[DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
The DXCC listings in the yearly book and Honor Roll should be in order of "current" entities with a slash to show totals with those deleted. So if W1AW has worked them all plus 20 deleted, the call would appear under 335 as W1AW/355. You could then quickly see how you stack up against the competition. And if you are interested in the absolute number, it's there. The "current" total is the only meaningful competitive measure. Listing calls with high totals that are also not on the honor roll because they haven't been active in years is a silly curiosity. The notion of "working them all" went out the window when the first deleted entity was "created." Absolute totals are a testimony to age and not current competitive activity. One long time DXer's opinion. 73, Steve WB6RSE Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
All this all-time DXCC listings (deleted and "gone forever") has created much discussion. I made a comment with that honor to senior DXers, but this could apply to all. Many DXers work hard to work a new one. They are not blessed with super stations with super antennas. And, many do not use the aid of computer programs that do everything but activate your transmitter. So, if a country was deleted at least all their effort was for nothing. But, with the present DXCC standards it is just that. So, the guy who has everything won't miss it. There was a comment regarding DXCC listings with both all-time and current shown. Does it matter? My listing is high but it doesn't include that little asterisk like everyone else at my level. I know my current level. And, anyone else who looks at the listing will know that N6JM ain't honor roll. But, so what. When I finally get around to making the honor roll it will be without the aid of a super station and/or super antenna. Hard work! 73 de John N6JM Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
[DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
It appears to be a case of whose ox is being gored. For those of us who have been long time active dxers and want to be recognized for what we have accomplished over the years, the overall total including currently deleted, but not deleted at the time we worked them, is valid. We have looked for years longingly at the numbers represented by gentlemen far beyond our years who have worked stations that we had no opportunity to work, with the understanding that at some point in the future, we too will have this opportunity to be recognized. Now, the newly licensed and those who didn't have the ambition or desire to work for the long term want it NOW NOW NOW. If you want to use stupid analogies like the Yankees, I'll present one just as stupid. Let's assume you want to be a doctor but dislike the thought of it having to spend all those years of preparation. Your solution would be to just give the certification to anyone who can pass the test or has the money to pay anyone who has a friend who took the test and has a copy that you can study. Fortunately it doesn't work that way...yet. When it does, it is my hope that people who want it NOW NOW NOW have the opportunity to have these people for their physician. Since it is my ox that is being gored, I waited and didn't scream NOW NOW NOW for all these years, and my NOW is finally becoming reality. Let us who have spent the years working at our count enjoy our DXCC count including deleted while we can just as those in the past have. Red K0LUZ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings A current total for everyone one on the DXCC lists has to be known otherwise the asterisk could not be printed. The data is the all there. It's a matter of which way it's cut. One is a deference to longevity (absolute total), the other to competition with recognition of long term accomplishment (current total sort with a slash absolute #). Neither cut says anything about a super station, QRP, or whether you worked a bunch of tough ones on 160 from one side of the country and then moved to the other side and worked a bunch more. Or whether or not you've even had a station for the last ten years but your buddy throws your call into all the pile ups and that keeps you on the Honor Roll. Only you know that and to first order, no one cares. I'm certain that there are DXers out there who have Honor Roll achievement but who've never submitted cards. They really don't care! They do it strictly for themselves. My point is simple: If there is a listing, it should be useful and not primarily a celebration of age. The present listing scheme is antiquated. It would be like listing baseball standings after the World Series with the Yankees always at the top because they've won more than any other team. Come to think of it, wouldn't that be a great enticement for youngsters to get interested?! 73, Steve WB6RSE Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
