As repeated many times... the cluster spotting network was designed, built,
and is operated by and for contesters. The use of it during the week
between contests was an afterthought that was originally just a way to keep
the rf node frequencies from being taken over by mail forwarding. So NO,
the cluster network will not shutdown during contests.
David Robbins K1TTT
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Dick-w0raa
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 15:52
> To: cq-contesting
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Shut down the clusters during a contest. SImple.
> Has anybody given thought to asking the people who own/operate the various
> clusters, to voluntarily shut them down during contest periods? What did
> do before there were clusters and packet? We fouind stations to work, the
> old fashioned way. We turned the knob and looked for them. God forbid we
> should have to do that today. What a horrible thought.
> So, why not just get all of them to voluntarily turn them off at the onset
> of a contest and then turn them back on at the end of the contest? I
> it's doable, so why not do it? Then we'd find out if these big gun
> are as big gunned as they claim to be. It's certainly worth considering.
> Also, all contests should be limited to 100 watts. Now there's where the
> cheating would go. Cheaters would be saying: "Me, more than 100 watts?
> me, I follow the rules!"
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Fatchett W0MU" <email@example.com>
> To: "Randy Thompson" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "Untitled"
> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 4:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet
> > Assisted seems to have less competitors which translates to higher
> > finishes...
> > I most cases if you are chasing spots you are probably not winning. Run
> > run
> > run run run.
> > On 12/12/07 4:37 PM, "Randy Thompson" <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> Because some of us still like to do things the old fashioned way. All
> >> ourselves! And we like the fact that we can compete in a category with
> >> other people who feel the same way. Even makes it more fun when we can
> >> beat
> >> the packet assisted guys.
> >> I am against combining them because I like to be recognized as a guy
> >> knows how to operate.
> >> I wouldn't mind if they were combined because then all the SOA guys who
> >> think they are competitive will realize that packet does not a winning
> >> score
> >> make.
> >> Randy, K5ZD
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> >>> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Yuri VE3DZ
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 7:08 PM
> >>> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet
> >>> I don't like Dx Cluster, but the reality is - like it or not
> >>> - almost everyone is using it nowadays, one way or another. I
> >>> mean 99.9 % of the HAM stations have the capability of using
> >>> Dx Cluster today.
> >>> So, why not just allow it for all categories, like it was
> >>> done for WAE or Russian DX long time ago?
> >>> What are we afraid of here?
> >>> Yuri VE3DZ
> CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list