Well, I'd be in favor of that, Joe! Even though I have it confirmed, I've
always regarded "Scaffold Reef" to be an absolute farce!
73,
Charlie, K4OTV
-----Original Message-----
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Joe
Subich, W4TV
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 7:47 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: DXCC Desk?
Unfortunately "BS Reef" is one of those pre-1998 "countries" that
continue on the list in spite of not meeting current criteria. On
the other hand, I would not object to simply deleting any entity
that did not meet the current standards.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 11/18/2013 4:57 PM, Charlie Cunningham wrote:
> Well, I will be pleased and my faith in DXCC will be restored when they
> delete the farce of "Scaffold Reef" - "B.S.- seven- hotel"!. As far as I'm
> concerned, I f you can't sleep on it and prepare meals on it - it ain't a
> "country"! I by any stretch of the imagination! ( I did work BS7H and
have
> it confirmed, but it's not a "country"!)
>
> 73,
> Charlie, K4OTV
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Joe
> Subich, W4TV
> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 3:56 PM
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: DXCC Desk?
>
>
> Herb,
>
> Get your "facts" straight ... the issues you raise happened in the main
> more than 20 years ago. The latest DXCC rules revision "DXCC 2000" has
> greatly simplified (and removed the subjectivity) from the entities
> criteria (although there are those who can't read a map properly and
> screw up the separation between Saba and Bonaire).
>
> The current criteria are quite simple and transparent - leaving very
> little "interpretation" as to what qualifies as a "political entity",
> or "Geographic Separation Entity". There is simply no opportunity for
> the backroom politics under the current rules. In that regard the
> issues about which you are kvetching have been resolved for 15 years.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
> On 11/18/2013 3:33 PM, Herb Schoenbohm wrote:
>> Gents... Amateur radio is supposed to be devoid of politics as much as
>> possible. but the more you dig the worse it gets. I once attended an
>> IARU Region II meeting in Jamaica and was amazed by all the wheeling and
>> dealing going on with DXCC accreditation at the core. That was nearly 50
>> years ago and it seems not much has changed. I had even heard that the
>> ops at 706T where banned from working any 4X4's but the sharp ops with a
>> wink and a nod just logged VX4*** rather than mentioning anything on the
>> air. Would the ARRL "DXCC Desk" discredit a single 4X4 in need of this
>> one? I sort of doubt it. At times there are bona fide reasons to make
>> exception. Also the creation of private DX preserves by the ARRL for
>> certain Radio Societies is legend. In fact KP5 (Desecheo) should never
>> have been granted DXCC status when Mona Island which permits visitors
>> was refused. Additionally Water Island, which KP2A fought for for
>> years, was clearly not part of the USVI and until recently administered
>> solely by the U.S. Department of interior. But so the story goes that
>> hams in Puerto Rico had decided to join the IARU as a distinct and
>> unique entity apart from the U.S. and the creation of a private DXCC
>> location was the price the ARRL paid to halt those plans. The DXCC
>> rules have been anything but consistant and have been bent and twisted
>> like a heavily gerrymander congressional district to purposely include
>> or exclude voters of certain just to satisfy some.
>>
>>
>> Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/18/2013 3:47 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>>
>>> Len,
>>>
>>>> Why, you might ask after all this suffering, is that this nation
>>>> still is not recognazid as a separate entity to this very small
>>>> world of the global assembly that Ham radio really is?
>>>
>>> Ask the Serbs and Russians why they blocked Kosovar membership in the
>>> UN and prevented ITU from assigning a callsign block, dialing prefix
>>> and internet TLD? If the Serbs and Russians recognize the Palestine
>>> they could certainly allow Kosovo similar international privileges.
>>>
>>> Kosovo is recognized by the US as an "independent state" (see:
>>> http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/4250.htm) and like the EU the US
>>> maintains diplomatic relations with Kosovo. Unfortunately, the
>>> DXCC Rules (see: http://www.arrl.org/files/file/DXCC/DXCC%20Rules.pdf)
>>> do not include the US DOS "Independent States in the World" listing as
>>> a qualifying option for a "Political (Rule 1) Entity".
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _________________
>> Topband Reflector
>>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector
>
_________________
Topband Reflector
_________________
Topband Reflector
|