In a message dated 6/16/03 10:02:41 PM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << The DXCC listings in the yearly book and Honor Roll should be in order of "current" entities with a slash to show totals with those deleted. So if W1AW has worked them all plus 20 deleted, the call would appear under 335 as W1AW/355. You could then quickly see how you stack up against the competition. And if you are interested in the absolute number, it's there. The "current" total is the only meaningful competitive measure. Listing calls with high totals that are also not on the honor roll because they haven't been active in years is a silly curiosity. The notion of "working them all" went out the window when the first deleted entity was "created." Absolute totals are a testimony to age and not current competitive activity. One long time DXer's opinion. 73, Steve WB6RSE >> AMEN Steve ! I would especially like to see the Single Band Awards listed by Current 'Countries' so that I could know how many each of the Top Guns need on each band. I would have no qualms about adding /355 etc to show LifeTime Totals. IMHO, it's time we gave up using Life Time Totals as the measuring stick for ALL DXCC Awards (and yes, I have confirmed MANY Deleted Countries in my 48 years of DXing). I've been waiting for over a decade for ARRL to revise the DXCC Listing requirement for making a submission in the previous 12 months which GUARANTEES that your call will be DROPPED from the Single Band Lists once you have 'worked them all' or all of the available countries. Hopefully this policy will be eliminated when the new computer program is completed. Tom N4KG (active since 1955) Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
A current total for everyone one on the DXCC lists has to be known otherwise the asterisk could not be printed. The data is the all there. It's a matter of which way it's cut. One is a deference to longevity (absolute total), the other to competition with recognition of long term accomplishment (current total sort with a slash absolute #). Neither cut says anything about a super station, QRP, or whether you worked a bunch of tough ones on 160 from one side of the country and then moved to the other side and worked a bunch more. Or whether or not you've even had a station for the last ten years but your buddy throws your call into all the pile ups and that keeps you on the Honor Roll. Only you know that and to first order, no one cares. I'm certain that there are DXers out there who have Honor Roll achievement but who've never submitted cards. They really don't care! They do it strictly for themselves. My point is simple: If there is a listing, it should be useful and not primarily a celebration of age. The present listing scheme is antiquated. It would be like listing baseball standings after the World Series with the Yankees always at the top because they've won more than any other team. Come to think of it, wouldn't that be a great enticement for youngsters to get interested?! 73, Steve WB6RSE Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
You seem to be inferring that building/obtaining a super station is NOT hard work. I am not 'blessed' with a super station, I obtained it with a lot of hard work. I design and build my own antennas, top loaded ground plane on 160m, 4sqs on 80m & 40m, long boom yagi's on 20, 15 & 10. All built with material that was discarded by other hams. I transported and erected my towers by myself using knowledge that I gained from helping others. I repair my own equipment and if/when it does not operate to my expectations I modify it. A couple of my friends have what I call super stations and they work hard at it too. We have found that these antennas and towers do not continue to function without assistance. And maintaining the rest of the station equipment is an ongoing issue also. We do not go into the local goody store, plunk down $10K to $1M, wait a couple of weeks and walk into a functioning super station. If you have only one radio and you admire the super station that has two, just remember that it requires twice as much work for him to get and keep the two radios as it is for your one. Same with antennas. If you are working with one tribander, the ham with 3 monobanders expends 3 times as much effort, etc. Yes, I am on the honor roll, and it WAS done by hard work. de Paul, W8AEF -- ZF2TA FO8DX FO0PLA 8Q7AA XZ0A -- - Original Message - From: "John and Mari Minke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:25 PM Subject: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings > All this all-time DXCC listings (deleted and "gone forever") has > created much discussion. I made a comment with that honor to senior > DXers, but this could apply to all. > > Many DXers work hard to work a new one. They are not blessed with > super stations with super antennas. And, many do not use the aid > of computer programs that do everything but activate your > transmitter. > > So, if a country was deleted at least all their effort was for > nothing. But, with the present DXCC standards it is just that. So, > the guy who has everything won't miss it. > > There was a comment regarding DXCC listings with both all-time and > current shown. Does it matter? My listing is high but it doesn't > include that little asterisk like everyone else at my level. I > know my current level. And, anyone else who looks at the listing > will know that N6JM ain't honor roll. But, so what. When I finally > get around to making the honor roll it will be without the aid of > a super station and/or super antenna. Hard work! > > 73 de John N6JM Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
