Barry:
Kan has been lobbying the ARRL for some time to make Swain's Island a
new one. He ws the behind the first Ducie Island DXpedition that
Tom Christian VR6TC led a few years back, even though he wasn't on
Ducie, he was the $$$ behind it.
Tom, WW5L
.
Barry wrote:
Just
Under the existing DXCC rules (aka DXCC 2000), there was originally a rule
that permitted recognizing a new or existing entity if there was an existing
IARU society. The purpose of that rule, IMHO, was to keep Hong Kong and
Macau on the list once administration of those two territories were
Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
Coincidence?
I have nothing per se against a new entity. It's the process that bothers
me. I'm in favor of open discussion and debate. Now I'm not saying that
anything wrong was done... but I dislike an appearance of impropriety, and
right now, there is (IMHO)
Ron W3WN wrote:
The unintentional side effect was the creation of several new entities by
creation of an IARU society -- Ducie for one comes to mind, which followed
from the creation of the Pitcairn Is IARU society. Consider that at least
one of these IARU groups was created solely to in turn
Let's not turn DXCC into another IOTA. Just because many of us have
worked them all, or close to it, doesn't mean we should to create new
ones using loop holes that were not the intent or spirit of the rules.
73,
Barry
John Warren wrote:
I suggested turning Andy ZD9BV, the only active ham
Creating "New Ones"stimulatesthe ARRL cash flow. Everyone otherwise stagnated, near or at the top,then submits an endorsement and accompanying $$$...
Don N7EF
-- Original message from Barry [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -- Just wondering why DXCC changed the rules to seemingly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Creating New Ones stimulates the ARRL cash flow. Everyone otherwise
stagnated, near or at the top, then submits an endorsement and
accompanying $$$...
Don N7EF
EXACTLY! Plus the donations from Yaecomwood to the DXpeditions of which
I'm sure ARRL gets a cut.
--
]
To: Dx-Chat dx-chat@njdxa.org
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 10:13 AM
Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] Why the new DXCC rule
Under the existing DXCC rules (aka DXCC 2000), there was originally a rule
that permitted recognizing a new or existing entity if there was an
existing
IARU society. The purpose
On Jul 29, 2006, at 11:38 AM, David Johnson wrote:
This rule has been discussed many times. At the Visalia DX
Convention for example, Wayne Mills talked about it at length
before a very large crowd of DXers. He even ask for a show of
hands from those who would like to see some new
Division DXAC rep, and I've been DX'ing for close to
30 years. That is another story.
73
-Original Message-
From: David Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 2:38 PM
To: Ron Notarius W3WN; Dx-Chat
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Why the new DXCC rule
This rule has been
from the Atlantic Division DXAC rep, and I've been DX'ing for
close to
30 years. That is another story.
73
-Original Message-
From: David Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 2:38 PM
To: Ron Notarius W3WN; Dx-Chat
Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Why the new DXCC rule
11 matches
Mail list logo
