CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] 1977 vanity calls (was Watch your dits this weekend)

To: CQ Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 1977 vanity calls (was Watch your dits this weekend)
From: Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 10:38:38 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Yes, you're right. And those of us who got them didn't have to pay anything
extra and do not have to pay any vanity call fees. I don't recall the words
"vanity call" being used by anyone back then.
I'm still curious about the requirements for the varions "gates" that were
set up by the FCC for availability. My memory ain't what it used to be ...

73, Zack W9SZ


On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:58 AM, James Cain <jamesdavidcain@gmail.com>wrote:

> PULLEEZE!
>
> Those 1977 call signs were NOT *vanity* call signs. They were issued on
> request to those who had passed the Extra Class exam when the exam still
> meant something. As far as I am concerned, the vast majority of us got them
> to have a shorter, more efficient call sign for operating, particularly
> contesting. It had nothing to do with vanity.
>
> Look up the definition of *vanity*.
>
> Jim Cain, K1TN
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>