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
|