You hit the nail on the head, Greg. Let's make sure we communication clearly with the membership. 73 from the Last Frontier Jim, K7CEX Sent from Jim's tablet On Sep 1, 2014 11:54 AM, G Widin <gpwidin@comcast.net> wrote:
With regard to the Technician privileges proposal, in my opinion, it is fine for the EC to take up the proposal and evaluate its merits.
However, I learned my lesson on RM-11708. Neither that proposal nor a proposal for new allocations for Techs is an urgent matter. Thus, we can afford to be deliberate about our actions in pursuing this proposal. We should not file anything with the FCC until we have had a chance to get member input on it. Though we cannot expect agreement on everything that might be proposed, we should encourage and accept comments from members, and genuinely be prepared to modify the proposal in the face of cogent arguments, or even to abandon the proposed filing if member sentiment is heavily against it.
I have seen a few comments that note that the proposed change would give Techs privileges that the content of the current Element 2 does not prepare them for (frequency allocations and HF operating practice). I would encourage EC to deal with this, since a major feature of the proposal seems to be that Techs would be able to use the new allocation without any additional testing or training.
However, regardless of the technical and regulatory sense (or not) of the proposal, I emphasize again that members ought to be asked for input before we take any formal action. 73, Greg, K0GW
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Kay Craigie <n3kn@verizon.net> wrote:
Since posting ODV:23143, I have received one message about the study motions now on the EC's agenda and the matter of BL 45. The EC will take into account the posts made on the ODV when the motions were first brought up.
After the Minutes were published, I received one message from a member about the Technician privileges proposal, which I acknowledged and forwarded to the person's Director, who happens to be on the EC.
That isn't a lot of input for the EC to work with.
Again, I encourage you to post your comments and analyses of these items so the EC will have the benefit of your viewpoints. Thanks and 73 - Kay N3KN
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org http://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv