[RTTY] Digital DXCC or ARRL Board of Directors, respectfully: have my strong disagreement

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

 > I agree.  This is a mistake.  RTTY is a fundamental and historical
 > mode.  CW, SSB, RTTY.  Dropping it in favor of a generic Digital tag
 > does not provide proper respect for a core mode.

While I also mourn the loss of the "RTTY" DXCC, it is a change that is
inevitable.  Even the "SSB" DXCC is not "SSB" DXCC - it is "Phone"
DXCC (check your certificates if you have one and look at the DXCC
page on the ARRL web site.  Just as the "RTTY" (now "Digital") DXCC
accepts confirmations using a wide variety of digital encoding -
from IAT2 ("RTTY") in various data rates, to PSK, QPSK, AMTOR/PACTOR,
at their various rates to "strange" modes like MFSK, JT-modes, etc.
so to does the "Phone" DXCC accept many forms or analog modulation
- from double sideband with carrier "AM" to SSB, FM, and even SSTV
and probably digital voice.

"RTTY" has not been an accurate name for the RTTY DXCC for many - maybe
20 (?) years.  I'm sure there were as many complaints from many of the
old-timers when the "AM" DXCC was changed to "phone" - certainly there
were complaints when confirmations using "SSB" were first accepted
(after all, SSB had that 10 dB advantage over AM - it was unfair).

I am happy my "Digital" DXCC says RTTY and I don't intend to change it
- but it's time to recognize what has been happening for a long time.
Several of my confirmations are digital modes other than ITA2 - even
though I've worked all of the entities using "RTTY" - since some of
the "RTTY" operators simply would not QSL over the years while newer
"digital" operators don't seem to be so pecuniary!

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 8/2/2011 6:47 PM, Jeff Blaine wrote:
> I agree.  This is a mistake.  RTTY is a fundamental and historical
> mode.  CW, SSB, RTTY.  Dropping it in favor of a generic Digital tag
> does not provide proper respect for a core mode.  I can see something
> (also traditional) like SSTV being logically called Digital.   But
> this is a minor mode as is PSK and all the other digital variants.
>
> RTTY because of it's fundamental place in radio history, strong use
> in modern times, and huge growth rate, deserves to remain a separate
> category.  I can only believe that the league did not have an
> adequate understanding of the prevalence of RTTY when considering
> their vote otherwise they would have left RTTY as a separate and
> distinct entity.
>
> 73, Jeff ACØC www.ac0c.com
>
> -----Original Message----- From: iw1ayd Sent: Tuesday, August 02,
> 2011 5:32 PM To: rtty at contesting.com Subject: [RTTY] Digital DXCC or
> ARRL Board of Directors, respectfully: have my strong disagreement
>
> Hi to all.
>
> Just to read the doc abou and not my personal opinion go there:
>
> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Board%20Meetings/2011%20Second%20MeetingMinutes%281%29.pdf
>
>  ( Take care of the URL line fragmenting and about the dead space
> representation as %20 )
>
>
> Abstract from "Minutes of the 2011 Second Meeting - ARRL Board of
> Directors - July 15-16. 2011"
>
> 29. On motion of Mr. Fenstermaker, seconded by Mr. Edgar, the
> following resolution was ADOPTED: WHEREAS the DX Advisory Committee
> (DXAC) was charged to investigate many aspects of the ARRL DX
> program; and WHEREAS Amateur Radio technology has advanced to include
> many variations of digital communication; and WHEREAS the DXAC has
> recommended changing the DXCC Award category from RTTY to Digital or
> RTTY/Digital or Digital Mixed; and WHEREAS the Programs&  Services
> Committee (PSC) deliberated this change and, along with ARRL staff
> believe the best revised name for this award is Digital DXCC, and
> WHEREAS, the ARRL thanks the DXAC for its work on this name change;
> Therefore, it is RESOLVED that the ARRL Board accepts the
> recommendation of the PSC to change the title of the RTTY DXCC Award
> to the DIGITAL DXCC Award.
>
>
> What to say, there are no reasons nor facts by any means about the
> decision taken inside that document, as seen here in the abstract.
> The phrase " WHEREAS Amateur Radio technology has advanced to
> include many variations of digital communication ...", tells by
> itself all. Technology have changed a lot since the radio was only
> used for CW, sparking or funk (DL), in the meantime, since than and
> until quite now, there weren't changes in the radio technologies,
> accordingly to this 2011 sentence: unbelievable.
>
> So, RTTY was RTTY, Phone was Phone and CW was CW. Now, 2011, the
> silliest and subtle discovery that whatever is not Phone or CW must
> be called Digital, like several appliances we have on hands or at
> home. So CW, a digital mode by default and by any mean, will remain
> unDigital as Phone, they couldn't could not be assimilated. RTTY,
> that by itself haven't any remarkable nor visible soul as Phone o CW,
> instead will be fully assimilated. Yes like the Star Trek saga, "Any
> resistance will be futile ...". In the movie that was a nice
> characterization, now it is only an awful envision at best.
>
> Instead to clearly change anything, i.e. adding a Digital DXCC award
> - yes why not, now we are all assimilated as Digital Borg. Worst,
> leaving out more than half of the world that is already digital since
> than. The sacred soul of CW and its big weapons. Playing  between
> presence or absence of a single signal and coding signs accordingly
> mean enough digital to my, any(?), eyes and my ears, but I would not
> start a religious discussion there. All the old DEC self instruction
> tapes have already made this point strong enough in the NRZ signals
> chapter, almost 35 years ago (just the clock/timing recovering may
> seems to gets out of the picture ... fuzzy or not fuzzy). Well done,
> another foot in the grave and nobody know how many of those we have
> to spare.
>
> Nemo propheta in patria.
>
>
> 73 de iw1ayd Salvo
>
>