> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ev Tupis
> Sent: March 18, 2007 19:57
> To: CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Remote Site Contesting Rules -
> Getting out of hand
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Paul J. Piercey p.piercey@nl.rogers.com
>
>
> To me, it's all about working the operator and not the radio.
> If your radio is in Timbuktu and you are in Texas, you're
> still an N5 no matter how you slice it.
> ---------------------------
>
> I think that the operative here is. "To me, ..."
>
> To contest sponsors and governmental authorities - within the
> context of this thread - the place where the RF comes from
> carries the weight. I would be in just as much trouble
> operating in-person from the "radio quiet zone" at Aricebo as
> if I was in New York operating a remote transmitter at Aricebo. :)
>
> Ev, W2EV
Sorry, Ev, I don't understand what this has to do with the discussion?
Obviously, at the very least, these remote stations, or any station for that
matter, would have to be set up in accordance with local laws and
provisions.
My point is that when I make contact with a station, even in a contest, it's
the operator that I am working, not the equipment. Isn't it the operator who
is licenced; not the equipment? When you call someone on the phone, it is
ultimately the person on the other end that matters, not the myriad of
switching equipment and relays that the signal has gone through to get there
and where that is located. When I send an e-mail to my neighbour on another
ISP, it goes through the network to Montreal and back. Should I consider him
to be in Montreal?
73 -- Paul VO1HE
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|