ARRL still represents Ham Radio's best interests? [Archive]

W3MIV

09-02-2007, 05:08 PM

Quote[/b] (N8UZE @ Sep. 02 2007,11:37)]Quote[/b] (wa2dtw @ Sep. 02 2007,09:36)]We are always hearing about how the ARRL protects amateur spectrum, how it opposes BPL, how it defends hams in antenna-related or RFI-related disputes and lawsuits. #But it has taken unpopular stands on controversial issues such as incentive licensing, codeless licensing, and regulation by bandwidth, without duly polling its membership. #Some have even suggested that the ARRL has a hidden agenda that differs from simply benefiting amateur radio. # Can this be possible? #Does the ARRL still represent our best interests? #Is a new, competing organization needed?[I]
If you rely on others to do this, it won't happen. #So don't sit here on QRZ and talk about it. #If you think it is needed, go do it.
I agree totally. Please feel free to go out and become the New Age's HPM.

Let us all know when you have everything in place and are ready to mail the first issue of your journal. I suggest you might name it QRP, for it surely will be a weak signal affair.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

K3UD

09-02-2007, 05:46 PM

Quote[/b] (wa2dtw @ Sep. 02 2007,08:36)]Some have even suggested that the ARRL has a hidden agenda that differs from simply benefiting amateur radio. Can this be possible? Does the ARRL still represent our best interests? Is a new, competing organization needed?
A lot of this comes down to defining best interests. Back in the early 60s Wayne Green (W2NSD/1) attempted to form a counter organization to compete with the ARRL. It was called the Institute Of Amateur Radio. This was initially thought of as a lobbying organization for Amateur radio and it would have several paid lobbyists. supported by the dues of the IOAR membership as well as any endowments that might come their way.

Wayne had his ax to grind with the ARRL, specifically over the possibility of Incentive Licensing, but more generally, he felt that the ARRL was not looking out for Amateur Radio's best interest and I think he also thought that the ARRL had hidden agendas as it regarded the ARS.

Wayne thought that he had a better way. He already had a a growing and successful magazine in 73 and more importantly he had a mailing list of subscribers who seemed to like what Wayne was all about and how he delivered the message in each issue of 73.

In the end, He could not sustain the IOAR and had to give up on it.
As far as I know, this was the only serious attempt to start something that could have been a counterbalance to the ARRL. I never did see anything concerning how many dollars went into this venture.

So what are, or have been the best interests for Amateur Radio?

Everyone will have a different answer because their best interests are personal interests. The ARRL has collaborated with the FCC on things that did a lot of good for the ARS and some that probably hurt the ARS.

Was it in the best interest of the ARS for the ARRL to push for an Incentive Licensing program in the 60s that actually took away already earned privileges General and Advanced licensees and force them to earn them back?

Should the ARRL have attempted to stop the publication of the specific question and answer pools for the written exams for every class?

Was it in the best interests of the ARS when the FCC lowered the code test to 5 WPM for all classes that took a code test? Did the ARRL really try to defend the code test before it was dropped altogether?

Is there some reality to the often mentioned charge by some that the ARRL does not include its membership when crafting proposals to the FCC?

Was the creation of the No Code Technician license a good or bad thing for the ARS? At first the ARRL opposed it than they seemingly endorsed it?

Was it a good or bad thing that the Novice license was discontinued? Did the No Code Tech reall replace it? Did the ARRL ever defend the Novice license to the FCC?

Did the VE system effectively replace the old FCC testing system?

My point is that everything I mentioned here could be effectively debated both ways. IMO I think that balance sheet generally supports what the the decisions and proposals that come from the ARRL. What is troubling though is that the ARRL seems to have lost some of its status at the FCC.

As far as starting another organization to counterbalance the ARRL, it would be difficult and expensive. We are looking at an outstanding example of long term organization and infrastructure that has stood the test for close to 100 years.

If you want to try and change it, The work would need to be done from the inside which means electing like minded Directors and elected field positions. The main problem would be the terrific inertia of a 100 year old organization.

Right now the balance sheet favors the ARRL.

73
George
K3UD

N2RJ

09-02-2007, 06:13 PM

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Sep. 02 2007,10:18)]Hello.

I see NOTHING wrong with the ARRL.
I also see nothing wrong with thr US government.
Hello.

then why are you leaving for saudi arabia?

ky5u

09-02-2007, 06:17 PM

Quote[/b] (N2RJ @ Sep. 02 2007,11:13)]Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Sep. 02 2007,10:18)]Hello.

I see NOTHING wrong with the ARRL.
I also see nothing wrong with thr US government.
Hello.

then why are you leaving for saudi arabia?
Camels have a restraining order on him.

W2BBQ

09-02-2007, 09:11 PM

A few insane comments from the desk of a dum ol' country boy bar b q for breakfast eater.

Well it seems we're kinda stuck with the arrl and we're kinda not stuck with the arrl.

We're stuck with 'em cause like been said it's not feasible to fabricate a new and competing organization. So be a member (arrl) and participate in making changes....Or.....

Or things could be lookyed at like we're kinda not stuck with the arrl. The arrl isn't ham radio and is hardly responsible for the majority of band privileges and regulations under which we operate today. That there seems to be the doins of the F - C - C up thar in gub'mentland. At it's as clear as a three pound tick on a hounddog's head that the F - C - C tain't no indoor lapdog of them arrl fellers over the years.

I fer one ain't afraid of that big bad wolf.

