April 2005 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

RE: [arrl-odv:12189] Bandplan Proposal & Marketing
by James Weaver 29 Apr '05

29 Apr '05

Brian, If you are receiving E-mail from members of your Division, only, feel lucky! At least being a surrogate dart board makes me feel useful! Jim Weaver, K8JE Director, Great Lakes Division ARRL 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040 Tel. 513-459-0142, E-mail k8je(a)arrl.org ARRL: The reason Amateur Radio is! Members: The reason ARRL is! -----Original Message----- From: Brian Mileshosky [mailto:n5zgt@swcp.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 10:08 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12189] Bandplan Proposal & Marketing Hi Everyone, Like you, I've been receiving emails from members in my Division, expressing pleasure or displeasure with the bandwidth proposal. They've spurred a concern that I shared with my Director, Rev, today and I'd like to share it with you. All of my emails are either to the tune of "I oppose because Winlink this..." or "I support because I think Winlink..." Winlink is the common thread in every one of them. There's no other reasoning behind these people's support or opposition. Incidentally, go to eHam.net or QRZ.com and you see pretty much the same thing there. All seemingly Winlink driven. Perhaps I've not been in this particular League circle long enough, but people seem to be thinking that Winlink is pretty cozy with us and this proposal. Is this really the case? If so, or if not -- is this the impression we want motivating people's support/opposition of the bandwidth proposal? At the risk of sounding cavalier, I think the League needs to do a MUCH, MUCH better PR job with respect to educating members (and non-members) about this proposal, its background, and our motivation. I see more on the ARRL website and QST about what we are doing, and not so much about WHY. We know why, but what level of knowledge does the membership that we serve have? Dave's recent "It Seems to Us" column is an excellent piece, but it won't be read by anyone until it hits the newsstands, whenever that is. In the meantime, people are drawing their own conclusions and that's certainly not buying us any friends, doing us any favors, or lending us any support. My suggestion is this: explain the proposal, from A to Z, in laymen terms, perhaps through an informative FAQ that both educated and dispells rumors. Post it in a most obvious place on the ARRL website. What spurred this proposal? What does it really fix? What if we don't act? What good does it bring to Ham Radio? What about these Winlink charges? Is this really crafted for the digital guys? Why only HF? And so on. Additionally, perhaps the same FAQ can be emailed to all the members who have an "arrl.net" address. Let's get the word out and market this, even if it's merely a proposal. Otherwise, I fear, things like Winlink is going to continue being a major driving force, and rumors, as well as the fringe on eHam.net and qrz.com are going to do our educating for us. Comments? Ideas? Respectfully submitted, Brian, N5ZGT

1 0

[arrl-odv:12198] H.Res. 230 Campaign Launched
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 28 Apr '05

28 Apr '05

Here is the announcement of H.Res. 230, including a link to a sample letter. Note that there is a variant in the letter for the 13 states where low-band VHF is in widespread use by public safety agencies. Mike Ross has really gone out on a limb for us on this. We need to give him a lot of support, not only through letters in search of cosponsors but also through approaches to the public safety communications community for their endorsement of the Resolution. To those directors who have already appointed Legislative Action Chairs, Coordinators, and Assistants, now's the time to turn them loose! 73, Dave K1ZZ http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/04/28/3/

1 0

[arrl-odv:12196] Re: Bandplan Proposal & Marketing
by Andy Oppel 28 Apr '05

28 Apr '05

And we should then take a copy of the e-mail and post it to all the message boards where Mr. Teller has been spreading his lies and innuendo. I say this because I doubt that most of the people on these message boards both receive and actually **read** e-mail from the ARRL. -- Andy Oppel, N6AJO Pacific Division Vice Director At 03:33 AM 4/28/2005, you wrote: >Brian, > >Good points! > >Unfortunately Skip Teller, who's not telling it like it is, had been able >to stir up the troops. And you are correct that up to this point we have >not been taking a leadership position and selling the idea. Dave has >written a "It Seems to Us..." or two but that's not really enough with the >level of urban legend circulating the Internet. > >Since the Internet is where the (mis)information is we probably need to >get more on the web about the proposal. A FAQ e-mailed to all sounds like >a good start. > >Thanks for that idea: > > >Additionally, perhaps the same FAQ can be emailed to all the > members >who have an "arrl.net" address. Let's get the word out and > market >this, even if it's merely a proposal. > >Frank....N2FF.... >

