[arrl-odv:24057] RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle
GM All, I have received a number if very angry complaints from some notable DXers in this division about this poorly placed add in April QST Digital Ed. Was this done on purpose or by coincidence? Many feel this to be a direct insult to their achievements in the DXCC program. Further, this is giving legs to the false claim circulating around that the ARRL is "selling out" to the commercial remote interests. This ad placement was not well thought out and now I have a good number of angry members demanding an apology and a one actually calling for an investigation. This continues to be a hot button issue for many of us and inattentive actions like this cause more controversy and do not facilitate an environment where we can settle any outstanding differences in a calm and reasonable manner among our members. Who did this ad layout and page selection? Does the hard copy April QST have the same page sequence? Someone needs to start using a little more thought and common sense. "40 over 9! RHR ad adjacent to that remote operating editorial? Really?? We're just asking for it! 73 David A. Norris, K5UZ Director Delta Division Sent from my iPhone
David, page 8 is a preferred position. The advertiser on that page pays extra for the placement. RHR has been on that page since the February issue. Dave K1ZZ ________________________________________ From: arrl-odv [arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] on behalf of Norris, David, K5UZ Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 12:45 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:24057] RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle GM All, I have received a number if very angry complaints from some notable DXers in this division about this poorly placed add in April QST Digital Ed. Was this done on purpose or by coincidence? Many feel this to be a direct insult to their achievements in the DXCC program. Further, this is giving legs to the false claim circulating around that the ARRL is "selling out" to the commercial remote interests. This ad placement was not well thought out and now I have a good number of angry members demanding an apology and a one actually calling for an investigation. This continues to be a hot button issue for many of us and inattentive actions like this cause more controversy and do not facilitate an environment where we can settle any outstanding differences in a calm and reasonable manner among our members. Who did this ad layout and page selection? Does the hard copy April QST have the same page sequence? Someone needs to start using a little more thought and common sense. "40 over 9! RHR ad adjacent to that remote operating editorial? Really?? We're just asking for it! 73 David A. Norris, K5UZ Director Delta Division Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
Dave, TU for the quick reply. Was there not another preferred ad position elsewhere? This is not playing well down here at all. 73 David A. Norris, K5UZ Director Delta Division Sent from my iPhone On Mar 14, 2015, at 11:49 AM, "Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ" <dsumner@arrl.org> wrote:
David, page 8 is a preferred position. The advertiser on that page pays extra for the placement.
RHR has been on that page since the February issue.
Dave K1ZZ
________________________________________ From: arrl-odv [arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] on behalf of Norris, David, K5UZ Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 12:45 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:24057] RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle
GM All,
I have received a number if very angry complaints from some notable DXers in this division about this poorly placed add in April QST Digital Ed. Was this done on purpose or by coincidence? Many feel this to be a direct insult to their achievements in the DXCC program. Further, this is giving legs to the false claim circulating around that the ARRL is "selling out" to the commercial remote interests.
This ad placement was not well thought out and now I have a good number of angry members demanding an apology and a one actually calling for an investigation. This continues to be a hot button issue for many of us and inattentive actions like this cause more controversy and do not facilitate an environment where we can settle any outstanding differences in a calm and reasonable manner among our members.
Who did this ad layout and page selection? Does the hard copy April QST have the same page sequence? Someone needs to start using a little more thought and common sense. "40 over 9! RHR ad adjacent to that remote operating editorial? Really?? We're just asking for it!
73
David A. Norris, K5UZ Director Delta Division
Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
Preferred positions are specific to the page. Dave Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID "Norris, David, K5UZ" <k5uz@suddenlink.net> wrote: Dave, TU for the quick reply. Was there not another preferred ad position elsewhere? This is not playing well down here at all. 73 David A. Norris, K5UZ Director Delta Division Sent from my iPhone On Mar 14, 2015, at 11:49 AM, "Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ" <dsumner@arrl.org> wrote:
David, page 8 is a preferred position. The advertiser on that page pays extra for the placement.
RHR has been on that page since the February issue.
Dave K1ZZ
________________________________________ From: arrl-odv [arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] on behalf of Norris, David, K5UZ Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 12:45 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:24057] RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle
GM All,
I have received a number if very angry complaints from some notable DXers in this division about this poorly placed add in April QST Digital Ed. Was this done on purpose or by coincidence? Many feel this to be a direct insult to their achievements in the DXCC program. Further, this is giving legs to the false claim circulating around that the ARRL is "selling out" to the commercial remote interests.
This ad placement was not well thought out and now I have a good number of angry members demanding an apology and a one actually calling for an investigation. This continues to be a hot button issue for many of us and inattentive actions like this cause more controversy and do not facilitate an environment where we can settle any outstanding differences in a calm and reasonable manner among our members.
