Thom R LaCosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> made an utterance to the drakelist gang ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Please read this email very carefully...
If you value your Amateur Radio activities and feel that you need to be represented before the FCC, there is information here that should
make you wake up and smell the coffee. I'm hoping each member of the list will take the advice offered here to heart and act accordingly. Thom www.baltimorehon.com/ Home of the Baltimore Lexicon www.tlchost.net/hosting/ Web Hosting as low as 3.49/month ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 09:59:18 -0500 (EST) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [QRP-L] ARRL BOD Hey gang; As you all know from reading some of my postings here on qrp-l, I have been making contact with BOD members as I can. Yesterday in particular I made contact with one of them that for reasons which will shortly become obvious; I cannot tell you exactly whom. At least one other ham on this list is aware of which Director I am speaking about, and that is to keep me honest so to speak. (I simply will not divulge his name, so do not bother asking.) Anyways it is much worse than I could have imagined. This director thought he was voting to increase voice bandwidth as he both wrote and later in a telephone conversation confirmed his viewpoint: that there was a current limit of 2.7 kHz for voice communications on the ham bands by FCC rules ! And he wanted that increased to 3.5 kHz to help the hi-fi voice users get what they want !! No I am not kidding. This was his *primary* reason for voting on this measure. FURTHER, this director apologized for making a mistake about this, but he wanted me to understand that he was human and entitled to make mistakes. Sadly, he did not see that being a BOD member required him to both study and take the time to make sure he did not make any such mistakes. He had NO IDEA about much else that was going on concerning this proposal. He also did not understand where the proposal originated, thinking it to be *singularly* the *recent* work of the EC (Executive Committee) formed late last year. HE had not heard about the previous Ad-Hoc Committee that Skip Teller, KH6TY had left or the results of that earlier committee's work. He obviously thought concerns that the earlier committee was dominated by singular viewpoints, most notably about Winlink were unfounded. He also was not aware of the support to and from the ARRL and the company that sells Winlink. When asked he thought that the BOD members had ample opportunity to review this proposal as he was able to talk to Executive Committee members and other BOD members during breaks and the night before the voting. <- The most far reaching proposal the ARRL BOD has voted affirmatively on in the last decade, perhaps ever, and this was deemed to be sufficient time for consideration by this director. This BOD member also felt that the EC was a sufficient source for information it the proposal that was put forward BY the EC for BOD consideration. This director said he got a lot of email, too much to go through, so he depended on the EC for technical appraisal. This director was very forthcoming that he did not have any engineering background. This director had no idea of how this ARRL Proposal had all the earmarkings of representing a paradigm shift in radio regulations for amateurs. He also felt limiting bandwidth to 3.5 kHz for voice users was enough, as anything someone might want to do could be accomplished in that amount. When asked he could not tell me how much bandwidth an AM station used. He obviously had similar difficulty answering other technically based questions. Also he admitted that he had not taken any time to read up on this proposal from outside of the EC and/or BOD circles he depends on for information. There was more to my conversation with this BOD member, but I am writing this to you all because I agree that it is time for YOU to contact the BOD members if you have strong feelings on this matter. And please do not stop with just your own Director. These ten guys are representing the several 100 thousands of ham radio operators in the US because of the cache the ARRL represents to the FCC. More to the point: If other BOD members feel that they can be allowed to represent us by ignoring their email, depending on an even smaller group of bureaucrats called the Executive Committee for information, not paying attention to qualified outside input and our diverse viewpoints, and making important decisions with a minimal amount of discussion; then gentlemen we are in big trouble. And if not now, eventually. It is up to YOU to let ALL of the BOD members know that such cavalier behavior by YOUR representatives is NOT acceptable. Tell then that YOU want them to go back to the drawing board and seek out membership opinions on this and ANY other proposals that are important, if not EVERY proposal they create. Tell them you are dissatisfied with the closed nature of these committees that work on such proposals. Tell them you expect them to seek out information and viewpoints. Tell them you want every motion that is voted on to have a tally of how the directors voted so you can hold them accountable. Oh yeah, when I mentioned that Skip Teller had in his possession a certified letter that had been returned to him because a member of the EC had refused to accept it, this director was aware that there had been ongoing problems with that member of the EC. This director I talked to could not explain to my satisfaction, when asked directly, why he valued technical input from someone who did not in turn value input from other experts like Skip. These ten fellows obviously need your guidance. Guys please wake up and contact the BOD members. Please. Vy 72; Bob Finch w9ya P.S.... If you want to post this email to other groups and elsewhere on the internet you have my permission to do so provided you do not edit it in any way, and please also attribute this to me and the qrp-l. Please let those who read it understand this email was the result of intense discussion on the qrp-l going back well over a year. (Yes the discussion was off and on, mostly off, but intense when on.) And please go ahead and use it in snail mail or elsewhere as YOU see fit as long as you take care to follow the guidelines in the previous paragraph. Thanks gang for both taking the time to read my email and for going out and contacting BOD members. Oh yeah, I am told that the BOD members phone numbers and email addys are posted on the web. If that is not true, please let me know. ______________________________________________________________ QRP-L mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/qrp-l Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On Behalf of Thom R LaCosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Submissions: drakelist@www.zerobeat.net Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - unsubscribe drakelist in body Hopelessly Lost: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - help in body of message Zerobeat Web Page: http://www.zerobeat.net Brought to you courtesy of TLCHost.net http://www.tlchost.net/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------
