[Dx-qsl] Fwd: Re: Visalia Update DX Forum

Tue Apr 8 14:01:00 EDT 2014

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [Dx-qsl] Visalia Update DX Forum
Date: 	2014年4月08日 10:04:15 -0700
From: 	Ron Lago <ac7dx at comcast.net>
To: 	Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw at verizon.net>
Amen Ron...lets just give them all #1 so it doest take them years to 
achieve it..they did away with cw..why not this??
73
Ron
On 4/8/2014 9:57 AM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
> Anything worthwhile doing should be earned. Making it easier on someone only diminishes the value of the effort and of the reward.
>> "It's supposed to be hard. If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it great."
>> 73, ron w3wn
>>> On 04/08/14, Harvey Hutchison wrote:
>> If we are trying to increase licensing among the younger generations how do
> you tell a new HAM it might take him/her 45+ years (or never) to obtain #1
> Honor Roll?
>> Maybe the DX Rules Committee should consider adding some "younger" (read
> newer) members as well as some Ladies. From my view point as a HAM with a
> Doctorate in Adult Education I know that anytime the composition of a group
> is changed by 20 or more percent it significantly alters the group
> dynamics..... and from my view point we have a concentration of "gray
> beards"...by the way I will be 67 in June......
>> Hutch, NK?S
> (OA4/NK0S, HL9HP, YS9HH, HP1XHH)
> Royal Order of the Wouff Hong
>> -----Original Message-----
> From:dx-qsl-bounces at mailman.qth.net [mailto:dx-qsl-bounces at mailman.qth.net]
> On Behalf Of MG
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 9:22 AM
> To: DX Posts
> Subject: [Dx-qsl] Visalia Update DX Forum
>>> "Visalia Update from the DX Forum (by Rich KY6R)
>> Here is a status update from the Visalia DXCC Forum. This is my
> interpretation of what I heard -- not an official line from the ARRL or the
> DXAC.
>>> Kosovo
>> The panel basically said that Kosovo calls into question what defines an
> "entity". They admitted that this is an imperfect situation, and that if we
> just reverted back to using real "countries", somewhere around 50 entities
> would have to be completely removed from the list. The audience did not like
> that. But they also mentioned that adding Kosovo opens up a real can of
> worms -- so IMHO -- don't expect it to be added any time soon. Changing the
> definition of what an entity is to add in one entity like Kosovo would
> really cause a ripple effect.
>> I agree with their assessment.
>>> DXCC Rules Changes
>> The DXAC praised the previous DXAC members for drafting the 1999 Rules
> Update. They said it had two typos -- but that the team that produced that
> set of rules designed something that seems to have stood the test of time.
> And I agree -- it has -- amazingly so I might add.
>>> Remote Operations
>> Its clear that no matter what is considered, Remote operations rules (like
> running legal power) simply cannot be enforced, and it is really a matter of
> whether or not a person has the conscience to follow the rules or not.
> However, a few rules will most likely be changed -- for example
> -- the use of remote where say -- you are on business in Beijing, and you
> remote into your US station to work a DX-pedition.
>> I also agree with this -- if we cheat -- we only cheat ourselves, and since
> this is a personal achievement award -- we are only competing with
> ourselves.
>>> Kingman Reef
>> Don't expect it to be Deleted -- at least for several years. When I asked
> about its status, the DXAC said: 1.There are no rules that cover what
> happens when an entity disappears because it is under water, and what "under
> water" means. They said nothing could happen until and unless they added in
> a rule to cover this. 2.They also said "What if it comes back?" (My response
> was "What if Maria Teresa Reef comes back?") 3.Finally, they said that they
> wished that they could convince me to try to activate it. My answer was that
> it had been rumored that it would be deleted since 2000, and that even
> though a couple of teams have looked into activating it -- one team that
> estimates it would cost 180ドルK to activate it said it wasn't worth bothering
> with -- and instead would most likely activate another rare KH based entity.
>> I agree with everything the DXAC said -- and understand and respect their
> position. But it still is very frustrating nonetheless.
>> I feel strongly that Kingman Reef will stay on the list but not be Deleted
> for many years. I also expect this to start becoming an issue that will be
> paid more attention to when Kingman Reef enters the Top 10
> -- which will happen maybe in 5 years or so.
>> Personally, this is fine -- it will take me 10 more years to get to HR
> #1 -- and so -- I would bet something will happen in 5 -- 10 years.
>> Who knows -- maybe someone will convince the US F&W to issue a permit and
> then have it activated? Or maybe it will eventually be Deleted?
>> For now, in my mind, its called "Conundrum Reef"...'
>> (SOURCE: DX COFFEE BULLETIN 4/8/2014
>> ______________________________________________________________
> DX-QSL mailing list
> Home:http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx-qsl
> Help:http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post:mailto:DX-QSL at mailman.qth.net
>> This list hosted by:http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list:http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>> ______________________________________________________________
> DX-QSL mailing list
> Home:http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx-qsl
> Help:http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post:mailto:DX-QSL at mailman.qth.net
>> This list hosted by:http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list:http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>> ______________________________________________________________
> DX-QSL mailing list
> Home:http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx-qsl
> Help:http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post:mailto:DX-QSL at mailman.qth.net
>> This list hosted by:http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list:http://www.qsl.net/donate.html