[CW] ARRL BOD Jan. 19-20, 2001

[Pedro J. Santa]

Then, if that's the case, the ARRL should NOT have abstained from the vote
at the NCVEC meeting, but should have voted against the approved resolution
and should have taken a more aggressive role against its approval at this
time.  This is, I think, the beginning of the end of the ARRL as the leading
institution for amateur radio affairs in the U.S.

Pedro KP3X..

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "W2AGN" <w2agn@w2agn.net>
To: "David J. Ring, Jr." <n1ea@arrl.net>; <cw@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: [CW] ARRL BOD Jan. 19-20, 2001


> On 13 Aug 2003 at 12:30, David J. Ring, Jr. wrote:
>
> > Lovers of CW:
> >
> > Your attention is directed to this web page of the ARRL where the Board
of
> > Directors (BOD) directs the following actions:
> >
> > http://www.arrl.org/announce/board-0101/
> >
> > NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the ARRL Board of Directors
recognizes
> > and accepts that suppression of the Morse code requirement in Article
S25 is
> > likely to occur at WRC 2003; and be it
> > FURTHER RESOLVED, that deletion of the requirement from Article S25
should
> > not automatically or immediately mean a similar removal of the Morse
code
> > from Part 97 of the FCC rules; and be it
> > FURTHER RESOLVED, that each administration should determine if Morse
code is
> > retained as a testing element; and be it
> > FURTHER RESOLVED, it is the opinion of this Board at this time that
Morse
> > code should be retained as a testing element in the U.S.; and be it
> > FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Morse code is deserving of continued support
as
> > an important operating mode including providing for the protection and
> > maintenance of sufficient spectrum in band planning; and be it
> > FURTHER RESOLVED, that staff develop a program designed to promote the
use
> > of Morse code; and be it
> > FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution supersedes all previous
statements of
> > policy related to suppression of the Morse code requirement in Article
S25.
> >
> > No subsequent action by the BOD or the Executive Committee of the ARRL
has
> > been made on this subject according to a complete reading and a manual
> > search of the minutes of all later BOD and Executive meetings for the
word
> > "morse".
> >
> > 73
> >
> > David Ring, N1EA
>
>
> Which make the claim that the ARRL Rep at trhe NCVEC conference had "no
> policy" to go by a big lie! Even the ARRL President claimed that there
> was no policy in place, or that it had changed after WRC2003. Since the
> above was done expecting the results of WRC2003 to be as they were, once
> again, the ARRL speaks with very forked tongue.
> ---
> +-++-++-++-++-+   John L. Sielke
> |W||2||A||G||N|        http://www.w2agn.net [UPDATED]
> +-++-++-++-++-+    Ex-K3HLU,TF2WKT,W7JEF,W4MPC,N4JS
> _______________________________________________
> CW mailing list
> CW@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
>