Thanks for contacting him, Jim, and for posting that here.
I find it a bit ironic that K9JF is in my log many times, but... always on
phone. Not one single RTTY/digital/CW QSO. Makes me think of the "taxation
without representation" thing...
Please keep us posted. I think it's darn wrong.
73,
Erik - K5WW
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim W7RY" <jimw7ry@gmail.com>
To: <iw1ayd@googlemail.com>; <rtty@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 11:40 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Digital DXCC or ARRL Board of Directors,respectfully:
have my strong disagreement
>I have emailed Jim Fenstermaker, K9JF to find out his justification of
>this.
> I happen to live in the Northwestern Division so he represents me. We
> shall
> see his response.
>
> I also pointed him to the RTTY reflector so he could see the "crap storm"
> he
> has created.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "iw1ayd" <iw1ayd@googlemail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 3:32 PM
> To: <rtty@contesting.com>
> Subject: [RTTY] Digital DXCC or ARRL Board of Directors, respectfully:
> have
> my strong disagreement
>
>> Hi to all.
>>
>> Just to read the doc abou and not my personal opinion go there:
>>
>> http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Board%20Meetings/2011%20Second%20MeetingMinutes%281%29.pdf
>>
>> ( Take care of the URL line fragmenting and about the dead space
>> representation as %20 )
>>
>>
>> Abstract from "Minutes of the 2011 Second Meeting - ARRL Board of
>> Directors - July 15-16. 2011"
>>
>> 29. On motion of Mr. Fenstermaker, seconded by Mr. Edgar, the following
>> resolution was ADOPTED:
>> WHEREAS the DX Advisory Committee (DXAC) was charged to investigate many
>> aspects of the ARRL DX program; and
>> WHEREAS Amateur Radio technology has advanced to include many variations
>> of digital communication; and
>> WHEREAS the DXAC has recommended changing the DXCC Award category from
>> RTTY to Digital or RTTY/Digital or Digital Mixed; and
>> WHEREAS the Programs & Services Committee (PSC) deliberated this change
>> and, along with ARRL staff believe the best revised name for this award
>> is Digital DXCC, and
>> WHEREAS, the ARRL thanks the DXAC for its work on this name change;
>> Therefore, it is RESOLVED that the ARRL Board accepts the recommendation
>> of the PSC to change the title of the RTTY DXCC Award to the DIGITAL
>> DXCC Award.
>>
>>
>> What to say, there are no reasons nor facts by any means about the
>> decision taken inside that document, as seen here in the abstract.
>> The phrase " WHEREAS Amateur Radio technology has advanced to include
>> many variations of digital communication ...", tells by itself all.
>> Technology have changed a lot since the radio was only used for CW,
>> sparking or funk (DL), in the meantime, since than and until quite now,
>> there weren't changes in the radio technologies, accordingly to this
>> 2011 sentence: unbelievable.
>>
>> So, RTTY was RTTY, Phone was Phone and CW was CW. Now, 2011, the
>> silliest and subtle discovery that whatever is not Phone or CW must be
>> called Digital, like several appliances we have on hands or at home. So
>> CW, a digital mode by default and by any mean, will remain unDigital as
>> Phone, they couldn't could not be assimilated. RTTY, that by itself
>> haven't any remarkable nor visible soul as Phone o CW, instead will be
>> fully assimilated. Yes like the Star Trek saga, "Any resistance will be
>> futile ...". In the movie that was a nice characterization, now it is
>> only an awful envision at best.
>>
>> Instead to clearly change anything, i.e. adding a Digital DXCC award -
>> yes why not, now we are all assimilated as Digital Borg. Worst, leaving
>> out more than half of the world that is already digital since than. The
>> sacred soul of CW and its big weapons. Playing between presence or
>> absence of a single signal and coding signs accordingly mean enough
>> digital to my, any(?), eyes and my ears, but I would not start a
>> religious discussion there. All the old DEC self instruction tapes have
>> already made this point strong enough in the NRZ signals chapter, almost
>> 35 years ago (just the clock/timing recovering may seems to gets out of
>> the picture ... fuzzy or not fuzzy). Well done, another foot in the
>> grave and nobody know how many of those we have to spare.
>>
>> Nemo propheta in patria.
>>
>>
>> 73 de iw1ayd Salvo
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|