[DX-CHAT] homeCall/p from some of Lecce Islands
EU-091. Operators Giovanni/IW7DOL, Marco/IZ7DOK, Luigi/IW8EQS, Oreste/IZ8EDJ, Salvatore/IZ8GGF and other friends will be active as homeCall/p from some of Lecce Islands (several IIA references). QSL via their home callsigns. See photos and info on: http://www.strangeradioteam.com Greetings Oreste D'Anzilio, IZ8EDJ S.R.T. Founder Coordinator QSL Manager ( ED8SRT, EF8SRT, IR8C, L30BST, V51KC, V55SRT, V55O, YI3SRA ) www.strangeradioteam.com Vote your DXpeditiond: http://www.strangeradioteam.com/wwdxt/ --- Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article
I think any ham who is concerned about the future of our hobby should read this article in Computing Unplugged Magazine on Broadband Over Powerline (BPL). http://www.computingunplugged.com/issues/issue200608/1818001.html . Be sure to click onto home http://www.computingunplugged.com/ to view the other BPL articles. While the series' intent is to present a fair and balanced summation of the controversy, it has to date been somewhat one-sided on the side of BPL and needs more input from ham radio's viewpoint. I have already submitted a lengthy message-article to the editor, received a favorable response from him, and will now have to update, clarify, and document my article for possible future publication. I am certain there are others who are far more technically oriented than I who might also think to submit a well-written letter (email message) to Computing Unplugged Magazine, especially if you have had firsthand experience with BPL interference. -- 73 de Fred Stevens K2FRD, VO2FS http://homepage.mac.com/k2frd/K2FRD.html Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article
Fred, I got errors on the complete link you showed, but once I went to the home page itself [http://www.computingunplugged.com/], I could see all the articles, including the one you cited. Interesting. Nice op-ed piece from N3OH explaining the other side of things, too. Of course, in the editor's controversy heats up piece, he has to include a few put-downs. Weird antennas, strange call signs, and my favorite, some of them claim broadband over powerline radiates. Now let's think about that one for a moment... we're get knocked for pointing out that the Emperor is wearing no clothes? But no, the editor isn't BIASED or anything. We were prepared to mock the ham radio operators as being so last century. If you can win them over on the facts, humiliate them until they shut up and go away? Grrr. 73, ron w3wn From: Fred Stevens K2FRD [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/08/14 Mon AM 10:06:55 CDT To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article I think any ham who is concerned about the future of our hobby should read this article in Computing Unplugged Magazine on Broadband Over Powerline (BPL). http://www.computingunplugged.com/issues/issue200608/1818001.html . Be sure to click onto home http://www.computingunplugged.com/ to view the other BPL articles. While the series' intent is to present a fair and balanced summation of the controversy, it has to date been somewhat one-sided on the side of BPL and needs more input from ham radio's viewpoint. I have already submitted a lengthy message-article to the editor, received a favorable response from him, and will now have to update, clarify, and document my article for possible future publication. I am certain there are others who are far more technically oriented than I who might also think to submit a well-written letter (email message) to Computing Unplugged Magazine, especially if you have had firsthand experience with BPL interference. -- 73 de Fred Stevens K2FRD, VO2FS http://homepage.mac.com/k2frd/K2FRD.html Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org 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, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] how much is expected these days?
