Bruce,
None of the questions you asked mean anything tangible, but they make it sound like a lot is going on. Is there? I don't know? To the contrary, many public private grants and contracts are awarded and produce absolutely nothing or are awarded for all the wrong reasons and end up suffering down the line (being scrubbed, re-competed, etc...). How long have the projects been taking place and what has actually been produced? Is there a transponder? Is there a ground station?
So with all the amateur radio in space work ORI is getting now, is it directly competing with AMSAT at this point or is it still trying to 'fix' AMSAT?
From the looks of the AMSAT bylaws, having an 'AMSAT organizational
membership' (Member Society, proper noun), eally just means you submitted an application and paid a fee. Any organization could do the same and would likely get accepted (membership-fees applied).
When you say """We were not aware that AMSAT had already hired lawyers against Michelle and Patrick when we formed ORI.""". That's a red flag in my mind, and it begs the question, why? And i'm not actually asking you why, but i'm asking the membership to consider why this could be. My individual observation is that AMSAT never hired an attorney 'against' me, or any volunteering members in the past, at least the ones I know personally. So, there must be a difference or other information / circumstances.
Congratulations on lobbying to end morse code. Just imagine the number of Amateur radio users there would be, if we just lobbied to get rid of the permits.
Joseph Armbruster KJ4JIO
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 4:20 PM Bruce Perens bruce@perens.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:42 PM Joseph Armbruster josepharmbruster@gmail.com wrote:
Can you start your own amateur space organization?
You mean the one that just got three different grants that, in a better time, would have gone to AMSAT? The one that is designing the 6U microwave transponder for space use, and the ground station to go with it? The one that is operated with a sufficient level of transparency that participants can get their technical projects done, and can collect funds for them without their being diverted elsewhere? The one where technical discussion dominates their mailing lists, and the most controversial subject is how to spend their money?
I founded ORI with Michelle, and wrote the $3500 check to carry out its 501(c)3 acceptance (my largest donation ever to any organization), because we needed to get our projects done in the face of AMSAT's board being intractable. It should never have been necessary. We were not aware that AMSAT had already hired lawyers against Michelle and Patrick when we formed ORI. Obviously, this would have given us more reason. But we applied for and were accepted for an AMSAT organizational membership, because our intent was NOT to replace AMSAT but to fix it.
As you know, I previously lobbied, successfully, to replace a large portion of the ARRL board and end the confidentiality vs. transparency debacle there. Ironically, there are many parallels to the situation here, including a board that chose to publicly libel one of their directors for his attempt to reform them, a thing that the succeeding board wisely withdrew.
Before that, I lobbied to end Morse code testing as a criterion for Amateur licensing, also succeeding. Even though people pleaded with me to allow Amateur Radio to "die with dignity".
Both of those things required working against ARRL, when ARRL and the majority of its own membership were barriers to the advancement of Amateur Radio. Fortunately, that was not the case internationally, and IARU voted, against the urging of ARRL - their own international directorate - to work to end the code testing requirement. Today, more people use CW on the air than ever! Everybody won!
You don't achieve these things by backing down.
Thanks Bruce