From dbcolter at myfairpoint.net Sun Aug 24 09:14:11 2014 From: dbcolter at myfairpoint.net (Dave Colter) Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 09:14:11 -0400 Subject: [ECAC] Draft letter to NTS national staff Message-ID: <94EACFC0BF0B45FFA7C6B28D1D0ED44D@daveogou4t7u0c> Read this carefully and tell me what you think. Dave _____ Dear NTS National Staff, Thanks for taking the time to develop a more constructive and accurate response to ECAC's proposals. However, I believe you've missed a key point. Any comparison of ECAC's Joint Emergency Communications Committee (JECC) concept and NTS' expanded Field Organization is "apples and oranges." The two proposals have quite different goals and are thus more complementary than conflicting. While the NTS proposal is intended to solve NTS/ARES operational interface problems, this is not a primary goal for the JECC. Its proposed mission is to provide high level support to both programs and thus improve performance and interoperability across all groups and systems. The JECC is intended to foster high-level collaboration between both programs to develop best practices standards for ARES and training materials for both programs, and other functions that simply creating a parallel ARES operational structure to match NTS' cannot accomplish. A JECC might well deal with the operational issues by enabling a dialogue between leaders in both programs and developing joint recommendations, but that was simply one item on a much larger and more diverse list. Perhaps we should be supporting each other's proposals. If you carefully read the JECC proposal, I'm confident you will see there is a tremendous upside benefit to the future of both programs. We may still have practical or philosophical differences regarding some details, but I believe those can be worked out. Of course, I'm speaking only for myself here, but I'm sure other members of the former ECAC will concur. The alternative is that we continue to be at odds, which will create more confusion in the minds of board members and HQ staff. That will pretty much ensure that nothing is done, and we'll be right back where we started. None of us want that. Nothing less than the future of Amateur Radio is at stake. Regards, Dave Colter, WA1ZCN ASEC - Operations, Training State EOC Team NH-ARES www.nh-ares.org 603-763-4976, option 1 Ex-ARRL Emergency Communications Advisory Committee New England Division Representative & Vice Chairman . From k0rm at comcast.net Mon Aug 25 10:53:46 2014 From: k0rm at comcast.net (Jeff Ryan) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 14:53:46 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [ECAC] Draft letter to NTS national staff In-Reply-To: <94EACFC0BF0B45FFA7C6B28D1D0ED44D@daveogou4t7u0c> References: <94EACFC0BF0B45FFA7C6B28D1D0ED44D@daveogou4t7u0c> Message-ID: <1829272089.6071989.1408978426216.JavaMail.root@comcast.net> Dave: My thoughts are that the ECAC completed its duties. It submitted a report to the board/PSC and the committee was discharged with thanks. Any further activity in the name of the ECAC is inappropriate since it no longer exists. Creating a document in the name of the "former ECAC" is akin to submitting an edict from a deposed king.... it carries no standing and makes the deposed king appear desperate in my humble opinion.. The "response" by the NTS officials to the ECAC report is their business. The PSC, as a committee can accept it or not as they see fit and the former ECAC should remain silent. Our submitted report speaks for us and is our final report. And final means "final". We can not be concerned that some seek to poke holes or disagree with our report. We should not seek to "improve" or explain anything further. Doing so actually demeans the submitted report-- it's as if we believe it needs to be explained and/or defended. Its like two kids picking a fight on the playground--- the one that walks away from the fight (because it serves no purpose) is the winner. The one who speaks last is actually the loser.. I strongly urge the that we all resist the temptation to keep engaging in this argument. The higher ground is to remain silent. Our report is our final word on the subject. Respectfully, Jeff, K0RM ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Colter" To: Ecac at mailman.qth.net Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 7:14:11 AM Subject: [ECAC] Draft letter to NTS national staff Read this carefully and tell me what you think. Dave _____ Dear NTS National Staff, Thanks for taking the time to develop a more constructive and accurate response to ECAC's proposals. However, I believe you've missed a key point. Any comparison of ECAC's Joint Emergency Communications Committee (JECC) concept and NTS' expanded Field Organization is "apples and oranges." The two proposals have quite different goals and are thus more complementary than conflicting. While the NTS proposal is intended to solve NTS/ARES operational interface problems, this is not a primary goal for the JECC. Its proposed mission is to provide high level support to both programs and thus improve performance and interoperability across all groups and systems. The JECC is intended to foster high-level collaboration between both programs to develop best practices standards for ARES and training materials for both programs, and other