[Boatanchors] I agree
wcmoore at verizon.net
Mon Nov 30 08:08:16 EST 2015
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
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
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.
On 11/29/15, Wilson<infomet at 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
Dropping out over an issue is petty. They can't please everyone all the
Pactor may have some EMCOMM use, but I consider its boater use a
antithetical to "real" ham operation.
Routine use on boats (or anywhere) is contrary to all stated ham
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
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
So let's get some cards and letters going to the right places.
Also getting old
From: Glen Zook via Boatanchors
Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 9:14 PM
To: bcarling at cfl.rr.com
Cc: boatanchors at puck.nether.net ; tetrode at googlegroups.com ;
Novice-Rigs at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] [Glowbugs] I agree
The ARRL has been, seemingly, pushing for more WINLINK / PACTOR
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
spend any money to be able to use the Internet while on the water.
again, amateur radio operators also have a reputation as to being
and, I suppose, boat / yacht owners are no different where money is
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
periodically, that is in small print in the back of QST, it is pretty
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
other members who have abandoned the ARRL and, it seems, that they are
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
that organization. However, when the ARRL submits petitions to the FCC,
even when they are proposing such, that affects the entire amateur
population then I definitely do have the right to comment!
Several years ago, the ARRL submitted a request for an NPRM that
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
have been for the good of amateur radio and some have not been good for
amateur radio. However, I definitely believe in doing everything
to stop changes that are definitely not in the best interests of the
Boatanchors mailing list
Boatanchors at puck.nether.net
1. mailto:bcarling at cfl.rr.com
2. mailto:boatanchors at puck.nether.net
3. mailto:tetrode at googlegroups.com
4. mailto:Novice-Rigs at mailman.qth.net
6. mailto:Boatanchors at puck.nether.net
More information about the Boatanchors