Who did this ad layout and page selection? Does the hard copy April QST have the same page sequence? Someone needs to start using a little more thought and common sense. "40 over 9! RHR ad adjacent to that remote operating editorial? Really?? We're just asking for it!
73
David A. Norris, K5UZ Director Delta Division
Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
I spoke at the San Diego DX Club meeting last Thursday. When I discussed the remote-operation DXCC rule change, no one in attendance voiced any concern over the change, the existence of RHR, the advertisement or its placement. I wonder how many of those who are complaining paid someone to install and / or maintain their towers and antennas. 73, Marty N6VI
Marty I am President of CTDXCC and I spoke to TDXS at their February meeting. I asked for a vote of all present as to approval/disapproval of the DXCC remote rules: the ARRL lost — unanimously — in both meetings. There is no joy in Mudville. 73 *-----------------------------------------------------* ** John Robert Stratton N5AUS Office telephone: 512-445-6262 Cell: 512-426-2028 PO Box 2232 Austin, Texas 78768-2232 *-----------------------------------------------------* On 4/2/15 9:01 AM, n6vi@socal.rr.com wrote:
I spoke at the San Diego DX Club meeting last Thursday. When I discussed the remote-operation DXCC rule change, no one in attendance voiced any concern over the change, the existence of RHR, the advertisement or its placement.
I wonder how many of those who are complaining paid someone to install and / or maintain their towers and antennas.
73,
Marty N6VI
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
All: I'm afraid this is not playing well in the NW Division either. Although I understand we need advertisers, I feel that we should have used a little more conservative placement, until we finalized our rule planning/changing and input from our members in regards to DXCC and Contest issues vs. For lease/hire stations. I'm sure we will weather the storm but it might have been easier after a full review of rules in regards to the foregoing. 73, Jim -----Original Message----- From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of David Norris Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 9:45 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:24057] RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle GM All, I have received a number if very angry complaints from some notable DXers in this division about this poorly placed add in April QST Digital Ed. Was this done on purpose or by coincidence? Many feel this to be a direct insult to their achievements in the DXCC program. Further, this is giving legs to the false claim circulating around that the ARRL is "selling out" to the commercial remote interests. This ad placement was not well thought out and now I have a good number of angry members demanding an apology and a one actually calling for an investigation. This continues to be a hot button issue for many of us and inattentive actions like this cause more controversy and do not facilitate an environment where we can settle any outstanding differences in a calm and reasonable manner among our members. Who did this ad layout and page selection? Does the hard copy April QST have the same page sequence? Someone needs to start using a little more thought and common sense. "40 over 9! RHR ad adjacent to that remote operating editorial? Really?? We're just asking for it! 73 David A. Norris, K5UZ Director Delta Division Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
Jim, I don't know how we could have achieved "a little more conservative placement." RHR's payment for the placement is on an ongoing basis (since the February issue) and is not tied to whatever the topic of the editorial on the facing page might be. In any case, the editorial isn't likely to revisit the topic of remote operation any time soon. The subject isn't on the PSC agenda for further consideration, is it? 73, Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of Pace, Jim, K7CEX Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 6:33 PM To: Norris, David, K5UZ; arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:24061] Re: RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle All: I'm afraid this is not playing well in the NW Division either. Although I understand we need advertisers, I feel that we should have used a little more conservative placement, until we finalized our rule planning/changing and input from our members in regards to DXCC and Contest issues vs. For lease/hire stations. I'm sure we will weather the storm but it might have been easier after a full review of rules in regards to the foregoing. 73, Jim -----Original Message----- From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of David Norris Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 9:45 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:24057] RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle GM All, I have received a number if very angry complaints from some notable DXers in this division about this poorly placed add in April QST Digital Ed. Was this done on purpose or by coincidence? Many feel this to be a direct insult to their achievements in the DXCC program. Further, this is giving legs to the false claim circulating around that the ARRL is "selling out" to the commercial remote interests. This ad placement was not well thought out and now I have a good number of angry members demanding an apology and a one actually calling for an investigation. This continues to be a hot button issue for many of us and inattentive actions like this cause more controversy and do not facilitate an environment where we can settle any outstanding differences in a calm and reasonable manner among our members. Who did this ad layout and page selection? Does the hard copy April QST have the same page sequence? Someone needs to start using a little more thought and common sense. "40 over 9! RHR ad adjacent to that remote operating editorial? Really?? We're just asking for it! 73 David A. Norris, K5UZ Director Delta Division Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
