May 2002 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

RE: [ARRL-ODV:7268] Re: Positive ID for Amateur Radio Emergency
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 31 May '02

31 May '02

They've been around for at least a couple of years. I know we've had this discussion at least once before. To me it doesn't look much like a badge an authorized law enforcement official would carry. If you want one that looks more authentic there's any number of places you can get one. I have not heard of a complaint from a law enforcement agency. Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: jmax(a)attglobal.net [mailto:jmax@attglobal.net] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 10:22 AM To: arrl-odv(a)listserv.arrl.org Subject: [ARRL-ODV:7268] Re: Positive ID for Amateur Radio Emergency I guess I'm not concerned about people spending money on junk so much as I'm worried about the stray ham flipping open his police-style wallet in order to crash a barricade or impress his girl. This is an image problem. How long have these items been offered for sale? 73. Jim, W6CF Kay Craigie wrote: > I have heard a number of complaints about this product over the years, and > in my opinion the item appeals to a particular mentality ... I am trying to > think of a term for it that isn't way too coarse for this reflector. No > success! Anyhow, it isn't a mentality we want to encourage or endorse. > > True, nobody has to buy this product who disapproves of it, yet I wish there > were a way we could drop the advertising for this phony piece of junk. 73 - > Kay WT3P > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com) > Version: 6.0.368 / Virus Database: 204 - Release Date: 5/29/2002

5 4

[Fwd: [Fwd: [SECARRL] Re: Positive ID for Amateur Radio Emergency Communicators]]
by jmax＠attglobal.net 31 May '02

31 May '02

The following was forwarded to me by an SEC, who picked this discussion up off the SEC reflector. I suggest you all check the URL provided. I have to admit that this kind of product bothers me. I don't like the image it may project for hams. 73. Jim, W6CF Hello to All, RE: "West Electronics presents Ham Radio Operators ID Badge" http://www.arrl.org/adredir.php3?id=98 The ARRL allowing advertising of this "Amateur Radio" ""badge"" is in my opinion, a really bad idea that can only contribute to a negative image of Ham Radio Operators. Who all wants that to happen? Why would the organization that we all spend many hours a month supporting and one that spends many dollars on public relations and lobbying efforts want to detract from our image by permitting such advertising? I encourage you to email your Division Director and ask them to bring this up at the June Board meeting that is coming right up. They are the ones that have the real power at ARRL. You can find their email address near the top of this page: http://www.arrl.org/email.html. If you wish to copy ARRL Advertising, the address is Debra Jahnke, djahnke(a)arrl.org. If we do nothing, that shiny badge will likely continue to tarnish our image on the pages of ARRLWeb.

5 6

RE: [ARRL-ODV:7280] Re: WRC-03 Article 25
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 31 May '02

31 May '02

Tom asked: >How much will this impact the US position? Do we get a chance to file comments with the FCC >in support of (or not) the proposal? Besides our work on the ITU committees, how does the >ARRL's position get formally detailed to the FCC? Tom, the FCC WRC-03 Advisory Committee agreed to draft U.S. proposals on agenda item 1.7.1 last November 15. The text is at http://www.fcc.gov/ib/wrc-03/files/docs/us_proposals/USPL_1_07_1.pdf. This is an industry advisory committee and its output does not automatically become U.S. policy, but in this particular case I know of no reason why the U.S. would not go along. If you compare the documents you will see a lot of similarities, which is not surprising since the starting point for each was the output of the IARU Future of the Amateur Service Committee (FASC) that worked on this in 1996-1998. Dave

1 0

Fw: [ARRL-ODV:7258] Re: [Fwd: [Fwd: [SECARRL] Positive ID for Amateur Radio Emergency
by R. B. Vallio 31 May '02

31 May '02

I sent this to Jim, and failed to send it to the ODV list. So...here it is. 73, Bob - W6RGG ----- Original Message ----- From: "R. B. Vallio" <w6rgg(a)sbcglobal.net> To: "James Maxwell" <w6cf(a)arrl.org> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 2:38 PM Subject: Re: [ARRL-ODV:7258] Re: [Fwd: [Fwd: [SECARRL] Positive ID for Amateur Radio Emergency > Golly Gee, Holy Smokes, Look at Me! I know we can not prevent people from > manufacturing such deceptive products. I don't see how we can, in good > conscience, carry the advertising for this and similar products in our > official organ. That certainly appears to give these products an official > ARRL endorsement. Every representation of their product at the listed URL > looks like an official Public Safety badge. I know the Sheriff of Alameda > County would take a dim view of the wearers of this product in his > jurisdiction. > > Bob - W6RGG > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <jmax(a)attglobal.net> > To: <arrl-odv(a)arrl.org>; <"Communicators]]"@p1k.arrl.org> > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 10:55 PM > Subject: [ARRL-ODV:7258] Re: [Fwd: [Fwd: [SECARRL] Positive ID for Amateur > Radio Emergency > > > > The following was forwarded to me by an SEC, who picked > > this discussion up off the SEC reflector. > > > > I suggest you all check the URL provided. I have to > > admit that this kind of product bothers me. I don't > > like the image it may project for hams. > > > > 73. Jim, W6CF > > > >

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:7269] Re: Positive ID for Amateur Radio
by sysop＠bfdin.com 31 May '02

