John - Thanks for weighing in. I hope the ARRL Board thinks better of this action, like they did with their previous sanctioning of Richard Norton N6AA.
John - Thanks for weighing in. I hope the ARRL Board thinks better of this action, like they did with their previous sanctioning of Richard Norton N6AA.
lays out a timeline that is problematic for Ria even though she argues it was not. It seems a couple of key dates occurred early last year beginning back in March when she signed the contract and certified that she had no conflict of interest and the contract stipulated the book be delivered (I presume the first draft) to the publisher by June 6. On June 14 she allegedly contacted the E&E Committee for the first time about the matter. In the thread Ria contends that it would have made no difference if she had contacted them three months earlier or when she finally did.
As I see it, Ria should have been proactive and engaged the E&E from the very start at the time she thought about authoring and publishing such a book. She is the one who set this entire mess in motion even if I give her the benefit of the doubt that she truly believed her project was not a conflict of interest.
Nate - I tried to convey that I didn't think N2RJ was blameless in this; there were clearly mistakes either of omission or commission, and wading into the timeline of she said / they said is a point past which I care to go. Others may feel differently. In my opinion N2RJ's "sin" for which she was censured was that she wrote a book (not for the ARRL), and ARRL derives revenue from publishing books.
John - Thanks for weighing in. I hope the ARRL Board thinks better of this action, like they did with their previous sanctioning of Richard Norton N6AA.
Unfortunately, this doesn't seems so clear cut that the ARRL BoD are the bad guys here. This Reddit post by KC2SST:
https://www.reddit.com/r/amateurradio/comments/10hx3n9/comment/j5ck1mh/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
lays out a timeline that is problematic for Ria even though she argues it was not. It seems a couple of key dates occurred early last year beginning back in March when she signed the contract and certified that she had no conflict of interest and the contract stipulated the book be delivered (I presume the first draft) to the publisher by June 6. On June 14 she allegedly contacted the E&E Committee for the first time about the matter. In the thread Ria contends that it would have made no difference if she had contacted them three months earlier or when she finally did.
As I see it, Ria should have been proactive and engaged the E&E from the very start at the time she thought about authoring and publishing such a book. She is the one who set this entire mess in motion even if I give her the benefit of the doubt that she truly believed her project was not a conflict of interest.
Nate - I tried to convey that I didn't think N2RJ was blameless in this; there were clearly mistakes either of omission or commission, and wading into the timeline of she said / they said is a point past which I care to go. Others may feel differently. In my opinion N2RJ's "sin" for which she was censured was that she wrote a book (not for the ARRL), and ARRL derives revenue from publishing books.