Yes, this issue is a real problem for the DX community-- prior approval of a
proposed DXpedition-- and for the DXCC desk at ARRL.
A proposed DXpedition to a very difficult (but do-able) entity (no
government there [Somalia], or conflicting government agencies [XW] or less
trusted situation [VU4], or whatever) needs prior approval to justify the
preparation efforts.
But, ARRL seems to argue (with some justification) that it needs to see not
only written documentation from the "correct" official, but also wants the
DXpedition to actually happen before giving any opinion about the potential
validity of the DXpedition proposed. This position must have kept a number
of good DXpeditions from happening and certainly provided lots of worry and
lack of early support for others.
I think ARRL's "standards" are too restrictive and too open to individual
interpretation. I suggest a standard that says "if the DXpedition went to
the entiry openly (not in secret) and has proof of its presence, and if the
group of operators are (a) not arrested and/or (b) not chased out by any
kind of authorities (a Carib island?), then the operation is approved."
We are a hobby, not the U.N.
PS: the DXCC official making a decision of DXpedition approval should NEVER
also be going to operate, too. Simple appearance of conflict of interest is
no good, of course. 73
Charles Harpole
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
