[arrl-odv:30859] Re: Proposed Amateur Radio Application Fees
All I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post it. If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors, the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur licensees. Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well articulated and published position and campaign— against the implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town criers do not serve us well. Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day. _______________________________________ John Robert Stratton N5AUS Director West Gulf Division Office:512-445-6262 Cell:512-426-2028 P.O. Box 2232 Austin, Texas 78768-2232 *_______________________________________***
John, Full agreement here. 73 Ria, N2RJ On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton <N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote:
All
I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post
it.
If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors,
the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we
must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur
licensees.
Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may
face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should
use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well
articulated and published position and campaign— against the
implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging
failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not
communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League
is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our
Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town
criers do not serve us well.
Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West
Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box
2232
Austin,
Texas 78768-2232
*_______________________________________*
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
Agree with Dale, Jim, John and Ria and many prior comments. I’ve had a number of members write in opposition. The consensus is, yes, $50 every 10 years won’t hurt most of us but it will provide an economic barrier to entry to those considering amateur radio - particularly young and economically disadvantaged. It will definitely have a dampening effect on the growth of amateur radio. We should charge our counsel to compose a full throated, broad oppositional response to this proposal on our behalf, and perhaps provide a template for member opposition filings. 73, Mickey N4MB On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:56 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
John,
Full agreement here.
73 Ria, N2RJ
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton <N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote:
All
I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post
it.
If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors,
the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we
must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur
licensees.
Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may
face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should
use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well
articulated and published position and campaign— against the
implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging
failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not
communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League
is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our
Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town
criers do not serve us well.
Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West
Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box
2232
Austin,
Texas 78768-2232
*_______________________________________*
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
-- “Ends and beginnings—there are no such things. There are only middles.” Robert Frost
I agree! At least the ARRL Bulletin had this in it today: "ARRL is reviewing the matter and intends to file comments in opposition." A little soft by my book, but better than the original press release. I was recently watching one of the popular video blogs, (5,000 subscribers), and the guy was bashing us for not taking a stand in the initial press release. I don't think he's alone in that..... 73; Mike W7VO
On 09/03/2020 6:29 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote:
Agree with Dale, Jim, John and Ria and many prior comments. I’ve had a number of members write in opposition.
The consensus is, yes, $50 every 10 years won’t hurt most of us but it will provide an economic barrier to entry to those considering amateur radio - particularly young and economically disadvantaged.
It will definitely have a dampening effect on the growth of amateur radio.
We should charge our counsel to compose a full throated, broad oppositional response to this proposal on our behalf, and perhaps provide a template for member opposition filings.
73,
Mickey N4MB
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:56 PM rjairam@gmail.com mailto:rjairam@gmail.com < rjairam@gmail.com mailto:rjairam@gmail.com > wrote:
> >
John,
Full agreement here.
73 Ria, N2RJ
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton < N5AUS@n5aus.com mailto:N5AUS@n5aus.com > wrote:
> > >
All
I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post
it.
If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors,
the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we
must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur
licensees.
Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may
face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should
use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well
articulated and published position and campaign— against the
implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging
failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not
communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League
is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our
Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town
criers do not serve us well.
Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West
Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box
2232
Austin,
Texas 78768-2232
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
> >
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
>
-- “Ends and beginnings—there are no such things. There are only middles.” Robert Frost _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
I asked Counsel Siddall this afternoon to provide us with some counsel on the application fee matter and arguments/points our members can use. As I told the EC, I want to fight against it for all applications, regardless of whether it is applied to new or renewal applications, vanity call, or license upgrades. 73,Rick - K5UR -----Original Message----- From: Michael Ritz <w7vo@comcast.net> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Sent: Thu, Sep 3, 2020 10:07 pm Subject: [arrl-odv:30863] Re: Proposed Amateur Radio Application Fees I agree! At least the ARRL Bulletin had this in it today: "ARRL is reviewing the matter and intends to file comments in opposition." A little soft by my book, but better than the original press release. I was recently watching one of the popular video blogs, (5,000 subscribers), and the guy was bashing us for not taking a stand in the initial press release. I don't think he's alone in that..... 73; Mike W7VO On 09/03/2020 6:29 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote: Agree with Dale, Jim, John and Ria and many prior comments. I’ve had a number of members write in opposition. The consensus is, yes, $50 every 10 years won’t hurt most of us but it will provide an economic barrier to entry to those considering amateur radio - particularly young and economically disadvantaged. It will definitely have a dampening effect on the growth of amateur radio. We should charge our counsel to compose a full throated, broad oppositional response to this proposal on our behalf, and perhaps provide a template for member opposition filings. 73, Mickey N4MB On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:56 PM rjairam@gmail.com < rjairam@gmail.com> wrote: John, Full agreement here. 73 Ria, N2RJ On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton < N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote: All I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post it. If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors, the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur licensees. Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well articulated and published position and campaign— against the implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town criers do not serve us well. Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day. _______________________________________ John Robert Stratton N5AUS Director West Gulf Division Office: 512-445-6262 Cell: 512-426-2028 P.O. Box 2232 Austin, Texas 78768-2232 _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ 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 -- “Ends and beginnings—there are no such things. There are only middles.” Robert Frost _______________________________________________ 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
Sentiment in this Division is overwhelming in opposition to the proposed FCC licensing fee for all the reasons stated. Also, members are having difficulty getting to the right place on the FCC sight and and some sort of “go by” on the comments from HQ would help many. 73 David A. Norris, K5UZ Director, Delta Division Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 4, 2020, at 2:17 AM, Roderick, Rick, K5UR via arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> wrote:
I asked Counsel Siddall this afternoon to provide us with some counsel on the application fee matter and arguments/points our members can use.
As I told the EC, I want to fight against it for all applications, regardless of whether it is applied to new or renewal applications, vanity call, or license upgrades.
73, Rick - K5UR
-----Original Message----- From: Michael Ritz <w7vo@comcast.net> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Sent: Thu, Sep 3, 2020 10:07 pm Subject: [arrl-odv:30863] Re: Proposed Amateur Radio Application Fees
I agree! At least the ARRL Bulletin had this in it today: "ARRL is reviewing the matter and intends to file comments in opposition."
A little soft by my book, but better than the original press release. I was recently watching one of the popular video blogs, (5,000 subscribers), and the guy was bashing us for not taking a stand in the initial press release. I don't think he's alone in that.....
73; Mike W7VO
On 09/03/2020 6:29 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote:
Agree with Dale, Jim, John and Ria and many prior comments. I’ve had a number of members write in opposition.
The consensus is, yes, $50 every 10 years won’t hurt most of us but it will provide an economic barrier to entry to those considering amateur radio - particularly young and economically disadvantaged.
It will definitely have a dampening effect on the growth of amateur radio.
We should charge our counsel to compose a full throated, broad oppositional response to this proposal on our behalf, and perhaps provide a template for member opposition filings.
73,
Mickey N4MB
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:56 PM rjairam@gmail.com < rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
John,
Full agreement here.
73 Ria, N2RJ
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton < N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote:
All
I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post
it.
If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors,
the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we
must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur
licensees.
Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may
face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should
use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well
articulated and published position and campaign— against the
implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging
failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not
communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League
is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our
Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town
criers do not serve us well.
Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West
Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box
2232
Austin,
Texas 78768-2232
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
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
-- “Ends and beginnings—there are no such things. There are only middles.” Robert Frost _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
The better link is this one that shows comments, with a menu down the left hand side to comment: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/filings?proceedings_name=20-270 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* On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 12:17 PM David Norris via arrl-odv < arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> wrote:
Sentiment in this Division is overwhelming in opposition to the proposed FCC licensing fee for all the reasons stated.
Also, members are having difficulty getting to the right place on the FCC sight and and some sort of “go by” on the comments from HQ would help many.
73
David A. Norris, K5UZ Director, Delta Division
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 4, 2020, at 2:17 AM, Roderick, Rick, K5UR via arrl-odv < arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> wrote:
I asked Counsel Siddall this afternoon to provide us with some counsel on the application fee matter and arguments/points our members can use.
As I told the EC, I want to fight against it for all applications, regardless of whether it is applied to new or renewal applications, vanity call, or license upgrades.
