For those of you who want to read about someone else's country picking travails, here's the wsj article I mentioned yesterday. 73, Walt W0CP http://www.w0cp.com/wsj.htm ________________________________ I've stopped 35,726 spam messages. You can too! Get protection at http://www.w0cp.com/mailwasher.htm -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 8:55 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:9765] Re: DXCC/IARU scoiety question I wasn't involved in the committee discussions at the time, and I don't know the arguments that were advanced in favor of using the IARU society test. However, as long as it's not made retroactive (and there's a rule against doing so), dropping the IARU society test from here on out would have no negative effect that I can think of. Any separate status based on the existence of a "real" (i.e., not manufactured for the purpose) IARU member-society has already been granted. I really don't know why RSGB signed over its right to represent Pitcairn although I can ask the then-president, Don Beattie (who is now IARU Region 1 Secretary). RSGB is a member of Region 3, but by giving up Pitcairn it is now reduced to using Chagos (Diego Garcia) as its sole justification for being a Region 3 member. I don't think the UK plays any active role in administering telecommunications on Pitcairn (which according to the CIA World Factbook has 17 telephones, all connected to one party line), so they don't have quite the same problem that the ARRL would have if American Samoa were separately represented to the FCC. Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: Frahm, Bruce (Vice Dir, Midwest) Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 5:32 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:9760] DXCC/IARU scoiety question Tnx to Dave for the info on the American Samoa assn. I can understand the awkwardness of not providing them a letter such as RSGB did with PIARA, and the hassles of make-work that might come up from time to time. But -- didn't the DXCC revamp committee have valid reasons for including the IARU society test in the mix for a "Point 1" country? I don't claim any great pool of knowledge or recollection. I wasn't a member of that committee but I did sit in on a number of their meetings..... There were reasons for having IARU membership serve as grounds for parent country status. If ANY of them still have validity, and if methods exist to thwart inappropriate applications to IARU, wouldn't it be worth occasional embarrassment and hassle to maintain the rules as is? I'd like to hear more committee members' recollections of the reasons for including the IARU society test. Also as a sidelight Dave (or Rod), do you think there was an element of a "gift to DXers" counteracting what would (or should) have otherwise been a refusal to sanction PIARA, in RSGB's decision? Bruce