1 0

[arrl-odv:12195] Re: Bandplan Proposal & Marketing
by W3KD＠aol.com 28 Apr '05

28 Apr '05

In a message dated 4/28/2005 10:25:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, dsumner(a)arrl.org writes: > > It's been almost three years since the Board started the process of updating > the regulatory framework from mode of emission to bandwidth. There was a > need to do so, and that need has been explained over and over. The details are > still under discussion, and members (and others) are welcome to participate. > In short, we're doing exactly what we ought to be doing. > > The need for a better explanation of "why" on regulation by bandwidth is an interesting discussion. It strikes me that, if the draft petition that has been circulated to the Board on more than one occasion does not adequately explain to the satisfaction of our own Board why the paradigmatic change is necessary, then it stands no chance of persuading the FCC and other hams. We will have a revised version of the petition for you shortly, after EC review, and the Board may consider critically whether it meets the litmus test of explaining "why" in a satisfactory manner. 73, Chris W3KD

1 0

[arrl-odv:12194] Re: Bandplan Proposal & Marketing
by John Bellows 28 Apr '05

28 Apr '05

Dave, thanks for the background references. They should be helpful. In your message you referred to the EC and "its view over time" regarding the bandwidth proposal in general and more particularly semi-automatic operation. As a point of clarification it is worth noting the membership of the EC has also changed over time. In 2004 only one Director member carried over from the previous committee and in 2005 two of the five Director members were new to the committee. The EC recommendations may have changed, whether the views of the constituent members of the EC over time have correspondingly changed is less clear. 73, Jay, KØQB -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 8:25 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12193] Re: Bandplan Proposal & Marketing For those of you looking for an explanation of "why" we started down the road toward regulation by bandwidth in the first place, a good starting point is the Op-Ed by Mark Miller N5RFX, in May 2004 QST (page 91). Next, see the September 2004 QST editorial (page 9), "Regulation by Bandwidth." Again, the focus is on "why." That's with regard to the broad question of why we need to move away from FCC regulation by mode of emission to regulation by bandwidth. Unless you're dealing with someone whose kneejerk reaction to any and all change is to oppose it, explaining this is rather easy. HF digital operation is growing in popularity and scope, and if someone's interest is in protecting traditional modes -- and they understand how little protection is afforded by the present rules -- then they realize some changes are needed. If the existing rules are simply left in place and technology develops as it inevitably will, there's nothing to prevent collisions between analog voice and digital voice/image in the "phone bands," or between CW and the growing variety of digital data modes in the "CW bands" (including the use of much wider bandwidths than we now consider normal). The narrower question of why the EC is recommending dropping the existing restrictions on semiautomatic operation and separating voice (both analog and digital) from non-voice digital modes is one on which the EC itself has changed its view over time, and on which the Board has not adopted a position. I can try to explain the rationale for the EC's recommendations, as I've done via quotes Rick Lindquist has included in the Web story and in the June editorial, but at this point the EC's recommendations are not ARRL policy. The Board may decide in July to do something different. Those of us who were in Denver less than three weeks ago presumably still think the EC recommendations are a good package, but the rest of you are not obliged to agree. There can and should be healthy discussion of the pros and cons between now and July, including an exploration of how to address the weak points in the recommendations -- such as the fact that the existing mechanisms for reviewing and updating band plans are inadequate. It's been almost three years since the Board started the process of updating the regulatory framework from mode of emission to bandwidth. There was a need to do so, and that need has been explained over and over. The details are still under discussion, and members (and others) are welcome to participate. In short, we're doing exactly what we ought to be doing. Dave K1ZZ

