It seems a few people are missing some points here. For one, at least a
couple of the VUAC members are also on this reflector and other VHF
reflectors - probably more. Jim DID ask for our feedbeck, didn't he?
Also, it is true that the VUAC gets directions from the MSC on what to
look at, but I think you probably have SOME say over what they look at.
Have you contacted any of the members of the MSC or your Director? My
Director is easily accessible, being a member of the Society of Midwest
Contesters and sending out e-mails regularly to his constituents; he also
shows up at all the major hamfests.
As for the 144.200 debate, I have never had a problem with that frequency,
either in or out of contests. The excellent post by Bob K2DRH emphasizes
it isn't a problem in this area. In those areas where it is a problem, I'd
say the education step is more desirable than just banning the use of that
frequency for ARRL contest operations. It seems like it would be rather
difficult to enforce, anyway.
73, Zack W9SZ
On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Alex wrote:
> Jim Worsham wrote:
>
> > As an advisory committee we do not set our own
> >agenda. We can propose topics for study but in the end the Programs and
> >Services Committee sets the agenda and makes the decisions.
>
> In other words, you (the committee) are not representing the VHF/UHF
> community, but are representing the ARRL. There is a big difference. I
> guess that's where part of the confusion comes from. The committee is
> just there to study whatever is mandated by the ARRL. The ARRL decides
> what is important to them with regard to VHF/UHF operations, not the
> community.
>
> Thanks for that clarification. It's just another ARRL special interest
> committee, just like the Digital Advisory Committee. Of course one may
> wonder of what importance such a committee is for the a group they do
> not represent (the VHF/UHF Community). So far it seems that the
> committee is only brought to life to give the appearance of
> representation and is given a non-issue to study. One on which there is
> already consensus.
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|