On Fri, 8 Dec 1995 18:54:18 -0500 KD8O wrote:
|The flip side of this, is that it cost me hundreds of q's to let them
|operate... their rate capability, at this stage, is low... BUT... the only
|way to improve that is to show them how for an hour, then let them operate
|<being available, but only if asked> to gain experience and skills... at the
|cost of low rates and scores....There is also a strong undercurrent of self
|selection here... In volunteering my station I have marked myself as an
|also ran.... The usual top five station is not going to accept slipping down
|for any reason, and the usual second tier station is too busy trying to move
|up to accept a handicap.... so, who is left?...
I'm not in your situation so perhaps it is presumptuous of me to speak, but
if more of the better stations gave up top tier once in a while no one would
have to do it a lot. Everyone probably has a least favorite of the big
contests that one could use in this way. Anyhow, that's one thought.
But here's another. Do just what you have said above, only pick a "lesser"
contest, e.g. another country's big dx contest, a state qso party, even a
10-10 qso party? and work that with one or two new contesters. The NH QSO
Party a couple years ago proved pretty good for this when one of our local
contesters ran our radio club's station from his location.
And one more, and this probably has the most potential; do what Warren
WB1HBB did in preparation for the 1994 field day. To try to get more local
people used to contest type activity, he started a local 10 meter sprint
between members of two area clubs (this grew to about four clubs before it
was over). This turned into a monthly event. It took one hour on the last
Wednesday evening of each month, was scored on the honor system with
checkins before and after on a local repeater, and was a lot of fun. The
best people could work just about everybody in the time allowed (there was a
twenty minute window during which CW could be used in the lower part of the
contest subband), code speed was limited to 10 wpm or so on pain of having
all CW q's disqualified, so as not to discourage all the Novice/Tech people
from trying it, and the scoring scheme was tuned each month to make it more
fair or more interesting. This is a perfect opportunity for an experienced
operator with a nice station to invite in a couple people to come in and try
it out as well. This monthly sprint was so popular it continued well past
field day and only ran out of steam after about its 14th running. A little
work to publicize a contest like this locally and some solid support from
active contesters, and you have something that can provide an easy way for
HF newcomers to test the waters.
Oops, I got to rambling.
/JBL KD1ON
--
Nets: levin@bbn.com | "There were sweetheart roses on Yancey Wilmerding's
or jbl@levin.mv.com| bureau that morning. Wide-eyed and distraught, she
POTS: (617)873-3463 | stood with all her faculties rooted to the floor."
ARS: KD1ON | -- S. J. Perelman
>From JIM BREAKALL <JKB@arlvax.arl.psu.edu> Sat Dec 9 14:12:52 1995
From: JIM BREAKALL <JKB@arlvax.arl.psu.edu> (JIM BREAKALL)
Subject: TS-950S CW VOX problem?
Message-ID: <01HYLJKH8C0G9FNUQC@arlvax.arl.psu.edu>
Brett,
The service bulletin from Kenwood on this is SB-962, TS-950SD Early
Relay Protection with TL-922A. It is dated 1/17/90. It involves 2
transistors, 1 resistor, and 1 capacitor. I did the mod here for my
Ameritron AL-1200 and it solved the problem nicely. It was quite noticeable
on SSB before the mod when using VOX. Hope this helps and good luck....
73 Jim Breakall WA3FET....
>From Steven Sample <aa9ax@iglou.com> Sat Dec 9 14:32:29 1995
From: Steven Sample <aa9ax@iglou.com> (Steven Sample)
Subject: ARRL 160 Contest DX Window
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.951209092817.15979A-100000@iglou>
On Sat, 9 Dec 1995, Bill Tippett wrote:
> contest more international. I personally would love to see it become
> more like the CQ 160 and less like a 160 Sweepstakes. That's just
> because I happen to prefer DX contests more than Sweepstakes. If
>
>
Bill...
I agree with everything you say, EXCEPT making the ARRL 160 more like the
CQ 160. I personally prefer to see it more like "a 160 sweepstakes".
Some of us have no chance in a DX contest, and under the present format
we at least have a chance to compete. There are quite enough "DX
CONTESTS" for the superstations. How about leaving a few alone for us
"regular ham types"?
Just my opinion. 73... Steve/AA9AX
>From jfeustle@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU (Joseph A. Feustle, Jr.) Sat Dec 9 15:47:58
>1995
From: jfeustle@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU (Joseph A. Feustle, Jr.) (Joseph A. Feustle,
Jr.)
Subject: ENFORCEMENT-contests and otherwise
Message-ID: <01HYLL68DC3I002Q25@UOFT02.UTOLEDO.EDU>
Anyone who has played in the 160 contest for a while is up to the tricks of
fellow contestors who violate rules such as plunking down in an "unofficial"
window, or running illegal power, and proudly running their mouths about it
at Dayton. They also proudly collect their plaques for winning,
unfortunately, on many occasions. And, that's what rubs!
So, go ahead and enforce the contest rules. Kick the jerks out, and, being
the litigious society we have become, kiss contests and journals good bye.
"It wasn't me in the window...." "I do not have a 10 kw amp named the
Defficator...." On, and on as the lawyers for the accused and those for the
sponsors consume every penny available to them. End of fun for the abusers
and, quite unfortunately, for the rest of us.