1 0

[arrl-odv:12193] Re: Bandplan Proposal & Marketing
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 28 Apr '05

28 Apr '05

For those of you looking for an explanation of "why" we started down the road toward regulation by bandwidth in the first place, a good starting point is the Op-Ed by Mark Miller N5RFX, in May 2004 QST (page 91). Next, see the September 2004 QST editorial (page 9), "Regulation by Bandwidth." Again, the focus is on "why." That's with regard to the broad question of why we need to move away from FCC regulation by mode of emission to regulation by bandwidth. Unless you're dealing with someone whose kneejerk reaction to any and all change is to oppose it, explaining this is rather easy. HF digital operation is growing in popularity and scope, and if someone's interest is in protecting traditional modes -- and they understand how little protection is afforded by the present rules -- then they realize some changes are needed. If the existing rules are simply left in place and technology develops as it inevitably will, there's nothing to prevent collisions between analog voice and digital voice/image in the "phone bands," or between CW and the growing variety of digital data modes in the "CW bands" (including the use of much wider bandwidths than we now consider normal). The narrower question of why the EC is recommending dropping the existing restrictions on semiautomatic operation and separating voice (both analog and digital) from non-voice digital modes is one on which the EC itself has changed its view over time, and on which the Board has not adopted a position. I can try to explain the rationale for the EC's recommendations, as I've done via quotes Rick Lindquist has included in the Web story and in the June editorial, but at this point the EC's recommendations are not ARRL policy. The Board may decide in July to do something different. Those of us who were in Denver less than three weeks ago presumably still think the EC recommendations are a good package, but the rest of you are not obliged to agree. There can and should be healthy discussion of the pros and cons between now and July, including an exploration of how to address the weak points in the recommendations -- such as the fact that the existing mechanisms for reviewing and updating band plans are inadequate. It's been almost three years since the Board started the process of updating the regulatory framework from mode of emission to bandwidth. There was a need to do so, and that need has been explained over and over. The details are still under discussion, and members (and others) are welcome to participate. In short, we're doing exactly what we ought to be doing. Dave K1ZZ