I've got my HF ~ VHF all mode station and my license. I will be more thankful for being born an American and that our current regulatory system has provided us what we have. Sure the arrl has done some profitable things towards favorable regulatory changes, and over the years, but that is still not like saying something like "they'd be no ham radio by now if it wern't for the arr...whoever.

Pork...uh...er...I mean Ham Radio is an internationally regulated thingy that folks from all over this big world gotta get together and negotiate this darn radio thing every few years. Boy, I bet those radio big shots really know how to party eh? So it ain't even just all about us here in the U. S. of A. much less what the hell a little lobbying group wants. There's bigger fish to fry out there son.

Radio waves go all over the place like crazy and stuff. We enjoy the thrill ourselves of propagating our own signals and wanting them to go far. Radio waves are adventurous bastards and have apparently no regard for man's many puny maps or political allegances.

So we must be nice and play nice and.....share.

So go fellow hammies.....Go ye now I say and sin no more. Go ye and transmittith much but be nice, and play nice, and play by all the local and international rules and conventions, and share....and life will be all sweet and fruitful in HammyLand http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

W5HTW

09-02-2007, 09:40 PM

It may not be as difficult or expensive as one may suggest to start a competing organization. The Internet provides the means to get a free monthly, or even weekly, magazine to a LOT of people. Technical volunteers can write articles to be published in a newsletter that is a part of that magazine.

In fact, QRZ is exactly one such site, as is eHam. Here on QRZ we have technical articles, classified ads, commentary, and subscriptions. And for many of us, who are not paid subscribers, it's free.

In fact, were I to drop my ARRL membership, I could still find out most of the happenings in ham radio right here on QRZ - AR Newsline is published here, as is the ARRL Letter. Links to the FCC web site, training materials, sample tests. It's all here.

So there already ARE competing organizations. But the question would be, if the ARRL represents a specific line of political stance, as an entity, does QRZ? Does eHam?

What about SPAR? I joined but haven't heard anything since, nor seen any mention of it. It is/was a competing organization with the ARRL.

Could QRZ or SPAR offer training materials for emergency communications? Or an annual Field Day? Or recruitment aids? Certainly, and virtually free.

But could QRZ offer lobby activities in Washington, DC? Probably not. Not without a much larger subscription base.

So the potential is there. No one has to offer print media. You want it printed? Download it and print it! Simple. And heck you can even have movies and sound files!

All it would take would be for QRZ to start leaning in one specific direction involving amateur radio. It would instantly become a viable alternative to the ARRL. It's just that easy.

Could you or I do it? Yes, though it would take a lot more effort and money, but the potential is still there, thanks to the internet. We don't have to print a magazine.

Proof? Google "blogs."

Ed

AJ4BF

09-02-2007, 11:37 PM

If there is a single issue that a lot of hams agree on, and the ARRL is going in a different direction on that issue, then perhaps an organization could be formed to deal with that one issue only. (An example might be WinLink QRM on HF).

wa6itf

09-03-2007, 03:43 AM

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 02 2007,10:46)]In the end, He could not sustain the IOAR and had to give up on it.

As far as I know, this was the only serious attempt to start something that could have been a counterbalance to the ARRL. I never did see anything concerning how many dollars went into this venture.
Actually, there have been two other "serious" attempts at creating an alternative to the ARRL. They were the National Amateur Radio Association (NARA) founded by the late Don Stoner, W6TNS and the still alive but never really viable American Amateur Radio Association by Glenn Baxter, K1MAN.

In the case of NARA, the organization was "personality driven" and Don Stoner was the "personality" that drove it. As a result NARA was quite quickly gaining members. Unfortunately, in the same time frame Don's health was failing. As a result he could spend less and less time managing the "political" aspect of the organization. (The publication aspect had already been delegated to staff.) Without Don at the helm on a day to day basis, NARA as a "political entity" began to flounder. As there was no "heir apparent" to replace him, NARA disintegrated of its own accord with the remnants sold off to a book publishing group. (I forget which one.)

The American Amateur Radio Association is really the story of a one-man organization. I will not recount all the details here except to say that most people tend to bring failure on themselves. If you are aware of K1MAN and his attempt to become a one-man ARRL, then theres no need to re-tell it. If not, just "Google" K1MAN and you will learn the story in far more detail than I could ever tell it here. But the bottom line is that an on-the-air bulletin does not equate to a viable organization.

Between the end of the IOAR and today there have actually been close to a dozen attempts to create an alternative to the ARRL. In each case the result has been the same: Total failure.

Why you ask? I could conjecture hundreds of possibilities for you but only one holds any logic. One word: Apathy.

There are about 650,000 llicensed U.S. radio amateurs. Of that number its likely only 50% or about 325,000 are really active in the hobby. By "active: I mean on the air at least a few times a week.

ARRL membership accounts for about 150,000 of them so there are still at least 175,000 hams out there -- who are on the air but have no interest in helping to decide the future of the service. If they had interest in the politics but not in being ARRL members, at least a portion of them would be members of a loyally opposing party. But they are not and there seems no interest by them in becoming politically active.

And another important reality check: How many "ARRL members" are truly active in the ham radio political process and how many view their membership as naught but a subscription to QST Magazine? If you judge by the numbers voting in the various divisional elections vs. the number of quoted members for a given Division, the answer appears to be -- not all that many are what one would consider as truly active in the process.