I'm getting my cards ready to send out for Swain's and Montenegro. I have about 4 or 5 Q's for each. In the old days a buck or two was fine. What's the going rate now, especially since Swains was probably a much more difficult and expensive trip? 5 for Swains? 3 for Mentenegro? More? Less? how about some opinions. thanks harry -- No trees were harmed in the sending of this message, however a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced. Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article
The Follow The Money section incensed me and was the basic inspiration for my long email to the Editor. His innuendoes and insinuations were way out of line, so I answered them point by point and took him to task for making such accusations which border on libel. As it turns out, the Editor responded in a very positive manner to my message, requested permission to publish it which I granted with the proviso that he may do so if I clarify, update, and document some of my statements (I needed to confirm that the ARRL does not have any fulltime lobbyists nor office in DC and to track down the League's grassroots program which I have done, among several other things including the fact that BPL CAN be made to be interference-free as evidenced by the Motorola BPL installation at League HQ) and that the ARRL's Annual Report is online showing that it does not receive funds from DSL and cable providers. I have until Wednesday to finish the document, so have dropped a few projects to concentrate on the article. It won't be my best work since I usually spend weeks on articles for publication. However, the Editor is also very active in Boy Scouting (with which I compare the ARRL's non-lobbying efforts and general lack of political influence and controversy). I had presumed Computing Unplugged would be swamped by ham responses to his article and am still hoping that others with more expertise and different perspectives than I will send more technical and debate information. I am also going through recent back issues of QST looking for buzzwords, position papers (there's a good one by Frank Fallon N2FF and the League's grassroots lobbying effort) and additional information along with an emphasis on the politicalization of BPL at the FCC and NTIA levels. Oh, the original link may have unwrapped resulting in a 404 error. Here it is again: http://www.computingunplugged.com/issues/issue200608/1818001.html . Back to work. 73 de Fred K2FRD At 10:50 AM -0500 14/8/06, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: I no longer have any doubt that the editor of this publication is biased. The following paragraph was on the page right after the comment box ... willing to look at, and print, both sides. Fair reporting at its best. And I quote [see Why are we giving BPL all this coverage from http://www.computingunplugged.com/]: Follow the money We're still trying to figure this one out. From all we know of the FCC and their desire to protect the radio spectrum, I have some trouble accepting the claims of the ham operators. It seems to me that it's likely to have been doubtful that the FCC would approve this technology if it was broadcasting as intensely as the hams claim. Whenever there's a dispute this strong, I always look to where the money interests are. We know where the interests of the BPL advocates are. After all, they have chips, equipment, and services to sell. They have a clean, apparent reason for pushing their agenda. I'm not so sure about the ARRL. The ARRL is a membership organization, but it's also a very well-connected political organization as well. How many of the ham radio operators who contacted us experienced problems on their own and how many just read the lobbying documents provided by the ARRL in the organization's magazine? Who's funding the ARRL? Do the cable providers and DSL providers have an interest in this debate? After all, BPL is a direct competitor to cable modems and DSL services. Or is this truly the case of one technology interfering with another? Frankly, if it were just ham radio operators unable to play with their toys, this debate would be a non-issue. Ham radio is really a technology of the 20th Century. It was exciting back then when you couldn't call any country easily except with a ham radio. It was exciting when you couldn't talk to anyone when they were out and about unless they had an operator's license Un freaking believable. Now if I read this correctly, the author is implying... perhaps smearing would be more precise... that the ARRL is against BPL because of hidden funding from DSL and cable providers. And we don't know any better. Keep in mind that the ARRL has said countless times, and I'm paraphrasing here, that the issue wasn't BPL, it was QRM from the early BPL test configurations. And ARRL has been cooperating with one BPL variant (from Motorola if I recall correctly) which has proven to date to NOT cause interference. But I guess it's just easier as to brand the League, and all of us, as the old geezers who won't get out of the way. Don't bother with the little details, you know, like the facts. G. Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH????
