- AMSAT-BB - mailman.amsat.org

huskysat-1
by Rosa & Robert Fitzpatrick 14 Jul '20

14 Jul '20

what is the latest status on huskysat-1.thank you bob/kb5sqgGranbury tx

4 3

children
by 73 Bob W7LRD 14 Jul '20

14 Jul '20

When my children were very young they would very occasionally get into fights and conflicts. I would put them both into a small room in the house and tell them, "you're not coming out until you can get along. > 73 Bob W7LRD

3 2

test
by Ted Krempa 14 Jul '20

14 Jul '20

test

1 0

Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list
by Brian Karcher 14 Jul '20

14 Jul '20

I thought being a member of AMSAT was about keeping amateur radio in space, learning about satellites and for some of us working amateur radio satellites in space. Since the last election AMSAT seems to be about nothing but politics and misinformation. In my opinion AMSAT was a lot more fun to be apart of before the last election. All the politics and misinformation drives people away from AMSAT and is not good for the organization. I have been told in the past by one of the new board members that all of this is necessary for change to happen. I don't see that AMSAT has to go through some fundamental change or movement. I am tired of the new AMSAT since the last election. I am seriously considering not renewing my membership and I know plenty of other that are considering the same. When will all of this end so we can start enjoying AMSAT again and working satellites? Brian D. Karcher KG5GJT > On July 13, 2020 at 8:55 AM amsat-bb-request(a)amsat.org wrote: > > > Send AMSAT-BB mailing list submissions to > amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > amsat-bb-request(a)amsat.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > amsat-bb-owner(a)amsat.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of AMSAT-BB digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Back after a 2 yr absence (Armando Mercado) > 2. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (Michelle Thompson) > 3. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (David Swanson) > 4. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (Hans BX2ABT) > 5. AMSAT Member Mailing list (Bruce Perens) > 6. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (Bruce Perens) > 7. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (Bruce Perens) > 8. Re: AMSAT Member Mailing list (Bruce Perens) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 01:57:45 -0400 > From: Armando Mercado <am25544(a)gmail.com> > To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > Subject: [amsat-bb] Back after a 2 yr absence > Message-ID: > <CAOgooFkH6TK5L=zMEvg7qis17gh-QOz1T2UVT3361i1=SNPN_Q(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > I recently renewed my membership. Looks like I have a lot of catching up > to do. > Armando, N8IGJ > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 03:29:49 -0700 > From: Michelle Thompson <mountain.michelle(a)gmail.com> > To: Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com> > Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list > Message-ID: > <CACvjz2U2fCYU4r8fLYE49HG80VHCRh9_LyW-5QQ5JP-cdNkUsA(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Yes, I can. > > That part of Clayton's letter is wrong and has been repeatedly clarified > before. Including at the 2019 annual board meeting, where Tom Clark asked > me about it, as part of the record. > > Clayton Coleman was secretary in 2019. > > He ran the election. > > He decided that candidate statements were limited in length to 350 words, > would be subject to editorial control by AMSAT, and could not include > links. These new rules were given to us right before the 4th of July > holiday with a deadline of the 7th. > > This is different than any election before, where statements went directly > to the printer from the candidate, were not limited in length, and no one > from AMSAT leadership (who might be running for reelection themselves) had > any control over the content of their challengers' statements. > > We got these rules right before ballots went out. We (four challengers) > already had normal-sized statements on the web and they had been up six > weeks at that point. Those were the ones we wanted to use, and link to. > > We knew that as candidates, we had the right to request the mailing list, > and send our own statements, independent of the ballot. > > I requested the address list and got the DBASE4 export. > > Bruce Perens had already written a letter of support and distributed it > widely on the web. It introduced us and included our four full bios and > statements. > > I asked Bruce if we could use his letter in the mailing. He said yes. Since > he was President of Open Research Institute at the time, he wanted the > return address to not be his private home address, but a business address. > That was ORI's address. He was the author of the endorsement, so I used his > preferred return address. > > I converted the DBASE4 to a more useful format, fixed the 50 or so > undeliverable addresses, and found an inexpensive printer. Then I sent the > letter from Bruce to the printer, with the bios and statements. > > That turned out to be a good thing. Bios and statements were not included > with the ballots mailed out, at all. > > If we had not sent the letter, then name recognition would be the primary > factor. We were running against well-known people. > > We complained about this. It was unusual departure from the past and seemed > set up to let leadership benefit from being incumbents. > > The original proposal from Clayton was for an electronic only ballot. > Patrick said that the bylaws were a bit clunky here and it did need to be > mailed out on paper. Paper was required. > > This is a big reason why I made a motion at our one board meeting, in > March, for a bylaws committee. > > This bylaw isn't hard to fix. There's lots of examples out there of > organizations doing electronic voting with working published bylaws. > > Bruce made it very clear, when the incumbents stirred up the pot about the > return address, that it was an endorsement from him, this was commonly done > in political campaigns, and it would be grossly improper for me to use > AMSATs return address because that would make it look like Bruce was > speaking for or was from AMSAT. That was not going to happen. *That* would > be