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

Fri Jul 10 21:34:05 EDT 2015

Greg,
  I consider this type of operation totally legitimate. The station 
never moves around.
Dave, W5UN
p.s. guys, send your arguments for or against  to your ARRL director 
before Wednesday
p.p.s. lets get this resolved

On 7/11/2015 1:11 AM, Greg Zenger wrote:
> Bob and the others,
>
> I understand (and even agree with, at least to an extent) many of the
> arguments against remote operation. It seems like most of these arguments
> are against remote stations that are rented, or remote stations that are
> self owned but at a different location than the operators primary operating
> location (Other side of country, lower noise QTH, etc.)
>
> Do you have a problem with those of us who operate our own primary stations
> remotely?  Sometimes I am sent out of the continental USA for business
> trips, and I can be away for months at a time.  I'm likely to miss a good
> DXpedition or two during that time away. By operating remotely, it gives me
> something to do in the hotel room when the work for the day is complete,
> and it drives me to build a more robust and reliable station, because I
> dont have the luxury of making repairs until I return home.  It sure is
> nice to have these 'remote' contacts that I make count towards my award.
> Afterall, every contact applied toward my award was made from the same
> antennas, connected to the same radios, in the same yard, regardless of
> where I was when I touched the paddles or PTT.
>
> Curious to hear your opinions on this particular angle.
>
> 73,
> Greg N2GZ
>
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Robert Harmon <k6uj at pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>