functions that simply creating a parallel ARES operational structure to match NTS' cannot accomplish. A JECC might well deal with the operational issues by enabling a dialogue between leaders in both programs and developing joint recommendations, but that was simply one item on a much larger and more diverse list. Perhaps we should be supporting each other's proposals. If you carefully read the JECC proposal, I'm confident you will see there is a tremendous upside benefit to the future of both programs. We may still have practical or philosophical differences regarding some details, but I believe those can be worked out. Of course, I'm speaking only for myself here, but I'm sure other members of the former ECAC will concur. The alternative is that we continue to be at odds, which will create more confusion in the minds of board members and HQ staff. That will pretty much ensure that nothing is done, and we'll be right back where we started. None of us want that. Nothing less than the future of Amateur Radio is at stake. Regards, Dave Colter, WA1ZCN ASEC - Operations, Training State EOC Team NH-ARES www.nh-ares.org 603-763-4976, option 1 Ex-ARRL Emergency Communications Advisory Committee New England Division Representative & Vice Chairman . ______________________________________________________________ ECAC mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ecac Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:ECAC at mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html From ghays at cis-broadband.com Mon Aug 25 13:58:11 2014 From: ghays at cis-broadband.com (Grant Hays) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 10:58:11 -0700 Subject: [ECAC] Draft letter to NTS national staff In-Reply-To: <94EACFC0BF0B45FFA7C6B28D1D0ED44D@daveogou4t7u0c> References: <94EACFC0BF0B45FFA7C6B28D1D0ED44D@daveogou4t7u0c> Message-ID: <000901cfc08e$22af5a40$680e0ec0$@cis-broadband.com> Dave: Greatly appreciate and understand your efforts. But honestly said the mission is over -- ECAC no longer exists. The Board has our report and the ball is in their park. I do not believe the ECAC because it no longer exists has any portfolio to add anything further. Thanks and 73 Grant WB6OTS -----Original Message----- From: ECAC [mailto:ecac-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Dave Colter Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 6:14 AM To: Ecac at mailman.qth.net Subject: [ECAC] Draft letter to NTS national staff Read this carefully and tell me what you think. Dave _____ Dear NTS National Staff, Thanks for taking the time to develop a more constructive and accurate response to ECAC's proposals. However, I believe you've missed a key point. Any comparison of ECAC's Joint Emergency Communications Committee (JECC) concept and NTS' expanded Field Organization is "apples and oranges." The two proposals have quite different goals and are thus more complementary than conflicting. While the NTS proposal is intended to solve NTS/ARES operational interface problems, this is not a primary goal for the JECC. Its proposed mission is to provide high level support to both programs and thus improve performance and interoperability across all groups and systems. The JECC is intended to foster high-level collaboration between both programs to develop best practices standards for ARES and training materials for both programs, and other functions that simply creating a parallel ARES operational structure to match NTS' cannot accomplish. A JECC might well deal with the operational issues by enabling a dialogue between leaders in both programs and developing joint recommendations, but that was simply one item on a much larger and more diverse list. Perhaps we should be supporting each other's proposals. If you carefully read the JECC proposal, I'm confident you will see there is a tremendous upside benefit to the future of both programs. We may still have practical or philosophical differences regarding some details, but I believe those can be worked out. Of course, I'm speaking only for myself here, but I'm sure other members of the former ECAC will concur. The alternative is that we continue to be at odds, which will create more confusion in the minds of board members and HQ staff. That will pretty much ensure that nothing is done, and we'll be right back where we started. None of us want that. Nothing less than the future of Amateur Radio is at stake. Regards, Dave Colter, WA1ZCN ASEC - Operations, Training State EOC Team NH-ARES www.nh-ares.org 603-763-4976, option 1 Ex-ARRL Emergency Communications Advisory Committee New England Division Representative & Vice Chairman . ______________________________________________________________ ECAC mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ecac Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:ECAC at mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html From dbcolter at myfairpoint.net Mon Aug 25 18:45:32 2014 From: dbcolter at myfairpoint.net (Dave Colter) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:45:32 -0400 Subject: [ECAC] Draft letter to NTS national staff In-Reply-To: <1829272089.6071989.1408978426216.JavaMail.root@comcast.net> References: <94EACFC0BF0B45FFA7C6B28D1D0ED44D@daveogou4t7u0c> <1829272089.6071989.1408978426216.JavaMail.root@comcast.net> Message-ID: <5737BD1F5E2747B3A3D09BFB9A79CBAE@daveogou4t7u0c> Jeff, Chuck