improper. > > No one candidate wanted their personal address used as a return address. We > were mailing this as a slate and splitting the cost. We didn't have time or > funds to make an organization or rent a box for one letter on short notice. > The printer required a real return address. > > No one had the address list except the candidates. Namely me because I > contracted the printer and handled the DBASE4 address conversion. That is a > neat story in and of itself,, for another time. > > Bruce only sent the text to me and chipped in some money for postage. > > The printing was automated in Van Nuys, CA. > > All of this is known to Clayton Coleman and his friends on the board that > signed the statement from this week. It has been explained by Bruce > publicly, and by me several times on social media. Tom Clark brought it up > at the 2019 annual board meeting because of the return address > pot-stirring. I explained it there too. Like I said, it's on the record. > > I think insinuating the addresses were mishandled is a deliberate twisting > of honest efforts to scramble to get uncensored candidate statements out to > voters on short notice. We just didn't have a lot of time, and Bruce was > very generous in writing a cover letter. > > Again, candidates are allowed the use of the mailing lists for election > purposes. > > So, no, there was no breach. Clayton knows all this. > > Saying it the way he did is a cheap shot at me, Patrick, Bruce Perens, and > ORI. > > -Michelle W5NYV > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 19:11 Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all > > received as members. > > > > > > https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_L… > > > > I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before. > > > > "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to > > Open Research Institute." > > > > Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious > > breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost? > > was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say > > "out in the wind"? > > > > Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how > > ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something > > that was procured online? > > > > AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it > > found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in > > the future. > > > > > > I look forward to an answer > > > > 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available > > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions > > expressed > > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of > > AMSAT-NA. > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 06:32:38 -0500 > From: David Swanson <dave(a)druidnetworks.com> > To: Michelle Thompson <mountain.michelle(a)gmail.com> > Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list > Message-ID: > <CANq+eyWHQ8o369h6=fqi1PJLWuMGP-1dTVj5Oej2CstAPY8S-w(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Spin Spin Spin. The simple truth here is Director Thompson took the AMSAT > member database, and handed it over to a 3rd party competing entity for the > purpose of solicitation. I know I did not give ORI my home address, yet ORI > sent me a letter. This was a violation of my privacy, and for AMSAT > members living in the EU, this was a violation of the law. Any attempt to > explain this away is just more lies and deceit from Director Thompson about > the shady practices they have engaged in over the past few years. As I keep > saying, this isn't a one time thing, this is a pattern of > reprehensible behavior that is unbecoming of an elected position and this > community. Director Thompson and Director Stoddard should resign. > > -Dave, KG5CCI > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 5:33 AM Michelle Thompson via AMSAT-BB < > amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> wrote: > > > Yes, I can. > > > > That part of Clayton's letter is wrong and has been repeatedly clarified > > before. Including at the 2019 annual board meeting, where Tom Clark asked > > me about it, as part of the record. > > > > Clayton Coleman was secretary in 2019. > > > > He ran the election. > > > > He decided that candidate statements were limited in length to 350 words, > > would be subject to editorial control by AMSAT, and could not include > > links. These new rules were given to us right before the 4th of July > > holiday with a deadline of the 7th. > > > > This is different than any election before, where statements went directly > > to the printer from the candidate, were not limited in length, and no one > > from AMSAT leadership (who might be running for reelection themselves) had > > any control over the content of their challengers' statements. > > > > We got these rules right before ballots went out. We (four challengers) > > already had normal-sized statements on the web and they had been up six > > weeks at that point. Those were the ones we wanted to use, and link to. > > > > We knew that as candidates, we had the right to request the mailing list, > > and send our own statements, independent of the ballot. > > > > I requested the address list and got the DBASE4 export. > > > > Bruce Perens had already written a letter of support and distributed it > > widely on the web. It introduced us and included our four full bios and > > statements. > > > > I asked Bruce if we could use his letter in the mailing. He said yes. Since > > he was President of Open Research Institute at the time, he wanted the > > return address to not be his private home address, but a business address. > > That was ORI's address. He was the author of the endorsement, so I used his > > preferred return address. > > > > I converted the DBASE4 to a more useful format, fixed the 50 or so > > undeliverable addresses, and found an inexpensive printer. Then I sent the > > letter from Bruce to the printer, with the bios and statements. > > > > That turned out to be a good thing. Bios and statements were not included > > with the ballots mailed out, at all. > > > > If we had not sent the letter, then name recognition would be the primary > > factor. We were running against well-known people. > > > > We complained about this. It was unusual departure from the past and seemed > > set up to let leadership benefit from being incumbents. > > > > The