Red - Call what you will "stupid" but it's MY opinion just as yours is yours. When I see an unachievable number with an asterisk next to it, I'm not inclined to think of anything much more than "OT." When I see 335 as a "current" number I wonder on what band that op snagged the P5. A listing sorted by the current totals slash absolute serves both purposes - current competition and a tip of the hat to longevity. The yearly QST Honor Roll listing is shown this way. The year book should be the same but isn't. I'll guess that's the League's compromise. 73, Steve WB6RSE (I'll have to get back to you on that Physician's analogy after I check with the DXCC desk on why my personal doctor isn't listed.) On Tuesday, June 17, 2003, at 09:48 AM, K0LUZ wrote: It appears to be a case of whose ox is being gored. For those of us who have been long time active dxers and want to be recognized for what we have accomplished over the years, the overall total including currently deleted, but not deleted at the time we worked them, is valid. We have looked for years longingly at the numbers represented by gentlemen far beyond our years who have worked stations that we had no opportunity to work, with the understanding that at some point in the future, we too will have this opportunity to be recognized. Now, the newly licensed and those who didn't have the ambition or desire to work for the long term want it NOW NOW NOW. If you want to use stupid analogies like the Yankees, I'll present one just as stupid. Let's assume you want to be a doctor but dislike the thought of it having to spend all those years of preparation. Your solution would be to just give the certification to anyone who can pass the test or has the money to pay anyone who has a friend who took the test and has a copy that you can study. Fortunately it doesn't work that way...yet. When it does, it is my hope that people who want it NOW NOW NOW have the opportunity to have these people for their physician. Since it is my ox that is being gored, I waited and didn't scream NOW NOW NOW for all these years, and my NOW is finally becoming reality. Let us who have spent the years working at our count enjoy our DXCC count including deleted while we can just as those in the past have. Red K0LUZ Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
I've been around the block enough to know that owners of some of these super stations don't necessarily put hard work into it. Only hard cash. They hire professionals to design and install their stations and antennas. Now don't jump and down - I did not say owners of all stations. However, there are a lot of wealthy DXers out there and this is no problem. And, when you get along in years it is a smart thing to do and leave the antenna stuff to professionals. 73 de John N6JM Paul Playford wrote: > > You seem to be inferring that building/obtaining a super station is NOT hard > work. I am not 'blessed' with a super station, I obtained it with a lot of > hard work. I design and build my own antennas, top loaded ground plane on > 160m, 4sqs on 80m & 40m, long boom yagi's on 20, 15 & 10. All built with > material that was discarded by other hams. I transported and erected my > towers by myself using knowledge that I gained from helping others. I > repair my own equipment and if/when it does not operate to my expectations I > modify it. > > A couple of my friends have what I call super stations and they work hard at > it too. We have found that these antennas and towers do not continue to > function without assistance. And maintaining the rest of the station > equipment is an ongoing issue also. We do not go into the local goody > store, plunk down $10K to $1M, wait a couple of weeks and walk into a > functioning super station. > > If you have only one radio and you admire the super station that has two, > just remember that it requires twice as much work for him to get and keep > the two radios as it is for your one. Same with antennas. If you are > working with one tribander, the ham with 3 monobanders expends 3 times as > much effort, etc. > > Yes, I am on the honor roll, and it WAS done by hard work. > > de Paul, W8AEF > > -- > ZF2TA FO8DX FO0PLA 8Q7AA XZ0A > -- > > - Original Message ----- > From: "John and Mari Minke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:25 PM > Subject: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings > > > All this all-time DXCC listings (deleted and "gone forever") has > > created much discussion. I made a comment with that honor to senior > > DXers, but this could apply to all. > > > > Many DXers work hard to work a new one. They are not blessed with > > super stations with super antennas. And, many do not use the aid > > of computer programs that do everything but activate your > > transmitter. > > > > So, if a country was deleted at least all their effort was for > > nothing. But, with the present DXCC standards it is just that. So, > > the guy who has everything won't miss it. > > > > There was a comment regarding DXCC listings with both all-time and > > current shown. Does it matter? My listing is high but it doesn't > > include that little asterisk like everyone else at my level. I > > know my current level. And, anyone else who looks at the listing > > will know that N6JM ain't honor roll. But, so what. When I finally > > get around to making the honor roll it will be without the aid of > > a super station and/or super antenna. Hard work! > > > > 73 de John N6JM > > Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems > http://njdxa.org/dx-chat > > To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 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, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
Paul, Beautifully stated. Anyone with a super station will know the amount of effort required. I do not count myself among those but I do know that even a moderately successful station takes a lot of work.This does not even take into account the operator's skill which is another important ingredient. Plunking down the big bucks alone does not assure success and a moderate station does not preclude it. Howard..K2HK 365/334 confirmed Original Message Follows From: Paul Playford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: DX - chat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 17:50:23 + You seem to be inferring that building/obtaining a super station is NOT hard work. I am not 'blessed' with a super station, I obtained it with a lot of hard work. I design and build my own antennas, top loaded ground plane on 160m, 4sqs on 80m & 40m, long boom yagi's on 20, 15 & 10. All built with material that was discarded by other hams. I transported and erected my towers by myself using knowledge that I gained from helping others. I repair my own equipment and if/when it does not operate to my expectations I modify it. A couple of my friends have what I call super stations and they work hard at it too. We have found that these antennas and towers do not continue to function without assistance. And maintaining the rest of the station equipment is an ongoing issue also. We do not go into the local goody store, plunk down $10K to $1M, wait a couple of weeks and walk into a functioning super station. If you have only one radio and you admire the super station that has two, just remember that it requires twice as much work for him to get and keep the two radios as it is for your one. Same with antennas. If you are working with one tribander, the ham with 3 monobanders expends 3 times as much effort, etc. Yes, I am on the honor roll, and it WAS done by hard work. de Paul, W8AEF -- ZF2TA FO8DX FO0PLA 8Q7AA XZ0A -- _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
Steve, Red, et al, I've been reading this thread (for the most part) and sometimes when I feel rushed, I've just hit the delete key. For some reason I read these two and wanted to add my 2 cents worth which will become "delete fodder" for many, but others might have a slight interest. I am an OT...not as much of an OT as many, but I've been at it for nearly 50 years. Only the past 25 or so have I been even close to what one could call "competetive in the pileups". But through dumb and good luck and good fortune, I've done OK. All that said, I really wanted to add what the CURRENT DX country total/total DX country including DELETED total means to me. First of all, it certainly does not make me want to belittle the accomplishments of many nor does it make me jealous of the recognition of the accomplishments of the real OT's but rather tickles my memory of when I first got into ham radio and looked thru the loaned copies of CQ and QST magazines from the 30's and 40's and saw the black and white fotos, small and grainy, of the native ham on some obscure island in the Pacific or Indian Ocean who was running a 6L6 (that's a tube for the young folk) at 10 watts to a wire strung between two coconut trees, giving contacts to those who had antennas and receivers and transmitters capable of establishing such a contact. Some of those islands and locations have turned out to be hot tourist spots now, with many DXpeditions handing out QSO's by the thousands but SOME of those little obscure hams and their stations were operating from places that no longer exist, due to political or other reasons. Names like Goa, Rio de Oro, Ifni, French