Hi Dan and all.
This is a very thought provoking thread!
> I disagree with the rule. Suppose I decided to open my station up to give
> some non-contesters a chance to get their feet wet. Maybe they are new
> hams, maybe they just don't have room for HF antnennas, maybe they just
> never considered contesting before. Ideally, they would sit down, work a
> bunch of guys with their own call, let the next guy work some, etc. Maybe
> get the contesting bug. Unfortunately, this misguided rule prevents them
> from doing that. (I already answer 4000 QSLs per year, don't even suggest
> they use my call!)
An initial reaction is, "The rulz is the rulz," but after more
thought this is an interesting perspective. I assume when you talk
about allowing non-contesters to get their feet wet with their call,
you mean Generals and higher. If you have Novice, Tech or Tech-Plus
they will probably require a call to use and control operator, you or
another volunteer. In a club scenerio this is easily handled by
using the club call, having the necessary control ops, and entering
as MS, but you nix MS below.
As for the QSLs, one way to handle this is to keep track of what
times the guest ops were on and let them reply to the QSLs. Perhaps
allowing them to keep the QSLs from those stations they worked would
be a nice reminder of a fun day for the future. They will also learn
proper QSLing techniques and be exposed to the entire contest
experience. The idea of exposing non-contesters to "our side" of the
event is always laudable and most find the experience quite
enjoyable and will be less inclined to sit on a frequency and gripe
about others having fun.
> Here's another scenario: I have limited time, maybe all I can do is work
> some low band stuff at night during certain contests. So my station sits
> idle all day because of this rule. Maybe KL2A or somebody could come over
> and crank out some high band Qs while I'm gone, but the rule says no. So,
> the options are:
>
> 1. Let the station sit idle all day
>
> 2. Let someone else also operate, pointedly violate the rule, but just
> don't send in either score
>
> 3. Claim multi-single and use one call, which neither one of us want to do
>
> 4. Get ticked off and don't operate this contest
Such are the decisions to be made prior to an event. I suspect
option 4 won't hurt too many folks but yourself and those you may be
the only contact for to the AK section. Otherwise, unless a given
rule proves detrimental to contest participation, I doubt the ARRL
will remove it.
> Allegedly this rule is to prevent manufactured contacts, but like a lot of
> ill-wrought legislation, the cure is worse than the disease. In the spirit
> of fairplay, the rule should be rewritten to prevent manufactured contacts,
> not prevent increased contest participation.
I admit to being naive when it comes to any reason why using more
than one call from a given station would be of any benefit until the
answer hit me. Imagine the scenerio where a single world class
station capable of operating the 6 HF contest bands simultaneously in
CQWW, either mode, enters six seperate single band/single op scores
all with different calls. Now, if a naive person like me can dream
that one up....
> Now I have to go answer more QSLs....
Getting rid of those pesky awards requiring confirmed QSOs and AK's
DXCC status would sure help ;-)
> Dan KL7Y
73, de Nate >>
Packet | KA0RNY @ WF0A.#SCKS.KS.USA.NOAM | "If wires can be
Internet | ka0rny@midusa.net | connected in two
Location | Valley Center, KS USA EM17hs | different ways,
View yet another web page at: | the first way
http://homepage.netspaceonline.com/~ka0rny/ | blows the fuse!"
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|