At 06:18 PM 2/14/2002 -0500, Ron Wetjen/WD4AHZ wrote:
>Tom Frenaye wrote:
>> From the survey appendix: "The survey sample of 1200 was selected in
>> systematic, stratified fashion..." It only included licensed,
>> domestic (USA) members. "Responses have been weighted in tabulation
>> to accurately reflect true population proportions." The weighting
>> was by license class reported in the FCC database.
>WOW ... this just hit me ...
>"The weighting was by license class reported in the FCC database."
>Wouldn't it be more accurate to weigh the survey by ARRL Members license
>class, instead of what's in the FCC database?
Guess I didn't say it clearly enough. It was weighted by license class of the
person/individuals returning the survey. The survey company used what was in
their FCC record instead of what was reported by them in the returned survey.
License class in ARRL records comes from the FCC database.
>This explains why QST has turned into a "beginners" magazine instead of
>the technical journal it used to be.
>I'd guess the majority of Amateurs listed in the FCC database are Tech's
>or Tech Plus (and I bet a large percentage of those aren't even active),
>so THAT is the demographic the ARRL is trying to reach. This also falls
>in line with the ARRL's proposals (restructuring, lower CW requirements,
>etc.) to "dumb down" Amateur Radio, and trying to get these Amateurs to
>join ARRL (huge untapped potential).
>I'm glad to see my suspicions have finally been confirmed.
Nope, no aliens under that rock.
e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/
Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com