original proposal from Clayton was for an electronic only ballot. > > Patrick said that the bylaws were a bit clunky here and it did need to be > > mailed out on paper. Paper was required. > > > > This is a big reason why I made a motion at our one board meeting, in > > March, for a bylaws committee. > > > > This bylaw isn't hard to fix. There's lots of examples out there of > > organizations doing electronic voting with working published bylaws. > > > > Bruce made it very clear, when the incumbents stirred up the pot about the > > return address, that it was an endorsement from him, this was commonly done > > in political campaigns, and it would be grossly improper for me to use > > AMSATs return address because that would make it look like Bruce was > > speaking for or was from AMSAT. That was not going to happen. *That* would > > be improper. > > > > No one candidate wanted their personal address used as a return address. We > > were mailing this as a slate and splitting the cost. We didn't have time or > > funds to make an organization or rent a box for one letter on short notice. > > The printer required a real return address. > > > > No one had the address list except the candidates. Namely me because I > > contracted the printer and handled the DBASE4 address conversion. That is a > > neat story in and of itself,, for another time. > > > > Bruce only sent the text to me and chipped in some money for postage. > > > > The printing was automated in Van Nuys, CA. > > > > All of this is known to Clayton Coleman and his friends on the board that > > signed the statement from this week. It has been explained by Bruce > > publicly, and by me several times on social media. Tom Clark brought it up > > at the 2019 annual board meeting because of the return address > > pot-stirring. I explained it there too. Like I said, it's on the record. > > > > I think insinuating the addresses were mishandled is a deliberate twisting > > of honest efforts to scramble to get uncensored candidate statements out to > > voters on short notice. We just didn't have a lot of time, and Bruce was > > very generous in writing a cover letter. > > > > Again, candidates are allowed the use of the mailing lists for election > > purposes. > > > > So, no, there was no breach. Clayton knows all this. > > > > Saying it the way he did is a cheap shot at me, Patrick, Bruce Perens, and > > ORI. > > > > -Michelle W5NYV > > > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 19:11 Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> wrote: > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all > > > received as members. > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_L… > > > > > > I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before. > > > > > > "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to > > > Open Research Institute." > > > > > > Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious > > > breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost? > > > was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say > > > "out in the wind"? > > > > > > Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how > > > ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something > > > that was procured online? > > > > > > AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it > > > found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in > > > the future. > > > > > > > > > I look forward to an answer > > > > > > 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available > > > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. > > Opinions > > > expressed > > > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of > > > AMSAT-NA. > > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite > > program! > > > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available > > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions > > expressed > > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of > > AMSAT-NA. > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 20:02:25 +0800 > From: Hans BX2ABT <hans.bx2abt(a)msa.hinet.net> > To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list > Message-ID: <4c8da5db-cddd-e51e-0b26-9142c1787528(a)msa.hinet.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 7/13/20 7:32 PM, David Swanson via AMSAT-BB wrote: > > Spin Spin Spin. > > I think this is the biggest problem in the world right now. > > People simply don't want to believe each other any more, or even > entertain the thought that the "opponent" might be (partially) right or > acting in good faith. Mistakes cannot be forgiven, because they are > always made with malicious intent. And one's own actions are always > right, because the other party is always wrong. > > The trenches are dug, the weapons are loaded: let's go to war. > > In the meantime the Russians give us Sputnik RS-44 (almost MEO), the > Chinese shoot cool experiments into space (albeit with the quality of > most stuff made in China) and the Germans achieve the first > geo-stationary amateur payload. What does AMSAT-NA achieve? The world is > already shaking its head when the USA are mentioned because of how it > handles COVID-19. Now the amateur radio world laughs at how AMSAT-NA is > handling itself. To quote your great leader: "So sad!" > > 73 de Hans (BX2ABT) > > > P.S. not an AMSAT-NA member, just here to share and learn about > satellites. Now ducking for incoming flak. > > > > > > The simple truth here is Director Thompson took the AMSAT > > member database, and handed it over to a 3rd party competing entity for the > > purpose of solicitation. I know I did not give ORI my home address, yet ORI > > sent me a letter. This was a violation of my privacy, and for AMSAT > > members living in the EU, this was a violation of the law. Any attempt to > > explain this away is just more lies and deceit from Director Thompson about > > the shady practices they have engaged in over the past few years. As I keep > > saying, this isn't a one time thing, this is a pattern of > > reprehensible behavior that is unbecoming of an elected position and this > > community. Director Thompson and Director Stoddard should resign. > > > > -Dave, KG5CCI > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 5:33 AM Michelle Thompson via AMSAT-BB < > > amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> wrote: > > > >> Yes, I can. > >> > >> That part of Clayton's letter is wrong and has been repeatedly clarified > >> before. Including at the 2019 annual board meeting, where Tom Clark asked > >> me about it, as part of the record. > >> > >> Clayton Coleman was secretary in 2019. > >> > >> He ran the election. > >> > >> He decided that candidate statements were limited in length to 350 words, > >> would be subject to editorial control by AMSAT, and could not include > >> links. These new rules were given to us right before the 4th of July > >> holiday with a deadline of the 7th. > >> > >> This is different than any election before, where statements went directly > >> to the printer from the candidate, were not limited in length, and no one > >> from AMSAT leadership (who might be running for reelection themselves) had > >> any control over the content of their challengers' statements. > >> > >> We got these rules right before ballots went out. We (four challengers) > >> already had normal-sized statements on the web and they had been up six > >> weeks at that point. Those were the ones we wanted to use, and link to. > >> > >> We knew that as candidates, we had the right to request the mailing list, > >> and send our own statements, independent of the ballot. > >> > >> I requested the address list and got the DBASE4 export. > >> > >> Bruce Perens had already written a letter of support and distributed it > >> widely on the web. It introduced us and included our four full bios and > >> statements. > >> > >> I asked Bruce if we could use his letter in the mailing. He said yes. Since > >> he was President of Open Research Institute at the time, he wanted the > >> return address to not be his private home address, but a business address. > >> That was ORI's address. He was the author of the endorsement, so I used his > >> preferred return address. > >> > >> I converted the DBASE4 to a more useful format, fixed the 50 or so > >> undeliverable addresses, and found an inexpensive printer. Then I sent the > >> letter from Bruce to the printer, with the bios and statements. > >> > >> That turned out to be a good thing. Bios and statements were not included > >> with the ballots mailed out, at all. > >> > >> If we had not sent the letter, then name recognition would be the primary > >> factor. We were running against well-known people. > >> > >> We complained about this. It was unusual departure from the past and seemed > >> set up to let leadership benefit from being incumbents. > >> > >> The original proposal from Clayton was for an electronic only ballot. > >> Patrick said that the bylaws were a bit clunky here and it did need to be > >> mailed out on paper. Paper was required. > >> > >> This is a big reason why I made a motion at our one board meeting, in > >> March, for a bylaws committee. > >> > >> This bylaw isn't hard to fix. There's lots of examples out there of > >> organizations doing electronic voting with working published bylaws. > >> > >> Bruce made it very clear, when the incumbents stirred up the pot about the > >> return address, that it was an endorsement from him, this was commonly done > >> in political campaigns, and it would be grossly improper for me to use > >> AMSATs return address because that would make it look like Bruce was > >> speaking for or was from AMSAT. That was not going to happen. *That* would > >> be improper. > >> > >> No one candidate wanted their personal address used as a return address. We > >> were mailing this as a slate and splitting the cost. We didn't have time or > >> funds to make an organization or rent a box for one letter on short notice. > >> The printer required a real return address. > >> > >> No one had the address list except the candidates. Namely me because I > >> contracted the printer and handled the DBASE4 address conversion. That is a > >> neat story in and of itself,, for another time. > >> > >> Bruce only sent the text to me and chipped in some money for postage. > >> > >> The printing was automated in Van Nuys, CA. > >> > >> All of this is known to Clayton Coleman and his friends on the board that > >> signed the statement from this week. It has been explained by Bruce > >> publicly, and by me several times on social media. Tom Clark brought it up > >> at the 2019 annual board meeting because of the return address > >> pot-stirring. I explained it there too. Like I said, it's on the record. > >> > >> I think insinuating the addresses were mishandled is a deliberate twisting > >> of honest efforts to scramble to get uncensored candidate statements out to > >> voters on short notice. We just didn't have a lot of time, and Bruce was > >> very generous in writing a cover letter. > >> > >> Again, candidates are allowed the use of the mailing lists for election > >> purposes. > >> > >> So, no, there was no breach. Clayton knows all this. > >> > >> Saying it the way he did is a cheap shot at me, Patrick, Bruce Perens, and > >> ORI. > >> > >> -Michelle W5NYV > >> > >> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 19:11 Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> wrote: > >> > >>> Hello All, > >>> > >>> In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all > >>> received as members. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_L… > >>> I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before. > >>> > >>> "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to > >>> Open Research Institute." > >>> > >>> Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious > >>> breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost? > >>> was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say > >>> "out in the wind"? > >>> > >>> Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how > >>> ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something > >>> that was procured online? > >>> > >>> AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it > >>> found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in > >>> the future. > >>> > >>> > >>> I look forward to an answer > >>> > >>> 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available > >>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. > >> Opinions > >>> expressed > >>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of > >>> AMSAT-NA. > >>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite > >> program! > >>> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available > >> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions > >> expressed > >> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of > >> AMSAT-NA. > >> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > >> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available > > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed > > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 20:33:38 -0700 > From: Bruce Perens <bruce(a)perens.com> > To: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Subject: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list > Message-ID: > <CAK2MWOs9Vjn46XSXiOt-a_453vZnObB5GsPF+RhZV7EuryDyLg(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Bruce Perens <bruce(a)perens.com> > Date: Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 8:32 PM > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list > To: Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com> > > > The mailing list was never compromised. But my HOME address, under "Open > Research Institute" was used as the return address. This was a mistake and > I didn't ask for it. I was, however, the author of the mailer, in which I > introduced the candidates. The mailing was done by a bulk Mail company and > did not involve me. I got one returned letter, informed someone responsible > who had a right to see that address, and promptly forgot it. > > Thanks > > Bruce > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 7:11 PM Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all > > received as members. > > > > > > https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_L… > > > > I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before. > > > > "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to > > Open Research Institute." > > > > Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious > > breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost? > > was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say > > "out in the wind"? > > > > Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how > > ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something > > that was procured online? > > > > AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it > > found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in > > the future. > > > > > > I look forward to an answer > > > > 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available > > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions > > expressed > > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of > > AMSAT-NA. > > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > > Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 21:08:35 -0700 > From: Bruce Perens <bruce(a)perens.com> > To: Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com>, AMSAT BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list > Message-ID: > <CAK2MWOskn_hhT4MpdhwQ2-nz7P44u+SUVuYvr-PYd7P8k3-ARw(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > The candidates are allowed the use of the mailing list for their campaign. > If you read the bylaws, they make it very clear. One of the candidates did > all of the handling of the mailing list. > > Incidentally, the board was not aware that they had to give the mailing > list to the candidates. This was something the candidates had to tell them, > after I read the bylaws. Had the board run things the way they desired, > only a board controlled 200 word statement would have reached you from the > candidates, except for the incumbents, who have had free use of AMSAT's > official publications to carry their opinions. > > In a more perfect world, the board would have known their own bylaws, or at > least the secretary who was running the election would have read them. > > But in a more perfect world, two people were trying to reform the > organization with not face quite this uphill a battle. > > Thanks > > Bruce > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 9:00 PM Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Well how did the bulk mailing company get the AMSAT member mailing list if > > AMSAT did not provide it? > > > > Kevin > > > > > > On 7/12/2020 8:32 PM, Bruce Perens wrote: > > > > The mailing list was never compromised. But my HOME address, under "Open > > Research Institute" was used as the return address. This was a mistake and > > I didn't ask for it. I was, however, the author of the mailer, in which I > > introduced the candidates. The mailing was done by a bulk Mail company and > > did not involve me. I got one returned letter, informed someone responsible > > who had a right to see that address, and promptly forgot it. > > > > Thanks > > > > Bruce > > > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 7:11 PM Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > > wrote: > > > >> Hello All, > >> > >> In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all > >> received as members. > >> > >> > >> https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_L… > >> > >> I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before. > >> > >> "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to > >> Open Research Institute." > >> > >> Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious > >> breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost? > >> was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say > >> "out in the wind"? > >> > >> Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how > >> ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something > >> that was procured online? > >> > >> AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it > >> found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in > >> the future. > >> > >> > >> I look forward to an answer > >> > >> 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available > >> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. > >> Opinions expressed > >> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of > >> AMSAT-NA. > >> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > >> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > >> > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 21:48:21 -0700 > From: Bruce Perens <bruce(a)perens.com> > To: Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com> > Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list > Message-ID: > <CAK2MWOu-sb=r3bn14TwkT37m_LVhhj+rGrMHM90O0O_nQkjYuw(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Kevin, > > No, I never saw the mailing list . I didn't do the mailing . I only wrote > the content . > > So, why was I involved at all ? > > I won't say I'm the best tech evangelist you know, because that is for > other people to judge. However, if you count the Open Source movement in > software; the campaign for the elimination of the Morse code requirement > for Amateur Radio licenses, which among other things I got on the front > page of the New York Times, above the fold; My work to help elect a new > ARRL board to end the confidentiality versus transparency debacle; And my > global appearance for IBM's "Dear Tech", campaign, which got at least 50000 > television and Internet airplays; > > If you count all those things, I am probably the person you want > introducing you as a candidate, and I might be a good person to tell you > how to run a campaign. > > As it happens I wrote my own campaign, which I was going to put out under > my own name, endorsing those candidates. And then the candidates chose to > use it as their main campaign statement. This was very flattering and > entirely their own choice. > > As an ARRL member, it was my right to participate in their election, and it > is my right to participate in AMSAT's. > > Thanks > > Bruce K6BP > > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 9:29 PM Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Bruce, > > So hang on a moment, you're telling me that the candidates are allowed > > to use the mailing list for their campaign (fine), but rather than them > > doing it themselves they turned the task over to you? So you were in > > possession of the mailing list and then you turned it over to the bulk > > mailing center when you authored the mailer? > > > > Kevin WA7FWF #19623 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7/12/2020 9:08 PM, Bruce Perens wrote: > > > > The candidates are allowed the use of the mailing list for their campaign. > > If you read the bylaws, they make it very clear. One of the candidates did > > all of the handling of the mailing list. > > > > Incidentally, the board was not aware that they had to give the mailing > > list to the candidates. This was something the candidates had to tell them, > > after I read the bylaws. Had the board run things the way they desired, > > only a board controlled 200 word statement would have reached you from the > > candidates, except for the incumbents, who have had free use of AMSAT's > > official publications to carry their opinions. > > > > In a more perfect world, the board would have known their own bylaws, or > > at least the secretary who was running the election would have read them. > > > > But in a more perfect world, two people were trying to reform the > > organization with not face quite this uphill a battle. > > > > Thanks > > > > Bruce > > > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 9:00 PM Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Well how did the bulk mailing company get the AMSAT member mailing list > >> if AMSAT did not provide it? > >> > >> Kevin > >> > >> > >> On 7/12/2020 8:32 PM, Bruce Perens wrote: > >> > >> The mailing list was never compromised. But my HOME address, under "Open > >> Research Institute" was used as the return address. This was a mistake and > >> I didn't ask for it. I was, however, the author of the mailer, in which I > >> introduced the candidates. The mailing was done by a bulk Mail company and > >> did not involve me. I got one returned letter, informed someone responsible > >> who had a right to see that address, and promptly forgot it. > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 7:11 PM Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hello All, > >>> > >>> In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all > >>> received as members. > >>> > >>> > >>> https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_L… > >>> > >>> I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed before. > >>> > >>> "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to > >>> Open Research Institute." > >>> > >>> Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a serious > >>> breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost? > >>> was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say > >>> "out in the wind"? > >>> > >>> Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how > >>> ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something > >>> that was procured online? > >>> > >>> AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it > >>> found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in > >>> the future. > >>> > >>> > >>> I look forward to an answer > >>> > >>> 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available > >>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. > >>> Opinions expressed > >>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of > >>> AMSAT-NA. > >>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite > >>> program! > >>> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 22:30:29 -0700 > From: Bruce Perens <bruce(a)perens.com> > To: Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com> > Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT Member Mailing list > Message-ID: > <CAK2MWOsYiCqnWi8igTOnVC-vh_Xo=yFtZKYgwwgnzYF-6qNfPQ(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > The candidate felt that since I wrote the letter, that the return address > should be mine. I didn't ask for it, I especially did not ask for my home > address, which is not in the call book, to be used. As it happens, I found > out about one silent key member in the return mail, which I passed on and > promptly forgot. I work for lawyers all day in my consulting business, and > thus I read the rules, I understand the rules, I follow the rules. These > are not, by the way, Robert's Rules of Order. These are things like what a > director is responsible for, and how to run an election. It really bothers > me that the incumbents didn't know those rules. > > Thanks > > Bruce > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 10:11 PM Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Well Bruce, > > > > Something doesn't jive here, " I didn't do the mailing . I only wrote > > the content " then it seems the candidate