At 01:52 PM 5/4/2009, you wrote:
With all due respect, Larry, your "ONE QUESTION" is a test unrelated
to what the rule says. The rule itself says it applies to the
additional self-assigned identifier separated by the "/", so the
question is the conflict posed by "R," not "/R." If the "/" was
included in the conflict test, there would be no reason for the
rule, since no country is allocated "/" or other non-alphanumerics
as part of its national call letter pool.
Au contrare, my friend.
The question is posed by the addition of anything that could
reasonably be seen to obscure, hide or somehow bring one to the
belief that the identifying sign was something other than what it is.
The "/R" addition to a callsign does not and indeed - CANNOT do that,
as "R" alone is NOT an identifier that is associated with another country.
You might as well argue that the use of ANY of the 26 letters of the
alphabet are inadmissible because SOMEONE might ue them in their own
callsign. For that matter - the 10 digits are also out - same reasoning.
Sorry - but I stand by my comments.
The "/R" addendum to a callsign is NOT a violation of the
"self-assigned identifier rule".
Nothing in the rule limits "conflict" to the amateur service. If
another country has the authorization under international treaty to
give broadcasters, ships at sea, or long-range baby monitors a
callsign beginning with (or consisting of) "R," we can't legally use
it following a "/". Sure, it's a one-size-fits-all rule, but what's new?
Again - WRONG. The question is whether or not "/R" ALONE is an
identifier for another country - which it is NOT.
Good amateur practice would suggest the shortest legal repeater ID
regardless, to reduce the time you're occupying the spectrum. If the
"/R" is not required, why would anyone use it? To distinguish the
repeater from all the other Morse chatter you hear on 2m FM?
More accurately, to distinguish the repeater ID'er from ANY other
traffic - including that of the individual whose license the releater "uses".
All that said, Larry, I don't think you're in danger of an imminent
enforcement action. The FCC doesn't have time to chase violations
that draw no complaints. In fact, in the current political
environment, if the Russians made a fuss, the feds would probably enjoy it.
I am assuredly not in danger of ANY enforcement - as I do not have my
callsign on any repeater at the moment, nor am I the trustee for any
repeater. I simply understand what the words in the English language MEAN.
If the FCC starts cracking down on 10-codes used on 2m, maybe worry then.
"10-codes"? I don't use those either. Indeed - I TEACH prospective
technicians - and the non-use of ciphers is part of my course.
Larry Wagoner - N5WLW
VP - PRCARC
PIC - MS SECT ARRL
