Hello to all.
Just few notes from the desk here. I agreed and still agree silently
with Fabi VA2UP and Bill W6WRT. I appreciated their words and I would
stay silent but sometimes I couldn't resist .
The decision as far as I could see the words used by the documents and
something reported here by others isn't exclusively driven by the rules
of the DXCC desk. It could seem, but it is not driven by that. Almost in
the way anybody with a simple mind could imagine.
May be it was done in the reversal, wrong, way.
"... We have to accommodate a new entry for sure, let us deal with this
businesses deleting a nearby element ... not to increase the total
amount of awards and having several more happy customers ..."
It seems driven by what is called "technology advancing". That's cited
in the minute I pointed out and anybody could see . Not to cite some
silliest reasons that sometime bubbled out, ranging from the "why not"
to "all those mode are the same thing".
Well, what could be the "technology advancing"of today or yesterday and
when that subtle change was made? There was undoubtedly a technology
advancing in digital communications well out of ours roofs with just
something under ours roofs as ham radio digital communications operators
in the late years: that's for sure. But I still doesn't see what the
hell it means about the decision to get rid of RTTY then or now ...
May be somebody was asking for a Digital DXCC, "well why not", but this
doesn't means that anythings that is the most similar to the popular
view, RTTY, must be de facto vacuumed to accommodate a new DXCC class.
As this could be the perception of who cares about words and meanings.
As the rules impose not to add on of awards ... simply cancels the
nearest to accommodate the newest, well done. Great idea. So silly that
seems unbelievable. Well done. The juggernaut was in motion.
By the way such sort of technology advancing was happen several years
ago and we are still dealing with DXexpeditions that ignore this thing
and use QRG plainly placed inside the PSK sub bands. Witch one is this
technology advance that happen so recently to impose a move so silly?
Gibberish.
What the next advance in technology? DA DA DA DA or DI DI DI DI or all
together why not.
Out of this if who make the decision is or was operating RTTY have no
meaning at all. Even who operate CW isn't anymore a perfect chevalier
just because him or she operate CW. Listen and read on that CW contest
weekend.
Thanks to God there is the SARTG next weekend and it is RTTY only and
I am still learning everything . CU all there.
73 de iw1ayd Salvo
PS ... I don't know when and if I will survive to that date but I am
already laughing thinking when somebody will suddenly discover that CW
seems Digital too, as it is out of any possible discussion. Fuzzy
digital modes, non fuzzy digital modes, remember. I have no advocacy for
CW but right now it seems the only ham radio mode with a soul, all the
other modes are colored as me. We are going back, back and back.
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|