73, Rick - K5UR
-----Original Message----- From: Michael Ritz <w7vo@comcast.net> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Sent: Thu, Sep 3, 2020 10:07 pm Subject: [arrl-odv:30863] Re: Proposed Amateur Radio Application Fees
I agree! At least the ARRL Bulletin had this in it today: "ARRL is reviewing the matter and intends to file comments in opposition."
A little soft by my book, but better than the original press release. I was recently watching one of the popular video blogs, (5,000 subscribers), and the guy was bashing us for not taking a stand in the initial press release. I don't think he's alone in that.....
73; Mike W7VO
On 09/03/2020 6:29 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote:
Agree with Dale, Jim, John and Ria and many prior comments. I’ve had a number of members write in opposition.
The consensus is, yes, $50 every 10 years won’t hurt most of us but it will provide an economic barrier to entry to those considering amateur radio - particularly young and economically disadvantaged.
It will definitely have a dampening effect on the growth of amateur radio.
We should charge our counsel to compose a full throated, broad oppositional response to this proposal on our behalf, and perhaps provide a template for member opposition filings.
73,
Mickey N4MB
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:56 PM rjairam@gmail.com < rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
John,
Full agreement here.
73 Ria, N2RJ
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton < N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote:
All
I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post
it.
If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors,
the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we
must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur
licensees.
Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may
face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should
use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well
articulated and published position and campaign— against the
implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging
failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not
communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League
is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our
Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town
criers do not serve us well.
Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West
Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box
2232
Austin,
Texas 78768-2232
*_______________________________________*
_______________________________________________
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
-- “Ends and beginnings—there are no such things. There are only middles.” Robert Frost _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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
If you go to youtube.com and search for ARRL Fee, you'll find a dozen videos that vary, but are fairly negative about the fees and the ARRL's lack of clear, strong opposition. A popular vlogger, K6UDA, says at https://youtu.be/AQJwNDSip30?t=170 <https://youtu.be/AQJwNDSip30?t=170> *"One thing that I did notice about the article here, (re: our August 28 web posting) is, this is, it really looks like a straight news article. which, you know what, as far as the news. that's what you'll want you just report the news. I get it, but the ARRL is an advocacy group. To be perfectly honest, from this article, I can't even tell what the ARRL's position is on this new rule making, if they even have a position.* Right now, (Friday, September 11, 8:30EDT), there are 11,221 views of this video and 375 comments, some very negative about ARRL. I believe that we have agreement among the Directors that we are asking our Washington counsel to draft opposing comments to all facets of this proposal for our review and subsequent filing. Can we please substitute an article which states this and replaces the current article? I'm getting many emails and phone calls about this. In these times (and forward) we must do better with timely changes to online media. 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* On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:29 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote:
Agree with Dale, Jim, John and Ria and many prior comments. I’ve had a number of members write in opposition.
The consensus is, yes, $50 every 10 years won’t hurt most of us but it will provide an economic barrier to entry to those considering amateur radio - particularly young and economically disadvantaged.
It will definitely have a dampening effect on the growth of amateur radio.
We should charge our counsel to compose a full throated, broad oppositional response to this proposal on our behalf, and perhaps provide a template for member opposition filings.
73,
Mickey N4MB
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:56 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
John,
Full agreement here.
73 Ria, N2RJ
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton <N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote:
All
I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post
it.
If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors,
the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we
must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur
licensees.
Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may
face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should
use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well
articulated and published position and campaign— against the
implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging
failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not
communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League
is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our
Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town
criers do not serve us well.
Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West
Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box
2232
Austin,
Texas 78768-2232
*_______________________________________*
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
-- “Ends and beginnings—there are no such things. There are only middles.” Robert Frost
I've asked Counsel Siddall again this evening to please expedite his advice and suggestions. He'd indicated a few days ago that he was working on it when we had some questions raised about how and when to file comments. We said in the article in the ARRL Letter, and in the revised article on the webpage, that we intend on filing comments in opposition, and the Board is clear on that point. 73,Rick - K5UR -----Original Message----- From: Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Sent: Fri, Sep 11, 2020 7:40 pm Subject: [arrl-odv:30923] Re: Proposed Amateur Radio Application Fees If you go to youtube.com and search for ARRL Fee, you'll find a dozen videos that vary, but are fairly negative about the fees and the ARRL's lack of clear, strong opposition. A popular vlogger, K6UDA, says at https://youtu.be/AQJwNDSip30?t=170 "One thing that I did notice about the article here, (re: our August 28 web posting) is, this is, it really looks like a straight news article. which, you know what, as far as the news. that's what you'll want you just report the news. I get it, but the ARRL is an advocacy group. To be perfectly honest, from this article, I can't even tell what the ARRL's position is on this new rule making, if they even have a position. Right now, (Friday, September 11, 8:30EDT), there are 11,221 views of this video and 375 comments, some very negative about ARRL. I believe that we have agreement among the Directors that we are asking our Washington counsel to draft opposing comments to all facets of this proposal for our review and subsequent filing. Can we please substitute an article which states this and replaces the current article? I'm getting many emails and phone calls about this. In these times (and forward) we must do better with timely changes to online media. 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 On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:29 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote: Agree with Dale, Jim, John and Ria and many prior comments.I’ve had a number of members write in opposition. The consensus is, yes, $50 every 10 years won’t hurt most of us but it will provide an economic barrier to entry to those considering amateur radio - particularly young and economically disadvantaged. It will definitely have a dampening effect on the growth of amateur radio. We should charge our counsel to compose a full throated, broad oppositional response to this proposal on our behalf, and perhaps provide a template for member opposition filings. 73, Mickey N4MB On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:56 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote: John, Full agreement here. 73Ria, N2RJ On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton <N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote: All I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post it. If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors, the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur licensees. Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well articulated and published position and campaign— against the implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town criers do not serve us well. Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day. _______________________________________ John Robert Stratton N5AUS Director West Gulf Division Office: 512-445-6262 Cell: 512-426-2028 P.O. Box 2232 Austin, Texas 78768-2232 _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ 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 -- “Ends and beginnings—there are no such things. There are only middles.” Robert Frost _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
I would take the K6UDA video with a large grain of salt. He is a "shock jock" who routinely bashes the ARRL for clicks and views and you literally cannot please him. He isn't even an ARRL member even more. However, I do agree that the appearance of our response has been less than spectacular. There is the impression that the ARRL doesn't seem to be pursuing this diligently or enthusiastically, or at all (in some cases). We aren't presenting an actual position, nor any force, nor any real concern. We have to show all of the above. Ria N2RJ On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 8:41 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote:
If you go to youtube.com and search for ARRL Fee, you'll find a dozen videos that vary, but are fairly negative about the fees and the ARRL's lack of clear, strong opposition.
A popular vlogger, K6UDA, says at https://youtu.be/AQJwNDSip30?t=170
"One thing that I did notice about the article here, (re: our August 28 web posting) is, this is, it really looks like a straight news article. which, you know what, as far as the news. that's what you'll want you just report the news. I get it, but the ARRL is an advocacy group. To be perfectly honest, from this article, I can't even tell what the ARRL's position is on this new rule making, if they even have a position.
Right now, (Friday, September 11, 8:30EDT), there are 11,221 views of this video and 375 comments, some very negative about ARRL.
I believe that we have agreement among the Directors that we are asking our Washington counsel to draft opposing comments to all facets of this proposal for our review and subsequent filing.
Can we please substitute an article which states this and replaces the current article? I'm getting many emails and phone calls about this.
In these times (and forward) we must do better with timely changes to online media.
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
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:29 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote:
Agree with Dale, Jim, John and Ria and many prior comments. I’ve had a number of members write in opposition.
The consensus is, yes, $50 every 10 years won’t hurt most of us but it will provide an economic barrier to entry to those considering amateur radio - particularly young and economically disadvantaged.
It will definitely have a dampening effect on the growth of amateur radio.
We should charge our counsel to compose a full throated, broad oppositional response to this proposal on our behalf, and perhaps provide a template for member opposition filings.
73,
Mickey N4MB
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:56 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
John,
Full agreement here.
73 Ria, N2RJ
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton <N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote:
All
I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post
it.
If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors,
the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we
must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur
licensees.
Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may
face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should
use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well
articulated and published position and campaign— against the
implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging
failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not
communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League
is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our
Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town
criers do not serve us well.
Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West
Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box
2232
Austin,
Texas 78768-2232
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
-- “Ends and beginnings—there are no such things. There are only middles.” Robert Frost
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
So I was able to attend an actual Hamfest today. How sweet it was!! The number one question asked at my ARRL table was "What are WE doing to confront the proposed charges from the FCC?" The "WE" was the collective we, clearly meaning all of us as League members. I was able to say that the Board and HQ staff are working on developing a suitable and effective response and then came the second question, (from all, by the way) was "How can I help?" Truly, all around here want to lend a hand in any way they can, be it letter writing, e-mails or phone calls. Interestingly, in their eyes, the Commission has further lost credibility, as not one person had anything complimentary to say about the FCC. Most are pretty steamed about "...the FCC's pursuit of the almighty dollar while letting the cost-free contributions that Amateur Radio provides to the wold all fall by the wayside..." 73, back to net..........OH await, the second-most-asked question was "What are WE doing to confront the proposed removal of the 3.0 to 3.5 GHz band?" -- Same answer, same commentary. We really need to get loud about what we are doing. It is past time. This needs to be in headlines and lead articles. Again, 73 -- Dale WA8EFK On 9/11/2020 10:31 PM, rjairam@gmail.com wrote:
I would take the K6UDA video with a large grain of salt. He is a "shock jock" who routinely bashes the ARRL for clicks and views and you literally cannot please him. He isn't even an ARRL member even more.
However, I do agree that the appearance of our response has been less than spectacular. There is the impression that the ARRL doesn't seem to be pursuing this diligently or enthusiastically, or at all (in some cases). We aren't presenting an actual position, nor any force, nor any real concern. We have to show all of the above.
Ria N2RJ
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 8:41 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote:
If you go to youtube.com and search for ARRL Fee, you'll find a dozen videos that vary, but are fairly negative about the fees and the ARRL's lack of clear, strong opposition.
A popular vlogger, K6UDA, says at https://youtu.be/AQJwNDSip30?t=170
"One thing that I did notice about the article here, (re: our August 28 web posting) is, this is, it really looks like a straight news article. which, you know what, as far as the news. that's what you'll want you just report the news. I get it, but the ARRL is an advocacy group. To be perfectly honest, from this article, I can't even tell what the ARRL's position is on this new rule making, if they even have a position.
Right now, (Friday, September 11, 8:30EDT), there are 11,221 views of this video and 375 comments, some very negative about ARRL.
I believe that we have agreement among the Directors that we are asking our Washington counsel to draft opposing comments to all facets of this proposal for our review and subsequent filing.
Can we please substitute an article which states this and replaces the current article? I'm getting many emails and phone calls about this.
In these times (and forward) we must do better with timely changes to online media.
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
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:29 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote:
Agree with Dale, Jim, John and Ria and many prior comments. I’ve had a number of members write in opposition.
The consensus is, yes, $50 every 10 years won’t hurt most of us but it will provide an economic barrier to entry to those considering amateur radio - particularly young and economically disadvantaged.
It will definitely have a dampening effect on the growth of amateur radio.
We should charge our counsel to compose a full throated, broad oppositional response to this proposal on our behalf, and perhaps provide a template for member opposition filings.
73,
Mickey N4MB
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:56 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
John,
Full agreement here.
73 Ria, N2RJ
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton <N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote:
All
I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post
it.
If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors,
the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we
must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur
licensees.
Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may
face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should
use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well
articulated and published position and campaign— against the
implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging
failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not
communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League
is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our
Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town
criers do not serve us well.
Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West
Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box
2232
Austin,
Texas 78768-2232
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
-- “Ends and beginnings—there are no such things. There are only middles.” Robert Frost
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'll ditto Dales report. Although it was a small tailgate with only 40 people at least 30 of them wanted to know what to do, and what we are doing. Mark, HDX On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 4:06 PM Dale Williams <dale.wms1@frontier.com> wrote:
So I was able to attend an actual Hamfest today. How sweet it was!!
The number one question asked at my ARRL table was "What are WE doing to confront the proposed charges from the FCC?" The "WE" was the collective we, clearly meaning all of us as League members.
I was able to say that the Board and HQ staff are working on developing a suitable and effective response and then came the second question, (from all, by the way) was "How can I help?"
