Jim, K1IR makes a very persuasive argument in my view. I am a non US
contester but I am also a fully paid up member of the ARRL and intend to
remain so. I would gain nothing myself from an earlier release of contest
results to non members. Though.......
"I'd like you to come play my game, but by the way, I'm not going to tell
you how you did until a month after everyone else, unless you pay me some
money", is a position which has a rather ugly feel to it.
There is no denying the ARRL has to operate viably as a business and has
therefore to maintain focus on securing its revenues, but this is not a good
way to aim to do it. Someone's thinking is badly off track here.
There are many members of the contesting community around the world and many
more who may be attracted to contesting who simply don't have the luxury of
being able to afford to pay for ARRL membership. For the ARRL to take steps
to further disadvantage these folks is IMHO unnecessary and wholly
For my money as a member of ARRL I would like to see staging of results
release abandoned forthwith and all efforts applied to finding ways to
further speed up results publication. We all hate the long wait for results
Bob 5B4AGN, P3F, ZC4ZM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Idelson" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "CQ-Contest Post" <email@example.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 12:40 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Perception IS reality
> > This email is my comment on the "ARRL contest results" thread.
> > By my count, about 2/3 of the non-US contesters who have commented on
> > topic here on cq-contest say that they are not happy with the way ARRL
> > putting out the results. That fact speaks for itself. Those of you who
> > you can change their feelings by forcing your own point of view on them
> > fail. The League should listen carefully to these comments from outside
> the US
> > and do their best to understand and address the problem. In the proposal
> > submitted to the League on publication of contest results, we made the
> > quite strongly that coverage of contests must be treated as a global
> > This discussion reinforces that point.
> > Seems to me international participation is an absolute requirement for
> > ARRL contests. It's obvious to me that alienating DX stations in any way
> is not
> > an acceptable result, and steps should be taken to avoid it. This is a
> > problem right now; this is the time to fix it.
> > a) Remove the one month delay - not a single membership will be lost,
> > b) Put a PDF of the contest results on the website for unrestricted
> download -
> > just like the old QST article and listings - so it can be printed and
> shared by
> > just about anyone, anywhere.
> > c) Possibly make the on-line Soapbox and/or the sortable database
> > of the permanent Members Only area. This would allow anyone to get
> > results in the PDF, while Members would have access to the "next level"
> > analysis and results.
> > 73,
> > Jim Idelson K1IR
> > email firstname.lastname@example.org
> > web http://www.designet.com/k1ir
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest