My needs are simple. Keep the frequency allocations for my
transmission, and help stop my neighborhood from filling with devices
that emit stray RF and block my reception. My two issues are, almost
certainly, the primary issues for many other people.
Perens has http://perens.com/static/ARRL/TransparencyOctober2018.html
about new people for five director slots. Going through them, I first
see that the Valerie Hotzfeld website is "very worried" about 160,000
members versus 170,000. Seems like a minor concern to me.
The Ria Jairam website says she'll oppose any proposal to the FCC
unless there's open debate by membership. I believe that the correct
ARRL position, when the FCC may be considering a change relevant to my
two issues, is sometimes COMPLETELY OBVIOUS and what we actually need
is the fastest possible action by ARRL.
The Fred Hopengarten website mentions "A low cost basic membership:
one idea - no QSL bureau (inbound or outbound)." But inbound QSLs (see
the https://www.arrl.org/incoming-qsl-service page) don't require
membership at all! I'm not sure why a prospective member would pay a
"low cost" to reduce their current service level.
The Michael Ritz website talks about "addition of Kosovo, Z6, to the
DXCC Approved Country list." Hello? I'm a maker, not an international
diplomat.
Five candidates' websites, and I can't find any discussion of what I
need from ARRL. And yet, my incumbent director, who apparently has no
website at all, has a mailed statement to our entire division saying
he'll emphasize my two issues.
Perens has http://perens.com/static/ARRL/TransparencyOctober2018.html about new people for five director slots. Going through them, I first see that the Valerie Hotzfeld website is "very worried" about 160,000 members versus 170,000. Seems like a minor concern to me.
The Ria Jairam website says she'll oppose any proposal to the FCC unless there's open debate by membership. I believe that the correct ARRL position, when the FCC may be considering a change relevant to my two issues, is sometimes COMPLETELY OBVIOUS and what we actually need is the fastest possible action by ARRL.
The Fred Hopengarten website mentions "A low cost basic membership: one idea - no QSL bureau (inbound or outbound)." But inbound QSLs (see the https://www.arrl.org/incoming-qsl-service page) don't require membership at all! I'm not sure why a prospective member would pay a "low cost" to reduce their current service level.
The Michael Ritz website talks about "addition of Kosovo, Z6, to the DXCC Approved Country list." Hello? I'm a maker, not an international diplomat.
The George Hippisley website has a tantalizing mention of "Frequency Spectrum" at http://www.w2ru.net/whatFrequencySpectrum.html - but it's BLANK!
Five candidates' websites, and I can't find any discussion of what I need from ARRL. And yet, my incumbent director, who apparently has no website at all, has a mailed statement to our entire division saying he'll emphasize my two issues.