In the current situation, the proposal presented by Tonno and others is
probably the best comprise we can achieve right now.
There is a risk that both Ukrainian and Russian hams with too much
political focus from either side will disagree about this proposal, but in
my view, it is something they need to accept if they believe more in Ham
Spirit than the political megaphones on either side.
What we gain by using this compromize is the following:
No single contester will be placed in the dark outside the competition.
Despite global political failure to deal with a messy situation in Ukraine,
the Ham Community has shown at least some progressive thinking to let hams
in a debatable territory still be part of our international community, and
not like CQ Magazine wanted - to place them freezing alone outside in
Nomansterritory.
I might be blamed from either side of the emotional bunch for supporting
this proposal of Tonno and others.... but in the interest of true Ham
Spirit I am ready to still support. This is probably the only way to reach
a compromise.
I hope the CQ Magazine editors (supported by CQWW CC) realize this proposal
is far better than the irrational decision taken before.
73 de RM2D (SM6LRR)
On Sunday, October 19, 2014, Tonno Vahk <tonno.vahk@gmail.com> wrote:
> The cases are not exactly comparable I guess. It is obvious that CQWW needs
> to make a decision in all those problematic cases. It is also obvious that
> the rules and principles are clear about pirate operations not being
> allowed. So whenever CQWW accepts a dubious country or operation it is a
> one-time decision. I am sure they had their good reasons to accept Taiwan
> for example.
>
> I am amazed to see how much demagogy is written in the list here. In the
> situation where any Russian calls operating from Crimea are clearly pirates
> by the standards well described it would have been very difficult for CQWW
> to accept them. They made the only decision that is based on the rules and
> the only decision that is non-political. Anything else is deviating from
> the
> rules and anything else would have been a political decision and political
> opinion. Not opposite!
>
> Some people seem to actually believe that if a criminal walks into your
> shack and puts a gun to your head forcing you to start signing P5 then you
> should be allowed to work as P5 and it should be counted. After all, you
> are
> not able to work otherwise and doing anything else would be dangerous for
> you. A boy wants to get in the air, right?
>
> In this unfortunate situation obviously it would be good to still find a
> solution how the hams in Crimea could take part in CQWW. So far the public
> has heard UARL position which has been clear and well-reasoned. There has
> been no reason to doubt they represent all UR. We have not heard any common
> position by Crimean hams other than rhetoric statements by a few after the
> CQWW decision was announced. We did at the same time saw how a Crimean ham
> UU5JHQ using UU callsign was harassed by Russian contest organizers and
> DQ-ed from Russian WW Digital Contest for "foreign callsign usage on the
> Russian territory"
> (
> http://www.rdrclub.ru/news-radio/russian-ww-digital-contest/214-ruswwdigi-2
> 014-dq). By no means should CQWW support such action and it does show that
> not all Crimean hams are happily accepting Russian calls and continue to
> use
> their legitimate Ukrainian calls.
>
> If it is indeed so that clear majority of Crimean hams finds that it is
> acceptable for them to use Russian calls and they confirm that this is the
> only way they can possibly operate then I believe as an interim solution
> accepting all entries from Crimea whatever the call and counting them as
> Ukraine for DXCC is plausible.
>
> I hope all those enthusiastic advocates of Crimean hams' rights to operate
> would be greeting the solution of them using Russian calls but being
> counted
> as Ukraine till the political situation will be solved and things return to
> normal. That in my mind could be a compromise CQWW could consider.
>
> 73
> Tonno
> ES5TV
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com <javascript:;>]
> On Behalf Of
> Steve London
> Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 6:19 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com <javascript:;>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Crimea, Taiwan and CQWW
>
>
> This may come as a surprise to some of you, but the USA and the UN do not
> recognize the Republic of China (Taiwan) as a country.
> Diplomatically, Taiwan (BV) is part of the Peoples Republic of China (BY).
> 172 of the 193 UN member countries (including the USA) agree with this
> position on Taiwan.
>
> So, applying the same logic that CQ magazine management has applied to
> Crimea, QSO's with Taiwan should only be counted if they are made by
> licensees of the Peoples Republic of China (BY). A BV-issued license is not
> legitimate. A BV-issued license is no different than the 1B1 licenses
> issued
> by the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (which also does not count for
> DXCC).
>
> I am not saying that I agree with the position CQ has taken on
> Russian-licensed Crimeans, nor that BV-licensees should not be counted,
> just
> the inconsistency in CQ magazine policies.
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com <javascript:;>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com <javascript:;>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|