I don't know either, Dave, but am seeing another publishing decision that has caused some membership anxiety. As for P&SC, I have no idea as I am not on that committee. I'm sure we will get through this one, as in the previous ones. 73, Jim -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 7:17 AM To: Pace, Jim, K7CEX; Norris, David, K5UZ; arrl-odv Subject: RE: [arrl-odv:24061] Re: RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle Jim, I don't know how we could have achieved "a little more conservative placement." RHR's payment for the placement is on an ongoing basis (since the February issue) and is not tied to whatever the topic of the editorial on the facing page might be. In any case, the editorial isn't likely to revisit the topic of remote operation any time soon. The subject isn't on the PSC agenda for further consideration, is it? 73, Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of Pace, Jim, K7CEX Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 6:33 PM To: Norris, David, K5UZ; arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:24061] Re: RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle All: I'm afraid this is not playing well in the NW Division either. Although I understand we need advertisers, I feel that we should have used a little more conservative placement, until we finalized our rule planning/changing and input from our members in regards to DXCC and Contest issues vs. For lease/hire stations. I'm sure we will weather the storm but it might have been easier after a full review of rules in regards to the foregoing. 73, Jim -----Original Message----- From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of David Norris Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 9:45 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:24057] RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle GM All, I have received a number if very angry complaints from some notable DXers in this division about this poorly placed add in April QST Digital Ed. Was this done on purpose or by coincidence? Many feel this to be a direct insult to their achievements in the DXCC program. Further, this is giving legs to the false claim circulating around that the ARRL is "selling out" to the commercial remote interests. This ad placement was not well thought out and now I have a good number of angry members demanding an apology and a one actually calling for an investigation. This continues to be a hot button issue for many of us and inattentive actions like this cause more controversy and do not facilitate an environment where we can settle any outstanding differences in a calm and reasonable manner among our members. Who did this ad layout and page selection? Does the hard copy April QST have the same page sequence? Someone needs to start using a little more thought and common sense. "40 over 9! RHR ad adjacent to that remote operating editorial? Really?? We're just asking for it! 73 David A. Norris, K5UZ Director Delta Division Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
Consistent with how I've handled/tracked all recently cleared PSC business topics, this topic will be in the "Status" section of the next meeting's agenda so PSC can be briefed by staff on its roll-out since our last PSC meeting. As part of that I expect some final discussion to occur (e.g. NN1N feedback about any unresolved misinterpretation of rule language that's been flagged and might require PSC attention; general feedback from PSC members). 73, Brian N5ZGT On Mar 16 2015 8:57 AM, Northwestern Division Director - Jim K7CEX wrote:
I don't know either, Dave, but am seeing another publishing decision that has caused some membership anxiety. As for P&SC, I have no idea as I am not on that committee.
I'm sure we will get through this one, as in the previous ones.
73, Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org]
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 7:17 AM To: Pace, Jim, K7CEX; Norris, David, K5UZ; arrl-odv Subject: RE: [arrl-odv:24061] Re: RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle
Jim, I don't know how we could have achieved "a little more conservative placement." RHR's payment for the placement is on an ongoing basis (since the February issue) and is not tied to whatever the topic of the editorial on the facing page might be.
In any case, the editorial isn't likely to revisit the topic of remote
operation any time soon. The subject isn't on the PSC agenda for further
consideration, is it?
73, Dave K1ZZ
-----Original Message----- From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of Pace, Jim, K7CEX Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 6:33 PM To: Norris, David, K5UZ; arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:24061] Re: RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle
All:
I'm afraid this is not playing well in the NW Division either. Although I understand we need advertisers, I feel that we should have used a little more conservative placement, until we finalized our rule planning/changing and input from our members in regards to DXCC and Contest issues vs. For lease/hire stations. I'm sure we will weather the storm but it might have been easier after a full review of rules in regards to the foregoing. 73,
Jim
-----Original Message----- From: arrl-odv
[mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of
David Norris Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 9:45 AM To: arrl-odv
Subject: [arrl-odv:24057] RHR Add on Adjacent Page to K1ZZ Artiicle
GM All,
I have received a number if very angry complaints from some
notable DXers in
this division about this poorly placed add in April QST Digital Ed. Was this done on purpose or by coincidence? Many feel this to be a direct insult to their achievements in the DXCC program. Further, this is giving legs to the false claim circulating around that the ARRL is "selling out" to the commercial remote interests.
This ad placement was not well thought out and now I have a good number of angry members demanding an apology and a one actually calling for an investigation. This continues to be a hot button issue for many of us and inattentive actions like this cause more controversy and do not facilitate an environment where we can settle any outstanding differences in a calm and reasonable manner among our members.
Who did this ad layout and page selection? Does the hard copy April QST have the same page sequence? Someone needs to start using a little more thought and common sense. "40 over 9! RHR ad adjacent to that remote operating editorial? Really?? We're just asking for it!
73
David A. Norris, K5UZ Director Delta Division
Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv [1]
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv [1]
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv [1] Links: ------ [1] https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
participants (6)
-
Brian Mileshosky -
David Norris -
JRS -
n6vi＠socal.rr.com -
Northwestern Division Director - Jim K7CEX -
Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