1 0

[arrl-odv:12192] IN-News
by Kustosik, Lisa, KA1UFZ 28 Apr '05

28 Apr '05

IN-Newsletter Vol. 28, No. 17 April 27, 2005 Development The 2005 Education & Technology Program solicitation has topped $38,000 from nearly 700 donors. The follow up segments are in production, including a segment of members recognized as Loyal Members of 40 years or more. The first of two major funding commitments to the 2005 Teachers Institute has been received. A trust document was received from a California couple who have been welcomed into the Legacy Circle. Development is working with the Finance office to investigate offering charitable gift annuities to members as part of the ARRL's planned giving program. Media & Public Relations Stan Perkins reports that the National Association of Broadcasters showing by the ARRL went very well - in fact it went so well that they ran out of some promotional materials even with more available than any prior year. I await word on how the concept of celebrating 100 years of voice over the air was received. Follow-up contacts are underway with the people whose names were collected at the NAB. A proposal for implementing the Speakers' Bureau was finalized for the PSC. The first run of news clips in pdf form was done from the new BurellsLuce site and went well. Recruitment of people for Take Your HT to Work Day is underway - it should be a lot of fun. Materials and presentations are being prepared for Dayton. Production/Editorial The 2004 DXCC Yearbook has been released to the printer. Rick Lindquist reports The ARRL Letter, Vol. 24, No. 16, distributed to 65,258 members on Apr 22. .Rick prepared/edited news stories on the EC meeting of Apr 9 (remaining business); W6TER antenna case win; new crew arrival/change of command aboard ISS; NH ARISS school QSO, amateur applications referred for hearing by FCC, W0ORE to be ARRL EXPO 2005 guest, plus several news briefs and announcements. Rick also completed work on "Happenings" for June QST. Rick voiced, edited and produced ARRL Audio News, our weekly webcast. Sales and Marketing The advertising section for June QST left for the printer as scheduled, despite numerous last minute advertising insertions. Based on the last two years performance we had originally planned 55 QST display pages for June. Our final tally was 61 advertising pages with actual revenue exceeding expectations by $20,000. We have received the very first membership returns from our 45,000 April membership mailing. No returns had been planned until May. However, our mailing bureau was able to turn the mailing around very quickly. We will have our first analysis report in 30 days. The agency assisting with our May, 60,000-piece Technician mailing has been peppering us for various information and we hope to see a first package draft shortly. Returns for this mailing are slated to begin in June. Advertising staff continues to work on ad insertions for the New Ham Express as well as beginning work on July QST. Publication sales this month had exceeded $200,000 by April 24, suggesting our target for the month likely will be met. A nice handful of new publications began shipping this month. An email solicitation was sent to our publications list on Friday. The email featured ARRL Field Day products, the RSGB book sale, the ARRL National Convention, and new editions of TravelPlus, ON4UN's Low Band DXing, and The ARRL Repeater Directory. The effort was a big success, achieving over $10,000 in online orders placed throughout the weekend. Thanks go to Penny Harts and Judy Miller for offering to staff the ARRL lobby store during the Newington NARL hamfest, June 11 and 12. ARRL National Convention Planning Less than 30 days to Dayton! Exhibitor badges have been ordered for staff, Officers, Directors, Vice Directors, and other exhibit volunteers. Efforts are now focused on wrapping up supplies for shipping: posters, signs, handouts, publications, and all the "trimmings." The official ARRL National Convention web page has been updated with the latest convention detail. Visit www.arrl.org/expo to download the ARRL National Convention Guide. These four pages will also be printed within the Dayton Hamvention program. It is filled with all of the ARRL National Convention activities taking place throughout Hamvention. Upon reviewing the material, a Hamvention Committee member remarked "WOW...you ARRL folks must be bringing an 18-wheeler to Dayton!" ARRL Passport has left for press. This booklet supports a convention-style scavenger hunt. Visitors pick up a free ARRL Passport at the ARRL EXPO exhibits area. They'll use their ARRL Passport to wander from exhibitor to exhibitor and from activity to activity, and qualify to win great prizes! The activity is limited to the first 5,000 visitors to the ARRL EXPO exhibits area. Passport Prize Drawing winners will be announced during the Sunday afternoon Hamvention awards activity in the arena. Prizes have been donated by Icom, Kenwood, AOR, and Alinco. The activity is sponsored entirely by ARRL advertisers. We are coordinating with volunteer Mike Kirlin, KC8UPN who will organize and run the Hamvention Special Events Station, featuring