Joe, your reply truly saddens me. But I will give you this much credit;
unlike many of the others who seem to feel as you do, at least you will
stand up (metaphorically speaking) and say so publicly.
It is obvious that I'm not going to convince you otherwise. The day may
come that the contest rules do get changed, or worse more and more
administrations impose by law band plans because some of us couldn't abide
by voluntary band plans in any form. I hope it doesn't, but I can see it
What is really unfortunate is that the voluntary band plans were developed
by amateurs in other countries as guidelines so as to avoid unneeded
governmental regulation. What you are saying is that since there's no
regulation, you can ignore the band plan. Not only do you thus invite chaos
and further regulation or re-regulation, but (IMHO) you thus choose not to
use good amateur practices.
Must ethics be legislated to be self-enforced?
Now, I was ready to shoot back a lengthy rebuttal, but outside of these few
remarks, I'm not going to bore the others on the reflector. I think my
views by now should be pretty clear. So out of curiousity, let me ask you
Have you ever been trampled on by people participating in a contest that
I had it happen to me. I'll spare you the details. Suffice to say, it gave
me a slightly jaundiced view of the lengths that some will go to, to make
one more "new" one.
And with that, I will let your words speak for themselves.
From: Joe Subich, W4TV [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 8:36 PM
To: 'Ron Notarius W3WN'; 'CQ Contest Reflector'
Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] SSB in CW band
> 2. My analogy is flawed? Hmmm. 40 is taken over by
> contesters, so if you don't want to contest, go to another band.
> That's not "another route through town," to play on the analogy,
> that's "another town."
Yes, your analogy is flawed. Another band is not "another town"
it's another road, perhaps a road less traveled, but another
road to making QSOs. In the case of 40, if you're looking for
domestic QSOs, 80 is a good alternate, if a somewhat longer path
is your thing 30 meters is generally better than 40 any time.
> Joe, I think it's very clear that you believe that if it's
> not prohibited by law, it's allowed, that might makes right,
> that anything goes if it's not illegal.
Absolutely, if it is not prohibited by law it is permitted. Laws
are made to provide objective rules that apply equally to everyone.
Your "bandplans" say if I want to contest and the rest of the band
is full up with broadcasters and 5,000 contesters, I can't do it on
7022 but if I want to rag chew with some 5 WPM Extra across town
using a KW I can? That's absurd.
If you want to prohibit a behavior for "the greater good" convince
your bleeding heart regulators to make the behavior illegal.
> And thus, you are one of the examples of what the non-contesters
> are complaining about. I'm sorry to have to say that; frankly, I
> thought better of you.
Non-contesters have no more right to preferential access to a
frequency than SSTV does to 14.230 or Jack Gerritsen had to the
VHF/UHF and pubic service spectrum on the West Coast. Amateur
frequencies are not "assigned channels" like the commercial
service - they are there on a first come first served basis. I'm
not advocating intentional interference and never will but if a
frequency I'm licensed to use is open and I'm looking for a "hole"
in the band, you'd better believe I'll use it and not leave it for
someone else who might be engaged in a different kind of amateur
There is nothing wrong with that behavior and any non-contester who
can't understand the concept of first come first served has not
read the back of his/her license recently.
CQ-Contest mailing list