In reality, the ARRL only represents a fraction of the total, but its the vocal fraction that in and of itself is the minority that is guiding the destiny of the hobby. Its the voices thatr are heard heard in Newington and in turn by the FCC in Washington. The latter, whether or not it supports the ARRL or opposes it on a given issue. And its the only game in town and likely to remain the only game in town for the foreseeable future.

de
WA6ITF

.

wb6mmj

09-03-2007, 10:53 AM

As I have said in other forums on this subject I believe the ARRL has a conflict of interest. They are a non-profit organization. They operate just as a for profit business would in most ways.
That`s where I believe they have a conflict. The ARRL needs to make money to pay their bills and try to grow, ect.
Where does the ARRL draw the line when it comes to running the ARRL`s business and making sure they are doing the right things for Ham Radio?
It seems that most decisions made in this country by business are based on money. Is the ARRL any different?
I think the ARRL needs some competition. If there were two or more organizations competing for members maybe Amateur Radio`s interests would be better considered.
To be fair, the ARRL has done "some" good things. Not all they do is bad but I think they have taken a wrong turn and have put their interests first.

kl7aj

09-03-2007, 04:43 PM

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 02 2007,10:46)]Quote[/b] (wa2dtw @ Sep. 02 2007,08:36)]Some have even suggested that the ARRL has a hidden agenda that differs from simply benefiting amateur radio. Can this be possible? Does the ARRL still represent our best interests? Is a new, competing organization needed?
A lot of this comes down to defining best interests. Back in the early 60s Wayne Green (W2NSD/1) attempted to form a counter organization to compete with the ARRL. It was called the Institute Of Amateur Radio. This was initially thought of as a lobbying organization for Amateur radio and it would have several paid lobbyists. supported by the dues of the IOAR membership as well as any endowments that might come their way.

Wayne had his ax to grind with the ARRL, specifically over the possibility of Incentive Licensing, but more generally, he felt that the ARRL was not looking out for Amateur Radio's best interest and I think he also thought that the ARRL had hidden agendas as it regarded the ARS.

Wayne thought that he had a better way. He already had a a growing and successful magazine in 73 and more importantly he had a mailing list of subscribers who seemed to like what Wayne was all about and how he delivered the message in each issue of 73.

In the end, He could not sustain the IOAR and had to give up on it.
As far as I know, this was the only serious attempt to start something that could have been a counterbalance to the ARRL. I never did see anything concerning how many dollars went into this venture.

So what are, or have been the best interests for Amateur Radio?

Everyone will have a different answer because their best interests are personal interests. The ARRL has collaborated with the FCC on things that did a lot of good for the ARS and some that probably hurt the ARS.

Was it in the best interest of the ARS for the ARRL to push for an Incentive Licensing program in the 60s that actually took away already earned privileges General and Advanced licensees and force them to earn them back?

Should the ARRL have attempted to stop the publication of the specific question and answer pools for the written exams for every class?

Was it in the best interests of the ARS when the FCC lowered the code test to 5 WPM for all classes that took a code test? Did the ARRL really try to defend the code test before it was dropped altogether?

Is there some reality to the often mentioned charge by some that the ARRL does not include its membership when crafting proposals to the FCC?

Was the creation of the No Code Technician license a good or bad thing for the ARS? At first the ARRL opposed it than they seemingly endorsed it?

Was it a good or bad thing that the Novice license was discontinued? Did the No Code Tech reall replace it? Did the ARRL ever defend the Novice license to the FCC?

Did the VE system effectively replace the old FCC testing system?

My point is that everything I mentioned here could be effectively debated both ways. IMO I think that balance sheet generally supports what the the decisions and proposals that come from the ARRL. What is troubling though is that the ARRL seems to have lost some of its status at the FCC.

As far as starting another organization to counterbalance the ARRL, it would be difficult and expensive. We are looking at an outstanding example of long term organization and infrastructure that has stood the test for close to 100 years.

If you want to try and change it, The work would need to be done from the inside which means electing like minded Directors and elected field positions. The main problem would be the terrific inertia of a 100 year old organization.

Right now the balance sheet favors the ARRL.

73
George
K3UD
Wayne Green was also a life member of ARRL! I guess he was hedging his bets. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif Wayne's still alive and kicking, however....www.waynegreen.com

N4PRT

09-03-2007, 06:07 PM

Somewhere in this thread, a writer made the observation that we live in America and are offered a number of choice liberties as a result of that. Taking this line of reasoning a little further, think just a moment about how we get the public voice into legislation.

Some citizens claim that we are a democracy--true only to a certain point in process. Our founding documents firmly establish us as a republic, a form of democracy. A republic essentially means that instead of the common citizen and his endless opinions voting and having a say in everything (a formula for complete chaos and confusion), citizens select by ballot the most capable and competent (or so we would wish to believe) representatives to sort all of this out and act on the behalf of the majority of the population--in the direct interest of the public good.

While this is less than perfect, and oft times results in regulation that does not benefit everyone equally, it is one of the most functional and beneficial forms of government in modern history. Any truly balanced and effective organization must support the interest of the majority--not catering to the full spectrum of wants and wishes called up by the constituency. ARRL is akin to this system, in that we elect and support an organization to represent the interests of ARS as a service and a hobby--at home and in the international community.

Just like any representative body, actions are taken daily that please some and infuriate others. Agendas are formed by necessity, and the general membership has the right and ability to challenge and vote representatives in and out based upon popular consensus. It is no secret that plenty of volunteer positions in the ARRL are open right now--and elections of a variety of functionaries happen on a regular basis.

If one does not like something, or wants to be part of a process for change and progress, it takes a little more than complaining at club meetings, on the air, and pontificating in internet forums. Volunteer, run, become involved. The writer that said apathy is a problem was dead right. Apathy is the failure to contribute to a process in a positive and beneficial way, preferring the powerlessness of armchair critique or simply ignoring the issues.

