Regardless of where you put an FAQ or facts about a topic, the people that post on e-ham and qrz.com are, in my opinion, people who spend more time hanging out in chat rooms typing on a keyboard from a dark corner of their home rather than actually reading anything related to facts or actually turning on a radio to see what's on the air, or they're driving by a personal agenda to "stir the pot" and post. I prefer to avoid those places because I'm not convinced it is a factual, representative position and any amateur radio group. 73 Joel W5ZN -----Original Message----- From: Brian Mileshosky [mailto:n5zgt@swcp.com] Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 11:48 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12216] Re: Bandplan Proposal & Marketing Dave (et al), Sorry I've not responded to this yet...I'm in the middle of final exam preparation...my life will be much happier as of Tuesday evening. As for the FAQ, I'll look it over after exams and provide recommendations. Right off the bat, however, the first recommendation is to put the FAQ in a noticeable place (like at the very top of the page, front and center), rather than buried in a bunch of text. My view of a FAQ is something that someone reads if they want to boil pages and pages of quotes and text down to only concise details. Much like an abstract or executive summary of a published paper. Anyhow, for what it's worth... I'll offer some additions to the FAQ later this week. 73, Brian, N5ZGT On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ wrote:
Brian, we have an FAQ. It's linked directly from the story. What additions or changes do you suggest to it?
Dave
-----Original Message----- From: Mileshosky, Brian N5ZGT (Vice Dir, RM) Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 11:37 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12201] Re: Bandplan Proposal & Marketing
Chris (et al),
I may not be reading your response correctly, but my concern is not about us (the ODV). My concern is of John Q. ARRL Member, and whether or not he understands -- with clarity -- what this proposal is for, what it fixes, what happens if we don't act, what rumors not to listen to, etc.
All I'm saying is that the League can do a better PR job with this proposal given the fanfare (positive, or in my members' case, negative) that it's created prior to, and especially after Denver. Rather than asking members to dig up columns and op-eds from 2004, or reading through 4-pages of quotes and EC actions (such is the case of the latest ARRL web article), let's provide that information in a much more consice manner. That's why I suggested a "Frequently Asked Questions"-type of web document, to address the fundamentals, answer the burning questions members might have at this point, and kill the rumors.
Taking it a step further, perhaps send it to the 89,525 members who receive email via an arrl.net address. Then they can become a bit more educated, or use that info to educate and win the support of their friends and club members. Win-win.
Even a printed version can be handed out at Dayton. My gut feeling is that lots of members and general Hams are salivating at the chance to get answers and explanations from those of us who are going. After chatting, send them away with the FAQ for the same reasons mentioned above.
If this is such a crucial measure as many of us make it out to be, I'm sure we're equally concerned with it being accepted amongst the ranks without misinformation or rumors leading their decision-making. Perhaps a bit of marketing between now and the July Board meeting will allow this to happen with greater ease.
Again, just my 2-cents being the young whippersnapper I am. (wink)
73, Brian, N5ZGT