Hi All: I've been meaning to write on this topic of the Section News for awhile. I agree with Jim Maxwell in ODV:3790. 1.) Recall that I had a motion at the last Board meeting for someone to be desginated at HQ to coordinate the effort to educate the SM's on this issue. I pulled it after talking to some of you. My concern proved true as we have had no coordinated effort of info and reasoning with the Sm's except for a blurp in QST by Sumner. 2.) My SM's are against the removal of Section News. I respect that some of your SM's think otherwise. It's like I've have seen before on some issues in th past. Across the geographic state or division line can be like night and day sometimes. At a hamfest several months ago on the border of Arkansas (my Division) and Oklahoma (Coy's Division), a survey was taken at the ARRL Forum on this issue. Both the AR and OK SM's were present and stood in front of the crowd and polled the attendees. All of the OK hams said it was fine to remove Section News from QST, yet all of the AR hams said do not remove it, and were quite vocal to me afterwards about it. Two sections, two divisions, adjacent to each other and 180 degrees apart. 3.) There is a figure we have been quoting from a survey of the percent of hams that are on email/internet. It is high, what, something like 90%? I say, no way is that correct. I know it is not correct in my division. I've polled too many club meetings, and too many hamfests. I am concerned about those that don't have such capability. 4.) Now that it's been several months, I'd like to ask Sunner if it is still necessary to remove Section News. What alternatives have been explored? Thanks. 73, Rick - K5UR