As appealing as enforcement may seem, it's not really practical. Ditto,
"black lists." Perhaps in another time, but not in the USA in 1995/96. As
for me, my only concern is how I followed the rules. That's it. It ends there.
By the way, what's the proper weight for a lawyer? --Put on flameproof
suit-- It's 2 lbs., not counting the weight of the urn.
Joe Feustle, N8AAT
>From btippett@ctc.net (Bill Tippett) Sat Dec 9 15:39:49 1995
From: btippett@ctc.net (Bill Tippett) (Bill Tippett)
Subject: ARRL 160 Contest DX Window
Message-ID: <01HYLOV4HTXU8WVYNF@SUNBELT.NET>
AA9AX wrote:
>>
>Bill...
>I agree with everything you say, EXCEPT making the ARRL 160 more like the
>CQ 160. I personally prefer to see it more like "a 160 sweepstakes".
>Some of us have no chance in a DX contest, and under the present format
>we at least have a chance to compete. There are quite enough "DX
>CONTESTS" for the superstations. How about leaving a few alone for us
>"regular ham types"?
>
Steve, I think ARRL 160 is perfectly fine the way it is if (BIG IF!)
everyone would just
follow the rules...unfortunately a few don't and they are the same guys
every year.
As is true in many aspects of life, a few spoil things for the majority.
C'est la vie!
No more on this from me...I'm designing Beverages!
73, Bill W0ZV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Tippett, PO Box 37, New London, NC 28127-0037 USA
Phone/FAX: +1 704-463-1445 E-mail: btippett@ctc.net
>From rjohnson@server.nlbbs.com (Roger D. Johnson) Sat Dec 9 18:45:32 1995
From: rjohnson@server.nlbbs.com (Roger D. Johnson) (Roger D. Johnson)
Subject: 160m DX Window
Message-ID: <199512091845.NAA16407@server.nlbbs.com>
We have the same old discussions and arguements after every contest. ARRL
enforce the window? Not a
chance! Rumor has it they're afraid of lawsuits. Probably the same at CQ
magazine. If we want a super-
station free zone in order to hear the weak DX, we have to enforce it
ourselves. In this spirit, here
are some of the stations I heard soliciting contacts in the window in the
recent ARRL 160 contest:
***DISCLAIMER***
We all know that this list was not really the
listed stations but other stations using their
callsigns in an effort to make them look bad!
AB4RU, K7OX, WB1GQR, K1BV, KF9FU, NI2C, KG8EF, N2MD, W3GH,
WA2SRQ, K8RYU, W1IHN, K8ZJN, W0UC, NA4N, KQ2M AND WB3Q
Of these, by far the most serious offender was the station imitating WB1GQR
who had to be chased out
of the window several times. Even so, his key clicks were so bad that the
lower end of the window was
useless for hearing DX for most of the contest. A truly stellar
demonstration of ungentlemanly conduct
or equipment operating ineptitude, I'm not sure which.
'till the next one,
Roger, AD1G
>From Tony and Celia Becker <becker@shell.portal.com> Sat Dec 9 16:53:57 1995
From: Tony and Celia Becker <becker@shell.portal.com> (Tony and Celia Becker)
Subject: ENFORCEMENT-contests and otherwise
Message-ID: <199512091953.LAA28638@nova.unix.portal.com>
At 10:47 AM 12/9/95, Joe Feustle, N8AAT, wrote:
>As appealing as enforcement may seem, it's not really practical. Ditto,
>"black lists."
I share your concern for the possible dampening effect of litigation, and so
agree that any organized enforcement effort would risk too much.
However, the old norms of behavior in our society still exist to a much
greater extent than we might expect by what we hear in the media, including
this new one.
In another time and place I was a member of a local contest club. One of
the young stallions wanted to win by any means and discreetly built a big
amp, which caused a critical antenna component to melt in the middle of the
contest. He called another member for help with emergency repairs. When
confronted, he was unrepentant. That member sought the advice of his peers
and when the story got around the group, they all started to ignore him.
Many years older and wiser, our now middle-aged stallion is still competing
in the same contest. So are several of the old club members: some are
regular correspondents on this reflector, others I see occasionally at the
conventions. They never talk about him. When one of his scores recently
made it into the box, none of the old members offered any congratulations.
He probably has plenty of wallpaper and plaques, but these must seem hollow
victories as they unaccompanied by the respect and support of peers who know
him. To repair his reputation now he would have to realize who is ignoring
him and approach each one privately. Some will never respect him again.
Contrast this situation with the congratulations we all read posted here
after each big event. I've heard similar stories in confidence from lots of
contesters. We are only human and so de facto blackballing will always be
with us.
Joe continued:
>Perhaps in another time, but not in the USA in 1995/96. As for me, my only
>concern is how I followed the rules. That's it. It ends there.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing". Attributed to Edmund Burke, 1729-1797.
In anthropological terms, we humans and our society have not changed very
much in the last 200 years, despite our tools growing orders of magnitude
more powerful. The principle expressed by Burke still applies.
I'll quickly agree that having 1.2 million lawyers in the USA alone is a
vast oversupply of dangerous tools. We do not need to cower in fear of
them, however. Each of us is still master of his own opinion, especially
here in the USA. Rather than punish each offender by name, we can and do
denounce such deeds in general terms. And remember the name. Privately.
May you always enjoy contesting and a clear conscience.
73,
AE0M, Tony Becker - becker@shell.portal.com - Silicon Valley, U.S.A.
|