Where Never Is Heard... ARRL Board "Code of Conduct" on HamRadioNow

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by KN4AQ, Dec 4, 2017.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: l-assoc
ad: Left-2
  1. WA3JPY

    WA3JPY Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    I cannot agree with that assessment. This was a well thought out informative discussion of certain facts that all ARRL members should be aware of. As far as "League Bashing" is concerned, sometimes the actions of an organization are so over the top that they need to be made public, so that fair and logical decisions can be made. Otherwise, you are at the mercy of outlets such as CNN and MSNBC, not that either would be interested in anything but "Trump Bashing", but never-the-less good examples. Try listening to the whole podcast before throwing out a comment such as you did please. Be fair, and if you disagree with a point made, please say so, in detail. 73, Mark WA3JPY
    NK2U, K0IDT, KD5BVX and 1 other person like this.
  2. K4MZR

    K4MZR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Waiting for the whitepaper or transcript ... who has 2 hours to spend on a podcast?
    NE1U and N8XTH like this.
  3. K3FHP

    K3FHP XML Subscriber QRZ Page

  4. KN4AQ

    KN4AQ Subscriber QRZ Page

    So far, about 800 people have seen the video, and another 600 listened to the audio. I've gotten some email (and some comments here) that people have enjoyed it, because it's a show, not a class. There won't be a transcript - nobody has the money to do that. I think K1OIK is looking for someone to volunteer to edit bite-sized excerpts of the shows. Well, I assume he is because he's always complaining about the wasted time.*

    But you don't really need any of it. Here are links to all the relevant documents. You can easily see what's happening for yourself:

    *(BTW, any public-spirited ham can easily review the program and create a series of links using YouTube's "START AT" feature, pointing to specific comments or discussion points. If I come across that, I'll add it to the web site and YouTube description text. Someone with the skills and technology is welcome to beat Bert to the punch and make the edited excerts. The video is licensed Creative Commons/Attribution. I can even send you the 2.5 GB size mp4 video file.)
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2017
    NK2U, KD5BVX and K7VZ like this.
  5. AA7BQ

    AA7BQ QRZ Founder Administrator QRZ Page

    Has anyone else noticed a rather big change to the QST magazine as of late?

    For many, many years, the QST magazine has followed a familiar format. As you start at page 1, there are a couple dozen ages of ads, followed by pages of ad-free editorial content, and finally followed by more pages of ads. I always felt that the magazine was unique in this regard, and I appreciated it.

    Over the past couple of issues, however, ads have started appearing in the editorial section. Worse, however, is the fact that the ads are appearing in the equipment review section, RIGHT NEXT TO THE ITEM BEING REVIEWED. Yes, they are reviewing new amateur equipment and then posting full page ads about that same equipment, on the facing page.

    This is shameful, in my opinion, and it effectively negates the objectivity of the review.

    The ARRL operates on an annual budget that exceeds $10M. They sell single pages of advertising for as much as $12,000 for one issue. Was this ad insertion really necessary?

    By contrast, QRZ employs 4 full time people serving 710,000 registered users. That's 177,000 members per employee. The ARRL: fewer than 2000 members per employee.

    I've been a league member for 25 years and continue to subscribe. The equipment reviews, however, I must regard as paid advertisements now.
    NK2U, K1OIK, W0FS and 4 others like this.
  6. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    The paper magazine is ...well, there's not much there.

    Also the format AND media has changed.... print is now on thinner stock with too much visual 'bleed' of the other side in normal lighting. It feels cheap, like those grocery inserts you get in the newspaper (for those who still read newspapers).

    Fred, Zed ain't always perfect, but it's vastly more informative, and reasonably self-correcting. It's immersive. QST is not. IMO, though, Zed should have more actual 'news': the ARRL website has jumped all over that niche and filling it as of late. Zed used to do this far better than it does now, IMO. There's got to be a better way to get the real 'news' across, without diluting the front page as it stands.

    As for users per employee, that's a bit unfair: the ARRL does do a lot of hands on stuff that has not succeeded elsewhere with remote and digital handling. People, in some cases, need to interact with people. I have never got a sense of being put off or laziness when I visit the ARRL. People are engaged and busy. The employees are really great people. Management? Your opinion may differ from mine.

    I just don't agree with much of their actions nowadays.

    Chip W1YW
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2017
    NK2U and NL7W like this.
  7. AA7BQ

    AA7BQ QRZ Founder Administrator QRZ Page

    I must agree with you. The members per employee thing is unfair and was submitted only as an interesting factoid. They do a lot of work that we don't and are therefore not a good comparison. There are also a lot of great people at ARRL HQ. I've been there and they were extraordinarily nice to me, my wife, and even my dog!

