From: ehare@arrl.org (Ed Hare - KA1CV)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.policy,acm.forum.comm,uno.radio
Subject: Re: Text of FCC PR Docket 92-136, Relaxation of 'No-Business' Rule
Date: 2 Sep 92 21:52:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: arrl.501
Organization: American Radio Relay League

In rec.radio.amateur.policy, uri@watson.ibm.com (Uri Blumenthal) writes:

>In article <476@arrl.org>, jbloom@arrl.org (Jon Bloom) writes:

>|> Once again I am forced to point out that the best way to get an answer
>|> from ARRL HQ is to ask directly.  

>I don't seek the "best way". I'm trying to ask my question in
>such a way, that wide amateur population will see what I'm
>concerned about, and probably will participate in my
>attempts to clarify/fix the issue.

I agree that the activities of the ARRL, including members such as yourself,
should be public and above board. The point Jon was trying to make is that
it is not a good idea to rely on the appropriate staffer reading the news
to always see it and give you an answer to a question that you asked around
us, not of us. We have had more than our unfair share of news-feed problems
here and have missed a lot of news. 

Perhaps a good way to get the best of both worlds is to send us a letter
(to ward off the flames, email is a letter, too. :-) ) and post a copy
of the letter and our response. That both ensures that we get it and
that you get the public forum that helps create a widespread understanding
of the issues and League position.

> . . .

>Of course. Then wouldn't it be reasonable to pass it to
>somebody *inside* ARRL who can give an *educated* 
>opinion? [Sorry for sounding rude, I don't 
>really want to pick on you.]

I have passed along several letters and emails that were sent to me to
the correct individual here at HQ. But I can only pass along what I
receive. I have also, when I had time, passed along usenet postings
that I considered as being of special importance. But I have also not
passed along usenet postings that were not directed at us. The basic
message doesn't change -- if you want to communicate with us (positive
or negative) *communicate* with us. I can think of no reasoned explanation
or justification for posting instead of mailing if your objective is to
attract our attention and elicit a response. I can accept any reasoned
explanation for posting *in addition* to mailing. My dealings with the
amateur community, unless strictly cited as being personal (I have a 
personal life, too -- one that includes hammy things. :-) ), are 
public and repeatable.

>|> and ask.  Or call ARRL HQ on the phone and say you have a question on
>|> the rules.  Or write via snail-mail.

>Well, it's much faster to type my letter on the keyboard and have
>it delivered to you in matter of minutes, without bothering
>myself with envelops, addresses, stamps and other
>nonsense... 

Email is fine.

>And as I said - I want others to know what my concern is, for I
>believe they'll share it.

A concept I firmly believe in! Also, make your views known to your Division
Director, in person, via telephone, mail, email or, to be as public
as possible, at an ARRL Forum at a League convention or major hamfest.
These folks work hard and really want your input, especially on
controversial issues.

>. . .

73 from ARRL HQ, EdN
-----
Ed Hare, KA1CV                  ehare@arrl.org
American Radio Relay League
225 Main St.
Newington, CT  06111            There is no limit to what you can 
(203) 666-1541 - voice          accomplish if you don't care who
ARRL Laboratory Supervisor      gets the credit. - Harry S Truman
RFI, xmtr and rcvr testing  
-----