[Dx-qsl] New DXCC Rules

Sat Jan 24 14:43:50 EST 2015

Now that is the best suggestion I have heard and Dave, it might have had 
a change on the outcome. Please send the suggestion to the ARRL for 
consideration. If not I will. Let me (us) know.
73 Murray K3BEQ
>>> *"It would have been better for the ARRL to have setup an online forum on which DXers could weigh in, and see what their fellow DXers had to say. While this probably would not have changed the outcome, there'd be less of a concern that the changes were made without broad input."*
On 1/24/2015 02:23 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:
>> AA6YQ comments below
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DX-QSL [mailto:dx-qsl-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Doug Renwick
> Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2015 1:59 PM
> To: 'Richard F DiDonna NN3W'; dx-qsl at mailman.qth.net
> Subject: Re: [Dx-qsl] New DXCC Rules
>> Comments ## below:
>> -----Original Message-----
> From: DX-QSL [mailto:dx-qsl-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Richard F DiDonna NN3W
>> DXCC has always been an individual achievement. Always.
>> ## I agree.
>> DXCC has never been an equal footing competition. Operators use their own equipment, their own time, and operate from stations
> featuring different geographies and different topographies.
>> ## I disagree. The ARRL/DXCC sees it otherwise. They publish the DXCC and 5B standings which puts everyone, everyone, into the
> same competition.
>>>>> Yes everyone is in the same competition, but as Rich NN3W pointed out the competitors are not on an equal footing. DXers whose
> QTH is 100 miles from an auroral zone are competing with Dxers whose QTH is on the equator. DXers with a single QTH are competing
> with DXers with multiple QTHs within the same large DXCC entity. DXers who are limited to equipment for which they scrimp and save
> to build by hand are competing with DXers who happen to live near a well-funded club or contest station with monoband stacks and
> four-squares.
>>>>> Other than in contrived situations like WRTC, no two DXers have identical operating conditions. Whoever originally established
> the ARRL DXCC awards decided to mostly ignore these variations. Over the years, DXers in large numbers have pursued these awards,
> despite the fact that the playing field is not remotely level and cannot ever be level. Changes in technology must be addressed one
> way or the other, and there may be no option that pleases a majority of DXers, much less all of them.
>>>>> It would have been better for the ARRL to have setup an online forum on which DXers could weigh in, and see what their fellow
> DXers had to say. While this probably would not have changed the outcome, there'd be less of a concern that the changes were made
> without broad input.
>> 73,
>> Dave, AA6YQ
>>> ______________________________________________________________
> 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
>