glc@akgua.UUCP (G.L. Cleveland [Lindsay]) (07/10/84)
Mark Levine, WA2YBA, raised some interesting points. At this time
I shall not reply to them, but would like to comment on his question:
I'd really like to know what drives League policy here, as the
FCC seemed ready to go for this idea [no-code experimenter's
license] before ARRL started lobbying--does anyone think that
impression wrong?
At the time of that proposal, I had the opportunity to quietly talk
with the ARRL Director from our Section. His comment was that the
League Headquarters staff and the Directors initially "kept quiet"
as far as recommending "yea" or "nay" to no-code. The purpose was
to see what the response was from the Ham community and in
particular from League members. The response was (according to
him) quite lop-sided against the no-code proposal.
Since the League is really all us dues-paying members (not the
Headquarters Staff as some seem to think), the Directors then
publically came out against no-code, reflecting the views and
opinions of the large majority of the members.
Whether no-code was good or bad isn't what I want to bring out in
this posting. The point to make is: the League membership is what
drives League policy.
73, Lindsay W4IZI
Lindsay Cleveland (...{ihnp4|mcnc|sdcsvax|clyde}!akgua!glc)
AT&T Technologies/Bell Laboratories ... Atlanta, Ga
(404) 447-3909 ... Cornet 583-3909