Re: Proposed Changes to DXCC for Remote Stations - Charge to DXAC

Steven Rutledge <steven.t.rutledge@...>

Charles, did you read the proposal?  Give me some examples of ARRL attacks on RHR, please.  The entire audience needs to see them.  Tell me about a proposed rule change that would make RHR contacts ineligible for DXCC.  I'm not aware of any.

Steve, N4JQQ

On 8/10/2020 4:16 PM, Charles Hoppe wrote:

Hey everyone,

My thoughts on this matter:

If you really want the hobby to grow and live, you need to bring more youth in to the hobby. What Remote Ham Radio is doing is amazing for the hobby and is really blessing youth like me. I have had some wonderful opportunities thanks to RHR. I have been fortunate to be a part of two record breaking fully-remote M/M contest operations, in the midst of this pandemic. Being 13 years old it makes it difficult to get permission to and travel to superstations for contest operating… being able to have those same experiences remote has really been a blessing.

And you are proposing a rule change that would make remote operating not qualifiable for DXCC? That is stupid.

Honestly it seems that the ARRL has been attacking RHR in many different ways recently. This proposed rule change just seems like you are trying to tear RHR down… is it just me or does it not seem like merely a coincidence?

The ARRL needs to concentrate their efforts somewhere that will ACTUALLY do something for youth in the hobby, instead of a rule change that will do HARM for youth.

Look toward the FUTURE, not to the past. Remote operating is only going to help the hobby, and trying to get rid of it is detrimental and will be regretted later.


Charles Hoppe – AA4LS (13 years old)

Join { to automatically receive all group messages.