I really was hoping for some opinions, not sarcasm. -- No trees were harmed in the sending of this message, however a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced. Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article
Well, it is early in the day yet. I plan on writing something to the editor; I just don't want to do it right now while my dander is up. Can't very well expect the editor/author to stick to fair and balanced reporting unless I try to do it myself... What's really sad is the implication, on face value, of his libel (and that's what it is, IMHO): The primary, if not sole, reason that the ARRL is opposed to BPL is because they must have been paid off to do so by BPL's commercial competitors. So if we're not for you, we must have been bribed to be against you? Oh, as far as the lobbyist thing goes, I thought the League did have someone in DC to represent our interests. But I don't recall the details, and hesitate to comment further without them. (Hopefully someone more in touch with that than I am can get you more specific and accurate information). By the way, do take note that the author/editor indicates at one point that he was once interested in amateur radio and getting a license. Makes one wonder why he didn't, and whether or not he has some ulterior motive in his little smear there. 73 - From: Fred Stevens K2FRD [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/08/14 Mon PM 02:52:45 CDT To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article The Follow The Money section incensed me and was the basic inspiration for my long email to the Editor. His innuendoes and insinuations were way out of line, so I answered them point by point and took him to task for making such accusations which border on libel. As it turns out, the Editor responded in a very positive manner to my message, requested permission to publish it which I granted with the proviso that he may do so if I clarify, update, and document some of my statements (I needed to confirm that the ARRL does not have any fulltime lobbyists nor office in DC and to track down the League's grassroots program which I have done, among several other things including the fact that BPL CAN be made to be interference-free as evidenced by the Motorola BPL installation at League HQ) and that the ARRL's Annual Report is online showing that it does not receive funds from DSL and cable providers. I have until Wednesday to finish the document, so have dropped a few projects to concentrate on the article. It won't be my best work since I usually spend weeks on articles for publication. However, the Editor is also very active in Boy Scouting (with which I compare the ARRL's non-lobbying efforts and general lack of political influence and controversy). I had presumed Computing Unplugged would be swamped by ham responses to his article and am still hoping that others with more expertise and different perspectives than I will send more technical and debate information. I am also going through recent back issues of QST looking for buzzwords, position papers (there's a good one by Frank Fallon N2FF and the League's grassroots lobbying effort) and additional information along with an emphasis on the politicalization of BPL at the FCC and NTIA levels. Oh, the original link may have unwrapped resulting in a 404 error. Here it is again: http://www.computingunplugged.com/issues/issue200608/1818001.html . Back to work. 73 de Fred K2FRD At 10:50 AM -0500 14/8/06, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: I no longer have any doubt that the editor of this publication is biased. The following paragraph was on the page right after the comment box ... willing to look at, and print, both sides. Fair reporting at its best. And I quote [see Why are we giving BPL all this coverage from http://www.computingunplugged.com/]: Follow the money We're still trying to figure this one out. From all we know of the FCC and their desire to protect the radio spectrum, I have some trouble accepting the claims of the ham operators. It seems to me that it's likely to have been doubtful that the FCC would approve this technology if it was broadcasting as intensely as the hams claim. Whenever there's a dispute this strong, I always look to where the money interests are. We know where the interests of the BPL advocates are. After all, they have chips, equipment, and services to sell. They have a clean, apparent reason for pushing their agenda. I'm not so sure about the ARRL. The ARRL is a membership organization, but it's also a very well-connected political organization as well. How many of the ham radio operators who contacted us experienced problems on their own and how many just read the lobbying documents provided by the ARRL in the organization's magazine? Who's funding the ARRL? Do the cable providers and DSL providers have an interest in this debate? After all, BPL is a direct competitor to cable modems and DSL services. Or is this truly the case of one technology interfering with another? Frankly, if it were just ham radio operators unable to play with their toys, this debate would be
RE: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
Urb writes, Am I the only one who is concerned that the ARRL is determining what others may put up on their website? I understand their position but don't we all have the right to post legal information on our websites without censure or repercussions by a third party? I don't know that ARRL is determining what you may or may not post on your web site. What they are saying is that if you choose to post full details of QSOs (specific times), your action can contribute to cheating and as such, it violates he rules of the DXCC program. I don't see this as any different than a business listing the name, address and account numbers of its customers on a public web site. As long as the business does not publish the credit card and social security numbers it's probably not technically illegal but the information may well be enough to enable a less than honest person to get the credit card and social security numbers of those customers. 73, ... Joe, W4TV Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] Otrona 8:16 Attache' Computers
