Challenge certificate
|
Dave AA6YQ
Furthermore, Ria, your claim posted here that "LoTW has some serious underlying problems which makes adding additional awards/events problematic." is also false:
1. Starting in 2013, LoTW was successfully extended to support the NPOTA online activity, the Centennial online activity, and the Grid Chase online activity; each of these extensions included a realtime leaderboard. 2. In early 2018, LoTW was extended to support the CQ WAZ award. No "serious underlying problems" were encountered during any of these development efforts. Had there been, they would have been described in the ARRL-LOTW Committee's reports to the Board of Directors. No awards have been added to LoTW since 2018 because ARRL management re-assigned all LoTW developers to other projects: 1. the DXCC system reimplementation, which subsequently failed - for a second time 2. deployment of the Personify association management software, which at a cost of several hundred thousand dollars and 4 years of no forward progress on LoTW has given us the ability to "renew, donate, and shop all in one transaction" http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter?issue=2022-04-01 Meanwhile, the only action that the ARRL has taken to capitalize on the subsequent widespread adoption of new digital modes that make HF operation significantly more accessible to new hams is to offer an FT8 WAS endorsement. de AA6YQ |
|
|
|
Dave AA6YQ
I didn't post a personal insult, you took it as that.
+ Declaring me to be the master of inanity is a personal insult. A personal insult is you telling others you'd short the stock of my employer because you thought I was a terrible programmer (which is extreme irony in itself, but I digress). + That's completely false. + We were having a discussion on Facebook - before you became an ARRL Director - about whether to publicize the identities of candidates for the ARRL CEO position, which was open at the time. I posted that most high-quality candidates already had a good job, and wouldn't want it publicized that they were "looking". You responded that your company publicizes the identities of candidates, which prompted my "your company would be a good short" remark (because its policy deprives it of strong candidates). That was a criticism of your company, not a criticism of you, much less a personal insult. + Several of our mutual friends were party to that exchange. de AA6YQ |
|
|
|
I didn't post a personal insult, you took it as that. A personal
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
insult is you telling others you'd short the stock of my employer because you thought I was a terrible programmer (which is extreme irony in itself, but I digress). Regardless, I explained why it was counterproductive, and why I have my own, productive ways of communicating with members. Have a good day. Ria N2RJ On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 5:21 PM Dave AA6YQ <aa6yq@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Pete W1RM <w1rm@...>
Sigh, will everyone please get the terminology correct! The League is all the members. We are the League. HQ is the tireless staff who does the daily business of the League.
So if you have an issue with something not being done to your liking, I suggest contacting HQ and directing your query to the appropriate staff member.
Remember members are the League! I am too and I used to the a staffer back in the ‘60’s.
Pete Chamalian, W1RM W1RM@...
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Ria, N2RJ
Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2022 7:19 AM To: ARRL-Awards@... Cc: n2rj@... Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Challenge certificate
Open governance doesn't mean I should just subject myself to people taking shots at the League at me.
I have plenty of places where I communicate with members openly and I do it all the time.
But as I said - I am probably not the most suitable person to talk about awards. There are others who are in the PSC and also the radiosport department itself. Each one of these groups has a designated person from ARRL. Let them answer.
73 Ria, N2RJ
On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 12:41 AM HH Brakob <kzerohb@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Dave AA6YQ
Open governance doesn't mean I should just subject myself to people taking shots at the League at me.
+ The League exists to serve its members. If you are unwilling to hear civil criticism of the League's actions, you should not have become a League Director. + You posted a personal insult in this forum. When I asked you to explain your claim that "LoTW has some serious underlying problems which makes adding additional awards/events problematic." https://groups.arrl.org/g/ARRL-Awards/message/1715 + You responded "Dave I am avoiding answering your questions because you are the master of the strawman and back and forth arguments and inanity." https://groups.arrl.org/g/ARRL-Awards/message/1737 + That's an explicit violation of the rules governing this forum: "Neither personal attacks nor foul language will be tolerated". http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-creates-new-online-groups-for-members-to-communicate-with-leadership + When the ARRL's "Communications with Members" Committee created this and other online forums, we expected League Directors to set a positive example. de AA6YQ |
|
|
|
Jamie WW3S
IF there is a designated contact, then that contact SHOULD participate…..IF they dont, then they SHOULD NOT be the designated contact……
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On May 3, 2022, at 7:19 AM, Ria, N2RJ <rjairam@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Open governance doesn't mean I should just subject myself to people taking shots at the League at me. I have plenty of places where I communicate with members openly and I do it all the time. But as I said - I am probably not the most suitable person to talk about awards. There are others who are in the PSC and also the radiosport department itself. Each one of these groups has a designated person from ARRL. Let them answer. 73 Ria, N2RJ On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 12:41 AM HH Brakob <kzerohb@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Ria (and any other League staff and volunteers lurking here),
The “membership” didn’t establish these email lists. They were initiated by a Board action with the mission of providing more open two-way communications between “the League” (staff/volunteers/elected officials (such as yourself)) and the ham community in general.
