It seems you are assuming that the vote was for the new proposal vs the
staus quo. what if the alternative was even worse. Maybe the ones who
voted "for" are the good guys.
Ron N4WYR
>Reply-To: <k4oj@ij.net>
>From: "Jim White, K4OJ" <k4oj@ij.net>
>To: "Florida Contest Group E-Mail Reflector" <fcg@qth.net>,
> "cq-contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
>Cc: "Frank W4RH" <w4rh@arrl.org>
>Subject: [CQ-Contest] What ever happened to being proud you were a ham?
>
>
>I was pleased to see another ham in my division was as upset by the
recent
>ARRL Board's recommendation to the FCC as I was. His proposal is
probably
>for naught, but I suspect there are a lot of unhappy hams out there
right
>now - especially the ones who will be loosing what they have
earned...the
>Extra Class amateurs.
>
>Here is what he sent me, like I say this may not be the way to go but I
>sincerely hope that those who appreciate contesting and are OPERATORS
(not
>clear channel "shack in the crack" "hams" (<---- I use this VERY
loosely),
>will realize what is coming...I hope you enjoyed HF operating while it
was
>around - in a little while I don't think I will wanna go there.
>
>
>
>>
>> If anyone is interested in starting a recall campaign against his
ARRL
>> Director:
>> <the rest deleted>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|