Everything changes with time. This includes our hobby. The "need" that ARS was perceived to fill during the Cold War is rapidly waning in an age of "terrorism" and technologies such as cellular telephone and digital communications. The more superfluous any group becomes the more adamant certain elements are in resisting change and holding on to the past. My personal opinion is that hams should find ways to enjoy what it to be found in ARS and stop worrying about what was in the "salad days."

Don't like the ARRL agendas? Well then do something proactive to be a part of the process and volunteer or run for something. Join and vote in the elections. Work at the grassroots level for legislative action. Do something besides bitch.

73,

Patrick Thrush, N4PRT
ARRL Legislative Action Coordinator
Kentucky Section--Great Lakes District

wb6mmj

09-04-2007, 04:58 AM

Quote[/b] (N4PRT @ Sep. 03 2007,11:07)]Somewhere in this thread, a writer made the observation that we live in America and are offered a number of choice liberties as a result of that. #Taking this line of reasoning a little further, think just a moment about how we get the public voice into legislation.

Some citizens claim that we are a democracy--true only to a certain point in process. #Our founding documents firmly establish us as a republic, a form of democracy. #A republic essentially means that instead of the common citizen and his endless opinions voting and having a say in everything (a formula for complete chaos and confusion), citizens select by ballot the most capable and competent (or so we would wish to believe) representatives to sort all of this out and act on the behalf of the majority of the population--in the direct interest of the public good.

While this is less than perfect, and oft times results in regulation that does not benefit everyone equally, it is one of the most functional and beneficial forms of government in modern history. #Any truly balanced and effective organization must support the interest of the majority--not catering to the full spectrum of wants and wishes called up by the constituency. #ARRL is akin to this system, in that we elect and support an organization to represent the interests of ARS as a service and a hobby--at home and in the international community.

Just like any representative body, actions are taken daily that please some and infuriate others. #Agendas are formed by necessity, and the general membership has the right and ability to challenge and vote representatives in and out based upon popular consensus. #It is no secret that plenty of volunteer positions in the ARRL are open right now--and elections of a variety of functionaries happen on a regular basis.

If one does not like something, or wants to be part of a process for change and progress, it takes a little more than complaining at club meetings, on the air, and pontificating in internet forums. #Volunteer, run, become involved. #The writer that said apathy is a problem was dead right. #Apathy is the failure to contribute to a process in a positive and beneficial way, preferring the powerlessness of armchair critique or simply ignoring the issues.

Everything changes with time. #This includes our hobby. #The "need" that ARS was perceived to fill during the Cold War is rapidly waning in an age of "terrorism" and technologies such as cellular telephone and digital communications. #The more superfluous any group becomes the more adamant certain elements are in resisting change and holding on to the past. #My personal opinion is that hams should find ways to enjoy what it to be found in ARS and stop worrying about what was in the "salad days." #

73,

Patrick Thrush, N4PRT
ARRL Legislative Action Coordinator
Kentucky Section--Great Lakes District
"Don't like the ARRL agendas? Well then do something proactive to be a part of the process and volunteer or run for something. Join and vote in the elections. Work at the grassroots level for legislative action. Do something besides bitch."
I use to be a member of the ARRL. Until they change they arn`t getting another dime of my money. That`s how I am being proactive. If more people would choose NOT to become members, just maybe the ARRL would start asking why. But then again, maybe they won`t.
From what I have seen the ARRL total membership vs. the number of licensed Amateurs is only about 20% and they havn`t got the message yet.
Just because they are the only game in town is no reason to to help them grow if you don`t like, in general, what they have been doing. I believe the best way for them to get the message is to not join. Protesting has worked well in the past in this country.

K3UD

09-04-2007, 02:43 PM

Quote[/b] (wa6itf @ Sep. 02 2007,22:43)]Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 02 2007,10:46)]In the end, He could not sustain the IOAR and had to give up on it.

As far as I know, this was the only serious attempt to start something that could have been a counterbalance to the ARRL. I never did see anything concerning how many dollars went into this venture.
Actually, there have been two other "serious" attempts at creating an alternative to the ARRL. They were the National Amateur Radio Association (NARA) founded by the late Don Stoner, W6TNS and the still alive but never really viable American Amateur Radio Association by Glenn Baxter, K1MAN.

In the case of NARA, the organization was "personality driven" and Don Stoner was the "personality" that drove it. As a result NARA was quite quickly gaining members. Unfortunately, in the same time frame Don's health was failing. As a result he could spend less and less time managing the "political" aspect of the organization. (The publication aspect had already been delegated to staff.) Without Don at the helm on a day to day basis, NARA as a "political entity" began to flounder. As there was no "heir apparent" to replace him, NARA disintegrated of its own accord with the remnants sold off to a book publishing group. (I forget which one.)

de
WA6ITF
Bill,

I vaguely remember Don Stoner and the NARA and do not know how many members it had.

I did find this on the internet and it is very interesting reading.

Don Stoner W6TNS and the NARA (http://www.textfiles.com/hamradio/narago.ham)

It looked like Don could have had a long shot at building a viable organization.

73
George
K3UD

W0BKR

09-04-2007, 03:17 PM

Only game in town. What do you propose?

ky5u

09-04-2007, 03:20 PM

If you're ready for "action", it would be easier to change the ARRL than to start a group to compete with them. Join, talk to your Director face to face, and then run against him if he does not measure up. If you got a simple majority of Directors deciding that the ARRL had to change, it could get done. My Director is Henry leggette and I have spoke to him. Seems like he's got the right idea about things. Hopefully whoever replaces Frank Butler will be a common sense guy.

