Bob,
I don't have an argument against adding single mode versions
of 5BWAS (although in this day I would argue that it should
be 9BWAS <G>) if they are added for all three major mode
groups (CW, SSB, and RTTY/DIGITAL). I suspect one of the
reasons the 5BWAS (and 5BDXCC) award is not issued on a per
mode basis is to avoid the need to produce and stock per mode
plaques.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Robert Chudek - K0RC
> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 1:12 PM
> To: rtty@contesting.com
> Subject: [RTTY] 5-Band RTTY WAS
>
>
> Joe,
>
> Actually, *I* am the one suggesting heresy, not you.
>
> But before we get started, I thought you, me, Bill, and
> others should watch this video:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SEVuSZDIcI&feature=related
>
>
>
> {Argument begin}
>
> The 5-Band WAS CW, Phone, RTTY would only be an addition to
> the existing WAS Specialty awards being offered. Here's what
> they say about specialty certificates:
>
> "Aside from the basic certificate for any combination of
> bands/modes, specialty certificates are issued for a variety
> of different bands and modes such as Satellite, 160-meters,
> SSTV, Digital, Phone, and each VHF band. Available
> endorsements, for a $7.50 charge, include CW, Novice, QRP,
> EME, and any single bands. The Digital and Phone awards are
> available for the various modes. They will be dated, but not
> numbered."
>
> So in essence, if I read this right, you can already apply
> for 5 single band awards. ARRL is processing those cards
> anyway so I don't see any "extra work" involved. Maybe it's
> the $7.50 * 5 = $37.50 instead of $7.50 * 1 = $7.50 that is
> the deterrent to adding 5BWAS CW, Phone, and RTTY? If that's
> the case, they could adjust the processing fee to compensate
> for the extra work needed for these achievements.
>
> The ARRL "rules" need to evolve with the times. When these
> certificate programs were first created, no one had
> computers, even the ARRL. Everything was hand processed. So I
> don't see record keeping/tracking as a huge issue either.
>
> So... in the context of the video... did you sign up for the
> basic 5-minute argument or the full 10 sessions? :-)
>
> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
>
>
>
> ---- PART OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE THREAD ----
>
> Bob,
>
> > I think it's time to petition the ARRL again, but this time
> > for the 5-Band RTTY WAS award. I'll check to see what the
> > process is and make an attempt to get 5BWAS RTTY as another
> > award. You suggestions will be appreciated. I have never
> > attempted anything like this so I've got some learning to do!
>
> Not to be a heretic but why should there be a 5BWAS RTTY when
> the rules say:
> "There are no specialty 5 Band awards or endorsements."
>
> That means there is no 5BWAS-Phone, 5BWAS-CW or even "5BWAS-
> standing on your head."
>
> You are really asking that the entire 5B WAS award be redesigned
> to support specialty awards and endorsements. I do not think that
> the Awards Committee wants to get into setting rules/criteria for
> specialty awards or the added burden of specialized card checking
> and record keeping.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|