CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] "D1WW"

To: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>, cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] "D1WW"
From: Bosko Milankov <yt7ty@mts.rs>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 19:27:19 +0200
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Please explane me, and many others in the word, difference between D1 and Z6 status, taking into consideration ITU regulations, without any political explanations.


Thank you in advance.

Bosko  YU3A




On 13.9.2016 21:38, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
So how do we decide what callsigns are good and what are not? We have master lists to keep people from playing games with the clusters and RBN network.

I believe by posting your reply that you made it more of a political post than the prior posts. If you do some research you will see there are two sides to every story.

According to my sources these two areas are supported by Russia.

Politics have always been part of radio. That cat was let out of the bag long before I was born.

If we can verify that these callsigns are real hams and have some sort of legal basis to operate I would allow them. My guess is that they are using that callsign without any ITU coordination which makes them a bit suspect in my eyes.


W0MU






On 9/13/2016 12:38 PM, Mats Strandberg wrote:
Lugansk and Donetsk

_______________________________________________
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>