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

[JC]

Hi Larry

You right, I sent my comments to the board. The main rule I would like to
see implemented it the one in place, or  almost in place I should say it. 

All 160m QSL cards are verified by a certified 160m DXCC holder. QSO's
during day time are  rejected.

However LOTW does not have a simple software routine to check day time QSO's
on 160m and validate them. I reported several day time QSO's on 160m from
few PY's well know, but because the way LOTW works, if the QSO match on the
files when those QSO's was uploaded. It mean's validated!! ... and  as valid
the DXCC credit was  just few dollars away!! Without the same QSL
verification on/for the paper QSL!

I don't think the DXCC board will protect Ham Radio service when ARRL opened
the door for commercial use of ham radio frequencies paid U$ per minute. 

I see nothing wrong with the love to implement a remote station or a DX club
remote station.  I really love the technology that we built , it is part of
our DNA....

BUT !! and here is the BUT , when we welcome HRH to commercialize air time
per dollar using our HAM RADIO privilege frequencies, we are in risk to lose
our entire ham radio privilege. It has nothing to do with remote operation
at all. It is about the nature of our service.

We are allowing the change of the nature of our service! When we do so. It
is just a matter of who pay more, it become a price negotiation of the air
waves usage . No love or passion anymore , just pure money talk.

Just to be aware there is real invasion of new HF services hungry for
broadband digital communication. Some future discussion will be only about
revenue and not about public safety, innovation, love for radio, all things
we care and hold us together for the last century.

Regards
JC
N4IS 

-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Larry
Burke
Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2015 3:01 PM
To: topband at contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Fwd: ARRL Board meets next week - I'm looking for
input

I am fascinated by the enforceability argument. There are a number
unenforceable DXCC rules. And they JUST ADDED A NEW ONE in January ("For the
purpose of DXCC credit, all transmitters and receivers must be located
within a 500-meter diameter circle, excluding antennas"). At some point it
really does come down to honor. Some folks have it, some folks don't. 

The recent rules "tweaking" was accompanied by lots of words about ethics,
with little clarification of what that word means. While it seems simple,
many are equating "ethics" with "rules". They are not usually the same
thing. 

- Larry K5RK



-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of John
K9UWA
Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2015 12:04 PM
To: <topband at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: Fwd: ARRL Board meets next week - I'm looking for
input

Although I agree with many who have posted to this thread I will only say
this. 

The ARRL can not create a DXCC rule that they have no ability to enforce. 

Other than some He Said She Said that Joe Doe's signal was coming from the
wrong direction so he wasn't transmitting from his home station. Even then
who is to say that Joe Doe wasn't off visiting some ham buddy on the other
side of the country? Then it is legal under current rules. And no one
complains about that type of operation. 

John k9uwa


John Goller, K9UWA & Jean Goller, N9PXF Antique Radio Restorations
k9uwa at arrl.net Visit our Web Site at:
http://www.JohnJeanAntiqueRadio.com
4836 Ranch Road
Leo, IN 46765
USA
1-260-637-6426

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

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