and Grant; Perhaps you were not present for the several discussions or have forgotten them, but the committee agreed at the outset of this effort to analyze the reasons for failures of previous efforts to remodel ARES and NTS (ARESCOM et al). We did so, and further agreed that to help ensure that our work wouldn't just die in committee like the others, we would shepherd the report and proposal along, even after the committee sunsetted. We're following through on that commitment. To Chuck and Grant, let's get real. Both of you are NTS members who fought the ECAC effort from the beginning. Your motive in suggesting we just roll over and die is rather transparent. Doing so would leave NTS to push along its own proposal without any "competition" mucking up the effort. If you had confidence in the NTS proposal, you wouldn't be concerned that our efforts continue as agreed. Regards, Dave Colter, WA1ZCN ASEC - Operations, Training State EOC Team NH-ARES www.nh-ares.org 603-763-4976, option 1 ARRL Emergency Communications Advisory Committee (Sunsetted) New England Division Representative Vice Chairman . _____ From: Jeff Ryan [mailto:k0rm at comcast.net] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 10:54 AM To: dbcolter at myfairpoint.net Cc: Ecac at mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [ECAC] Draft letter to NTS national staff Dave: My thoughts are that the ECAC completed its duties. It submitted a report to the board/PSC and the committee was discharged with thanks. Any further activity in the name of the ECAC is inappropriate since it no longer exists. Creating a document in the name of the "former ECAC" is akin to submitting an edict from a deposed king.... it carries no standing and makes the deposed king appear desperate in my humble opinion.. The "response" by the NTS officials to the ECAC report is their business. The PSC, as a committee can accept it or not as they see fit and the former ECAC should remain silent. Our submitted report speaks for us and is our final report. And final means "final". We can not be concerned that some seek to poke holes or disagree with our report. We should not seek to "improve" or explain anything further. Doing so actually demeans the submitted report-- it's as if we believe it needs to be explained and/or defended. Its like two kids picking a fight on the playground--- the one that walks away from the fight (because it serves no purpose) is the winner. The one who speaks last is actually the loser.. I strongly urge the that we all resist the temptation to keep engaging in this argument. The higher ground is to remain silent. Our report is our final word on the subject. Respectfully, Jeff, K0RM _____ From: "Dave Colter" To: Ecac at mailman.qth.net Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2014 7:14:11 AM Subject: [ECAC] Draft letter to NTS national staff Read this carefully and tell me what you think. Dave _____ Dear NTS National Staff, Thanks for taking the time to develop a more constructive and accurate response to ECAC's proposals. However, I believe you've missed a key point. Any comparison of ECAC's Joint Emergency Communications Committee (JECC) concept and NTS' expanded Field Organization is "apples and oranges." The two proposals have quite different goals and are thus more complementary than conflicting. While the NTS proposal is intended to solve NTS/ARES operational interface problems, this is not a primary goal for the JECC. Its proposed mission is to provide high level support to both programs and thus improve performance and interoperability across all groups and systems. The JECC is intended to foster high-level collaboration between both programs to develop best practices standards for ARES and training materials for both programs, and other functions that simply creating a parallel ARES operational structure to match NTS' cannot accomplish. A JECC might well deal with the operational issues by enabling a dialogue between leaders in both programs and developing joint recommendations, but that was simply one item on a much larger and more diverse list. Perhaps we should be supporting each other's proposals. If you carefully read the JECC proposal, I'm confident you will see there is a tremendous upside benefit to the future of both programs. We may still have practical or philosophical differences regarding some details, but I believe those can be worked out. Of course, I'm speaking only for myself here, but I'm sure other members of the former ECAC will concur. The alternative is that we continue to be at odds, which will create more confusion in the minds of board members and HQ staff. That will pretty much ensure that nothing is done, and we'll be right back where we started. None of us want that. Nothing less than the future of Amateur Radio is at stake. Regards, Dave Colter, WA1ZCN ASEC - Operations, Training State EOC Team NH-ARES www.nh-ares.org 603-763-4976, option 1 Ex-ARRL Emergency Communications Advisory Committee New England Division Representative & Vice Chairman . ______________________________________________________________ ECAC mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ecac Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:ECAC at mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.2247 / Virus Database: 3955/7595 - Release Date: 08/25/14