ARRL expands its roster of online discussion groups for members

ARRL expands its roster of online discussion groups for members

The ARRL’s Committee on Communication with ARRL Members, as part of its ongoing efforts to enhance and improve communications between the ARRL leadership and ARRL members and prospective members, has launched three new online discussion forums. These forums, which are focused on the topics of antenna law, regulatory issues, and support for new amateur radio operators, will be activated on Thursday, Jan. 30, at 9 a.m. (ET).

The committee launched the online discussion program in the fall of 2019 when it introduced three forums – on contesting, awards, and the International Amateur Radio Union (IARU) – that were open to all amateur radio operators. The program was based on the success of the online ARRL-LoTW Group, which for the past several years, has served to answer amateur radio operators’ questions and generate discussions about ways to improve this service. This effort has demonstrated the effectiveness of online Groups as a means of achieving the desired interactivity.

So, the ARRL will be adding three additional online Groups, which will be open to ARRL members and non-members alike:

• Antenna Law and Policy Forum—moderated by ARRL New England Division Director and attorney Fred Hopengarten, K1VR, https://groups.arrl.org/g/ARRL-Antenna-Law-and-Policy

• Regulatory Affairs—moderated by ARRL Regulatory Affairs Manager Dan Henderson, N1ND, https://groups.arrl.org/g/ARRL-Regulatory-Affairs

• New Hams—moderated by Steve Ford, WB8IMY, editor of QST magazine, https://groups.arrl.org/g/ARRL-New-Hams

The committee is launching groups in these three topics areas based on requests from amateur radio operators, as well as to support the ARRL’s efforts to provide more resources to support beginner-to-intermediate operators.

ARRL IT Manager Michael Keane, K1MK worked with Groups.io to set up the new groups. Since these new groups are hosted on the Groups.io platform, those wishing to subscribe must use a Groups.io username and password, if they have one, or create a Groups.io account if they don’t.

The new groups join an ARRL discussion forum lineup that already includes:

• ARRL-Contesting - moderated by ARRL Contest Advisory Committee Chairman Dennis Egan, W1UE; (https://groups.arrl.org/g/ARRL-Contesting)

• ARRL-Awards - moderated by ARRL RadioSport Manager Bart Jahnke, W9JJ; (https://groups.arrl.org/g/ARRL-Awards)

• ARRL-IARU - moderated by IARU Secretary Dave Sumner, K1ZZ; (https://groups.arrl.org/g/ARRL-IARU

• ARRL-LOTW Group, moderated by ARRL IT Manager Michael Keane, K1MK, (https://groups.arrl.org/g/ARRL-LoTW)

Everyone who subscribes to an ARRL Group is automatically subscribed to the “ARRL Groups” group. This is an administrative feature that will allow ARRL to convey routine announcements to subscribers of all ARRL groups, such as an announcement of upcoming downtime for planned maintenance.

In the months ahead, it is expected that additional online Groups will be created to support two-way communications that focus on additional areas of interest to amateur radio operators, including ARRL activities, services, initiatives, and policies.

It is important to note that the ARRL currently has some "members-only" online forums, including on the topics of Awards and Contesting. While these forums will continue to operate, participants are being be encouraged to post new topics in the new Groups.

Since the aim of the new Groups is to encourage discussion, as opposed to just being a question-and-answer session, there are some basic ground rules to which participants of the Groups will be expected to adhere:

• All questions will be welcome, no matter how many times they have already been asked and answered, or how obvious the answers might be in the documentation.

• Neither personal attacks nor foul language will be tolerated. Violators will immediately be placed on "moderated" status, meaning their subsequent posts will require Moderator approval until the Moderator's trust has been regained.

• Those posting are reminded that these forums are open to everyone, including prospective hams and operators who are not ARRL members but may be thinking about joining; so civility and courtesy is expected, even when disagreeing.

The Committee believes that providing more opportunities for two-way discussion between the organization’s leaders and the entire community of amateur radio operators will assist the organization in truly serving the needs of this community.

http://www.southgatearc.org/news/20...r-of-online-discussion-groups-for-members.htm

 

Hmm, they ARRL really does not seem to have a grasp on why they are losing members left and right. No clue. They are just dying a slow death.

 

Glaringly obvious by their absence are discussion groups for ARRL governance or policy.

 

By all means, explain to us why they are losing members and how you would right the ship. A lot of hams would like to know.

.................Bob

 

I hoped for a group to discuss threats (and successes!) to our allocations.

For example, 3300MHz seems to have vanished with barely a whimper from ARRL. What the heck, folks?!??

Many of our allocations are under attack, both domestic US and internationally.

ARRL and their supposed Spectrum Defense are too quiet...

 

Its in prep, post board meeting. Comments due in a few weeks.

I am very concerned they will try to defend the entire 200 MHz of 9cm, and lose it all as a result. A carve-out is the only option. Asserting possession of the entire 200 MHz will make it incredibly easy to take it all away because:

1) 5G 'mid band' WILL use some or all of that spectrum;
2) We don't have enough active users of 9cm to justify the entire band.

It's not the FCC's job to suggest compromise solutions. It's their job to vet solutions proffered by others. If you don't ask for a carve-out , and justify it, you won't get it.

 

How is better communication a bad thing?

I don't get the grumpy replies....

 

Thanks for saying that Bob!

I think the ARRL fully understands its membership attrition.

The actual loss of membership is nearly all tied into the aging demographic of the membership. Not some policy or process issue.

The bigger problem has been failure to recruit NEW , younger members (say, under 50) that are almost exclusively Techs.

Obviously the ARRL is working to show the value of the organization to that pool.

Let me ask the obvious question to you 'Anti-Leaguers'. Assume that all your issues with the ARRL would be resolved. How long do you think it would take to notice it?

Many of you are attacking a straw man that doesn't exist, or hasn't existed for a while? Some, 10 years ago...50 years ago....

For example, bringing up (elsewhere) code vs no code or 'incentive licensing' from 1967, as a basis for complaint, is a just a memory loop, not a basis of complaint for today.

73
Chip W1YW

 

The IARU forum is a good place for such matters. Please consider joining.

Tim VE6SH

 

A good amount of discussion about how things get done in the league showed up in the Awards and the Contesting sub-groups. If you haven't yet looked at the new groups, give them a look.

 

Thanks, Tim.

 

if we don't ask, we can't get it. First rule of negotiating. Second rule: demand more than you're willing to settle for. As such, I think we ought to ask for 200MHz as Primary! Ha ha.

But anyway all other amateur allocations are in danger, gotta watch all of them.

 

That's unfortunately not how it works: The present situation is its ALREADY gone (in the FCC plan): thus we have to justify getting a piece of it back

 

How did that happen? Weren't you paying attention? How about our ARRL crack team? Yeah

 

*MY* ARRL team?

??

We've already discussed this. I couldn't be any clearer on the path that is most likely to work; I also expressed the likelihood that the ARRL would not take that approach.

Demand reinstatement of the entire band--outcome: total loss,

Request a carve-out of the band--outcome: likely approved.