On Feb 22, 2005, at 12:02 AM, N7MAL wrote:
> Here we go again: I was a packet-cluster sysop at the very beginning.
> It has never, let me shout it, "NEVER", been considered good etiquette
> for USA stations to spot USA stations during a DX contest.
Yes, and at the very beginning, packet-cluster networks were tenuously
connected by half-duplex 1200 bps and 2400 bps links. Throughput for
spots was very low. Often the cluster back-bone was on a shared
frequency with some or all users. If too many spots were generated too
quickly, the network would collapse.
In that environment, it makes sense to limit spots. Heck, I remember
cluster users being admonished not to spot EUROPE in the 80s....
Today, the environment is quite different. Most users and virtually all
of the network is on a high-speed link -- the internet. There's really
no need to artificially limit spots.
> Secondly a packet-cluster user cannot lock-out/reject spots from
> individual stations only regions or districts, i.e. W6 or CA.
Certainly a packet-cluster user in the USA can lock-out all spots for
stations in the USA, regardless of who sends them.
> Why would you suggest further penalizing stations who are already
> handicapped because they can't find DX stations on their own without
> the aid of the "cluster" big spotters.
How does having more spots penalize anyone? The recipient of spots can
choose to follow them (or not).
> Furthermore why would you penalize stations like, W6YX, who feel the
> need to show-off the fact they can hear every station on the band and
> then can actually type the calls in the cluster.
Huh? At any M/M, we are a huge consumer of spots. It's not fair for us
to use the spots without giving back. Again, if I'm at a mult station,
and I'm tuning around, if I find someone calling CQ that hasn't been
spotted recently (like in the last 30 minutes), I'll spot him.
> Everyone knows my feelings about using the"Cluster" during contests.
If you don't like it, then don't use it. Multi-ops make big use of it,
and there are tons of more casual operators that find it fun to do as
SOA.
> Early Saturday morning I had a nice/casual JA run going, 2 a minute.
> All of the sudden, as if by magic, my rate jumped to 5 a minute. I
> didn't ask for that and I guarantee you I didn't want it but someone
> in JA land spotted me on their cluster. While it may be nice for the
> ego all the fun went out of the JA run and it became work.
Then QSY. Problem solved.
> The saddest part is because the spot went out to the whole world 3,
> yes 3, USA stations called just because they saw the spot.
That's sad.
> Unfortunately most contest sponsors refuse to restrict, or outlaw,
> clusters during contests because they are afraid of losing precious
> revenue for their magazines, not in the integrity or the real meaning
> of contesting. So the cluster handicapped hams will always win out and
> the 'REAL' contesters will be the losers.
Big deal. So they won't win. If contesting were all about winning, then
we'd only have three contestors. Contests are about fun. If an operator
enters an assisted category and he is having fun, who cares what his
score is?
Perhaps this operator doesn't really care about his score. Perhaps he's
just trying to get DXCC or WAS or is working on a band endorsement.
> I suggest we no longer call it contesting, because it is no longer a
> contest when you know where to find stations to work because it is
> being spoon fed to you.
So, are you objecting to SENDING spots, or RECEIVING spots?
The spotting network isn't going away. We've got separate categories
for it. Accept it.
Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
-- Wilbur Wright, 1901
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|