would have been the person that > > was dealing with the bulk mailer and would have had their return address > > listed and it would not have been your home address on it. > > > > Guess it's time to pick a different bulk mailer. > > > > > > Kevin WA7FWF #19623 > > > > > > > > > > On 7/12/2020 9:48 PM, Bruce Perens wrote: > > > > Kevin, > > > > No, I never saw the mailing list . I didn't do the mailing . I only wrote > > the content . > > > > So, why was I involved at all ? > > > > I won't say I'm the best tech evangelist you know, because that is for > > other people to judge. However, if you count the Open Source movement in > > software; the campaign for the elimination of the Morse code requirement > > for Amateur Radio licenses, which among other things I got on the front > > page of the New York Times, above the fold; My work to help elect a new > > ARRL board to end the confidentiality versus transparency debacle; And my > > global appearance for IBM's "Dear Tech", campaign, which got at least 50000 > > television and Internet airplays; > > > > If you count all those things, I am probably the person you want > > introducing you as a candidate, and I might be a good person to tell you > > how to run a campaign. > > > > As it happens I wrote my own campaign, which I was going to put out under > > my own name, endorsing those candidates. And then the candidates chose to > > use it as their main campaign statement. This was very flattering and > > entirely their own choice. > > > > As an ARRL member, it was my right to participate in their election, and > > it is my right to participate in AMSAT's. > > > > Thanks > > > > Bruce K6BP > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 9:29 PM Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Bruce, > >> So hang on a moment, you're telling me that the candidates are allowed > >> to use the mailing list for their campaign (fine), but rather than them > >> doing it themselves they turned the task over to you? So you were in > >> possession of the mailing list and then you turned it over to the bulk > >> mailing center when you authored the mailer? > >> > >> Kevin WA7FWF #19623 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 7/12/2020 9:08 PM, Bruce Perens wrote: > >> > >> The candidates are allowed the use of the mailing list for their > >> campaign. If you read the bylaws, they make it very clear. One of the > >> candidates did all of the handling of the mailing list. > >> > >> Incidentally, the board was not aware that they had to give the mailing > >> list to the candidates. This was something the candidates had to tell them, > >> after I read the bylaws. Had the board run things the way they desired, > >> only a board controlled 200 word statement would have reached you from the > >> candidates, except for the incumbents, who have had free use of AMSAT's > >> official publications to carry their opinions. > >> > >> In a more perfect world, the board would have known their own bylaws, or > >> at least the secretary who was running the election would have read them. > >> > >> But in a more perfect world, two people were trying to reform the > >> organization with not face quite this uphill a battle. > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 9:00 PM Kevin <wa7fwf(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Well how did the bulk mailing company get the AMSAT member mailing list > >>> if AMSAT did not provide it? > >>> > >>> Kevin > >>> > >>> > >>> On 7/12/2020 8:32 PM, Bruce Perens wrote: > >>> > >>> The mailing list was never compromised. But my HOME address, under "Open > >>> Research Institute" was used as the return address. This was a mistake and > >>> I didn't ask for it. I was, however, the author of the mailer, in which I > >>> introduced the candidates. The mailing was done by a bulk Mail company and > >>> did not involve me. I got one returned letter, informed someone responsible > >>> who had a right to see that address, and promptly forgot it. > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> > >>> Bruce > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, 7:11 PM Kevin via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb(a)amsat.org> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hello All, > >>>> > >>>> In a previous email to the BB I posted the link to the letter we all > >>>> received as members. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> https://www.amsat.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200710_AMSAT_L… > >>>> > >>>> I was re-reading it and something caught my eye that I had missed > >>>> before. > >>>> > >>>> "AMSAT did not provide a copy of its membership mailing addresses to > >>>> Open Research Institute." > >>>> > >>>> Just how was our mailing list compromised? This seems like a > >>>> serious > >>>> breech of security, was this a hack? was any other information lost? > >>>> was it ever found out how it happened? is our mailing list as they say > >>>> "out in the wind"? > >>>> > >>>> Michelle could you possibly check from the ORI side and backtrack how > >>>> ORI came into possession of the AMSAT mailing list, was it something > >>>> that was procured online? > >>>> > >>>> AMSAT needs to follow up on this privacy issue and report back what it > >>>> found and any steps that were taken to prevent this from happening in > >>>> the future. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I look forward to an answer > >>>> > >>>> 73 Kevin WA7FWF #19623 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Sent via AMSAT-BB(a)amsat.org. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available > >>>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. > >>>> Opinions expressed > >>>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views > >>>> of AMSAT-NA. > >>>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite > >>>> program! > >>>> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > Sent via amsat-bb(a)amsat.org. > AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions expressed > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of AMSAT-NA. > Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! > https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb > > ------------------------------ > > End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 15, Issue 241 > *****************************************

