Bob Brock wrote in message . ..

On a related question, is it pro coders intention to boycott QSO's
with countries that have already dropped the code requirement for HF
work? Do you guys refuse to talk to Australians now?

In the event they have that country confirmed for DXCC, they will boycott.

On 4 Sep 2003 05:25:03 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Bob Brock wrote in message . ..

On a related question, is it pro coders intention to boycott QSO's
with countries that have already dropped the code requirement for HF
work? Do you guys refuse to talk to Australians now?

In the event they have that country confirmed for DXCC, they will boycott.

I was asking about you guys, not what they will do. Afterall, I've
boycotted General and above for about 9 years now because of
antiquated requirements.

Bob Brock wrote in message . ..
On 4 Sep 2003 05:25:03 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Bob Brock wrote in message . ..

On a related question, is it pro coders intention to boycott QSO's
with countries that have already dropped the code requirement for HF
work? Do you guys refuse to talk to Australians now?

In the event they have that country confirmed for DXCC, they will boycott.

I was asking about you guys, not what they will do. Afterall, I've
boycotted General and above for about 9 years now because of
antiquated requirements.

That's funny. I don't necessarily agree with it, but its funny.

Tell me, do you have any anecdotal stories?

In article , Bob Brock
writes:

On 4 Sep 2003 05:25:03 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Bob Brock wrote in message
...

On a related question, is it pro coders intention to boycott QSO's
with countries that have already dropped the code requirement for HF
work? Do you guys refuse to talk to Australians now?

In the event they have that country confirmed for DXCC, they will boycott.

I was asking about you guys, not what they will do.

I don't boycott any ham who follows the rules.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Bob Brock
writes:

On 4 Sep 2003 05:25:03 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Bob Brock wrote in message
...

On a related question, is it pro coders intention to boycott QSO's
with countries that have already dropped the code requirement for HF
work? Do you guys refuse to talk to Australians now?

In the event they have that country confirmed for DXCC, they will
boycott.

I was asking about you guys, not what they will do.

I don't boycott any ham who follows the rules.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Exactly. And, I hadn't heard of any attempt to boycott a "country" due to
its position on CW. That seems like something that would only get thought
up right here in this newsgroup, though! GRIN

Anyway, that's taking the whole CW debate just way too far, IMNSHO.

Kim W5TIT

On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 20:15:41 -0500, "Kim W5TIT"
wrote:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Bob Brock
writes:

On 4 Sep 2003 05:25:03 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Bob Brock wrote in message
...

On a related question, is it pro coders intention to boycott QSO's
with countries that have already dropped the code requirement for HF
work? Do you guys refuse to talk to Australians now?

In the event they have that country confirmed for DXCC, they will
boycott.

I was asking about you guys, not what they will do.

I don't boycott any ham who follows the rules.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Exactly. And, I hadn't heard of any attempt to boycott a "country" due to
its position on CW. That seems like something that would only get thought
up right here in this newsgroup, though! GRIN

Anyway, that's taking the whole CW debate just way too far, IMNSHO.

I simply asked if anyone would consider boycotting no code HF
operators from other countries. Oz is already issuing licenses.
Asking a question is not proposing anything. However, making that
jump in logic is typical of usenet in general.

"Bob Brock" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 20:15:41 -0500, "Kim W5TIT"
wrote:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Bob Brock
writes:

On 4 Sep 2003 05:25:03 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Bob Brock wrote in message
...

On a related question, is it pro coders intention to boycott QSO's
with countries that have already dropped the code requirement for
HF
work? Do you guys refuse to talk to Australians now?

In the event they have that country confirmed for DXCC, they will
boycott.

I was asking about you guys, not what they will do.

I don't boycott any ham who follows the rules.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Exactly. And, I hadn't heard of any attempt to boycott a "country" due
to
its position on CW. That seems like something that would only get
thought
up right here in this newsgroup, though! GRIN

Anyway, that's taking the whole CW debate just way too far, IMNSHO.

I simply asked if anyone would consider boycotting no code HF
operators from other countries. Oz is already issuing licenses.
Asking a question is not proposing anything. However, making that
jump in logic is typical of usenet in general.

Well, excuse the observation he but you asked and was answered, at least
by N2EY and by me. Both answers were succinct and without merit for the
return you have above--which seems quite defensive and I'm puzzled by why.

So, you simply asked and were quite simply answered.

And, since you were the one who asked the question of such a weird concept
you would be observing your own actions with regard to your last sentance.

Kim W5TIT

On Fri, 5 Sep 2003 06:55:21 -0500, "Kim W5TIT"
wrote:

"Bob Brock" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 20:15:41 -0500, "Kim W5TIT"
wrote:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Bob Brock
writes:

On 4 Sep 2003 05:25:03 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

Bob Brock wrote in message
...

On a related question, is it pro coders intention to boycott QSO's
with countries that have already dropped the code requirement for
HF
work? Do you guys refuse to talk to Australians now?

In the event they have that country confirmed for DXCC, they will
boycott.

I was asking about you guys, not what they will do.

I don't boycott any ham who follows the rules.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Exactly. And, I hadn't heard of any attempt to boycott a "country" due
to
its position on CW. That seems like something that would only get
thought
up right here in this newsgroup, though! GRIN

Anyway, that's taking the whole CW debate just way too far, IMNSHO.

I simply asked if anyone would consider boycotting no code HF
operators from other countries. Oz is already issuing licenses.
Asking a question is not proposing anything. However, making that
jump in logic is typical of usenet in general.

Well, excuse the observation he but you asked and was answered, at least
by N2EY and by me. Both answers were succinct and without merit for the
return you have above--which seems quite defensive and I'm puzzled by why.

So, you simply asked and were quite simply answered.

And, since you were the one who asked the question of such a weird concept
you would be observing your own actions with regard to your last sentance.

Kim W5TIT


OK Kim, show me where I said that I would boycott someone because of
their code status and I'll get back with you. If you can't quote me
saying that, who made the jump in logic will be apparent.

The ball is in your court.

Kim W5TIT wrote:

Well, excuse the observation he but you asked and was answered, at least
by N2EY and by me. Both answers were succinct and without merit for the
return you have above--which seems quite defensive and I'm puzzled by why.

So, you simply asked and were quite simply answered.

And, since you were the one who asked the question of such a weird concept
you would be observing your own actions with regard to your last sentance.


Hey Kim


I don't think we can apply the regular rules of logic to this one!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Bob Brock wrote:

I simply asked if anyone would consider boycotting no code HF
operators from other countries. Oz is already issuing licenses.
Asking a question is not proposing anything. However, making that
jump in logic is typical of usenet in general.

Guess you never heard of leading questions, eh? And that is exactly
what you're trying to do.

- Mike KB3EIA -