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

What will that accomplish? It doesn't matter how the bill is written. It is not going to pass. But you want to make it much more ham friendly than the crap that is in there now. Fine. Then you expect that perhaps by the 200th Congress they might actually get around to even pretending they care about hams? Will the ARRL still be in business to push it by then? The way they conduct themselves I have serious doubts.

 

I believe that we can get something passed if it is attached to, say, disaster preparedness legislation which recognizes that hams provide invaluable aid in disasters.

 

I like your sense of humor.

 

ARRL? What is that? Oh yes, I seem to recall paying them for a useless subscription the first year I got my ticket way back when, then I realized how useless they were and never gave them a penny afterwards. Nor did I ever listen to anything they said. Even the name is archaic for the modern age. When was the last time we did any relay stuff, especially for the military? (MARS is even a bigger joke than ARRL.) Maybe they should change the name to ARBS, as in, Amateur Radio Blowhard Society. Most of the American hams I hear on the radio these days are basically CBers with tickets, and most of them have tickets only because they were taught the correct answers to multiple choice questions. When I hear new hams asking how to use their radios, well I just want to puke...

 

Gary, I really think you need a follow on to this with the ARRL President, NOT CEO to answer questions on this topic. The President is answerable to the members as he is elected to the Board by the Members. He is elected President by the Board. The President is hired by the Board and thus speaks to day-to-day operations only.

It would not only do the ARRL some good to deal with this in the open, but it would also allow the other side of the equation to be presented. Specifically:

1) Why they felt the need for this Code of Conduct? (The rationale they state and the reasons for firing the BoD member from the SW does not jive.)
2) Who wrote it?
3) Was it vetted through Counsel and did it get signed off on by Counsel knowing they effectively put a gag order on the Board?
4) What is the ARRL Board's interpretation of what this Code is supposed to do?
5) What is this mysterious litmus test for violating the Code? Is it a case of , "I'll know it when I see it?" or is there a legitimate metric they measure enforcement by?
6) What is the ARRL afraid of? If they cannot accept feedback from Members to their actions (again outside of personnel issues) why do they exist?

 

NO!!!! Lets don't.

If the measure can't stand on its' own merits, then LET IT DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

We need an ARPA. But HR555 is not it.

 

We invited both the ARRL president and CEO to participate in the program. The president declined, and I didn't hear anything from the CEO.

That doesn't mean he'll never appear, and perhaps pressure from ARRL members we'll bring him out. On the other hand, I'm not interested in a press release or carefully worded statement that doesn't contain any more transparency than we usually get.

 

The current code of conduct would greatly restrict what they could say, even if they appeared. If the code had a problem, they couldn't tell you, because that might reflect badly on the organization. The recent censure was significant evidence that you are now only allowed to get good news about the League from the League.

 

Well, actually, a fair amount of message handling took place during Hurricanes Irma and Maria, just a few months ago. One can review the various bulletins issued by Radio Relay International during these incidents for a bit of background. There's still a lot of worthwhile public service communications provided by radio amateurs. However, this is not to defend the ARRL, which has largely marginalized innovation and de-emphasized organized EMCOMM at the national level for decades now, beyond perhaps supporting the WL2K group.

One could write a book or two about what is wrong in Newington. In my opinion, it is primarily a combination of two factors, one of which is the "big boys with big toys" mentality. Some ARRL Directors simply wish to protect their primary operating interest, such as contesting and DX, at the expense of diversity. The second factor is a general lack of humility, which leads to arrogance. That is; some of these men undoubtedly believe that their vision for the future of the Amateur Radio Service is inerrant. This leads to an "ends justifies the means" mentality in which those who are viewed as dissenters are naturally seen as not just a personal enemy, but a threat to the future of Amateur Radio.

Speaking of message relaying, take some time to read about the way NTS was treated by the ARRL Board of Directors when it was invited by FEMA to participate in a major Federal disaster exercise. NTS was tasked to convey message traffic between the Pacific Northwest and the National Response Coordinating Center in Washington, D.C. As a reward for achieving a 99.998 percent accuracy rate against five letter cipher group messages with typical message propagation times through the network measured in an average range of 10 to 13 minutes, the Board of Directors essentially decapitated the NTS national leadership. You can read about the whole sequence of events in great detail (all 28 pages) in the August, 2016 issue of the QNI Newsletter:

https://qninewsletterdotnet.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/qni-2016-8-4.pdf

Sadly, the leopard doesn't change its spots. Few things are as difficult to change as a corporate culture, even in a membership based, representative nonprofit. I have simply concluded that the ARRL will do little to move Amateur Radio forward. It will take the grass roots initiatives of others to do the hard work.

 

After reading the QNI newsletter account again about the FEMA/NTS/ARRL HQ debacle, I see that Bob K3RF tried to apparently act as a wise, well meaning facilitator and mediator.

However, as well as issues about ARPA, I wonder if this also put K3RF in disfavor with others within the ARRL that disapproved of what happened with FEMA, who, now additionally emboldened by the results of the resulting legal action against the League, may be seeking further misplaced retribution.

de John WØPV K

 

I have personally worked with Bob K3RF with a different non-profit and the description "wise and well-meaning" is apt. Add "highly informed " as well.

Lawyers ultimately try to keep their clients out of trouble --or get them out of trouble.

HR555 is a clear example where the wording invokes solid downsides and risks that the ARRL Directors do not take sufficiently seriously.

It is a tragic waste of a valuable asset to put Bob out of the leadership picture at the ARRL. IMO the membership suffers as a result.

73
Chip W1YW

 

EIGHT FRIGGING PAGES! Count them, eight pages of mostly very negative comments about the ARRL and its leadership (or lack thereof). I know they read it it yet they remain silent. I have been watching this thread since it started, made some of my own comments, yet where is the ARRL on this. Their silence speaks volumes. Where is the leadership on this, their absence shows their contempt for the common ham. They have become a fat-cat organization that needs to go. SHAME ON THEM because they are bringing shame on us, the common operators....

 

OK. Here's what happened, I contacted NY2RF about the Code of Conduct issue and the dismissal of K3RF as a candidate.
He told me he knows nothing of the matter and I should speak to my Atlantic Director. So, I write the President of the ARRL, K5UR and he says,
He's not in charge of this and I need to speak to my Atlantic Director. I contact my Atlantic Director and he informs me
that he cannot discuss it because of the Code of Conduct. How's that for a first class run around?
Lloyd - K3QNT

 

Now why would the official ARRL organization want to get tangled with a bunch of scurrilous wags on an internet forum over a settled policy decision? Why?