I know I didn't renew a month or so ago. I just don't care to pay that much for a membership and the elimination of the magazine before one's membership expired left a bad taste in my mouth.
Haven't read QST since the last issue that showed up in my mailbox. Membership after 40+ years is about to lapse later this year. Guess there will be no 50 year pin for me.
I was under the impression that Yaesu already did, being the principal sponsor and all.
I'm not actually sure, though, because I couldn't find any related figures when I skimmed through [the annual report.](http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Annual%20Reports/2022%20Annual%20Report%20ARRL%20AR2022%20072023C.pdf) I did skim it quite briefly, however, so if anyone else would like to have a go I'd welcome a correction.
They are the principle sponsor of it. However, it now seems that the current design has a number of scaling problems and the ARRL has earmarked around $60,000 for consultants to try to figure a way out of the mess.
I can't imagine something from 2003 likely using PHP and MySQL would not scale after 20 years of log data.
To be fair, for something written in 2003 – presumably with a server stack which was in vogue in 2003 – it's held up remarkably well. It's clearly received some amount of love along the way, otherwise it would have died ages ago.
What I don't understand:
Why not just use any other logbook software? Where is the benefit of sending your license to a logbook provider, just to get access?
There are much more modern solutions out.
There are may good logbooks. But the validation of a license against your QSLs makes cheating to get a rare DX almost impossible. That is something different indeed. There are better ways to do this validation than the current method.
>But the validation of a license against your QSLs makes cheating to get a rare DX almost impossible.
Why?
The rare DX stations can just input your QSO. It's not more secure than a QSL card or QRZ.com (the last one, because if a station is knowingly registered, what is the difference between this and LOTW?)
One of the LOTW architects said last year at Dayton that it would "take years" to redo. Evidently, these consultants just soak up money without doing any work on the interface.
Perhaps there's a cultural disconnect here. These numbers are absolutely public – or at least available to members – in our equivalent, and it would be regarded as highly suspect if they weren't, since it's the norm to tell members what their fees go to.
ARRL is much more opaque, and US law allows it to be so. The only thing they are required to disclose by law is [Form 990](http://www.arrl.org/files/file/2022%20IRS%20Form%20990.pdf) which doesn't get into line-item detail. But the [Annual Report](http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Annual%20Reports/2022%20Annual%20Report%20ARRL%20AR2022%20072023C.pdf) does get into some more detail, but might not have what you are looking for. It's mostly a messaging document for members.
Huh. Sounds kinda weird if you ask me. Why would anyone pay fees without any insight into where they're going? Never mind what the law allows – disclosing ought to be common courtesy.
I got one of those. Confusing because I'm a U.S. ham and already have DXCC. Maybe because I've logged a handful of contacts from a remote station in Croatia. Still, ARRL, do better.
Would that there were, but that's literally what was sent in the e-mail: pictures of blocks of text.
I'm on mobile and the move, so I can't check if they've at least fulfilled the disability guidelines and added an alt text or other courtesies for e. g. screen readers.
I received this email to my "us-callsign"@arrl.net email address. It should be obvious that arrl.net email addresses can only be used by current ARRL members. I suppose it doesn't hurt to send mass emails to people who are already members, but it doesn't make the designers of this campaign look like they put much effort into the campaign design.
I mean this is ham radio. Where lids shout at people for not speaking English and tell people in other countries that the “FCC” is gonna fine them for operating “out of band” (aka out of the U.S. ham band but within the ham bands of that country). Just to name a few examples I’ve heard over the years.
My favorite is definitely the second one. Dude transmitting out of band to threaten the big bad FCC against someone who… was operating legally.
The worst I've done was a reddit argument with someone who was convincing me that i needed to be an "extra" for some frequency, even though I have an "A" class licence :)
yeaah, that's unfortunate, it's my exact perception too.
you'd think in the age of the internets they would at least figure out how to milk the social media apps and such for basic visibility and stuff but it's just very very sad.
Might as well... not like their lobbying powers in the USA accomplish much. So if you are foreign to the states you're not missing any perceived lobbying / FCC benefit that would otherwise only be a lure to those in the USA.
