It was unfortunate that the election results were not released in a separate message on the amsat-bb. The mistake was explained by Mark Johns, K0JM, and is totally understandable. Putting out a weekly or monthly newsletter is a lot of work and those who have done it here or elsewhere know how much effort it takes. So hats off to those who do this for AMSAT.
There has been little discussion about the meaning of the election results themselves and that is what really matters. About 57% of the votes were for the three candidates who campaigned on staying the course. 43% of the votes wanted a change of some sort. So the organization is divided, but how serious the divide remains to be seen.
Although they were not on the ballot, In some ways the election was a referendum on Patrick and Michelle who have made their positions known to the membership that has been paying attention. Now that they did not pick up any support from the election, will they continue to serve? And if they choose not to serve, will the alternates (who wanted change also) feel that they would be able to contribute in a meaningful way? As Kenny Rogers once said, "You've got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away, know when to run." Some members have already announced their intentions not to serve in various ways and for various reasons. Others may follow.
The Symposium and associated Board Meeting coming up soon may provide some answers as to the future direction of AMSAT. We will wait and see how it all turns out.
73, John K8YSE
I am disappointed to learn of these results. I thought the new progressive group was headed in the right direction.
Satellite research takes money and there is lots of it out there! I just retired from a "university" where I found it fun to try to build amateur satellites with available project funding. But My fun was building them, not trying to figure out how to pay for them. I was getting by on maybe a $10k per year budget.
But then more academic faculty came on board. They spent their time looking for grants and money and writing proposals and we were swimming in so much money we did not have the resources to spend it! For a guy who likes to build a cubesat on a table top,, I could not possibly spend even a fraction of it. BUT THEY WERE leading in the right direction. They showed how there is so much money out there that if you just direct your interests and proposals correctly there is plenty to go around and to cover the amateur interests as well.
I learned the lesson that academics is all about making proposals and getting BIG bucks to do things that meet your mutual interests. That is the only way AMSAT can survive is to have those people on the leading edge and making proposals where AMSAT and other interests overlap.
I really ignored all the AMSAT BB arguing going on, because I thought it was obvious that the progressives were on the right track and the status quo was just holding us back. I am shocked to see the progressives lost.
Bob, WB4APR
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 5:02 PM john--- via AMSAT-BB amsat-bb@amsat.org wrote:
It was unfortunate that the election results were not released in a separate message on the amsat-bb. The mistake was explained by Mark Johns, K0JM, and is totally understandable. Putting out a weekly or monthly newsletter is a lot of work and those who have done it here or elsewhere know how much effort it takes. So hats off to those who do this for AMSAT.
There has been little discussion about the meaning of the election results themselves and that is what really matters. About 57% of the votes were for the three candidates who campaigned on staying the course. 43% of the votes wanted a change of some sort. So the organization is divided, but how serious the divide remains to be seen.
Although they were not on the ballot, In some ways the election was a referendum on Patrick and Michelle who have made their positions known to the membership that has been paying attention. Now that they did not pick up any support from the election, will they continue to serve? And if they choose not to serve, will the alternates (who wanted change also) feel that they would be able to contribute in a meaningful way? As Kenny Rogers once said, "You've got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away, know when to run." Some members have already announced their intentions not to serve in various ways and for various reasons. Others may follow.
The Symposium and associated Board Meeting coming up soon may provide some answers as to the future direction of AMSAT. We will wait and see how it all turns out.
73, John K8YSE _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@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
On 09/28/20 15:31, john--- via AMSAT-BB wrote:
There has been little discussion about the meaning of the election results themselves and that is what really matters.
John,
I, speaking only for myself, don't want that to start on this list.
The vote is over. The membership has spoken.
If someone wants to run during the next election, now is the time to demonstrate and exemplify being a leader. That person will gather support, and that support could carry them onto the board during the next cycle.
If you don't want to be part of AMSAT, there appears to be at least one other alternative (ORI). I suspect, in time, ORI will have some of the same discussions/debates/arguments/mudslinging on their list. History has a knack for repeating itself.