West Africa, Equitorial Africa, Inini, Straits Settlements, Federated Malay States, Non-federated Malay States, British North Borneo, etc. come to mind. These guys with the "deleted" totals were fortunate enough to have worked these placesmy reaction is WOW! Congratulations on your accomplishments under conditions that we probably can't or don't understand. And finally, rather than spend my time and effort debating whether those "deleted totals" should now be shown, I would much rather have the opportunity to sit down and hear the stories from these OT's on how they managed to work these "far away places with strange sounding names". How long has it been since you took the time or had the opportunity to hear any of these stories? I guess my favorites were those told by the GI's in WW2 who were on the air from these dots in the Pacific, using hand cranked generators, etcMaybe you real OT's could share a story now and then with us? Huh? Some of us would be interested and intent listeners. Best to all...Good DXing...see you in the pileups. Tony, W4FOA Chickamauga, GA PS: I don't have a clue what my totals are but I do know I only need VU4 and VU7! Watch your thoughts; they become words. Watch your words; they become actions. Watch your actions; they become habits. Watch your habits; they become character. Watch your character; it becomes your destiny. -Frank Outlaw -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Steve Lawrence Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 3:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings Red - Call what you will "stupid" but it's MY opinion just as yours is yours. When I see an unachievable number with an asterisk next to it, I'm not inclined to think of anything much more than "OT." When I see 335 as a "current" number I wonder on what band that op snagged the P5. A listing sorted by the current totals slash absolute serves both purposes - current competition and a tip of the hat to longevity. The yearly QST Honor Roll listing is shown this way. The year book should be the same but isn't. I'll guess that's the League's compromise. 73, Steve WB6RSE (I'll have to get back to you on that Physician's analogy after I check with the DXCC desk on why my personal doctor isn't listed.) On Tuesday, June 17, 2003, at 09:48 AM, K0LUZ wrote: > > It appears to be a case of whose ox is being gored. For those of us > who > have been long time active dxers and want to be recognized for what we > have > accomplished over the years, the overall total including currently > deleted, > but not deleted at the time we worked them, is valid. We have looked > for > years longingly at the numbers represented by gentlemen far beyond our > years > who have worked stations that we had no opportunity to work, with the > understanding that at some point in the future, we too will have this > opportunity to be recognized. > > Now, the newly licensed and those who didn't have the ambition or > desire to > work
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
The recent interest in whether or not the original (ie UNAET) East Timor entity will be removed has, finally, brought some attention to the one part of the "DXCC 2000" rules update that I (for one) was never comfortable with. I've had it explained to me a few times, including once or twice by some senior ARRL staffers at Dayton, and while I think I understand the rational, I never -- and still do not -- agree with it. Consider that Deleted Entities only "count" in two places, at present (that I know of) -- your DXCC application & updates (be it mixed, mode specific, band specific, or 5 Band), and personal bragging rights. They do NOT count towards Honor Roll -- a good thing, considering the number of Deleted Entities that so many recent DX'ers will never have an opportunity to work (some deleted long before said DX'ers were even born!), else HR would eventually be a SK listing and nothing more. Now, I would (grudgingly) agree with the reasoning that a Deleted Entity remains a Deleted one forever. Which (again, as was explained to me at Dayton as noted above) is why 4W/East Timor is not a "reactivated" CR8/Portugese Timor. But does it ultimately matter, if you reactivate an entity or create a "new" one? Only in the sense that reactivating an entity means that DX'ers who have had that deleted one on file for however long doesn't have to worry about working it after reactivation... ie, those who still had a CR8/PT card wouldn't have had to work a 4W/UNAET station to get the "credit" for HR, just resubmit or whatever. Whether or not that is desireable would be an interesting discussion, if it weren't a moot point right now. [And... before someone says "Western Sahara," I should again mention that I was told that that reactivation was an error -- it should have been considered a new entity, not a reactivation of the old EA9/Rio de Oro.I must agree on this point with that individual, who pointed out that just because an error happened