[Dx-qsl] A Solution for lack of activity VU4-VU7

[Bernie McClenny, W3UR]

Danny,
There is one and only one reason to remove a country from the DXCC list.  That is
if it no longer meets the DXCC criteria (or the criteria when it was added).
There is no status of active or inactive countries.  There is only a current and
deleted lists.

I was first licensed in 1977 and there were several countries I remember that
were so rare - BY and ZA.  BY was off the air for 30-40 years!  ZA was about 20
years!  XZ was another that was long awaited.  Recently (mid-to-late 90's) people
asked that P5 be taken off the list!  I think it was not added until 1991 or so.
DXCC was never about working them all, per Clinton Desoto!  Although some have
done it.  These places are rare for a reason.  I am sure that VU7/A or VU4/A will
eventually be active again.  I worked them in the early to mid 80's.  As they go
up the list (in rarity), folks will put more and more pressure on the authorities
to activate these most wanted QTHs.  After all if P5/4L4FN was approved, so
anything can happen!  It just takes the right person, in the right place at the
right time.  That is DXing!

For those who have never read the DXCC rules I would highly recommend it.  They
can be found at http://www.arrl.org/awards/dxcc/rules.html.

73
Bernie, W3UR

N7DC@cs.com wrote:

> Instant DXer?  Gary, you might wanna think again about that.  I have been on
> the air, going on to 40 years, and from 7 permanent countries, and about 20
> temporary spots/countries during that period, so Im no newbie.  Yes I have
> heard this discussed before, and it probably will before.  Those countries
> are not just "hard" to work right now, they are "impossible" until political
> and military situations change.
> Yes, they could change next week. So, add them to the list as new ones next
> week.  Meantime they dont belong on a list of active countries on which
> people are attempting to achieve a goal.  N> Korea should have been placed
> the same way, until someone was able to crack the governmental wall, and I am
> not sure it really meets the requirements now, even though ARRL has accepted
> the current operations.  My understanding was that the entity is not elgible
> for recognition, if the government there will not allow the local citizens to
> have amateur licenses.  That doesnt seem to be the case here.
>
>    I believe this is a legitimate question and subject, and name calling is
> uncalled for in a serious discussion of something that is of great interest
> to a large number of amateurs, not only in the USA, but in the rest of the
> world.
> This is not a case of me calling for something for nothing, its simply a case
> of calling for legitimizing a procedure with common sense.
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
> Please help QSL.NET . Send your donation now.
>
> If you have already donated, thanks !

--
Bernie McClenny, W3UR

Want the DX news or are you satisfied with the `DX olds?'
Editor of - The Daily DX
          - The Weekly DX
          - How's DX