[AMRadio] ARRL Bandwidth Plan

VJB wa3vjb at yahoo.com
Fri Dec 9 21:47:01 EST 2005

Jack, thank you.

Pete and I had a separate and direct email exchange
underway, and I feel there's no bad blood.

I really dislike confrontation. I prefer
collaboration, and it's my nature to spend a lot of
time making sure the other guy feels like he's getting
heard -- in addition to making sure I actually
understand what he's saying.

We could fill a book with the societal problems
displayed in ham radio. The hobby is tracking rather
faithfully the general decline in society at large.

Unfortunately, the last remaining institution that
might have served as a restraining, stabilizing, and
positive/nurturing influence has abdicated the role. 
The reasons are complex, but mostly seem rooted in a
failure to keep up with the cool stuff in the hobby,
while being stubbornly loyal to the way it was always

Now, it's too late to stem a major loss in support
(they really are down to about 20 percent
representation, by their own official figures), and
their confused and haphazard leadership behaves as if
it is very scared of the future. 

So now they've overreacted and are embracing the
novelty of "digital" peddled to society by commercial
interests (HDTV, cellphones, IPods), but for the hobby
via a charismatic leader who is pushing a specific
digital hookup between ham radio and the Internet.

The group who spawned this proposal further corrupted
the already shaky political process the League has
chronically failed to repair. This would include the
longstanding lack of published criteria for such "ad
hoc" committees employed over the years to shape the
leadership's decision-making.

I hate being a negative, pain-in-the-ass about their
system, but their methods are not doing anyone any
good, and their bandwidth scheme is only the latest
example of faulty product from a defective system.

I have to have faith the FCC will see it the same way
and toss it out.

There **are** many niches, specialties, and minority
operating interests in the hobby.  I am of like-mind
with your view we really must pull together and
minimize these little turf wars.

The problem remains that the approach the League took
foments just that kind of infighting.

The best answer, for the meantime, is to fight efforts
to give what most people would consider an unfair
advantage to one category of activity, inappropriately
using the regulatory structure besides.

After that, if there's still a stomach to radically
change what we now have, perhaps a group will coalesce
out of various "special interests" including the AM
community, to step around the League and forge a more
viable approach in a process that would yield
voluntary, broadbased support.

The ARRL's leadership really needs to be smacked
around on this one so they will sit down at a table
not their own and honestly take part on a lateral,
evenhanded basis with other, more active and involved
groups and individuals representing all our activities
at the outset.

For something of this magnitude, that's not an
unreasonable plan.


> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 18:35:40 +0000
> From: w9gt at comcast.net
> Subject: Re: [AMRadio] ARRL band width plan not
> accepted
> To: Discussion of AM Radio

=== message truncated ===

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 24 Feb 2018.