N4PRT

09-04-2007, 03:33 PM

As of 09/03/07, there were 655576 licensees on record according to the FCC. ARRL membership hovers around 152,000. At the bare surface, this represents 23% of all license holders. However, this number tells us nothing.

Let's look at this statistically. Using the most optimistic model possible, we take 30% directly off the top as completely inactive. Rounding off, this leaves us with approximately 458,900 licensees. Take 12% away for annual attrition (death, disability) and another 10% off for those whose interest does not follow a routine "ham" paradigm (radio control, family communication, email packet, job related), and we are left with a pool of 357,950 "active" operators. A very optimistic estimate indeed.

We now have an organization that can claim a 54% membership ratio within the "active" community. A consideration then must be made as to the rate of "joiners" versus "non-joiners" for any organization or cause. Even without factoring this in, 54% approaches the participation rate of voters in a presidential election year.

So, given this, does ARRL represent the general interests of the "mainline" ham community and manage to keep its numbers? You decide...

N8UZE

09-04-2007, 03:40 PM

Quote[/b] (wb6mmj @ Sep. 04 2007,00:58)]# #I use to be a member of the ARRL. Until they change they arn`t getting another dime of my money. That`s how I am being proactive. If more people would choose NOT to become members, just maybe the ARRL would start asking why. But then again, maybe they won`t.
From what I have seen the ARRL total membership vs. the number of licensed Amateurs is only about 20% and they havn`t got the message yet.
# #Just because they are the only game in town is no reason to to help them grow if you don`t like, in general, what they have been doing. I believe the best way for them to get the message is to not join. Protesting has worked well in the past in this country.
For the most part, amateurs aren't "joiners" so you will probably never have more (percentage wise) in the ARRL than you do now. This is backed up by looking at local club memberships. There are a lot of hams in my area and only a handful belong to a club.

Secondly many people joint simply for things like award eligibility, the magazine, use of the bureau, etc. They don't care about policy or if they do care about policy, they perceive the benefits received as being worth the membership fee.

There's only two ways to bring about change in the ARRL:

1. Start a new, competing organization and drain off their members. However unless it provides equal benefits like the bureau, your new organization probably won't be very competitive.
2. Work from within the ARRL to make a change.

Both of these alternatives require LOTS of hard work. Sitting here on QRZ and complaining or dropping your membership will have absolutely no effect. You council people to "protest" by dropping their memberships. Well that isn't going to happen in any significant numbers.

Sounds to me like you want changes based on what you alone think is best and you want someone else to do the work to boot. Not going to happen.

KC2PBJ

09-05-2007, 02:38 AM

Quote[/b] (wa2dtw @ Sep. 02 2007,08:36)]We are always hearing about how the ARRL protects amateur spectrum, how it opposes BPL, how it defends hams in antenna-related or RFI-related disputes and lawsuits. #But it has taken unpopular stands on controversial issues such as incentive licensing, codeless licensing, and regulation by bandwidth, without duly polling its membership. #Some have even suggested that the ARRL has a hidden agenda that differs from simply benefiting amateur radio. # Can this be possible? #Does the ARRL still represent our best interests? #Is a new, competing organization needed?[I]
Here we go again - flagellating the same old deceased equine. Recurrent whining by those who don't step up to the plate and actually do something constructive. Hey, its far easier to sit back, complain, draw some sympathy, and pontificate than take proactive steps to better our operating environment. Crummy propagation on 20m today resulted in at least one of the usual plaintive wails, nashing of teeth, and wringing of hands.

Cliff Notes: Who is going to establish this new organization and pay to get it started? Most of us are employed and even more have lives outside of grandiose amateur radio schemes. As the old commercial said so well, "Where's the beef?" In this thread, I'd even settle for the pickle and bun.

wb6mmj

09-05-2007, 02:56 AM

Quote[/b] (N8UZE @ Sep. 04 2007,08:40)]Quote[/b] (wb6mmj @ Sep. 04 2007,00:58)]# #I use to be a member of the ARRL. Until they change they arn`t getting another dime of my money. That`s how I am being proactive. If more people would choose NOT to become members, just maybe the ARRL would start asking why. But then again, maybe they won`t.
From what I have seen the ARRL total membership vs. the number of licensed Amateurs is only about 20% and they havn`t got the message yet.
# #Just because they are the only game in town is no reason to to help them grow if you don`t like, in general, what they have been doing. I believe the best way for them to get the message is to not join. Protesting has worked well in the past in this country.
For the most part, amateurs aren't "joiners" so you will probably never have more (percentage wise) in the ARRL than you do now. #This is backed up by looking at local club memberships. #There are a lot of hams in my area and only a handful belong to a club.

Secondly many people joint simply for things like award eligibility, the magazine, use of the bureau, etc. #They don't care about policy or if they do care about policy, they perceive the benefits received as being worth the membership fee.

b] #You council people to "protest" by dropping their memberships. #Well that isn't going to happen in any significant numbers. #

Sounds to me like you want changes based on what you alone think is best and you want someone else to do the work to boot. #Not going to happen.
"Both of these alternatives require LOTS of hard work. #Sitting here on QRZ and complaining or dropping your membership will have absolutely no effect."
First, I don`t just sit here on QRZ.
Second, When the topic comes up, it could be on QRZ or the air or a swap meet, I make my feelings known about the ARRL and will encourage others NOT to join.