Is there still a market for the Otrona portable computers? I have used one for computer CW and it seems to work fine. Has anyone else tried it? Thanks, Jim, K8OZ Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
Organizations can establish rules governing the behavior of their members so long as those rules are not discriminatory. Its not illegal to put a decimal point between the 1 and the 8 of an 18 mHz QSL either, but submit that card to the DXCC desk for credit and you'll also lose your membership. 73, Dave, AA6YQ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Urb LeJeune Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 16:59 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Subject: [DX-CHAT] ARRL Am I the only one who is concerned that the ARRL is determining what others may put up on their website? I understand their position but don't we all have the right to post legal information on our websites without censure or repercussions by a third party? Urb, W2DEC Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org 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, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
Urb, the premise of your statement is false. You may post anything you wish. However, you must remember that it's THEIR program(DXCC). If you choose to post information that, in the eyes of those managing the program, negates the efforts of those who organized and carried out a DX-Pedition you are free to do so. You simply must be prepared to deal with the wrath of those who you negatively affect. That not only includes the DX-Peditioners, but those who put their time and effort into contacting the DX-Pedition. Be my guest. 73, Mike, W5UC http://members.cox.net/w5uc - Original Message - From: Urb LeJeune [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 3:58 PM Subject: [DX-CHAT] ARRL Am I the only one who is concerned that the ARRL is determining what others may put up on their website? I understand their position but don't we all have the right to post legal information on our websites without censure or repercussions by a third party? Urb, W2DEC Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org 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, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
At 05:30 PM 8/14/2006, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: I don't know that ARRL is determining what you may or may not post on your web site. I think they are. The language is pretty specific: Presentation of such information in any public forum by the station operator, operators or associated parties is not allowed * is not allowed * says to me that I can not post such information publicly. If they had said, Station operator, etc. SHOULD NOT present such information in any public forum... lest there be consequences..., I would not have interpreted it the same way. 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.ad1c.us Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
Urb LeJeune wrote: Am I the only one who is concerned that the ARRL is determining what others may put up on their website? I understand their position but don't we all have the right to post legal information on our websites without censure or repercussions by a third party? Urb, W2DEC If that was the only thing rotten in Newington, we would be lucky! -- _____ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ John L. Sielke ( W )( 2 )( A )( G )( N ) http://w2agn.net \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ \_/ http://www.blurty.com/users/w2agn See the underhanded actions of QRP-ARCI®. http://w2agn.net/noarci.html Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] Coax wanted
This is DX related as it goes to my antennas! I am looking for 500 foot rolls of RG8X and RG-213. The RG8X will end up on Cocos-Keeling, VK9CGG. Anyone have any of this stuff? I realize shipping will be expensive but still looking around before going full bore! 73, Charlie, W0YG.. Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
To complete the contest of the DXCC rule: and may be considered sufficient reason to deny ARRL award credit for contacts with any station for which such presentations have been made. One can publish whatever one chooses on one's WEB site but one will have to live with the consequence of one's actions. Gerry VE6LB - Original Message - From: Jim Reisert AD1C [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 4:10 PM Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] ARRL At 05:30 PM 8/14/2006, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: I don't know that ARRL is determining what you may or may not post on your web site. I think they are. The language is pretty specific: Presentation of such information in any public forum by the station operator, operators or associated parties is not allowed * is not allowed * says to me that I can not post such information publicly. If they had said, Station operator, etc. SHOULD NOT present such information in any public forum... lest there be consequences..., I would not have interpreted it the same way. 73 - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863 USA +978-251-9933, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.ad1c.us Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org 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, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
- Original Message - From: Urb LeJeune [EMAIL PROTECTED] If the League is going to administer DXCC, or any other awards, let them deal with the cheaters, and not censor information used by the rule keepers. And, therein lies the problem. ARRL does not the ability to deal with those who run 10 KW, but they do have the ability to deal with those who threaten the integrity of the DXCC program. Whether or not DXCC belongs to ARRL or the members in a whole new debate. However in the context of this discussion, it IS their program because the members allow them to administer it. Mike, W5UC http://members.cox.net/w5uc Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
