[RTTY] K1N vs ARRL

[Paul Stoetzer]

"v) The control operator of a club station may accept compensation for
the periods of time when the station is transmitting telegraphy
practice or information bulletins, provided that the station transmits
such telegraphy practice and bulletins for at least 40 hours per week;
schedules operations on at least six amateur service MF and HF bands
using reasonable measures to maximize coverage; where the schedule of
normal operating times and frequencies is published at least 30 days
in advance of the actual transmissions; and where the control operator
does not accept any direct or indirect compensation for any other
service as a control operator."

73,

Paul, N8HM

On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 3:09 PM, john <w8wej at citynet.net> wrote:
> what???
> On 2/7/2015 7:34 PM, Paul Stoetzer wrote:
>>
>> The ARRL lawyers' position is that, if they are paying the control
>> operator, they cannot deviate from the schedule unless the schedule
>> deviation is announced and published in advance due to the wording of
>> the regulations, so the control operator at the ARRL has to fire up
>> the transmitter even if there's a station there.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Paul, N8HM
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Bob Burns W9BU <w9bu_lists at rlburns.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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 at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty