[MRIC] A question

[Bob Long]

Pat,

Is this what you want in the minutes.  If so I respectfully request that 
it be boiled down to exactly why you object to WinLink.  Personal 
admonitions should not be a part of the record of our actions and 
deliberations.  Your summary would make it easier to include in the 
minutes with out being edited.

Bob Long,
EC RO Washington County

Brett,

The point is, just because you did not think it made sense to add 
information about other digital modes, does not mean you are correct.  
What some others consider to be important and relevant information about 
Winlink2000 that has not yet been voiced, was left out  because you, not 
MRIC, chose to discount what I and the Baltimore County RO had to say 
about the matter.  Just because a motion was passed at a previous 
meeting to accept this or that, does not automatically shut the door to 
additional discussion on it or alternatives at future meetings.

Yes, you might disagree with me on this, and you might even say that I 
am trying to be argumentative or trying to derail the process (which I 
am not), but in reality all I, and for that matter the Baltimore County 
RO are trying to do is bring a reality check into play, be reasonable 
about what is and what is not affordable when it comes to spending money 
especially on high ticket items in these tight budgetary times, and keep 
MRIC from appearing to be just another group of "boys with toys" - 
especially expensive toys like Winlink2000, and to maintain our 
credibility.

I personally have nothing against Winlink2000.  However, my thirty-five 
plus years of experience in amateur radio public service communications 
in various parts of the United States has taught me to be fairly 
conservative and to only ask for well established technologies to be 
embraced by those we serve.  Winlink2000 is, in my opinion, still in 
it's "toddler stage" of development, and until it reaches its maturity 
and becomes an affordable and bulletproof technology it should not 
become a recommended technology to the Emergency Managers Association 
for full deployment when there are other digital methods of demonstrated 
reliability that can be deployed with a significantly less expenditure 
of tight monies.

You appear to believe that we should only present the good about a 
single technology to the Emergency Managers Association.  I and others 
believe that we should present the good, and the not-so good and the bad 
information to the Emergency Managers Association by using full 
disclosure.  Hence my insistence on Saturday that you capture not only 
my thoughts about the "in an ideal world" as you described it deployment 
of Winlink2000, but also others who expressed an opinion that did not 
agree with yours.  Yes, we could have given you a pie in the sky ideal 
concept for deployment of Winlink2000 in our jurisdictions, but to us 
that would have been unrealistic and demonstrated not only to the 
Emergency Managers Association, but to our Emergency Mangers as well, 
our irresponsibility on the matter because we know what is and is not 
realistic for RACES to ask for in terms of funding and that the return 
on the monies allocated for RACES capital purchases in our jurisdictions 
will be real from the get go.

Yes, Winlink2000 can support the exchange of e-mail in the event of an 
internet outage in Maryland.  However, Winlink2000 is still plagued by 
many bugs and e-mail is not always delivered in a timely manner 
according to the postings I have seen and continue to see in various 
Yahoo Groups for users and supporters of Winlink2000.  Winlink2000 has 
the potential, I repeat, the potential to be of major benefit to our 
served clients and Emergency Management Jurisdictions WHEN it has 
matured and become as reliable as other methods of data exchange.  Yes, 
I know that boaters have been using a commercial version of Winlink2000 
for several years now, but that is really their only affordable option 
at the moment to stay connected via e-mail.  It is NOT our only option 
for ensuring inter-jurisdictional communications and data exchange in 
times of communication crisis.  Hence, we should not put "all of our 
apples into one basket" by solely recommending Winlink2000 and ignoring 
all other digital methods.

As a final thought in this, please do not think that I am trying to 
challenge you or your intent.  I do believe that your intent is 
correct.  However, as the old saying goes, "there is more than one way 
to skin a cat" applies to MRIC also.  Just because you are the Chairman 
does not mean that you are the head of MRIC nor does it mean that you 
get to decide which way MRIC will go while you are Chairman.  If you do 
believe that, then you will be quite disappointed and perhaps even 
disillusioned with amateur radio public service communications.  As I 
have said many, many times before, when someone comes into this arena, 
they need to check their ego at the door otherwise there will be an 
awful lot of hurt feelings because they will wind up taking comments and 
challenges to issues personally, when the ones making the comments and 
challenges are not doing so personally.

73,
Pat Scolla, wb0egr
Harford County EC & RO