I think a couple key words below are may be considered. I think they could have said will be sufficient ! Looks like wiggle room to me. 73, Carl K8AV To complete the contest of the DXCC rule: and may be considered sufficient reason to deny ARRL award credit for contacts with any station for which such presentations have been made. One can publish whatever one chooses on one's WEB site but one will have to live with the consequence of one's actions. Gerry VE6LB Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] Computing Unplugged Magazine BPL Article
The the moment, I'm giving the editor the benefit of the doubt and will wait to see how he treats my article, presuming it gets published. I lean toward this attitude since, as I mentioned in my incomplete run-on sentence in my last post that he is active in Boy Scouting as am I, and also an Eagle Scout. Scouting teaches tolerance, so I'm being tolerant, at least for now. (Vietnam taught me the other end of the spectrum which is also still with me.) However, my article was (and still is) quite defensive of ham radio's and the ARRL's non-political, non-partisan (in regards to all but ham radio and especially not to special interest groups), and generally non-controversial essence, while being critical of the editor's presumptive insinuations against ARRL and ham radio operators. I am still incensed, but am trying to get beyond that with a rational coherent message; normally, like you, I wait 24 hours before making a response so that I cool off. My initial message from which I am building a foundation is somewhat lukewarm at the point and I'm still trying to moderate the invective and rhetoric. I also presumed that on this list, of all lists, where members are inclined toward argumentation that many would respond with their own invective, especially on the topic of BPL which WILL adversely affect us all. Of course, many probably are just cooling off themselves. :-D 73 de Fred K2FRD At 3:20 PM -0500 14/8/06, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: Well, it is early in the day yet. I plan on writing something to the editor; I just don't want to do it right now while my dander is up. Can't very well expect the editor/author to stick to fair and balanced reporting unless I try to do it myself... What's really sad is the implication, on face value, of his libel (and that's what it is, IMHO): The primary, if not sole, reason that the ARRL is opposed to BPL is because they must have been paid off to do so by BPL's commercial competitors. So if we're not for you, we must have been bribed to be against you? Oh, as far as the lobbyist thing goes, I thought the League did have someone in DC to represent our interests. But I don't recall the details, and hesitate to comment further without them. (Hopefully someone more in touch with that than I am can get you more specific and accurate information). By the way, do take note that the author/editor indicates at one point that he was once interested in amateur radio and getting a license. Makes one wonder why he didn't, and whether or not he has some ulterior motive in his little smear there. 73 -- 73 de Fred Stevens K2FRD, VO2FS http://homepage.mac.com/k2frd/K2FRD.html Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
Exactly.. so if everyone would not make a DXCC submission for 1 year and also not renew their membership for 1 year they would maybe finally realize that the membership is the ARRL and they need the MEMBERSHIP for them to function as a whole. ALL the members should have say in a vote to make rules after they are proposed.. not just a select few to make rules they feel they need, rules should be made by votes from the membership...I do not like a lot of things they do. ALL you ARRL members its your program and Newington is there to work for its members not for themselves. Seems ARRL is run more like a dictatorship than a democratic one. Make a choice cry or take action. 73 Pete -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike(W5UC) Kathy(K5MWH) Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 7:11 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org; Urb LeJeune Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] ARRL And, therein lies the problem. ARRL does not the ability to deal with those who run 10 KW, but they do have the ability to deal with those who threaten the integrity of the DXCC program. Whether or not DXCC belongs to ARRL or the members in a whole new debate. However in the context of this discussion, it IS their program because the members allow them to administer it. Mike, W5UC http://members.cox.net/w5uc Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org 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, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
Pete, you are speaking in terms of a true democracy. That may be practical for small organizations, but as in the case of the US Government that is impractical. That's why we have a Republic(a representative form of government) rather than a true democracy. The League is structured similarly. Additionally, there are those like me who can not opt in or out with their dollars. I have been a life member since you could become one for $200.00. Sometime in the late 60's or early 70's. Mike http://members.cox.net/w5uc - Original Message - From: Peter Penta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 6:57 PM Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] ARRL Exactly.. so if everyone would not make a DXCC submission for 1 year and also not renew their membership for 1 year they would maybe finally realize that the membership is the ARRL and they need the MEMBERSHIP for them to function as a whole. ALL the members should have say in a vote to make rules after they are proposed.. not just a select few to make rules they feel they need, rules should be made by votes from the membership...I do not like a lot of things they do. ALL you ARRL members its your program and Newington is there to work for its members not for themselves. Seems ARRL is run more like a dictatorship than a democratic one. Make a choice cry or take action. 