Truly, all around here want to lend a hand in any way they can, be it letter writing, e-mails or phone calls. Interestingly, in their eyes, the Commission has further lost credibility, as not one person had anything complimentary to say about the FCC. Most are pretty steamed about "...the FCC's pursuit of the almighty dollar while letting the cost-free contributions that Amateur Radio provides to the wold all fall by the wayside..."
73, back to net..........OH await, the second-most-asked question was "What are WE doing to confront the proposed removal of the 3.0 to 3.5 GHz band?" -- Same answer, same commentary.
We really need to get loud about what we are doing. It is past time. This needs to be in headlines and lead articles.
Again, 73
-- Dale WA8EFK
On 9/11/2020 10:31 PM, rjairam@gmail.com wrote:
I would take the K6UDA video with a large grain of salt. He is a "shock jock" who routinely bashes the ARRL for clicks and views and you literally cannot please him. He isn't even an ARRL member even more.
However, I do agree that the appearance of our response has been less than spectacular. There is the impression that the ARRL doesn't seem to be pursuing this diligently or enthusiastically, or at all (in some cases). We aren't presenting an actual position, nor any force, nor any real concern. We have to show all of the above.
Ria N2RJ
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 8:41 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote:
If you go to youtube.com and search for ARRL Fee, you'll find a dozen videos that vary, but are fairly negative about the fees and the ARRL's lack of clear, strong opposition.
A popular vlogger, K6UDA, says at https://youtu.be/AQJwNDSip30?t=170
"One thing that I did notice about the article here, (re: our August 28 web posting) is, this is, it really looks like a straight news article. which, you know what, as far as the news. that's what you'll want you just report the news. I get it, but the ARRL is an advocacy group. To be perfectly honest, from this article, I can't even tell what the ARRL's position is on this new rule making, if they even have a position.
Right now, (Friday, September 11, 8:30EDT), there are 11,221 views of this video and 375 comments, some very negative about ARRL.
I believe that we have agreement among the Directors that we are asking our Washington counsel to draft opposing comments to all facets of this proposal for our review and subsequent filing.
Can we please substitute an article which states this and replaces the current article? I'm getting many emails and phone calls about this.
In these times (and forward) we must do better with timely changes to online media.
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
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:29 PM Mickey Baker <fishflorida@gmail.com> <fishflorida@gmail.com> wrote:
Agree with Dale, Jim, John and Ria and many prior comments. I’ve had a number of members write in opposition.
The consensus is, yes, $50 every 10 years won’t hurt most of us but it will provide an economic barrier to entry to those considering amateur radio - particularly young and economically disadvantaged.
It will definitely have a dampening effect on the growth of amateur radio.
We should charge our counsel to compose a full throated, broad oppositional response to this proposal on our behalf, and perhaps provide a template for member opposition filings.
73,
Mickey N4MB
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:56 PM rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com> <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
John,
Full agreement here.
73 Ria, N2RJ
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 8:25 PM John Robert Stratton <N5AUS@n5aus.com> <N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote:
All
I posted this to the EC reflector, but forgot to cross post
it.
If we are to preserve the support of our Members, our donors,
the respect of the perennial naysayers and the FCC, I believe we
must oppose the planned assessment of fees against Amateur
licensees.
Even, if based on David Siddal's advice and opinion, we may
face an uphill battle or even no chance of prevailing, we should
use the opportunity to take a public stand — with a well
articulated and published position and campaign— against the
implementation of the proposed fees. One of our most damaging
failings — and it has been for many years — is that we do not
communicate well to the public or with our Members that the League
is always standing for the rights of Amateur Radio and our
Members; that failing cries out to be corrected. Our current town
criers do not serve us well.
Who knows? By entering the lists, we might just take the day.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West
Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box
2232
Austin,
Texas 78768-2232
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
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
-- “Ends and beginnings—there are no such things. There are only middles.” Robert Frost
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing listarrl-odv@reflector.arrl.orghttps://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing listarrl-odv@reflector.arrl.orghttps://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
participants (8)
-
Dale Williams -
David Norris -
John Robert Stratton -
k5ur＠aol.com -
Mark J Tharp -
Michael Ritz -
Mickey Baker -
rjairam＠gmail.com