"There's only two ways to bring about change in the ARRL"

1. #Start a new, competing organization and drain off their members. #However unless it provides equal #benefits like the bureau, your new organization probably won't be very competitive.
2. #Work from within the ARRL to make a change."
# #That`s your answers to your statement. I think there might be other answers or maybe only one answer to your statement.
# #I truly do not believe that you have to become a member of something to make change to it. Like I have said, protests have worked well in this country for many years.
# #I know I`m one person saying what I believe but there are many others that feel the same or close to the same as I do about the ARRL and I believe those numbers are growing. We will see, in time, if the ARRL wants to change to more meet the needs of Amateur`s or not.
# #If enough people say to the ARRL "enough is enough" maybe they will see the light. As for me, I choose NOT to give someone my money for things I don`t want. I am the customer here, the ARRL isn`t.

N8UZE

09-05-2007, 02:15 PM

Quote[/b] (wb6mmj @ Sep. 04 2007,22:56)]Quote[/b] (N8UZE @ Sep. 04 2007,08:40)]Quote[/b] (wb6mmj @ Sep. 04 2007,00:58)]# #I use to be a member of the ARRL. Until they change they arn`t getting another dime of my money. That`s how I am being proactive. If more people would choose NOT to become members, just maybe the ARRL would start asking why. But then again, maybe they won`t.
From what I have seen the ARRL total membership vs. the number of licensed Amateurs is only about 20% and they havn`t got the message yet.
# #Just because they are the only game in town is no reason to to help them grow if you don`t like, in general, what they have been doing. I believe the best way for them to get the message is to not join. Protesting has worked well in the past in this country.
For the most part, amateurs aren't "joiners" so you will probably never have more (percentage wise) in the ARRL than you do now. #This is backed up by looking at local club memberships. #There are a lot of hams in my area and only a handful belong to a club.

Secondly many people joint simply for things like award eligibility, the magazine, use of the bureau, etc. #They don't care about policy or if they do care about policy, they perceive the benefits received as being worth the membership fee.

b] #You council people to "protest" by dropping their memberships. #Well that isn't going to happen in any significant numbers. #

Sounds to me like you want changes based on what you alone think is best and you want someone else to do the work to boot. #Not going to happen.
"Both of these alternatives require LOTS of hard work. #Sitting here on QRZ and complaining or dropping your membership will have absolutely no effect."
First, I don`t just sit here on QRZ.
Second, When the topic comes up, it could be on QRZ or the air or a swap meet, I make my feelings known about the ARRL and will encourage others NOT to join.

"There's only two ways to bring about change in the ARRL"

1. #Start a new, competing organization and drain off their members. #However unless it provides equal #benefits like the bureau, your new organization probably won't be very competitive.
2. #Work from within the ARRL to make a change."
# #That`s your answers to your statement. I think there might be other answers or maybe only one answer to your statement.
# #I truly do not believe that you have to become a member of something to make change to it. Like I have said, protests have worked well in this country for many years.
# #I know I`m one person saying what I believe but there are many others that feel the same or close to the same as I do about the ARRL and I believe those numbers are growing. We will see, in time, if the ARRL wants to change to more meet the needs of Amateur`s or not.
# #If enough people say to the ARRL "enough is enough" maybe they will see the light. As for me, I choose NOT to give someone my money for things I don`t want. I am the customer here, the ARRL isn`t.
Since there is no other organization that offers the wide range of services that the ARRL does, your campaign to get people to quit will result in an insignficant change in numbers. Although many people disagree strongly with some of the ARRL's actions, they remain for the other benefits.

So your plan to get them to change by convincing people to quit will almost certainly be ineffectual. If you choose to hide your head in sand and think this plan will work, feel free to continue. Otherwise your choices remain: 1) found a new organization with all the benefits or 2) join and work from within. However these are much harder work than you are doing now.

I've also observed here on QRZ that those who complain about the ARRL tend to be people who focus on one or two issues. Because the ARRL doesn't follow the path they want, they condemn the ARRL in its entirety.

What are the specific issues for which you are condemning the ARRL?

W3MIV

09-05-2007, 03:27 PM

Quote[/b] (wa6itf @ Sep. 02 2007,23:43)]And another important reality check: #How many "ARRL members" are truly active in the ham radio political process and how many view their membership as naught but a subscription to QST Magazine? #If you judge by the numbers voting in the various divisional elections vs. the number of quoted members for a given Division, the answer appears to be -- not all that many are what one would consider as truly active in the process.
That is the proverbial "bottom line," Bill. It really is little different from the national political reality in which so many bark loudly but fail to even go to the polls.

Here on these fora, we see a host of the same calls offering the same tired objections, and few of them make the effort to join, not to even consider taking part and making a difference in the organization.

It was mentioned in this thread that Wayne Green was "hedging his bet" by remaining a member of the ARRL while working actively to develop an alternative to it. Green's alternative was never intended to really supplant the League, he knew as well as you or I that such an event was too remote to be realizable. He worked to create a means to more effectively pressure the ARRL into making changes that he felt were vitally necessary to meet the changing face of a hobby he loved. He was right in his goals, even if he fell short in his achievement.

You are quite correct in your essay that the number of votes in internal elections speaks far louder than any sort of braying in these threads. Unless and until that changes, the staff in Newington will hold the BOD hostage to its will. What is needed now is what was needed then: A Board with the independence of action to make changes and the will to carry them out. That will only come if more people become involved, both as active members of the ARRL and as active workers in the task to enforce change.