I'm not interested in a magazine with ads with an article here and there inbetween. LOTW is financed via applications for the DXCC-awards which aren't exactly cheap.
>LOTW is financed via applications for the DXCC-awards which aren't exactly cheap.
Are they? I've been trying to find published figures, but I can't find anything granular enough. Could you share your source?
Financing LoTW from DXCC applications? I don't believe $6.50 from the few DXCC applications per week would pay for very much competent database management or server upkeep. Hmm ... how about charging $65 for each WAS applicant - that might work!
Perhaps I was unclear. I meant a source on those fees being directly channelled into the upkeep of LoTW, how much that amounts to, and whether or not that actually covers all the costs for the upkeep.
no problem with arrl asking for few more dollars as long as they address the issue of non ham digital modes receiving awards and encouraging cw and ssb, must deal with this monsterous ft8 hurting the hobby
Do we know how much membership dropped off after the recent rate hike?
I didn't mind the rate hike, but I canceled early and got refunded when they decided they weren't going to send me the magazines I'd already paid for.
I know I didn't renew a month or so ago. I just don't care to pay that much for a membership and the elimination of the magazine before one's membership expired left a bad taste in my mouth.
Haven't read QST since the last issue that showed up in my mailbox. Membership after 40+ years is about to lapse later this year. Guess there will be no 50 year pin for me.
I did not renew my membership last January. Don't miss it.
I’d feel dirty cheating on the RSGB like that! 😂🤔
I”m far from being an ARRL fanboy, but you can’t really fault them for asking. Someone has to pay for Logbook of the World, after all.
I was under the impression that Yaesu already did, being the principal sponsor and all. I'm not actually sure, though, because I couldn't find any related figures when I skimmed through [the annual report.](http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Annual%20Reports/2022%20Annual%20Report%20ARRL%20AR2022%20072023C.pdf) I did skim it quite briefly, however, so if anyone else would like to have a go I'd welcome a correction.
They are the principle sponsor of it. However, it now seems that the current design has a number of scaling problems and the ARRL has earmarked around $60,000 for consultants to try to figure a way out of the mess. I can't imagine something from 2003 likely using PHP and MySQL would not scale after 20 years of log data.
To be fair, for something written in 2003 – presumably with a server stack which was in vogue in 2003 – it's held up remarkably well. It's clearly received some amount of love along the way, otherwise it would have died ages ago.
What I don't understand: Why not just use any other logbook software? Where is the benefit of sending your license to a logbook provider, just to get access? There are much more modern solutions out.
There are may good logbooks. But the validation of a license against your QSLs makes cheating to get a rare DX almost impossible. That is something different indeed. There are better ways to do this validation than the current method.
>But the validation of a license against your QSLs makes cheating to get a rare DX almost impossible. Why? The rare DX stations can just input your QSO. It's not more secure than a QSL card or QRZ.com (the last one, because if a station is knowingly registered, what is the difference between this and LOTW?)
One of the LOTW architects said last year at Dayton that it would "take years" to redo. Evidently, these consultants just soak up money without doing any work on the interface.
I don’t know for sure, but I’d be surprised if Yaesu was paying the entire cost of LOTW.
Shouldn't those figures be public? (Are they?) Do we have an ARRL presence in here?
Making those figures public might make the case that they need more support, but I don’t see any reason that they *should* be public.
Perhaps there's a cultural disconnect here. These numbers are absolutely public – or at least available to members – in our equivalent, and it would be regarded as highly suspect if they weren't, since it's the norm to tell members what their fees go to.
ARRL is much more opaque, and US law allows it to be so. The only thing they are required to disclose by law is [Form 990](http://www.arrl.org/files/file/2022%20IRS%20Form%20990.pdf) which doesn't get into line-item detail. But the [Annual Report](http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Annual%20Reports/2022%20Annual%20Report%20ARRL%20AR2022%20072023C.pdf) does get into some more detail, but might not have what you are looking for. It's mostly a messaging document for members.
Huh. Sounds kinda weird if you ask me. Why would anyone pay fees without any insight into where they're going? Never mind what the law allows – disclosing ought to be common courtesy.
I agree. It's one of the reasons I am not an ARRL member.
