quoting... "HOWEVER, surely dxcc could tell what kind of documentation is necessary from any one entity or another, and be able to name the local official who will approve an op that dxcc will also approve."
This is not true at all.. I know that there are many different scenarios, not all which are predictable for which the ARRL could accept some form of paperwork, documentation, etc and consider that good enough to approve it. The world is a changing place, and heck the guy who gives approval over the phone could be shot by the time you get there, especially in some place like Yemen. So in short lets chill all the pontification and start worrying about working Chris when he gets on the air. Paul On 8/11/07, Charles Harpole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I understand why dxcc can not pre-judge any one operation for validation for > dxcc credit..... have to wait until the op is actually done. > > HOWEVER, surely dxcc could tell what kind of documentation is necessary from > any one entity or another, and be able to name the local official who will > approve an op that dxcc will also approve. In my case, still a sore point, > dxcc would not tell me who was the key official to contact in Lao (PDRL), > although immediately after my op, dxcc was able to go directly to a Lao > official to check on me. Why not just tell me that guy's name in advance > and save all my QSOs the pain of getting my XW1UD card that does not count. > > I would never expect prior approval before the actual op, but surely > whatever validation procedure will occur just after the op could be shared > BEFORE the op. > > Further, several entities have a confusing or non-existing ways of getting > ham op permissions. Lao had three offices, then, all claiming to be THE > only one needed. There is no way someone in CT can have the detailed > knowledge of the inner workings of some entities governments (or lack of > same) so apparently just go on whatever comes up at the time. When a system > refuses nice looking PAPER signed by folks who seem to be ok, and > nevertheless OKs a tape recorded approval that is allowed to count, things > appear decidedly ad hoc. > > My thot is.... if the op has photo proof of presence in the entity, > operates, and departs without being arrested, then it should count..... Not > being evicted nor arrested to me is proof the local authorities approved. I > think, on the other hand, if an op is evicted (or arrested) that is obvious > evidence that the op was bogus. > > I still want to get approval to activate an iceberg..... 73 > > Charles Harpole > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > Messenger Café — open for fun 24/7. Hot games, cool activities served daily. > Visit now. http://cafemessenger.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_AugHMtagline > > > > Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems > http://njdxa.org/dx-chat > > To post a message, DX related items only, [email protected] > > This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA > http://njdxa.org > > Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [email protected] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