73 Pete -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike(W5UC) Kathy(K5MWH) Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 7:11 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org; Urb LeJeune Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] ARRL And, therein lies the problem. ARRL does not the ability to deal with those who run 10 KW, but they do have the ability to deal with those who threaten the integrity of the DXCC program. Whether or not DXCC belongs to ARRL or the members in a whole new debate. However in the context of this discussion, it IS their program because the members allow them to administer it. Mike, W5UC http://members.cox.net/w5uc Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org 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, dx-chat@njdxa.org 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, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] ARRL
Why would anyone need any more info than callsign, band, mode in an online log to tell if you made the contact? Maybe to try get credit for one they really didn't work? If you made the contact, then the date time is in your log. I sure don't see anything wrong with trying to make it harder on the cheaters. 73, Tim - N3XX - Original Message - From: Peter Penta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 7:57 PM Subject: RE: [DX-CHAT] ARRL Exactly.. so if everyone would not make a DXCC submission for 1 year and also not renew their membership for 1 year they would maybe finally realize that the membership is the ARRL and they need the MEMBERSHIP for them to function as a whole. ALL the members should have say in a vote to make rules after they are proposed.. not just a select few to make rules they feel they need, rules should be made by votes from the membership...I do not like a lot of things they do. ALL you ARRL members its your program and Newington is there to work for its members not for themselves. Seems ARRL is run more like a dictatorship than a democratic one. Make a choice cry or take action. 73 Pete -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike(W5UC) Kathy(K5MWH) Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 7:11 PM To: dx-chat@njdxa.org; Urb LeJeune Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] ARRL And, therein lies the problem. ARRL does not the ability to deal with those who run 10 KW, but they do have the ability to deal with those who threaten the integrity of the DXCC program. Whether or not DXCC belongs to ARRL or the members in a whole new debate. However in the context of this discussion, it IS their program because the members allow them to administer it. Mike, W5UC http://members.cox.net/w5uc Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org 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, dx-chat@njdxa.org 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, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] flying w. radios
Gerry at base I agree with you, I think carry on should be a purse sized thing and that is all. BUT, my experience with checked luggage is the reverse of yours I had a laptop and camera and other valuables stolen in Delhi airport and Delta refused to honor my request for reimbursement ... even after I sent them the box the laptop came in to prove my ownership of it I sent other documents too, of course. India friends tell me that guys there bribe their way into a baggage handler job just so they can strip the luggage. India is certainly NOT the only place like that. A few years ago when tv journalism still existed, there was a CBS hidden camera on the JFK NYC baggage handlers... They had an assembly line going... one man to pry the bags open, another to search, and another to carry away the stolen loot. Now, with extensive searches, you can not even lock your checked luggage. Too, the absurdity of the baggage searches is too evident A couple of trips ago, while standing there looking at the inspectors who knew it was my bag... I watched them paw thru my bag only to find a bottle of liquid Pepto these intrepid fellows triumphantly discovered. They never put items back the way I carefully packed them, and thus my delicate items are even more in danger of damage due to poor re-packing. Go on a DXpedition with one radio only to arrive with a mashed up box of junk ...or nothing at all... is very disappointing. When airlines provide as much security to their baggage handling as they provide by strip searching incoming passengers, THEN, I will add my small voice to the call for no carry on bags. Until then, anything valuable goes inside the cabin with me until I am arrested for doing so. P.S. ... A nice Haliburton or Pelican case is a sure tip off to rip off.. 73, Charles Harpole [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Gerry [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Charles Harpole [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] flying w. radios Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 08:17:07 -0600 I and my staff traveled the world with a lot more valuable, delicate and heavier electronics that ham gear in checked luggage with no problems (damage or loss) using good hard-shell cases like Halliburton and Pelican. If our flying security is improved by not allowing ANY carry-on electronics, I'm all for it. Gerry VE6LB - Original Message - From: Charles Harpole [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dx-chat@njdxa.org Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 9:51 PM Subject: [DX-CHAT] flying w. radios Latest airline flying scare suggests carry on may be very difficult now. Any thots about alerting the security system that ham radios are innocent? Should we show license immediately, etc? I sure hate to put radio or laptop in the hole (baggage compartment) and also fear theift from baggage handlers, 73, Charles Harpole, VU3CHE Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
