Re: [AMRadio] RE: Recent comments on AM
Why would the ARRL NOT what to provide quantatative information about this ? Could it be : a) over 50% of the respondents were against the ARRL position? b) so few responded that a) didn't matter? It seems to me if the ARRL had a heavy response rate in terms of total membership, and the majority was in favor of the ARRL position, the ARRL would certainly want to use that information as a major selling point of it's proposal. Mark K3MSB
[AMRadio] RE: Recent comments on AM
On line Dictionary: A survey of the public or of a sample of public opinion to acquire information. Webster's (One of several meanings): A questioning or canvassing of persons, usually selected at random or by quota from various groups, for obtaining information or opinions, especially to be analyzed. I will agree, so as not to confuse the masses, that requested comments from members and nonmembers on the proposal probably would have been a better choice of words than to use something like they polled their members for comments. Pete, wa2cwa On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 20:53:43 -0500 Bill Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think we are confusing conducting a poll with soliciting comments. A poll implies that there will be a numerical result that will be revealed at the end of the poll which shows how many of the population polled were for or against the issue in question. The ARRL did NOT conduct a poll. The ARRL did solicit comments, as stated else where. However there was no feedback as to how many folks commented or what the comments involved or any indication that the ARRL even read or considered what was sent to them. My Director solicited comments. In one of his letters he stated the tally of comments he had received for and against the proposal. He apparently did not count mine and two other comments that I know were sent and were against. It seems we may have been in the group that he said did not understand the proposal. The bottom line is, whether the ARRL conducted a poll or not is a mute issue at this time. Let's make our comments to the FCC on RM-11306 so we can get rid of this nonsense. If you want to try and hammer the ARRL into shape later, fine. Let's STOP RM-11306 NOW!! Bill KA8WTK
Re: [AMRadio] RE: Recent comments on AM
peter markavage wrote: On line Dictionary: A survey of the public or of a sample of public opinion to acquire information. Webster's (One of several meanings): A questioning or canvassing of persons, usually selected at random or by quota from various groups, for obtaining information or opinions, especially to be analyzed. I will agree, so as not to confuse the masses, that requested comments from members and nonmembers on the proposal probably would have been a better choice of words than to use something like they polled their members for comments. Pete, wa2cwa Now this is just a typical ARRL attitude. Note the condescension of the phrase so as not to confuse the masses. It would seem to me that neither of the definitions so patronizingly quoted from the dictionary are met by requesting comments. W2AGN (one of the masses who is NOT confused, or misled by ARRL-Speak)
[AMRadio] RE: Recent comments on AM
I think we are confusing conducting a poll with soliciting comments. A poll implies that there will be a numerical result that will be revealed at the end of the poll which shows how many of the population polled were for or against the issue in question. The ARRL did NOT conduct a poll. The ARRL did solicit comments, as stated else where. However there was no feedback as to how many folks commented or what the comments involved or any indication that the ARRL even read or considered what was sent to them. My Director solicited comments. In one of his letters he stated the tally of comments he had received for and against the proposal. He apparently did not count mine and two other comments that I know were sent and were against. It seems we may have been in the group that he said did not understand the proposal. The bottom line is, whether the ARRL conducted a poll or not is a mute issue at this time. Let's make our comments to the FCC on RM-11306 so we can get rid of this nonsense. If you want to try and hammer the ARRL into shape later, fine. Let's STOP RM-11306 NOW!! Bill KA8WTK