    I stand by my criticism of the ads in the review section, however.

    With respect to news articles on QRZ, we depend on user submissions. We don't have any journalists or writers on staff. We do have a bunch of dedicated contributors, however, and are always welcoming more.


    NK2U, NL7W, WB4YAL and 2 others like this.
  8. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Its truly appalling that Bob Famiglio K3RF should even remotely have any doubt caste on his character or professionalism. The ARRL is LUCKY to have him involved with oversight of this non-profit.

    I assume the same can be said for N6AA and others....
    NK2U, NL7W and N2SUB like this.
  9. N0TZU

    N0TZU Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    At the very least any director should be allowed to publicly disclose what his or her own voice vote was. Most of the board votes are voice votes, as opposed to roll calls which are recorded by name and published on the ARRL website.

    But even as a simple matter of incumbent self-preservation it seems a stupid policy. A candidate challenging an incumbent can't know his opponent's record and is free to invent any story about it, while the incumbent is prevented from discussing and defending his record. This will lead to ridiculous campaigns and elections where no member has any facts on which to base their vote.

    The only alternative I see under the current COC would be for at least one director to demand a roll call vote every single time which would slow the board meetings. This assumes of course that the present policy of publicly publishing the board minutes is continued.
    NK2U likes this.
  10. KN4AQ

    KN4AQ Subscriber QRZ Page

    Cool! Mr. Zed is hijacking the thread on my article! I'm honored!

    The income and budget - as you well know - don't tell the full story. You need the expense side before you even begin to figure out how things are doing. Then you can start arguing about efficiency, spending decisions, on and on. Apparently thinner paper is part of that, though I've been 'digital' or a couple years now, so I don't see it.

    In the December issue I count 21 ads before the primary editorial (with a few 'editorial' pages mixed in), so almost dozens. And one ad in the reviews area, a true aberration from historical practices. Without going to my archives, the mix of ads and editorial upfront was a change from ancient history, but I could be wrong. And the ad-free editorial section is a rare luxury that maybe ARRL can't afford any more?

    My last review was a few years ago (Yaesu FTM 400 dual-band Fusion mobile). It contained some critical comments, and a true mini-editorial at the end (very unusual for a review article).

    printed my comments mostly as written (they shortened it some, but didn't change the substance). Yaesu may have complained about the coments, and about me being the author. I called Dennis Motschenbacher to clear up some details. That's when he learned that I was writing the review. He said he was very disappointed, and would complain to the editor. I don't know if he followed through. On the other hand, that was my last review. They haven't invited me to write any more, but there may be many other reasons for that.

    I had an even more aggressive story about an ICOM reivew, where I included a sub-head about ICOM 'killing' D-PLUS in a new D-STAR radio (again, if I recall correctly. I'm on my tablet at Subway, and would have to dig hard for the issue). ICOM complained. They had implemented a system that was designed to make the radio easier to configure (which I acknowledged), but a feature of that new system made it harder to use D-PLUS, a fairly new, 3rd party network overlay that also made D-STAR easier to use. It's unlikely that they diliberately tried to disable the 3rd party network function, but at the time they hadn't embraced it, either (they do now).

    Anyway, I called it like I saw it. The QST editor checked with me to see if I wanted to stand by my story. I did, and they went with it. After that, they did hire me for several more reviews and other articles.

    My point is that the editors for QST and other ARRL publications I've written for have always accepted my somewhat eclectic writing style and editorial positions. Now I don't come close to the limb they crawled out on with the articles from "The Old Man," but that was a long time ago (and it turns out he ran the show. Ah, those were the days). BUT, we do have a new regime, and that brings change. Will Steve Ford be a whistle-blower on pressure from the Admin to happy-talk radio reviews from now on? Steve, give me a call. I can disguise your voice.

    Back to the subject of the hijack of the thread - economics. And I'll tie it back to the original article, League and Board transparency. How much do we know about League economics? I'll admit I don't dig through the Board minutes or even look to see how much I could learn about the money. I looked at the cars in the parking lot at HQ and didn't see a lot of BMWs. I don't think anybody's getting rich off of ARRL. I've had people tell they waste a lot of money, but for me that's just hearsay. They sure work hard at fundraising.

    But given this Code of Silence... er, Conduct... I have to wonder. As W2VU put it in the December CQ editorial, "What is the ARRL afraid of?" Or what are they hiding?
    NK2U, KN6Q, KD5BVX and 1 other person like this.

Share This Page

ad: M2Ant-1