Topband: Fwd: ARRL Board meets next week - I'm looking for input

[Doug Renwick]

I am in complete agreement with Bob and Charlie.  The ARRL has dumbed down
the DXCC award to the point where it is nearly meaningless.

Doug

I wasn't born in Saskatchewan, but I got here as soon as I could.

-----Original Message-----

Mike,

I also do not like the idea of remote station operation being acceptable for
DXCC.
(Charlie, you have one more year on me,   I was licensed in 1958 :-)
I have pursued the DXCC awards for all these years and now to allow remote
op to be granted
the same awards gives the DXCC awards almost zero value. Whether the remote
operation is 
rented or self owned it makes no difference.  I'm sure a lot of us have the
same thinking on this
but haven't had the opportunity to express our feelings.  Actually I believe
the majority of ARRL DXers feel this 
way.   I think the board needs to find a way to get input from the majority
!
Lastly,  One consideration for the board to look at is to have a separate
DXCC category for remote operation. Then
everyone is happy and there would be a level playing field for each
category, home station or remote.  (After all that is the 
crux of the issue)


73,
Bob
K6UJ



> On Jul 10, 2015, at 12:54 PM, Charles Cu nningham
<charlie-cunningham at nc.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi, Mike
> 
> Well, I've been licensed and a DXer since February 1957.  In my opinion
> remote stations and operations should NOT be acceptable for DXCC. Perhaps
a
> special NEW DXCC could be established for those operations Most of us over
> the decades have worked diligently so improve our stations and antennas
> within the bounds available to us!  To have to compete with remote Super
> Stations that are sited to provide significant advantages on certain DX
> paths or bands REALLY spoils it for oo many of us, and establishes is as a
> "Sport for the Rich" like so many other things in our society!  I am
opposed
> to offering conventional "DXCC" credit for remote operations!
> 
> 73,
> Charlie, K4OTV
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tony
> K1AMF
> Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 10:10 AM
> To: topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Topband: Fwd: ARRL Board meets next week - I'm looking for input
> 
> FYI, now's your chance to speak up if you haven't already.  Please e-mail
> N2YBB or other ARRL board members directly with any questions or comments.
> Not looking to rehash things here on the reflector.
> 
> -------- Original message --------
> From: ARRL Members Only Web site <memberlist at www.arrl.org>
> Date: 07/09/2015  7:01 PM  (GMT-05:00)
> To: k1amf at live.com
> Subject: ARRL Board meets next week - I'm looking for input
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Next week, the Board of Directors will be holding their second meeting of
> the year.  One of the topics up for discussion is the recent change in
DXCC
> rules, particularly as to the use of remote operations for DXCC credit.
> 
> I would be interested in knowing what you, the ARRL member, feel about the
> rules for DXCC.  In particular, I would like to know what your opinion is
> regarding crediting (for awards) DX contacts made by remote control
> operations, be they through self owned or rented stations.
> 
> I would be also be interested in your experiences if you have operated
> remotely in chasing DX for DXCC credit.
> 
> If you have any other items of interest, please also let me know.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> 73 de Mike N2YBB
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> ARRL Hudson Division
> Director: Mike Lisenco, N2YBB
> n2ybb at arrl.org
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> To unsubscribe from messages, go to:
> http://p1k.arrl.org/oo/9f9aac45c9716441c7caaf5957d1c686
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> 
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus