[CQ-Contest] More than misleading calls. De VY1JA

Ron Notarius WN3VAW wn3vaw at fyi.net
Sun Dec 8 13:24:48 EST 2002


You have touched on a fundamental misunderstanding here.

Who is the ARRL?  (Not what -- who)

The ARRL is the membership.  That's all of us (well, those who've paid dues,
anyway).  The Newington HQ staff is supposed to be working for use -- not
dictating to us.

If some up at HQ has made what you consider an arbitrary or wrong decision
on this matter, then it behooves you to write your ARRL Director or Vice
Director and tell them so.  (If you're not a member, write them anyway.
Some Directors will ignore you or discount you, but the better ones will
still listen to you to some degree).  If HQ doesn't hear from us, then
nothing will happen.  After all, if we don't tell them that we're upset, how
can we assume that they know?   (Yes, I know many individual ARRL staff
members read this and other reflectors -- or at least skim them -- but we
can not ASSUME that they know of our concerns just because something is
posted here!)

You say, one letter, one phone call, one email doesn't make a difference?
Well, I've often read or been told that US Congressional staffs figure that
statistically, each letter / phone call / telegram / e-mail they receive
represents from 750 to 1000 more people who didn't bother (for whatever
reason) to contact them.  The ratio probably isn't that high amongst active
amateurs, but a small flood of letters etc. will have an impact.

And even though I'm saying "ARRL" above, the same goes for RAC, RSGB, and
every other National amateur organization in the world.  We, the members,
are supposed to be served by the paid staff (if any), not the other way
around.  If we don't open our mouths and say something, then we have no one
to blame but ourselves.

In any event, since the ARRL spun off the old Canadian Division as the CRRL,
and then the CRRL & CARF and (I think) others merged into the existing
RAC... sounds to me like the RAC has the right to (re)name it's sections any
way it pleases.  By the same token, though, since Sweepstakes is still an
ARRL sponsored contest, they also have the right to lump together contest
sections for administrative purposes however they please.  (And it should be
just as obvious that it's in everyone's best interests to work together on

They key issue that J raised -- let's not forget this -- is that he and
other VY1 amateurs have been sending their territory name (YT) instead of
their section name (NWT), and this is being rejected by the contest robot
software BECAUSE YT is not a section.  If they are doing so because they are
confusing the Section Name with the Territory of the same name, why not just
rename the Section?  Seems logical enough.

But I detest hearing about anonymous "ARRL Reps" making decisions.
Sometimes the individual(s) being referred to actually has little or nothing
to do with the decision, or aren't actually ARRL officials or staff members,
or find that (due to creative misinterpretation of a string of emails, where
an "I suppose" evolves into "They said") they never actually said what
someone claims they said.  Who is the rep, what did they say, and in what
context did they say it?  (Didn't we just go through this excersize a few
months back with an alleged quote from an FCC official?)

73, ron wn3vaw

"You used up all the glue ON PURPOSE!"
In Memory of Shep K2ORS (SK) and 10:15 PM on WOR 710 AM

----- Original Message -----
Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 15:07:09 +0000
From: K4SB <hamcat at directvinternet.com>
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] More than misleading calls.  De VY1JA

"J. Allen" wrote:
> This year, the representatives in RAC, began working with suggestions for
> our present Canadian national organization, aimed at requesting that ARRL
> change the official designator for YT/NWT/NU.  When things got serious, an
> ARRL rep, suggested that the ARRL will do as it chooses.... the excuse of
> CARF having the power and ARRL as powerless to make the change was
> gone, and the stone wall appeared.
Well, I've said this before, but until the ARRL removes the "A" for
advisory from the committee names, we're stuck. These are the
individuals who should be making these decisions. I seriously
challenge the staff and directors of the ARRL to assert the position
that they are more knowledgeable then these representatives,
supposedly the best in the field.

The last time I checked, Canada was NOT the 51st State. I would simply
tell them that Canada will decide what their sections are named, and
if they don't like it, well too bad.

As for the "ARRL rep", mentioned, I think it high time to name these
rather than let them hide behind the facade of the ARRL.

And if I get dinged for submitting "YT", well, I will consider it a
vote in honor of our best friends in the world.


CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list