I'm fascinated by the degree to which this issue appears to be regionalized.  I haven't had a single complaint up here in 1-land.
 
Does anyone want a venture a guess as to why this is? 
 
73,
Mike
K1TWF
 
 
On 04/02/15, JRS<jrs@hamradio.us.com> wrote:
 
Marty

    I am President of CTDXCC and I spoke to TDXS at their February meeting.

    I asked for a vote of all present as to approval/disapproval of the DXCC remote rules: the ARRL lost — unanimously — in both meetings. There is no joy in Mudville.

   


73


-----------------------------------------------------

       John Robert Stratton       
                 
                        N5AUS                      

       Office telephone:    512-445-6262
       Cell:                         512-426-2028
                      PO Box 2232
            Austin, Texas 78768-2232


-----------------------------------------------------



On 4/2/15 9:01 AM, n6vi@socal.rr.com wrote:
I spoke at the San Diego DX Club meeting last Thursday.  When I discussed the remote-operation DXCC rule change, no one in attendance voiced any concern over the change, the existence of RHR, the advertisement or its placement.I wonder how many of those who are complaining paid someone to install and / or maintain their towers and antennas.73,Marty N6VI_______________________________________________arrl-odv mailing listarrl-odv@reflector.arrl.orghttps://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv



_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv