GB> ARRL is a 'MUST GET BETTER'

[Peter A Markavage]

Go here and find out all the issues the Directors and the various
committees talk about and or vote, throw on or off the table, etc.
currently, and in the past:
http://www.remote.arrl.org/announce/board.html

Go here for all the latest ARRL Bulletins:
http://www.remote.arrl.org/w1aw/

or for the weekly ARRL Letter:
http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter/

What you read in QRZ forums generally winds up being a very twisted view
of any kind of ARRL action, proposal, etc.

Pete, wa2cwa

On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 19:52:02 -0500 Brian Carling <bcarling at CFL.RR.COM>
writes:
> This is a puzzling answer.
> 
> Skip doesn't have "followers."  Not as far as I know.
> Who are they anyway? Can you tell us that way we can go to them.
> 
> I will go to anyone who will do more to combat the menace of 
> unattended robots, even ARRL Officials.
> 
> I am happy to report that I got a VERY positive reply from Jim 
> Haynie about this earlier today, and I found out that there are
> some moves afoot for some better HF band plans that will help
> reduce or eliminate the present mess with the Pactor Robots.
> 
> If that is the case, I might as well re-join ARRL.
> 
> All I ask for is a little common sense instead of the present 
> digital 
> mess, and the frequent absurd proposals to elimintae AM, to 
> eliminate home-brewing or to add high speed digital modes that 
> are 20 kHz wide (yes) on our HF bands.
> 
> Pete, I looked at your suggested web page:
> http://www.remote.arrl.org/announce/ec_minutes_475.html
> 
> Thank you for bringing this to my attention.
> It is vague enough that I have no idea of the details of what they 
> are talking about, but it could be very good.
> 
> It could be also that if nothing else we should be glad that they 
> are at last TALKING about the problem of the unattended Pactor 
> robots on HF>
> 
> Again, I appreciate this. It is hard to  keep up with all that is 
> happening, and I know Jim Haynie is hopeful about working these 
> things out.
> 
> I am sure that he and the ARRL Officers & Directors must be 
> under enormous pressure from all kinds of different interests
> within our fraternity.
> 
> I am glad that the ARRL has plenty of good folks who share my 
> desire to
> make things better, so that I don't have to vote with my feet.
> I am sure many others feel the same way about these concerns.
> 
> All the best - Brian, AF4K
> 
> 
> 
> On 6 Mar 2005 at 14:25, Peter A Markavage wrote:
> 
> > You might want to read this from the ARRL: 
> > Pursuant to due notice, the Executive Committee of the American 
> Radio
> > Relay League, Inc., met by telephone conference at 8:10 PM 
> Monday,
> > January 17, 2005, for the purpose of discussing the Committee's
> > recommendations to the Board with regard to the draft bandwidth
> > petition. See: 
> http://www.remote.arrl.org/announce/ec_minutes_475.html
> > 
> > Even though you may not want to support the ARRL, the League will
> > continue to support the entire Amateur Radio Service.
> > 
> > If you run into a BPL issue, or some other nasty Amateur Radio 
> issue
> > in your area going forward, maybe you should take it to Skip 
> Teller,
> > KH6TY, or one of his followers. > > Pete, wa2cwa > > > > On Sun, 
> 06
> > Mar 2005 04:55:27 -0500 "Brian Carling" > <bcarling at cfl.rr.com> >
> > writes: > > Guys - I have just received two solicitations in the 
> U.S.
> > mail > > from ARRL to renew my membership. > > > > I could easily
> > afford it... > > In fact I have been an ARRL member since 1975... 
> > >
> > Here is why I will NOT be renewing after THIRTY YEARS: > > > > In 
> my
> > opinion the ARRL leadership team has been selling > > us down the
> > river and refusing to listen to good reason. > > MANY radio 
> amateurs
> > have contacted our officers and > > representatives on this issue 
> only
> > to be met with a stone > > wall. > > > > I am so very sorry to 
> have to
> > give up on the organization that > > I have loved and believed in 
> for
> > over 30 years. > > > > They had their chance, but they ignored 
> sound
> > advice. > > They refused to even discuss it in most cases. > > > 
> >
> > Here is my explanation: > > http://www.af4k.com/Ham/dissent.htm

-----------------------------------------------------------
This list is a public service of the City of Tempe, Arizona
-----------------------------------------------------------

Subscription control - http://www.tempe.gov/lists/control.asp?list=BOATANCHORS
To post - BOATANCHORS at LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV
Archives - http://listserv.tempe.gov/archives/BOATANCHORS.html