[CQ-Contest] R: ARRL DX CW Results - Did Anyone Else Notice?

[Chuck Dietz]

Oh gee, I almost forgot that this is a hobby!

Chuck W5PR

On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 12:06 PM S57AD <mirko.s57ad at gmail.com> wrote:

> Can't agree more, Braco!
>
> 73  Mirko, S57AD
>
> V V tor., 22. avg. 2023 ob 18:08 je oseba Emir Memic <
> emir.memic at emssolutions.at> napisala:
>
> > Why do we made our lives more difficult as they are?
> >
> > If we realized there is problem with FCC and CEPT
> > Why don´t we work on it and try to change it to better
> >
> > What is better ? I would say more activity, more contesting, more
> > operators on the air ...more fun.
> >
> > All those restrictions are good for what ?
> >
> > I´m here not to charge if rules were broken or not...just imagine to
> focus
> > all energy from here to
> > allow more activity over the world.
> >
> > Going back to W2GD first post
> > "So the questions:  Was the use of FS/KO1A for this ARRL DX CW operation
> > legal under US CEPT rules governing the use of a US issued call?   If
> not a
> > legitimate use of his US call, should the operator have been awarded
> first
> > place over VP2V/AA7V in the results?  If we agree use of an unauthorized
> > callsign took place,  should the operation be assigned check log status
> or
> > be disqualified under ARRL DX rules?   And one more question, should the
> > contacts made with FS/KO1A be given credit under the DXCC program if the
> > callsign was in fact unauthorized?"
> > I would say
> > The question should be: "what do we need to change to make operation like
> > this more "legal" and have more competition each ear. And how we need to
> > change FCC and CEPT rules if needed! "
> >
> >
> > 73
> > Braco
> > E77DX
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Emir Memic
> > EMS Solutions
> > Koehlergasse 12/3
> > 1180 Vienna
> > Austria
> > +4369919227041
> > ATU53588808
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces+emir.memic=
> > emssolutions.at at contesting.com> Im Auftrag von r-emails at n5ot.com
> > Gesendet: Montag, 21. August 2023 23:21
> > An: Cq Contest <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> > Betreff: [CQ-Contest] R: ARRL DX CW Results - Did Anyone Else Notice?
> >
> > Matt, thanks for posting.  Of course everyone in the conversation is
> > interested in what you have to say.  I will try to keep my comments brief
> > and on-topic.
> >
> > Your posts convince me I am right by urging us to move the conversation
> > away from CEPT.  It turns out CEPT is a big mud pit way out in the weeds.
> > There is no reason to talk about CEPT, when it is easier to talk about
> > whether or not it is okay for someone to use their FCC license the way
> you
> > used yours.
> >
> > That is easier and more sensible.
> >
> > Your posts explain your opinion about what FCC rules mean.  I appreciate
> > your sharing your opinion about it.  I'm curious if you (Matt) or the
> > contest sponsor (ARRL), have actually asked the FCC what they think, or
> if
> > you are guessing at the answer.  That should determine if your score
> should
> > stand or if your operation was in violation of the rules of your FCC
> > license.
> >
> > To clarify, W5OV did say "We consulted with the FCC on this specific
> > matter" but the specific matter he is talking about (CEPT) is not the
> one I
> > am asking about here (FCC License).  CEPT is not the question.  I get it
> > they are intertwined, but at the end of the day, the FCC should be able
> to
> > say YES it was within FCC rules for Matt to use his USA license the way
> he
> > did -or- NO it was not.  It sounds like it's possible the FCC said
> > something like "it's CEPT there is nothing we can do" but of course I
> could
> > be wrong which is why I am asking the guy who had the conversastion.
> Bob,
> > if you will clarify that the FCC specifically said that what Matt did is
> > allowed under FCC rules, I feel sure the issue will end and everyone will
> > be satisfied.  Thank you for graciously accepting doubt in a respectful
> and
> > courteous forum.
> >
> > I totally understand that maybe FCC never considered this question and
> did
> > not have an answer.  Oops.  We are all human, after all.  That will just
> > show us (me, you, ARRL, FCC) where we need to improve.
> >
> > Matt, thank you again for weighing in.
> >
> > 73 - Mark N5OT
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
>
>
> --
> Mirko S57AD
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>