W1AW/8. Membership Services Awards Branch WAS QSL Cards Checked 250 WAS Certs. (450 QSLs F/C) 9 WAS Certs. (100 QSLs ES/C) 2 5BWAS Cert. (250 QSLs ES/C) 1 WAC QSL Cards Checked 78 A-1 Op. Nominations 1 A-1 Op. Certificates 5 LTMA Inquiries 4 VUCC Certs. Processed 2 VUCC Initial Apps. 3 Grids 450 VUCC End. App. 1 Grids 26 VUCC Backfill App. 1 Grids 359 Awards Mailed 24 Also, worked on some LTMA projects (on-going). Processing Status: Current or up to three weeks. For the coming week-More WAS QSL card checking, U.S. WAC, WAS in the 90th, and VUCC awards, plus mail out all this week's processed awards. Contest Branch We finalized the 160-Meter Web results and opened them to the web. We received back the 2005 RTTY Roundup article and material from the author, prepared it and forwarded it on to Web Services for layout for the web. We worked extensively with the DX Contest Log Checker testing new software for processing those results. Line scores for both Sweepstakes CW and Phone results were proofed from Production for attachment to the PDF for the web. DXCC Branch For the week of: April 24, 2005 Beginning Credits 22,038 Credits Received 11,429 Credits Processed 15,619 Ending Credits 17,848 Applications Pending 184 Processing Time (Conventional) 4.4 Weeks Processing Time (LoTW) 1 Working Day DXCC is currently mailing applications received on March 24, 2005. DXCC is currently entering credits received on March 24, 2005. Logbook of the World QSO records entered into the system 70,302,979 QSL records have resulted 3,115,987 Logs Processed 115,995 Active Certificates 14,287 Users registered in the system 9,564 Hybrids Pending Mail 5 QSL Bureau Processing time is 10 days from receipt. This week, 145 pounds of cards were received from members. Cards mailed as of 04/24/05: 337,050. Cards mailed on 04/22/05: 68,600. Field & Educational Services Rosalie reported that six of the seven crew members on the Return to Flight space shuttle mission are licensed ham radio operators. She helped prepare a first quarter NASA report on ARISS. The European Space Agency (ESA) posted a story on its Web site on the recent Italian ARISS QSO. ESA spationauts Thomas Reiter and Leopold Eyharts received training from Russia's Energia and GCTC and Sergey Samburov will train them on the SSTV system; they fly on the shuttle to the ISS in August. Field Education Team Gail Iannone compiled all information for those staying in the ARRL's block of rooms at the Dayton Marriott, and submitted the rooming list to the Marriott Event Manager. She sent 5 hamfest approval letters to the sponsoring committees confirming the Division Director's approval of their events as ARRL-sanctioned, processed 19 handout and door prize orders, and 3 label requests for upcoming events. She sent 8 approval letters to the sponsoring clubs confirming the EC's approval of their events as ARRL-sanctioned, and sent 4 new applications from clubs seeking ARRL-affiliation to the Division Directors and Section Managers for approval. Jean Wolfgang reports the good news that her solicitation to students who withdrew from EmComm classes in the last few months has resulted in some of those students registering again before the CNCS grant year is over! She has received email bounces from more than 12% of the students (that registered less than a month ago). She happily says that after sending email messages to 300 Level 2 graduates, inviting them to register for Level 3, the result is an almost full Level 3 section! Jean set up one hybrid class and received 3 more rosters for upcoming classes. She graduated 67 emcomm students, printed their certificates and ID cards and requested checks for them. Jean set up classes and assigned mentors, processing 4 sections that will open on April 29. With Tom Hogerty's help, Norm Fusaro uploaded two new learning tools to the ARRL's "Learn CW" page. The new resources came as a result of a recent article by Norm about learning CW. He worked on a CD-ROM of resources and programs available to clubs. He helped a prospective ham studying for his license get in touch with a local club for help. Norm entertained a new ham visiting HQ to make his first HF QSO from W1AW -- Nate, KB1MFH, age 10, just passed his Tech and CW exams, and is on his way to becoming a General. Norm will write a story about Nate and his grandfather, W1DPM, who has been a great mentor. Margie Bourgoin processed 25 updates to affiliated club records, and registered 1 new Volunteer Instructor. She placed orders for departmental supplies that are running low due to an increase in requests for exhibit kits and ham events. Margie continues to update the database of Public Service Activity Reports and the database of information from the EmComm Surveys. Amateur Radio Education & Technology Program Mark Spencer's Transistor Amplifier Exploration Board is complete and ready for distribution to schools; an announcement was posted on the web. Mark received 2 Progress and 1 Project grant applications to be processed during the second increment of 2005's grants. He has received 8 formal requests from teachers to attend the ARRL Hq Teacher's Institute. He changed the