5 4

Large AZ/El disk rotors
by Ollie Eisman 13 Jul '20

13 Jul '20

Hi everyone, I would like to attach a solid 8' fiberglass dish to an az/el rotor system. Does anyone have any experience with either Alfa Spid Big RAK/RAEL system or the Sub Lunar EME rotor that Green Heron sells? Curious to know how well they work, handle wind gusts, interface with a PC, etc. I like what M2 offers but their prices are a bit more than I can afford. I'm open to suggestions. 73, Ollie AJ1O AMSAT #19698

1 0

Still one part missing.... (skip if you don't want to read about the BoD concerns)
by Roy Dean 13 Jul '20

13 Jul '20

[Legal Disclaimer: None of the below should be construed as fact. I am only trying to confirm what I know in order to make an informed decision when it comes time to vote. Please feel free to correct any assumptions or conclusions I may have reached below] I understand both of Directors Stoddard's and Thompson's concerns about the validity of certain spending on legal advice. I understand both of Directors Stoddard's and Thompson's concerns about the withholding of corporate documents until a legal demand letter was presented. I understand the concerns of many of the board and executives about a conflict of interest with Director Thomson's involvement with ORI. I understand the concerns of many of the board and executives regarding harassment policies. I understand the concerns of some of the members about the potential misuse of the membership mailing list by an alleged "agent" of Director Thompson (and/or ORI), as well as understanding the reasoning Director Thompson put forward for the ORI return address on mailing in question. One thing I do not understand is why any of this does (or did) affect Director Stoddard? Why was corporate documentation withheld from him? From what I can tell, he has no relation to ORI. Is it because his candidate statement was included with the ORI mailing (I don't even know if it was, I cannot remember and didn't save my mailing)? Was it because he hesitated (or refused) to sign the new NDA? Or did he sign the new NDA? Were all other BoD members asked to sign the NDA prior to being given access to the corporate documents that were alleged to be withheld from Dirs. Stoddard and Thompson? Is that NDA now SOP for all new Directors and Executives? Again, I have had very positive relationships with almost everybody involved, so I want to be sure I understand exactly what has happened so that I can make an informed decision when it is time to vote for new Directors. If anybody feels that I have portrayed them unfairly or incorrectly, please let me know. I know this is just more fuel on the fire, and for that, I apologize. I hope we can all put this behind us soon. --Roy K3RLD

2 1

Re: [amsat-bb] Gravitas
by Robert Ehresman 13 Jul '20

13 Jul '20

I'd like to point out that the "Join AMSAT" page is currently giving out Error 404. PAGE NOT FOUND (ERROR 404) Sorry, but the page you are trying to access either does not exist or is not available. Home <https://launch.amsat.org/> Back Sitemap <https://launch.amsat.org/Sitemap> >I invite you to turn your angst, whatever it >might be, into action by joining AMSAT >and have a vote in the matter. Otherwise, >you?re just ranting with into the wind for >no reason other than to hear your own >voice? >https://www.amsat.org/join-amsat/ ><https://www.amsat.org/join-amsat/>

2 1

AMSAT-NA, another perspective
by Russ Ramirez 13 Jul '20

13 Jul '20

I have been a member on/off since 2012. I have never been removed from this AMSAT mailing list, but have not always been able to log into the AMSAT.org web site. In spite of this, I have renewed my membership, typically at Hamvention (until this year, but did so online), and made extra purchases to support the work of AMSAT. I definitely echo the message of Hans BX2ABT. Not everyone is bad, but unfortunately too many are not good either. When reading over each point of view of this ongoing dispute, it is not very clear what started this dispute. In a statement in response to allegations of financial mismanagement, Clayton wrote: *AMSAT's corporate records give a full accounting of all expendituresand are provided to its Directors upon request, in compliance with ourgoverning documents and law of the District of Columbia (D.C.) Ouroffice remains closed due to COVID-19, where those documents reside.Furthermore, AMSAT complies with IRS rules for 501(c)(3) disclosure ofpublic financial documents, such as the Form 990 available on theAMSAT website * The above statement is either wholly true, or gray, because making a statement like this which is completely false would be illegal. Michelle, you have claimed that you (and Patrick) were denied access to financial transaction records upon your written request. Can we simply focus on *what* specifically started this whole thing? Russ Ramirez K0WFS

6 7

Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 15, Issue 242
by Daniel Schultz 13 Jul '20

13 Jul '20

Dear Gailen, In filing your two line gripe about the "structural squabbling" displacing the normal discussion of the "birds" on amsat-bb, you forwarded all 913 lines of the entire AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 15, Issue 242, back to the group. If you are going to complain about the signal to noise ratio, at least take the time to edit your reply before hitting send. If you can't do that from your iPhone, then wait until you get home and send your reply from a real computer. No we are not going to create yet another mailing list. If you don't like it then hit Delete and go on to the next message about the "birds". Dan Schultz N8FGV ------ Original Message ------ >Received: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 15:50:47 -0500 >From: Gailen Marshall <gdm2md(a)gmail.com> >To: amsat-bb(a)amsat.org >Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 15, Issue 233 >Message-ID: <92CBBC69-47D9-46E3-A39C-4B8DBD8482F5(a)gmail.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > >Yes! Can we stick to the birds and let those interested in structural squabbling >have their own venue? Gailen N5GDM > >Sent from my iPhone

2 1

when is the election being discussed?
by Daniel Velez 13 Jul '20

13 Jul '20

I joined in June but I haven't seen any ballot info. 73 de Dan

2 1