As this thread, and others, clearly shows, it is easier to sit back and snipe than it is to push the sleeves up and wade into the fray.

N4PRT

09-05-2007, 11:23 PM

I have given this some thought, and there may be merit in the creation of another organization. In order to make a distinction between an "action" group and an "advisory" group, the latter would be instituted and all of the dissidents that have issue with the action group could have their own banner and voice.

After a conference with local ham curmudgeon Oscar Foxtrot (A1OF), it is suggested that the new organization title itself "Frequent Amateur Radio Tirade Society", or FARTS.

Of course, in order to compete with the "other" organization, subgroups would be established to handle routine tasks. Ecomm would be under the WHACC (We Have All Communications Covered) umbrella. Education would by handled by PUTZ (Public Understanding and Training Zone), public and governmental relations by WHINE (Worldwide House of Information and Nano Expository). Internet communications could be delivered by TROLL (Technical Radio Online Learning and Literature). Other elements, such as enforcement (HAMCOP), a radio station (LIDS), etcetera, could be added as the organization grows. In order to cut down on confusion, the moniker "Elmer" would be replaced and given to the most active members of the organization--OLD FARTS.

Now, here we would have a real enticing organization (an attractive nuisance, if you will) that would draw out the most reluctant non-joiner and ardent ARRL basher alike. Just think--this would give all of the Whackers, Whiners, Putzes, Ham Cops, Trolls, Lids, and Old Farts a place to go and forge brave new frontiers. Or in the alternate, just keep out of the way of those who are...

Of course it would need a charismatic leader to unite the membership and lead it to whatever its fate might be. I hear a fellow by the name of Baxter is looking for a new gig.

W3MIV

09-05-2007, 11:29 PM

Quote[/b] (N4PRT @ Sep. 05 2007,19:23)]I have given this some thought, and there may be merit in the creation of another organization. #In order to make a distinction between an "action" group and an "advisory" group, the latter would be instituted and all of the dissidents that have issue with the action group could have their own banner and voice.

After a conference with local ham curmudgeon Oscar Foxtrot (A1OF), it is suggested that the new organization title itself "Frequent Amateur Radio Tirade Society", or FARTS.

Of course, in order to compete with the "other" organization, subgroups would be established to handle routine tasks. #Ecomm would be under the WHACC (We Have All Communications Covered) umbrella. #Education would by handled by PUTZ (Public Understanding and Training Zone), public and governmental relations by WHINE (Worldwide House of Information and Nano Expository). #Internet communications could be delivered by TROLL (Technical Radio Online Learning and Literature). #Other elements, such as enforcement (HAMCOP), a radio station (LIDS), etcetera, could be added as the organization grows. #In order to cut down on confusion, the moniker #"Elmer" would be replaced and given to the most active members of the organization--OLD FARTS.

Now, here we would have a real enticing organization (an attractive nuisance, if you will) that would draw out the most reluctant non-joiner and ardent ARRL basher alike. #Just think--this would give all of the Whackers, Whiners, Putzes, Ham Cops, Trolls, Lids, and Old Farts a place to go and forge brave new frontiers. #Or in the alternate, just keep out of the way of those who are...

Of course it would need a charismatic leader to unite the membership and lead it to whatever its fate might be. #I hear a fellow by the name of Baxter is looking for a new gig.
Sign me up! In the meantime, I shall research a new avatar.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

N4PRT

09-05-2007, 11:45 PM

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Sep. 05 2007,16:29)]Sign me up! In the meantime, I shall research a new avatar. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Excellent! If we do a small portion of the footwork for them to get it started, it stands a better chance of whatever it stands a chance of (insert options here). My analysis states that given that it will be a true freerider organization, we must only do 97% of the work for them.

Oscar Foxtrot, A1OF, made the suggestion that you incorporate the image of a man beating a dead horse into the new logo. Any thoughts on that?

N4PRT

09-06-2007, 12:03 AM

Here is an example of what I mean:

A Logo Idea for FARTS (http://www.hamtechtalk.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=35&Itemid=48)

KC2PBJ

09-06-2007, 02:28 AM

We already have ""Frequent Amateur Radio Tirade Society", or FARTS". It's called the Zed. Lots of idle talk but no real action for positive change.

wb6mmj

09-06-2007, 04:04 AM

Quote[/b] (N8UZE @ Sep. 05 2007,07:15)]Quote[/b] (wb6mmj @ Sep. 04 2007,22:56)]Quote[/b] (N8UZE @ Sep. 04 2007,08:40)]Quote[/b] (wb6mmj @ Sep. 04 2007,00:58)]# #I use to be a member of the ARRL. Until they change they arn`t getting another dime of my money. That`s how I am being proactive. If more people would choose NOT to become members, just maybe the ARRL would start asking why. But then again, maybe they won`t.
From what I have seen the ARRL total membership vs. the number of licensed Amateurs is only about 20% and they havn`t got the message yet.
# #Just because they are the only game in town is no reason to to help them grow if you don`t like, in general, what they have been doing. I believe the best way for them to get the message is to not join. Protesting has worked well in the past in this country.
For the most part, amateurs aren't "joiners" so you will probably never have more (percentage wise) in the ARRL than you do now. #This is backed up by looking at local club memberships. #There are a lot of hams in my area and only a handful belong to a club.

