Agree... let's cut out the middleman and just pay for a QSL directly. Tom's suggestion was a valid one. If we don't like the direction the ARRL has been heading with this we should let our DXAC rep, Programs & Services Committee rep, and Division Director know. The commercial remote businesses encouraged their customers to lobby their ARRL reps and look how the rule turned out. As I understand it, the treatment of remotes for DXCC credit is a work in progress. Make your voice heard -- loudly and often.
BTW, the minutes from the ARRL January Board meeting shows only two Directors went on record as opposing the recent DXCC rule changes -- K5UZ and K7CEX. - Larry K5RK -----Original Message----- From: Doug Renwick [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 6:54 PM To: 'Larry Burke'; 'TopBand List' Subject: RE: Topband: CQWW160 Remote receiver rule When you see full page ads in QST for commercial remote operation, then you know the rules have really changed. It advertises 185 antennas, 50 towers, 18 stations, 15 amplifiers, 9 states, 2 continents and then says "What are you waiting for?" Why don't we just quit all this foolishness and cut through a 'minor' point. Why not just send the dxpedition a few hundred dollar bills and get confirmation on all bands, all modes. Against the rules you say. So who says there are any ethics left when operators now set their own ethical limits. I see little difference between buying contacts and using a commercial remote station. This also has the benefit leaving the bands open for 'smaller' home stations to have some fun and actually work the dx. Doug _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