June institute date to July 25-29 so as accommodate more teachers. He received 4 applications from people wanting to attend an institute to be held in Ohio. Community Education Program Bill Barrett updated his travel and work schedules; he contacted people in the next two months' worth of show locations to touch base with them and ensure the shows and work revolving around them are on their front burners. Locations are Humboldt, IA; Centennial, CO; Staunton, VA and Galesburg, IL. An e-newsletter, "CEP Update," to go to all remaining locations (clients and hams) was drafted. Its purpose is to aid in smoother future meetings by relating to, and gaining from, the experiences of the shows completed thus far. A follow-up letter is being finalized for mailing by USPS, to each of the previous locations, to measure the lasting results by soliciting comments; it will go to both clients and hams. Field Organization/Public Service Team ARRL recognized National Volunteer Week (April 17-23) and thanked its volunteers. Steve Ewald helped prepare a news story for the League's Web page and extended it to SMs via their reflector. Some SMs forwarded personal thanks to League members/volunteers in their sections. Steve joined Rosalie White and Mary Hobart in hosting an introductory visit to HQ by Linda Winkler, a Citizen Corps regional representative for FEMA Regions 1 and 2. We discussed ways ARRL and Citizen Corps (along with its other affiliates) could partner better with one another. In addition, Steve called into the monthly Citizen Corps Affiliates' teleconference. Leona Adams received a petition from J. Steven Cochrane, W7JSC, of Cheyenne, nominating him to run for Wyoming SM. Petitions for this SM cycle are due June 10. Ballots for the on-gong Section elections in West Texas and New Hampshire are still coming in, and are due at HQ on May 20. Over two dozen new Field Appointee initial-supply packages were sent this past week, and Leona continued updating the database. Chuck Skolaut received and reviewed documentation on two cases in California. One is on a repeater, and another is on a simplex frequency -- this information has been forwarded to the FCC. Chuck also sent the FCC details received about possible rule infractions on 40 and 75 meters. An Illinois station received thanks from Riley Hollingsworth at the FCC for information he provided about certain equipment listed for sale on Internet sites. Two Official Observer Coordinators were instrumental in resolving separate issues this week. Regulatory Information John Hennessee assisted an amateur with a local-government zoning problem in Los Ranchos, NM (K4RN), and with a covenant restriction in Ashe County, NC (KD4MCA). He processed the Volunteer Counsel application of John McGrath, N2HQD, of Albany, NY. He reports receiving more general questions about digital operations, probably spurred by the proposed bandwidth petition. EmComm Grants Dan Miller reports on his trips to the Ohio Homeland Security Symposium, where he answered many questions about ham radio emergency communications, and to the National Capital ARES Council, where he gave a two-hour presentation and brought home 30 surveys. At the Ohio event, 10 minutes into the keynote speakers' speeches, the power went down for 15 minutes, and speeches were completed using emergency lighting and no speaker system. In addition to the conferences, Dan attended a club meeting near each location. The April CNCS grant update was prepared by Joel Kleinman, edited by Dan Miller, and Tom Hogerty posted it to the ARRL Web. Sincerely, Dave Patton, NN1N Special Assistant to the Chief Executive Officer Staff Absentee List Dave Sumner 5/19-5/22 Dayton Hamvention Mary Hobart 5/18-5/23 Dayton Hamvention Dave Patton 5/18-5/23 Dayton Hamvention `` 5/23-5/27 Vacation `` 6/21-6/27 Friedrichshafen Germany Convention Wayne Mills 4/20-4/29 Vacation `` 5/19-5/20 Dayton Hamvention `` 6/22-6/27 Friedrichshafen Germany Convention Dan Miller 4/29-5/4 National Disaster Medical System Conference, Orlando FL `` 5/7-5/10 Salvation Army Conference, Lake Buena Vista, FL `` 5/13-5/16 EMCOMM WEST, Reno, NV `` 5/17 Vacation Joe Carcia 5/27 Vacation Ed Hare 4/25-4/29 ANSI Committee Meeting, Piscataway, NJ `` 5/18-5/22 Vacation Joel Kleinman 5/13 Vacation Bill Moore 4/28-5/1 State Convention, Birmingham, AL & Vacation `` 5/11 Vacation `` 5/19-5/20 Dayton Hamvention Scott Gee 5/2 Vacation `` 5/19-5/20 Vacation Judy Miller 5/5-5/6 Vacation `` 5/19-5/23 Vacation Joel Hallas 5/6pm Vacation `` 5/19-5/22 Dayton Hamvention `` 5/23 Vacation Kathy Capodicasa 5/9-5/13 Vacation `` 5/18-5/23 Dayton Hamvention Joel Kleinman 5/13 Vacation `` 5/23 Vacation Bob Inderbitzen 5/18-5/23 Dayton Hamvention Mike Tracy 5/18-5/23 Dayton Hamvention Maria Somma 5/18-5/22 Dayton Hamvention Debra Johnson 5/19-5/23 Dayton Hamvention `` 5/24 Vacation Dennis Motschenbacher 5/18-5/23 Dayton Hamvention Zoe Belliveau 5/19-5/23 Dayton Hamvention `` 6/20-6/24 Vacation Joe Bottiglieri 5/19-5/23 Dayton Hamvention Rick Lindquist 5/19-5/22 Dayton Hamvention `` 5/23 Vacation Fatima Lorusso 6/27-7/1 Vacation Lisa Tardette 6/27-7/8 Vacation Janet Rocco 4/29 Vacation