We're here to design, build, and/or operate satellites, and I hope we get back to that.
73,
--- Zach N0ZGO
I understand your not wanting discussion not related to engineering or operations on this list, but there is nothing against the rules about discussing the election or any other internal AMSAT issues on this list.
If you think there should be a rule against it or it should be moved somewhere else, you should make a serious argument for it in another thread or take it up with the org in some other serious way.
I personally think this discussion is critical to AMSAT's ability to function well, or at least change in positive ways.
I also think the list has been managed well through this, which is a compliment to the incumbents considering this is mostly about things others wish the incumbents did differently.
To me it is democratic, a sign of free speech, or other similar values. I hope we can all try to uphold these types of values within this community.
73, John Brier KG4AKV
P.S. You can campaign lots of ways. Yes by doing things that aren't resisted... But what about things that are resisted? Then you are forced to criticize the resistance, and those that resist can make their case as to why their resistance is legitimate, and back and forth until the situation resolves itself. That is how change happens, or doesn't. But you can't justify your resistance by just saying no louder.
P.P.S.
Please don't say what "we" are here for without specifying exactly who we is because I am not here only for that. I care about what kinds of satellites are built, what functions they have, and how and why they are commanded to do certain things.
All that affects how I am able to interact with them from the ground. Since I am not designing, building, or commanding them, discussion with the people who are, or the people they are directed by is my only way of affecting what is put in space. For my part I provide financial support while trying to welcome and support new sat ops who bring in their own financial resources.
All hams who use sats need designers and builders like you.
You all are doing the most technical work that many of us can't do. I am grateful and I think those of us who don't design and build but just use, are grateful too. I need you but I think you need me and those of us who don't design or build as well because this is an expensive hobby in sum. We have to work together.
P.P.P.S.
Thanks for reading.
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020, 17:29 Zach Metzinger via AMSAT-BB amsat-bb@amsat.org wrote:
On 09/28/20 15:31, john--- via AMSAT-BB wrote:
There has been little discussion about the meaning of the election results themselves and that is what really matters.
John,
I, speaking only for myself, don't want that to start on this list.
The vote is over. The membership has spoken.
If someone wants to run during the next election, now is the time to demonstrate and exemplify being a leader. That person will gather support, and that support could carry them onto the board during the next cycle.
If you don't want to be part of AMSAT, there appears to be at least one other alternative (ORI). I suspect, in time, ORI will have some of the same discussions/debates/arguments/mudslinging on their list. History has a knack for repeating itself.
We're here to design, build, and/or operate satellites, and I hope we get back to that.
73,
--- Zach N0ZGO _______________________________________________ Sent via AMSAT-BB@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
On 2020-09-28 18:12, John Brier wrote:
Please don't say what "we" are here for without specifying exactly who we is because I am not here only for that. I care about what kinds of satellites are built, what functions they have, and how and why they are commanded to do certain things.
Hello John,
Small point of clarification: I should have said "operating via", which would be using them, not commanding them.
I should have also avoided the pronoun "we". I do not claim to speak for anyone else.
I sincerely wish for a different mailing list which would cover only technical aspects of, news about, and operating via our fleet. I have absolutely no interest in rehashing election results or armchair quarterbacking of the management.
It seems to me that AMSAT is making progress. While Fox-1C failed, it is an outlier. Let's all root for a flawless Fox-1D launch and commissioning!
Golf-T and Golf-1 look to be great satellites, especially for microwave experimenters. This is my area of interest, and I've already obtained some bits and bobs, as our friends across the pond are fond of saying, for RX on 10GHz.
(I've been cleared by the XYL to put a rotator on the shed roof. Hopefully, I'll be able to point antennas at satellites soon!)
--- Zach N0ZGO
On 2020-09-28 21:50, Zach Metzinger wrote:
an outlier. Let's all root for a flawless Fox-1D launch and commissioning!
Correction: Fox-1E
(Too late for me to be writing emails.)
--- Zach N0ZGO
participants (4)
-
John Brier -
john＠papays.com -
Robert Bruninga -
Zach Metzinger