once does not obligate them to repeat it] Now: I suspect that the discussion may remain academic, as (based on what I have read and researched on my own) I do not believe that the WA2MOE/JA1BK petition to have the original 4W/UNAET entity removed has merit, nor do I believe it will suceed. As some of you are not doubt already aware, the petition is in part based on the original UN mandate to oversee East Timor, but subsequent documents expanded the UN's authority over & above the original mandate & superseeded it. Additionally, the unnamed (in the petition) ARRL official who supposedly admitted to an "error" or "mistake" has since stated that he merely acknowledged that the 4W prefix had been rescinded (and after all, wasn't it a temporary allocation to the UN anyway?) Therefore, I strongly doubt that the former UNAET, now Timor-Leste, entity will be removed & replaced with a "new" one. But that's my opinon, I could be wrong. (Besides, I'm MUCH more irritated to find out that 4W6MM's authorization to operate expired in March '02, but he wasn't told until months later, which invalidates my one & only QSO with him in the '02 IARU contest! Ah, nutz! Oh well, just have to try again...) 73, ron wn3vaw AJ: "Did you ever hear of Evel Kneival?" Lev: "I never saw Star Wars" -- Armageddon - Original Message - From: "John and Mari Minke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 9:25 AM Subject: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings All this all-time DXCC listings (deleted and "gone forever") has created much discussion. I made a comment with that honor to senior DXers, but this could apply to all. Many DXers work hard to work a new one. They are not blessed with super stations with super antennas. And, many do not use the aid of computer programs that do everything but activate your transmitter. So, if a country was deleted at least all their effort was for nothing. But, with the present DXCC standards it is just that. So, the guy who has everything won't miss it. There was a comment regarding DXCC listings with both all-time and current shown. Does it matter? My listing is high but it doesn't include that little asterisk like everyone else at my level. I know my current level. And, anyone else who looks at the listing will know that N6JM ain't honor roll. But, so what. When I finally get around to making the honor roll it will be without the aid of a super station and/or super antenna. Hard work! 73 de John N6JM Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
Hi Ron and the group Like mine (4W6EB) Thor's authorization for 4W6MM expired May 20, 2002, not March 20, 2002, so you gain two more months ! 73 Jose CT1EEB http://www.qsl.net/ct1eeb http://www.qsl.net/ed1ons "Besides, I'm MUCH more irritated to find out that 4W6MM's authorization to operate expired in March '02, but he wasn't told until months later, which invalidates my one & only QSO with him in the '02 IARU contest! Ah, nutz! Oh well, just have to try again" Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
BTW, the person who decides that a brand new entity is ok for DXCC should not also be in the first group to activate that entity. If a person wants to operate and activate, he/she should pass the final decision of ok/ no-ok on to others, or a committee, maybe, uh? Maybe that is already the way it is done. 73, Charles Harpole [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
Charles Harpole wrote: > > BTW, the person who decides that a brand new entity is ok for DXCC should > not also be in the first group to activate that entity. If a person wants > to operate and activate, he/she should pass the final decision of ok/ no-ok > on to others, or a committee, maybe, uh? Maybe that is already the way it > is done. 73, > > Charles Harpole > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charlie, You know the disadvantage of being the first to activate a new one is that he, unlike IOTA, does not get credit in his DXCC standings. 73 de John N6JM Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings
I stand corrected, but *sigh* it still doesn't make my (July 02) IARU 'test QSO any more valid for DXCC. 73, ron wn3vaw AJ: "Did you ever hear of Evel Kneival?" Lev: "I never saw Star Wars" -- Armageddon - Original Message - From: "Jose E. Ribeiro Sa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ron Notarius WN3VAW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:30 AM Subject: Re: [DX-CHAT] DXCC Listings Hi Ron and the group Like mine (4W6EB) Thor's authorization for 4W6MM expired May 20, 2002, not March 20, 2002, so you gain two more months ! 73 Jose CT1EEB http://www.qsl.net/ct1eeb http://www.qsl.net/ed1ons "Besides, I'm MUCH more irritated to find out that 4W6MM's authorization to operate expired in March '02, but he wasn't told until months later, which invalidates my one & only QSO with him in the '02 IARU contest! Ah, nutz! Oh well, just have to try again" Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