If “the League”-side folks are going to be “lurkers”, then this email list is a waste of electrons. For those who want to be “League Bashers”, QRZ, Facebook, and numerous other channels provide ample opportunity to write jeremiads on that subject.
But for those of us who want to interact with the League “insiders/movers-and-shakers”, these io.groups struck me as a genius development.
Using the issue at hand as an example, it had it’s roots here more than a year ago when I discovered that the DXCC Challenge had no “diploma” award, only a plaque. There was a discussion here, I communicated with my Director on the matter, and last summer (some body) directed the development of paper “diploma”. I was pleased to hear of that! Knowing “things take time in Newington”, especially during COVID, etc., I expected some delay in implementation.
Earlier this year (late February, I think) I posted a message here inquiring of the status of the diploma. There was no “League” answer, not even someone saying “I’ll check on that for you.” Crickets.
Fast forward a couple months more to this thread.
Last week Ken, AB1J made an inquiry, similar to mine, about the status of the award. There was some discussion, but no League response.
Someone suggested that we should “call the League” – OK, well who at “the League” should I call, and oh by the way, isn’t that what this email group is all about?
Another person put forward Bart as someone who might know. So I sent him a direct off-list email inquiring into the issue. He promptly answered here on this list with news that it was in process.
Since Bart (and other “League” people) obviously are subscribers here, a prompt answer (back in February, or last week) of “It’s still in process, times are busy, but we’ll keep you in the loop.” would have served two purposes:
On a personal note to Ria….. your campaign to Directorship gave a lot of us out here a promise of fresh blood and a more open governance at ARRL. “Open Governance” and “lurking” in the communications channels seem like non-congruent concepts.
73, de Hans, KØHB “Just a Boy and his Radio”™
Я підтримую Україну
From: Ria, N2RJ
Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2022 01:50 To: ARRL-Awards@... Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Challenge certificate
I basically slowed down my participation in these forums for two reasons.
1. Someone else posted that they don't respond because I always respond first. So I slowed down to give others a chance to answer. I am not on the PSC, and I frankly am good with my committee assignments as they fit better with my skill sets.
2. I found that some discussions just spiraled into an endless back and forth and then some will use it to take pot shots at the Board and others. So I now for the most part just take the feedback I see on these forums (as a lurker) and then discuss internally.
So there you go.
With regard to the issue at hand, Bart gave the answer which is that it's in progress.
Ria N2RJ
|
|
|
|
Dave AA6YQ
+ AA6YQ comments below
I ask myself what �protracted criticism� really means, and why would it be censored. Having done considerable public speaking to large groups (audiences exceeding 100) in the past, I have found that command of the English language is not always my forte. Therefore, looking it up seemed the appropriate thing to do to fully understand what the term implied. Also, to determine why it would be "antithetical" to the group. Protracted was found to mean �lasting or drawn out for a long period of time�. Fully knowing what criticism means, putting the two together means repetitious lamenting over and over of someone or something that the writer believes to be wrong. Noticing that this has been done in several of these forums makes one understand why that would be unwelcome throughout the forums. We are not five-year-olds, but rather adults who after a couple of repeats, understand the issue. Continued repetition of the same criticisms gets old, rarely solves the problem, and to some gives a negative impression of the writer(s). Surely it dulls the reception of the person(s) it is directed to and makes them less likely to respond or act. I must believe that when the rule was made, it was for the above reason. No doubt that what the rule-makers have in mind is rather than the continued repetition of the issue, they would welcome constructive criticism, and if possible, the inclusion of possible alternatives or solutions to try or test out. To do otherwise can lead others to the conclusion of a �Monday morning quarterback�. Rulemaking processes are often fluid. Perhaps initial rules no longer fit and had to be rethought. Often rulemaking is not a democratic process whether we like it or not. Constructive criticism (rather than protracted) would still be within the playbook of the group's formation. Just one person's opinion that I thought I would express, thoughts by others may be different and that�s ok too. + In the ARRL-LoTW Forum, the primary topic is LoTW. Feedback from LoTW users is precious. Any policy that causes a user to think twice before posting critique - like worrying that their comments might be considered "protracted criticism" -- will reduce the quantity and quality of criticism. This is the exact opposite of what the ARRL's "Committee on Communications with Members" (of which I was a member) set out to achieve when it augmented the ARRL-LOTW Forum - which successfully operated for years without the "no protracted criticism" rule - with Online Forums for other areas of interest -- like this one. + Note that incivility and personal attacks are explicitly forbidden in all ARRL Forums. 73, Dave, AA6YQ |
|
|
|
I basically slowed down my participation in these forums for two reasons.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