Secondly many people joint simply for things like award eligibility, the magazine, use of the bureau, etc. #They don't care about policy or if they do care about policy, they perceive the benefits received as being worth the membership fee.

b] #You council people to "protest" by dropping their memberships. #Well that isn't going to happen in any significant numbers. #

Sounds to me like you want changes based on what you alone think is best and you want someone else to do the work to boot. #Not going to happen.
"Both of these alternatives require LOTS of hard work. #Sitting here on QRZ and complaining or dropping your membership will have absolutely no effect."
First, I don`t just sit here on QRZ.
Second, When the topic comes up, it could be on QRZ or the air or a swap meet, I make my feelings known about the ARRL and will encourage others NOT to join.

"There's only two ways to bring about change in the ARRL"

1. #Start a new, competing organization and drain off their members. #However unless it provides equal #benefits like the bureau, your new organization probably won't be very competitive.
2. #Work from within the ARRL to make a change."
# #That`s your answers to your statement. I think there might be other answers or maybe only one answer to your statement.
# #I truly do not believe that you have to become a member of something to make change to it. Like I have said, protests have worked well in this country for many years.
# #I know I`m one person saying what I believe but there are many others that feel the same or close to the same as I do about the ARRL and I believe those numbers are growing. We will see, in time, if the ARRL wants to change to more meet the needs of Amateur`s or not.
# #If enough people say to the ARRL "enough is enough" maybe they will see the light. As for me, I choose NOT to give someone my money for things I don`t want. I am the customer here, the ARRL isn`t.
#Although many people disagree strongly with some of the ARRL's actions, they remain for the other benefits.

So your plan to get them to change by convincing people to quit will almost certainly be ineffectual. ##Otherwise your choices remain: 1) found a new organization with all the benefits or 2) join and work from within. #However these are much harder work than you are doing now.
"Since there is no other organization that offers the wide range of services that the ARRL does, your campaign to get people to quit will result in an insignficant change in numbers."

# #My Campaign? I didn`t know I had one. I think you should try to remember, people don`t all think like you do. You seem quick to label. I said, earlier, "Second, When the topic comes up, it could be on QRZ or the air or a swap meet, I make my feelings known about the ARRL and will encourage others NOT to join." This is not a "Campaign".

"If you choose to hide your head in sand and think this plan will work, feel free to continue."

# #Hide my head in the sand? I`ve been licensed in Ham Radio a long time now. I`ve been a member more than once in the ARRL. I have learned my lesson when it comes to the ARRL. They will not get any of my money, or support, until there is big change in their organization.

I've also observed here on QRZ that those who complain about the ARRL tend to be people who focus on one or two issues. #Because the ARRL doesn't follow the path they want, they condemn the ARRL in its entirety.

What are the specific issues for which you are condemning the ARRL?

We all have our opinions about what we like and dislike in this world and it is OK to focus, if you want, on one or two issues when it comes to the ARRL. Especially if those issues mean a great deal to you. You have the right to complain about people who focus on one or two issues just as they have the right to focus on what is important to them. Just don`t try to make them bad people for expressing their opinions as long as those opinions don`t hurt anyone.
# #As for my list, I choose not to get into a mud fight here. I am one who does NOT like to argue. It is a waste of time. I`m sure you have your list of things you like and maybe dislike about the ARRL and I do to.
# #Meanwhile, when the topic comes up in regards to the ARRL, I will speak my mind if asked and I will encourage others NOT to join. I will not get into a argument over that topic, or any other topic, though.

N8UZE

09-06-2007, 02:23 PM

Quote[/b] (wb6mmj @ Sep. 06 2007,00:04)]# #My Campaign? I didn`t know I had one. I think you should try to remember, people don`t all think like you do. You seem quick to label. I said, earlier, "Second, When the topic comes up, it could be on QRZ or the air or a swap meet, I make my feelings known about the ARRL and will encourage others NOT to join." This is not a "Campaign".
Sounds like a campaign to me even if it is only on a small scale. You are making an active effort to convince people not to join or to drop out because you don't like the ARRL.

ky5u

09-06-2007, 02:35 PM

Quote[/b] (KC2PBJ @ Sep. 05 2007,19:28)]We already have ""Frequent Amateur Radio Tirade Society", or FARTS". It's called the Zed. Lots of idle talk but no real action for positive change.
Actually because of the "talk" here and it's ability to spread to the real world, we have seen the pulling of a very bad petition for regulation by bandwidth. We have also seen some Directors of the ARRL taking to the notion of getting member opinions before they act.

It's usually when someone or some group gets wacked on the nose by public opinion that they begin to discount the effectiveness of new media outlets like QRZ.

N8UZE

09-06-2007, 02:48 PM

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Sep. 06 2007,10:35)]Quote[/b] (KC2PBJ @ Sep. 05 2007,19:28)]We already have ""Frequent Amateur Radio Tirade Society", or FARTS". #It's called the Zed. #Lots of idle talk but no real action for positive change.
Actually because of the "talk" here and it's ability to spread to the real world, we have seen the pulling of a very bad petition for regulation by bandwidth. #We have also seen some Directors of the ARRL taking to the notion of getting member opinions before they act.

It's usually when someone or some group gets wacked on the nose by public opinion that they begin to discount the effectiveness of new media outlets like QRZ.
INMHO, the effect of talking here though is probably indirect. What likely happens is that a lot of people are made aware of the issue here and start filing comments with the FCC in the case of petitions and writing their Directors, etc. in the case of policy matters. In othere words, it is the result of actions inspired by the discussions here not a direct result of the discussions themselves. My point is that one must act (a minimum of at least writing a letter or email to the people that are empowered to actually do something) not just talk here and read this board.

Such wide spread dissemination of information is a GOOD thing. However people must DO things based on that information to have an impact.