31 May '02

Dave, I don't think we need to take the chance...and I don't think this is the image the ARRL should project by permitting the advertising in the QST... - Bill N3LLR AR>They've been around for at least a couple of years. I know we've had this AR>discussion at least once before. AR>To me it doesn't look much like a badge an authorized law enforcement AR>official would carry. If you want one that looks more authentic there's any AR>number of places you can get one. AR>I have not heard of a complaint from a law enforcement agency. AR>Dave K1ZZ AR>-----Original Message----- AR>From: jmax(a)attglobal.net [mailto:jmax@attglobal.net] AR>Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 10:22 AM AR>To: arrl-odv(a)listserv.arrl.org AR>Subject: [ARRL-ODV:7268] Re: Positive ID for Amateur Radio Emergency AR>I guess I'm not concerned about people spending money AR>on junk so much as I'm worried about the stray ham AR>flipping open his police-style wallet in order to crash a AR>barricade or impress his girl. This is an image problem. How AR>long have these items been offered for sale? AR>73. Jim, W6CF AR>Kay Craigie wrote: AR>> I have heard a number of complaints about this product over the years, and AR>> in my opinion the item appeals to a particular mentality ... I am trying AR>to AR>> think of a term for it that isn't way too coarse for this reflector. No AR>> success! Anyhow, it isn't a mentality we want to encourage or endorse. AR>> AR>> True, nobody has to buy this product who disapproves of it, yet I wish AR>there AR>> were a way we could drop the advertising for this phony piece of junk. 73 AR>- AR>> Kay WT3P AR>> AR>> --- AR>> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. AR>> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com) AR>> Version: 6.0.368 / Virus Database: 204 - Release Date: 5/29/2002

1 0

Re: Positive ID for Amateur Radio
by dick＠pobox.com 31 May '02

31 May '02

30 MAY, 2002 - 2150 CDT I know we are trying to wring out every dollar of cost and squeeze every penny of revenue possible. But I don't believe the ARRL should even appear to be endorsing these badges by carrying the advertising in QST. The appearance of having sinned can be as damaging as the sin itself. If this is going to require a board policy change in July, so be it. 73 - Dick

1 0

WRC-03 Article 25
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 30 May '02

30 May '02

While I was still in Geneva I sent you the draft CPM text dealing with 7 MHz. Draft CPM text dealing with Article 25 (nee S25) was also agreed at the same meeting and is now available in the form in which it has been submitted for the draft CPM report. The contents of the draft CPM text are not proposals, but it is reasonable to expect that most of the proposals that will be made by administrations will be along the lines of the "methods" discussed in the CPM text. The highlights of the possible changes envisioned in the draft CPM text are: 1. Elimination of the "banned country" provision that has caused confusion over the years. 2. Elimination of the prohibition on international third-party traffic in the absence of a special agreement, or alternatively, reversing of the default condition so that such traffic is permitted unless specific steps have been taken to prohibit it. 3. Either elimination of the Morse code requirement, or modification to leave it to the discretion of the administration. 4. Three options re: technical and operational requirements to obtain an amateur license: slight simplification of language, and either a mandatory or a non-mandatory reference to Recommendation ITU-R M.1544. 5. Elimination of some redundant provisions. 6. New provisions to encourage administrations to prepare their amateur stations to provide disaster relief communications, and to encourage administrations to make arrangements to permit amateurs visiting from other countries to operate. Article 19 (call sign formation) is also covered in this draft text. 73, Dave K1ZZ <<026e_ww9.doc>>

2 1

Fwd: [YCCC] Dayton Presentation Emergency Comms
by Tom Frenaye 30 May '02

30 May '02

perhaps of interest -- Tom >To: towertalk(a)contesting.com, ham-law(a)altlaw.com, yccc(a)yccc.org >From: Fred Hopengarten <k1vr(a)juno.com> >Subject: [YCCC] Dayton Presentation Emergency Comms >Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 16:33:42 -0400 > >The presentation I made at Dayton 2002, on Emergency Communications >Reasons for an amateur radio antenna support structure, is now available >at www.antennazoning.com. > >If you believe that it will be difficult to convince a local zoning board >that HF communications is a good reason for a tall antenna support >structure, or if you believe that it will be easier to use local >emergency communications as the reason, or if you wish to combine the >two, the presentation might interest you. It contains citations to >relevant federal law. It also contains a novel way of showing need for >height, based on and presentation of the terrain between your place and a >local Civil Defense center/repeater or whatever. > >You'll be reading the presentation without the commentary, jokes and >colorful language, but it may still be helpful. > >Fred Hopengarten K1VR hopengarten(a)post.harvard.edu >Six Willarch Road * Lincoln, MA 01773-5105 >781/259-0088 *eFax 419/858-2421

1 0

Reminder - Low Airfares
by dick＠pobox.com 30 May '02

30 May '02

30 MAY, 2002 - 1505 CDT Just a friendly reminder about setting up your travel for the July board meeting. I just booked a round trip from ORD-BDL-ORD for $200 and change. The airlines are adding to their summer schedules in early June with the number of flights going back up to almost the total number before 9/11. But the so-called travel experts say there will be little or no further fare reductions this summer due to the reductions already made after 9/11 and this spring. Be sure and book your flights more than 30 days in advance in order to get lowest fare on the major carriers. 73 - Dick, W9GIG

1 0

RE: [ARRL-ODV:7274] Re: Positive ID for Amateur Radio Emergency
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 30 May '02

30 May '02

OK, Art, but what I see there is something from the Missouri SEC. If there's something from CA State OES I'm missing it. Getting back to the question of how long the product has been around, I have found an ad in April 1997 QST. I haven't gone back pre-1997. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Art Goddard [mailto:w6xd@attbi.com] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 1:37 PM To: arrl-odv(a)listserv.arrl.org Subject: [ARRL-ODV:7274] Re: Positive ID for Amateur Radio Emergency Dave- Bill Pennington's concern is just what Jim Maxwell already shared with you in ODV-7258. Bill is WA6SLA, and holds the position of (CA State) OES Communications Coordinator, Inland Region. http://acs.oes.ca.gov/ Bill sent his concern to Steve Ewald on May 29. 73, (D) Art (h)

2 1