1 0

[arrl-odv:12191] Re: Bandplan Proposal & Marketing
by Frank Fallon - N2FF 28 Apr '05

28 Apr '05

Brian, Good points! Unfortunately Skip Teller, who's not telling it like it is, had been able to stir up the troops. And you are correct that up to this point we have not been taking a leadership position and selling the idea. Dave has written a "It Seems to Us..." or two but that's not really enough with the level of urban legend circulating the Internet. Since the Internet is where the (mis)information is we probably need to get more on the web about the proposal. A FAQ e-mailed to all sounds like a good start. Thanks for that idea: >Additionally, perhaps the same FAQ can be emailed to all the members >who have an "arrl.net" address. Let's get the word out and market >this, even if it's merely a proposal. Frank....N2FF....

1 0

[arrl-odv:12190] Turn On Your Computer Sound System
by dick＠pobox.com 28 Apr '05

28 Apr '05

Here is the ultimate answer to those who continue circulating Internet "Urban Legends". http://www.softlab.ece.ntua.gr/~sivann/pub/swf/may02-smilepop-soapbox4.swf

1 0

[arrl-odv:12189] Bandplan Proposal & Marketing
by Brian Mileshosky 28 Apr '05

28 Apr '05

Hi Everyone, Like you, I've been receiving emails from members in my Division, expressing pleasure or displeasure with the bandwidth proposal. They've spurred a concern that I shared with my Director, Rev, today and I'd like to share it with you. All of my emails are either to the tune of "I oppose because Winlink this..." or "I support because I think Winlink..." Winlink is the common thread in every one of them. There's no other reasoning behind these people's support or opposition. Incidentally, go to eHam.net or QRZ.com and you see pretty much the same thing there. All seemingly Winlink driven. Perhaps I've not been in this particular League circle long enough, but people seem to be thinking that Winlink is pretty cozy with us and this proposal. Is this really the case? If so, or if not -- is this the impression we want motivating people's support/opposition of the bandwidth proposal? At the risk of sounding cavalier, I think the League needs to do a MUCH, MUCH better PR job with respect to educating members (and non-members) about this proposal, its background, and our motivation. I see more on the ARRL website and QST about what we are doing, and not so much about WHY. We know why, but what level of knowledge does the membership that we serve have? Dave's recent "It Seems to Us" column is an excellent piece, but it won't be read by anyone until it hits the newsstands, whenever that is. In the meantime, people are drawing their own conclusions and that's certainly not buying us any friends, doing us any favors, or lending us any support. My suggestion is this: explain the proposal, from A to Z, in laymen terms, perhaps through an informative FAQ that both educated and dispells rumors. Post it in a most obvious place on the ARRL website. What spurred this proposal? What does it really fix? What if we don't act? What good does it bring to Ham Radio? What about these Winlink charges? Is this really crafted for the digital guys? Why only HF? And so on. Additionally, perhaps the same FAQ can be emailed to all the members who have an "arrl.net" address. Let's get the word out and market this, even if it's merely a proposal. Otherwise, I fear, things like Winlink is going to continue being a major driving force, and rumors, as well as the fringe on eHam.net and qrz.com are going to do our educating for us. Comments? Ideas? Respectfully submitted, Brian, N5ZGT

1 0