1. Someone else posted that they don't respond because I always respond first. So I slowed down to give others a chance to answer. I am not on the PSC, and I frankly am good with my committee assignments as they fit better with my skill sets. 2. I found that some discussions just spiraled into an endless back and forth and then some will use it to take pot shots at the Board and others. So I now for the most part just take the feedback I see on these forums (as a lurker) and then discuss internally. So there you go. With regard to the issue at hand, Bart gave the answer which is that it's in progress. Ria N2RJ On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 8:45 AM Frank K4FMH <frankmhowell@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Greetings.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I ask myself what “protracted criticism” really means, and why would it be censored. Having done considerable public speaking to large groups (audiences exceeding 100) in the past, I have found that command of the English language is not always my forte. Therefore, looking it up seemed the appropriate thing to do to fully understand what the term implied. Also, to determine why it would be "antithetical" to the group. Protracted was found to mean “lasting or drawn out for a long period of time”. Fully knowing what criticism means, putting the two together means repetitious lamenting over and over of someone or something that the writer believes to be wrong. Noticing that this has been done in several of these forums makes one understand why that would be unwelcome throughout the forums. We are not five-year-olds, but rather adults who after a couple of repeats, understand the issue. Continued repetition of the same criticisms gets old, rarely solves the problem, and to some gives a negative impression of the writer(s). Surely it dulls the reception of the person(s) it is directed to and makes them less likely to respond or act. I must believe that when the rule was made, it was for the above reason. No doubt that what the rule-makers have in mind is rather than the continued repetition of the issue, they would welcome constructive criticism, and if possible, the inclusion of possible alternatives or solutions to try or test out. To do otherwise can lead others to the conclusion of a “Monday morning quarterback”. Rulemaking processes are often fluid. Perhaps initial rules no longer fit and had to be rethought. Often rulemaking is not a democratic process whether we like it or not. Constructive criticism (rather than protracted) would still be within the playbook of the group's formation. Just one person's opinion that I thought I would express, thoughts by others may be different and that’s ok too. 73, Dale K8TS -----Original Message-----
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ Sent: Monday, May 2, 2022 6:56 PM To: ARRL-Awards@... Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Challenge certificate + AA6YQ comments below Thanks for posting…here’s the phrase that should mean that ARRL staff monitor and participate in each of these Forums: “The new groups are aimed at enhancing communication among ARRL leadership, staff, members, and prospective members, in a manner that enables timely updates and collegial discussion.” Has this mission been forgotten/abandoned? + My take: 1. ARRL staff members like Bart W9JJ and committee members like Steve N4JQQ who were inclined to engage with members and prospective members are using these online Forums to do so; staff and committee members who weren't so inclined, don't. 2. Only two or three Board members have ever engaged in these Forums. 3. Bob W5OV, the ARRL's Director of Operations, recently announced on the ARRL-LoTW Forum that protracted criticism of the ARRL is forbidden. This is antithetical to the rationale for creating these online groups. 73, Dave, AA6YQ |
|
|
|
Dave AA6YQ
+ AA6YQ comments below
Thanks for posting…here’s the phrase that should mean that ARRL staff monitor and participate in each of these Forums: “The new groups are aimed at enhancing communication among ARRL leadership, staff, members, and prospective members, in a manner that enables timely updates and collegial discussion.” Has this mission been forgotten/abandoned? + My take: 1. ARRL staff members like Bart W9JJ and committee members like Steve N4JQQ who were inclined to engage with members and prospective members are using these online Forums to do so; staff and committee members who weren't so inclined, don't. 2. Only two or three Board members have ever engaged in these Forums. 3. Bob W5OV, the ARRL's Director of Operations, recently announced on the ARRL-LoTW Forum that protracted criticism of the ARRL is forbidden. This is antithetical to the rationale for creating these online groups. 73, Dave, AA6YQ |
|
|
|
versus a Phone call maybe use the newer Email reflector that IS being monitored and ask nicely :) Steve KG5VK Steven Lott Smith Tele 318-470-9806 ARRL NTX Section Manager Please note: My Out Going Email address is LottsPhoto@... KG5VK@... is forwarded to my Gmail address On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 7:57 AM Steven Rutledge <steven.t.rutledge@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Steven Rutledge <steven.t.rutledge@...>
I'd call them and ask them. Steve, N4JQQ On 5/2/2022 7:52 AM, Frank K4FMH wrote:
Dave, |
|
|
|
Dave,
Thanks for posting…here’s the phrase that should mean that ARRL staff monitor and participate in each of these Forums: “The new groups are aimed at enhancing communication among ARRL leadership, staff, members, and prospective members, in a manner that enables timely updates and collegial discussion.” Has this mission been forgotten/abandoned? Frank K4FMH |
|
|
|
Dave AA6YQ
"ARRL’s Committee on Communication with ARRL Members has opened new online forums where all radio amateurs — ARRL members and non-members alike — can discuss issues and topics in two-way conversation with ARRL leadership. The new groups are aimed at enhancing communication among ARRL leadership, staff, members, and prospective members, in a manner that enables timely updates and collegial discussion.