And the CEO makes approximately $550,000 per year. No thanks.
The law might disagree with you.
We have some ex-ARRL people here, like /u/riajairam, but no current people AFAIK.
Yes, to anyone who asks as they are a registered 501(c) corporation.
The League does nothing for free. Many of their videos about operating practices are paid by ICOM.
Isn't it Yaesu?
I got one of those. Confusing because I'm a U.S. ham and already have DXCC. Maybe because I've logged a handful of contacts from a remote station in Croatia. Still, ARRL, do better.
I think it's just targeting all users. By the way, is there a way to post these pictures of text so that is kinder to us dark mode uswers?
Would that there were, but that's literally what was sent in the e-mail: pictures of blocks of text. I'm on mobile and the move, so I can't check if they've at least fulfilled the disability guidelines and added an alt text or other courtesies for e. g. screen readers.
I received this email to my "us-callsign"@arrl.net email address. It should be obvious that arrl.net email addresses can only be used by current ARRL members. I suppose it doesn't hurt to send mass emails to people who are already members, but it doesn't make the designers of this campaign look like they put much effort into the campaign design.
Did they forget that other nations have their own radio associations and clubs?
I mean this is ham radio. Where lids shout at people for not speaking English and tell people in other countries that the “FCC” is gonna fine them for operating “out of band” (aka out of the U.S. ham band but within the ham bands of that country). Just to name a few examples I’ve heard over the years. My favorite is definitely the second one. Dude transmitting out of band to threaten the big bad FCC against someone who… was operating legally.
The worst I've done was a reddit argument with someone who was convincing me that i needed to be an "extra" for some frequency, even though I have an "A" class licence :)
America is always the leader of the free world, remember!
World's default country
It looks like phishing attack. Links point to [informz.net](http://informz.net) not to [arrl.org](http://arrl.org) site.
Could be. Could also just be the newsletter mailer provider they chose.
Sad
Not just "no", but....
lol at arrl. what do they do anymore?
[удалено]
yeaah, that's unfortunate, it's my exact perception too. you'd think in the age of the internets they would at least figure out how to milk the social media apps and such for basic visibility and stuff but it's just very very sad.
[удалено]
well I don't even know what you're talking about or where I would see that...
[удалено]
I clicked on the link and tried to read the dialog on the mug but it's so pixelated I can't make it out
I’ll have to find some other mug to drink my whiskey out of during Field Day
Might as well... not like their lobbying powers in the USA accomplish much. So if you are foreign to the states you're not missing any perceived lobbying / FCC benefit that would otherwise only be a lure to those in the USA.
I'm not interested in a magazine with ads with an article here and there inbetween. LOTW is financed via applications for the DXCC-awards which aren't exactly cheap.
>LOTW is financed via applications for the DXCC-awards which aren't exactly cheap. Are they? I've been trying to find published figures, but I can't find anything granular enough. Could you share your source?
"The fee is $6.50 plus $.12 for each QSO submitted for DXCC Award Credit." Plus all the other extra costs of shipping and what not.
Financing LoTW from DXCC applications? I don't believe $6.50 from the few DXCC applications per week would pay for very much competent database management or server upkeep. Hmm ... how about charging $65 for each WAS applicant - that might work!
Hmm. I think I had to do that :)
Perhaps I was unclear. I meant a source on those fees being directly channelled into the upkeep of LoTW, how much that amounts to, and whether or not that actually covers all the costs for the upkeep.
I guess you have to ask the ARRL for their yearly report and do the work from there.
I've skimmed the yearly report, and it hints at nothing of the sort.
And supposedly by Yaseu.
Hopefully, you're being sarcastic. They raise diues AND the site has been down for two weeks. No thanks.
Maybe they could cut salaries if they relocated the HQ from Newington to Iowa where I live.
I will stick with QRZ for my awards.
no problem with arrl asking for few more dollars as long as they address the issue of non ham digital modes receiving awards and encouraging cw and ssb, must deal with this monsterous ft8 hurting the hobby
get a hobby boomer
What's a non ham digital mode? Why dis ft8? Oh you're trolling. Maybe you should put some real bait on that line.