[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [RFI] Canal water! (& BPL)

To: "'Hare,Ed, W1RFI'" <w1rfi@arrl.org>, <rfi@contesting.com>
Subject: RE: [RFI] Canal water! (& BPL)
From: "Dave Bernstein" <dave.bernstein@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 17:40:57 -0400
List-post: <mailto:rfi@contesting.com>
I did not say 'no one within ARRL should be allowed to say that something is
someone else's job', I suggested the creation of an organization responsible
for winning the BPL war and then said 'No one in this organization should
ever respond with "not my bailiwick" '. I would modify that to 'No one in
this organization should ever respond with "not my bailiwick" with respect
to any question or issue involving BPL. If someone asks one of them whether
QSOs with 7O1YGF count yet, they can certainly say "not my bailiwick".


         Dave, AA6YQ

-----Original Message-----
From: rfi-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:rfi-bounces@contesting.com] On
Behalf Of Hare,Ed, W1RFI
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 5:11 PM
To: rfi@contesting.com
Subject: RE: [RFI] Canal water! (& BPL)

That about sums it up for me, too.  Much of what "I" do is building on the
work done by others, and I am more than pleased to serve as a conduit for
that work.  I had an interesting and productive exchange this morning with a
fellow about the general tone of ARRL's BPL material. It must serve a wide
range of needs, and as pleasing as it would be to create a www.gobpl.com web
page, in many cases, the amateurs working a problem locally need something
they can use to work with -- not against -- their local utility.  Having
relatively neutral material provides just that.  Those that want something a
bit more "direct" can go to some of Sumner's editorials (some of which are a
lot more forceful than I would write).  By not taking too "direct" a stance,
ARRL is able to serve on industry committees and work directly with a number
of the involved agencies, another advantage.  All in all, I think that this
sort of thing is headed in the right direction.

I appreciate constructive criticism, as many who have offered that to me
over the years knows, but when that criticism consists of a blanket
statement that no one within ARRL should be allowed to say that something is
someone else's job, that is simply not useable input.  I am not sure how to
deal with it, because the alternative is not to participate in these on-line
fora at all, and that doesn't seem like a good idea, either.

At any rate, tomorrow I am off to one those industry meetings. IEEE is
convening its second BPL standards meeting in NJ, and that will pretty much
take care of tomorrow. When I get back, I need to get in contact with each
of the local groups working BPL across the country, getting updates,
offering a bit of advice and getting people signed up for the bpl-local
reflector. Hopefully, next week, I can find some time to update the ARRL web
page; I have a few ideas that will add a bit to its usefulness. (Suggestions

Ed Hare, W1RFI
ARRL Laboratory Manager
225 Main St
Newington, CT 06013
Tel: 860-594-0318
Internet: W1RFI@arrl.org
Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis
Member: ASC C63 EMC Committee
   Chairman: Subcommittee 5, Immunity
   Chairman: Ad hoc BPL Working Group
Member: IEEE SCC-28 RF Safety
Member: Society of Automotive Engineers EMC/EMR Committee
Member: IEEE 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rfi-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:rfi-bounces@contesting.com]On
> Behalf Of Jim Jarvis
> Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 4:20 PM
> To: rfi@contesting.com
> Subject: [RFI] Canal water! (& BPL)
> You guys who seem hell bent on ARRL bashing need to get a grip. It's 
> much better coordinated than you're giving it credit for.
> We are 650K licensed amateurs, of whom 170k support the national 
> association.  That's a major part of the problem.
> We have little economic impact, principally because we cannot act in 
> concerted fashion.  We are threatened by BPL, and we're fighting 
> amongst ourselves.
> The core problem here is simple:  Social relevance.
> Is it "chatting with China", or "robust, distributed asset,
> interoperable
> voice and data emergency communications" which is threatened?
> We need to be clear in our vocabulary, and how we use it.
> WHY are we here?
> As for me...I support Ed Hare and Dave Sumner, and the ARRL staff. 
> They're doing a decent job of fighting the war.  Not perfect, but 
> we're all human, and in the PR vein, we're dealing with technology
> ignorant reporters.
> Can they benefit from our support?  You betcha.
> Can WE benefit from a PR kit and scripts?  You betcha.
> Reasoned, rational, measured, vocal--but professional.  That's what we 
> need to be.  We hang together, or we hang alone!
> N2EA
> -0-
> Given the magnitude of the threat we face, the ARRL should
> create within
> itself a single organization responsible and accountable for defeating
> BPL. All activities -- including PR -- should be driven by this
> organization. Anything less is pulling punches, which we can 
> ill afford.
> No one in this organization should ever respond with "not my 
> bailiwick".

RFI mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>