[ECAC] Next moves

[chuck]

Dave

I have ask who are you refering to in your remarks

"As an aside, it appears that at least one key NTS staffer whose name was
signed to their analysis of our proposal never saw it, before or after it
was sent out. I have wonder how many other "signers" didn't see it. Chuck,
perhaps you can answer that one."

Also Al W3YVQ wrote the document, Marcia KW1U, Rob K6YR,
Dave WB2FTX, Gary KB0OFD and myself reviewed the Document
thus all the signers of the document say, review it and appoved it.

73 Chuck W5KAV
ARRL Pacific Area Digital Coordinator NTSD
Member ARRL WL2K/NTS Committee
NTS Pacific Area TCC Cycle 2 station
ARES AEC Centralia WA EOC
ARRL VE
President Chehalis Valley Amateur Radio Society WA7UHD
National Communications Station NCS045
Life member Signal Corps Regimental Associaiation

Amateur Radio is a hobby...
Amateur Radio Emergency Communications is a commitment!
Member ARRL, the national association for Amateur RadioT

chuckw5kav at comcast.net
w5kav at arrl.net
w5kav at winlink.org
Skype name (ChuckV1)
ph:(253) 951 3945




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Colter" <dbcolter at myfairpoint.net>
To: <ecac at qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: [ECAC] Next moves


> I'd like others to fact check the rebuttal to make sure my memory is 
> correct
> (often doubtful of late!), and then we can tweak it and send it off to 
> P&SC.
> I'd also like to find out who received their proposal and the analysis to
> make sure everyone gets our side of the story.
>
>
>
> Beyond that, I think we should:
>
> 1) Develop a brief document contrasting the two proposals and their goals
> and approach.
>
> 2) Talk to our Directors, and start talking about this with as many people
> in as many forums as possible, asking them to contact their own directors.
>
>
>
> Obviously, if anyone has other ideas or suggestions, let 'em fly. That's 
> why
> we have this email group.
>
>
>
> I think what we don't want (or need) to do is attack the NTS proposal in 
> the
> factually challenged way their "analysis" paper did ours. Our proposal is
> strong enough that we can keep it 100% factual and objective and do just
> fine.
>
>
>
> As an aside, it appears that at least one key NTS staffer whose name was
> signed to their analysis of our proposal never saw it, before or after it
> was sent out. I have wonder how many other "signers" didn't see it. Chuck,
> perhaps you can answer that one.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave Colter, WA1ZCN
>
> ASEC - Operations, Training
>
> State EOC Team
>
> NH-ARES
>
> www.nh-ares.org
>
> 603-763-4976, option 1
>
>
>
> Vice Chairman
>
> ARRL Emergency Communications Advisory Committee
>
> New England Division Representative
>
> .
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ecac-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:ecac-bounces at mailman.qth.net] 
> On
> Behalf Of John J. McDonough
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 11:43 AM
> To: ecac at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [ECAC] Attempt #2 - NTS proposal and commentary
>
>
>
> So, what is our next move?
>
>
>
> 73 de WB8RCR
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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