RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] K1N vs ARRL

To: rtty@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] K1N vs ARRL
From: Bob Burns W9BU <w9bu_lists@rlburns.net>
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2015 14:28:25 -0500
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
On 2/7/2015 11:38 AM, Charles Morrison wrote:

K1N was there first.

Didn't we just have a heated discussion about this a few weeks ago?

As I recall, some posters took the position that RTTY operators should know that certain frequencies are accepted watering holes for various modes and are covered by gentlemen's agreements. More specifically, the stated position seemed to be that that RTTY operators should know about relatively fixed JT65 operating frequencies and, therefore, avoid them. If that position is valid, then those same RTTY operators should know about the relatively fixed ARRL bulletin operating frequencies and, therefore, avoid them.

If the concept applies to JT65, doesn't it apply to ARRL bulletins?

I acknowledge that I may be poking at the fire.

Bob...

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

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