This project was based on the success over the past several years of the ARRL-LoTW (Logbook of The World) Group in responding to Amateur Radio operators’ questions and generating discussion on ways to improve that program. “The LoTW initiative has clearly demonstrated the effectiveness of online Groups as a means of achieving the desired interaction,” ARRL said in announcing the new groups." http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-creates-new-online-groups-for-members-to-communicate-with-leadership 73, Dave, AA6YQ |
|
|
|
Ken,
That was also my understanding of why the League established these various groups….
Frank K4FMH
Sent from Mail for Windows
|
|
|
|
Bart Jahnke <bjahnke@...>
Hello Hans et al, The DXCC Challenge certificate continues to be in development. Stay tuned for updates to come. Any questions are always welcome, and can be sent to us at dxccadmin@... (or directly to me at w9jj@...). Thanks for everyone’s interest in the ARRL Awards Program. 73 Bart Jahnke W9JJ ARRL Radiosport Manager On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 11:09 PM HH Brakob <kzerohb@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Kermit Lehman
It was my understanding that the ARRL awards personnel set this site up and monitor it, so we don't have to worry about who to contact.
But I might be mistaken. Been there, done that.
73,
Ken, AB1J -----Original Message-----
From: Steven Rutledge <steven.t.rutledge@...> To: ARRL-Awards@... Sent: Sat, Apr 30, 2022 2:43 pm Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Challenge certificate Hans, I understand. Thanks for the response.
Steve, N4JQQ
On 4/30/2022 9:37 AM, HH Brakob wrote:
One of the blessings of modern technology is
that texts and emails allow me to communicate, since my
82-year-old ears are severely deficient for voice
communications.
73, de Hans, KØHB
“Just a Boy and his Radio”™
From:
ARRL-Awards@...
<ARRL-Awards@...> on behalf of Steven
Rutledge <steven.t.rutledge@...>
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2022 7:30:01 AM To: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Challenge certificate Hans, you could always call the ARRL. I'm sure you would get
a quicker answer.
Steve, N4JQQ
On 4/29/2022 10:09 PM, HH Brakob
wrote:
Are there any HQ or
“elected official” lurkers who could update us?
73, de Hans, KØHB
“Just a Boy and his Radio”™
Я
підтримую Україну
 From:
HH Brakob via groups.arrl.org
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2022 15:06 To: ARRL-Awards@... Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] Challenge certificate Last year sometime I was told
that “it’s in graphics”. Since then, just
crickets.
73, de Hans, KØHB
“Just a Boy and his Radio”™
 From:
ARRL-Awards@...
<ARRL-Awards@...>
on behalf of Kermit Lehman via groups.arrl.org
<ktfrog007=aol.com@...>
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2022 8:01:00 AM To: arrl-awards@... <arrl-awards@...> Subject: [ARRL-Awards] Challenge certificate Hi,
Is there an update on the
availability of the Challenge certificate?
I roll my own certificates when
needed. I put a Digital sticker on my 5BDXCC
(combination of RTTY and FT8) and presto! I had
a digital one.
I could make a Challenge
certificate of my own (copy the low-res picture
of the Challenge plaque from the ARRL website,
sharpen it up with a photo editor, fill it
in), but I'd rather have an official one.
73,
Ken, AB1J
|
|
|
|
Thanks!
I’ve emailed an inquiry to Bart.
73, de Hans, KØHB
“Just a Boy and his Radio”™
|
|
|
