CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] ETHICS

To: "'Don Cassel'" <ve3xd@rogers.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ETHICS
From: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 23:13:50 -0000
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
True.  It is the responsibility of each station to operate within the
constraints of their license.

That said, it would be a common courtesy to point out to a USA station when
they are operating outside of the US phone band.  Nothing wrong with being
helpful even in the heat of competition.

Randy, K5ZD 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Don Cassel
> Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 6:33 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ETHICS
> 
> I agree. It's not uncommon to be called by a U.S. station 
> when running below 14150. My responsibility is to be sure I 
> am operating within the bounds of my license not to check 
> whether anyone else is. The U.S. or any other caller is 
> responsible to be sure they are operating within the bounds 
> of their license. So if I work anyone when I am on 14.140 
> them I am legal and ethical. It's not my responsibility to 
> police the one out of bounds. 
> 
> Chad's example of working on 14153 would also apply to a U.S. 
> Extra class.
> Do these guys check to see if all U.S. callers are 
> appropriately licensed to be calling in on that frequency. 
> Again, it is the responsibility of the calling station not 
> the one doing the running.
> 
> 73, Don VE3XD
> 
> > This brings up an interesting point.  Is it really the VE's 
> > responsibility to know that every answer to his CQs is within their 
> > band or license
> class?
> > Sure, this example is a little easier, knowing that US hams 
> can't go 
> > below 14150, but what if he was on 14153 and a US general class 
> > licensee call him?  Should he quickly evaluate every caller 
> to see if 
> > they are approved
> to
> > operate on 14153?  If you say "of course not", I ask you, 
> what's the 
> > difference? In either case, the US ham is operating beyond their 
> > license class.  Why is it the VE's responsibility to police him if 
> > under 14150 and not at 14153?
> > 
> > Chad WE9V
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>