voice, give me your money, so I can tell you how wrong you are'. I think that's an false characterization of the ARRL. Flawed as it is, it's all we have and we'd best make the best of it. I'm not looking for an organization or publication to cater specifically to my particular interest. Electric Radio does an incredible job there. All I expect is equal and fair treatment, not being ignored in favor of a segment that many see as creating intentional interference and behavior that goes against the amateur creed, sanctioned by the ARRL and rewarded through multiple pages of 'results'. With the phone band expansion, I simply do not believe that there is a lack of space on the bands. That some may have decided that they, by God! own a particular
