|[AMRadio] Web page appears in opposition to RM-11306|
k4kyv at hotmail.com
Thu Jan 19 12:17:13 EST 2006
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout. Try it - you'll
>From: "W1EOF" <w1eof at hamnutz.com>
>... I wrote to several people at CQ Magazine asking why
>they did not voluntarily restrict the frequencies available for the
>Only got one response, from some guy who was not at CQ Magazine. He said it
>was not their business to police it, and those amateurs who operated down
>there were legally operating under the rules of their country. I got no
>official answer from CQ. Neither did anyone else I know who wrote to them.
>Personally I think the most shameful of all are the American hams that get
>license from the country they are visiting so they can operate without
>hinderance from those nasty sub-bands.
Nothing shameful about getting a l icence to operate in the country you are
visiting and using it according to the rules of that country. The shame is
with the contest sponsors who refuse to write contest rules that require
contesters to follow the accepted band plan.
I'd bet the people with the above attitude are some of the same ones who are
opposed to RM-11305 and are pushing for subband restrictions for 160.
Hypocrites selfishly pushing their own agenda.
More information about the AMRadio mailing list
This page last updated 12 Dec 2017.