There is a media phenomenon here that has been generated by one of our best section managers that needs some attention. This section manager is not in my division, but 5 of the 7 section managers as well as I have attended these sessions almost every week.

This is the most valuable interactive session in amateur radio today. Most people who attend are SMs and SECs, but the meetings have grown to capacity - first to 100 and now to 500.

Last night's session:

Topic: AREDN - Amateur Radio Data Networking for the 21st Century

Speaker: Randy Smith, WU2S, president and founder of Amateur Radio Emergency Data Network Inc.

Had 153 participants.

Today's Winlink session has exceeded 500 participants/ because the invitation went viral within FEMA. It turns out that we have ARES people in FEMA that are promoting amateur radio. (Please don't think that they shouldn't do that!) I received an invitation from a FEMA employee who I know that had over 100 emails on it, inviting them to the event.

I understand that a request from the SM (see below) for $395.08 to be allocated from several participating SM budgets was declined. I have been told that they must use our GOTOMeeting account. Wrong answer. Please find out who is thinking that way, I can't believe that was Barry,

Declining this $400 expenditure indicates that the staff is unable to recognize and capitalize on a viral event. $400, or even $4,000, for live interactive sessions twice per week that promote the value of ARES and actually HOW TO PERFORM the ARES mission, that is current, replicating successes and learning how to deploy the best in breed technology is a BARGAIN that WE SHOULD NOT MISS. The recordings can be captured and archived so that when we actually HAVE a "Lifelong Learning" system, we will have VALID ACCURATE CURRENT and USEFUL content for it.

Let's find a way to get these VOLUNTEERS repaid for their out of pocket expenditures and let's find a way to CAPTURE this intellectual property for the use of ARES and amateur radio in general. The BEST field programs should come from the field and Dan Marler, K7REX has momentum and a great thing going. Let's fund it FULLY and set up a weekly series of Zoom meetings for this purpose. Compared to other initiatives I've seen recently, this is a bargain.

Let's say YES to $400 now and talk to Dan to determine how we can help him continue.

Technology moves too fast for us to write and publish books about deployment of it. Please, let's encourage staff to fund this initiative so that the FEMA size crowds can attend.

This is the nature of viral opportunity. It demands action now. The funds are budgeted, let's allow their use in lieu of mileage for the several SMs that consent, or take the funds from the Southeastern Division travel budget.

73, thank you and let's think about GROWTH and POSSIBILITIES!

Mickey Baker, N4MB

Palm Beach Gardens, FL
“The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead." Robert K. Greenleaf

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: ARRL ID Section <arrl.idaho@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 8:12 PM
Subject: Setting the record straight
To: <n4mb@arrl.org>

I have received emails and seen others on email reflectors that show the need to clear up some issues.

Many have questioned my use of Zoom. The ARRL permitted me to purchase Zoom and authorized me to conduct the weekly nationwide meetings we've been holding since the first of the year and months before Covid-19 shut everything down and forced many to resort to video teleconferencing. After consulting with other section managers, I decided not to use the league's go-to-meeting. There is an issue of ARRL content control and scheduling challenges that using Zoom avoids. It seems ironic that the upcoming ARRL Board Meeting is apparently going to be conducted using Zoom rather than the "Go to Meeting" system, which is a rather low-tier and somewhat unreliable (but cheap) system, but they want the section managers to use it.

Recently, our Zoom meetings started exceeding the Zoom Pro limit of 100 participants, and knowing those numbers will only increase, I made a request to the ARRL to increase that limit to the next level of 500. Steve Ewald, WV1X took my request up through his chain of command, where it was declined. I didn't feel then, and I don't feel now that something that is being used nationwide should be paid for out of a section budget. However, a group of section managers did present a proposal to the league to do just that. That proposal was also rejected. I posted an update to the section managers as to where that stood, and what I posted was sent off, resulting in others getting involved. Directors and officers have been contacted by many inside and outside of the ARRL origination, and other voices have surfaced in all this. Bottom line: Those that support our efforts are making their voices heard, and those that don't, want the noise to go away.

Zoom costs: I added a 500 limit to an already paid for Zoom Pro account ($14.99/mo - $148.90 annually). The additional 500 seats added $50/mo, bringing the total up to $64.99/mo - $779.88 annually. I received a discount, so the actual billing was $600.00.

Since we already had the paid Zoom Pro account, they pro-rated the amount due to $395.08, which is the amount I am asking the ARRL for reimburse. The current Zoom account is paid up to February 13, 2021, at which time it will need to be renewed for the full amount of $64.99/mo - $779.88 annually. Rather or not, we renew Zoom at that time will depend on several factors.

To address comments made about me representing ARRL section managers, I want to stress that in no way do I represent the ARRL's section managers or their sections either through my actions or what I say. However, I do provide them a platform for them to represent themselves and the sections they serve. While not all section managers participate, over half do, and together we've been able to make amazing progress. It is only a beginning, and we have a lot more yet to accomplish.

Our ARRL members and others affected by the decisions of the ARRL want to be a part of that process. Section Managers are in the best position to be the voice of those in the field and need to be able to represent their membership better. The current procedure is for section managers to go through their division directors does not work for everyone. If a section manager is restricted from representing his or her section, the membership is who it hurts most. The section managers met with some directors to work out a solution. While the solution we came up with was not ideal, it was a start but short-lived as the directors did not except it, and those doors were closed. Muting the voice of those elected to serve the members effectively mutes the membership.

Other projects include ARES, which is not covered here.

Hopefully, this answers a lot of questions.

Please feel free to contact me directly or by email.

- Dan

Dan Marler, K7REX
208-914-8939
K7REX@arrl.org