Topband: ET7L DXCC approval

[Johann Bruinier]

Does anyone know the reason(s) for ARRL's withholding the approval for
the excellent ET7L operation?

Another unpleasant item is the growing use of remote RXs. It's not
difficult to identify the fakers but does ARRL care?

Seasons' Greetings & 73!

Jan DL9KR.

_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

[DXer]

This is going to be a much bigger issue than the adultered 18M QSLs. :^)

I don't know how easy it is to detect the use of a remote RX, unless a P5
contact at 12 noon local time is claimed. :^))

73 de Vince, VA3VF

Post by Johann Bruinier
Another unpleasant item is the growing use of remote RXs. It's not
difficult to identify the fakers but does ARRL care?
Seasons' Greetings & 73!
Jan DL9KR.

_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

[DXer]

So...the ARRL does not care. Libertarianism at its best, nothing wrong with
that.

Point taken about this reflector not being the place for this discussion.
End of story for me. :^)

73 de Vince, VA3VF

The reflector isn't the place to start a discussion of what is and what is
not acceptable, but the League has made their decision about remote ops.
11. Issues concerning remotely controlled operating and DXCC are best
dealt with by each individual carefully considering the ethical limits that
he/she will accept for his/her DXCC and other operating awards.
<cut>
It will continue to be up to the operator to decide what types of legal
remote control operating he/she will use (if any) to contribute to an
operating award.
Naturally, I have my opinions, and will gladly share them over a few
beers.
I've been a card checker since the program started, and am happy to say
that I have only found one case of a card being changed from 18 to 1.8
MHz. The guy didn't even TRY to make it look good - couldn't believe it.
--
73,
Mike Cizek WØVTT
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2016 08:51
Subject: Re: Topband: ET7L DXCC approval
This is going to be a much bigger issue than the adultered 18M QSLs. :^)
I don't know how easy it is to detect the use of a remote RX, unless a P5
contact at 12 noon local time is claimed. :^))
73 de Vince, VA3VF

Post by Johann Bruinier
Another unpleasant item is the growing use of remote RXs. It's not
difficult to identify the fakers but does ARRL care?
Seasons' Greetings & 73!
Jan DL9KR.

_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

_________________
Topband Reflector

[Chortek, Robert L.]

Their license was apparently approved and issued by the wrong governmental department.

73,

Bob AA6VB

Sent from my iPhone

Does anyone know the reason(s) for ARRL's withholding the approval for the excellent ET7L operation?
Another unpleasant item is the growing use of remote RXs. It's not difficult to identify the fakers but does ARRL care?
Seasons' Greetings & 73!
Jan DL9KR.
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband

[Merv Schweigert]

I see a lot of remote receiver and transmitter use, so far its not
being addressed
that I know of.

I got blasted yesterday on the DX clusters because I was spotting A45,
3B9, 3B8,
RA9 etc, LID on the cluster said I was using remote, I suggest the
operator LID
use the call book and see where my call is licensed before opening his
mouth and
proving his ignorance.

Merv K9FD (Manaloa Hawaii for the uninformed)

Post by Johann Bruinier
Does anyone know the reason(s) for ARRL's withholding the approval for
the excellent ET7L operation?
Another unpleasant item is the growing use of remote RXs. It's not
difficult to identify the fakers but does ARRL care?
Seasons' Greetings & 73!
Jan DL9KR.
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
.

_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband