I think the WRTC teams all did an excellent job. I believe that anything
regarding packet spotting was beyond their control and was not authorized or
condoned by them.
As far as use of the Internet, packet spotting, skimmer, Morse code readers,
any technology not yet developed, etc., it's pretty obvious that everyone
has his or her own ideas and opinions about it and they are not likely to
change those despite arguments to the contrary, whatever they may be. My
attitude has been "You use or don't use what you want to and I'll use or not
use what I want to. But please abide by the rules."
73, Zack W9SZ
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Milt, N5IA <n5ia@zia-connection.com>wrote:
> Thanks John,
>
> Very well written and articulated.
>
> Now let's see if the community of posters can live up to higher
> expectations
> and raise the bar.
>
> 73 de Milt, N5IA
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <K1AR@aol.com>
> To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 9:24 AM
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Consider This Fellow Contesters
>
>
> >
> >
> > All,
> >
> > Over the past few weeks in particular, there has been a significant
> > increase in personal attacks and mudslinging on this channel. Someone
> > aptly
> > pointed out recently that rather than celebrating the enormous
> > accomplishments
> > at WRTC-2010, we spent more time complaining about the impact of packet
> > spotting-related issues. It's no wonder that the majority of actual
> > competitors
> > have avoided posting celebratory summaries of their experiences. Someone
> > might chew them out for their airline selection between London and New
> > York
> > or the fact that they used the Internet to catch up on email during the
> > flight. Or, they might simply be thinking, "Why bother with this crowd?"
> > That
> > is a huge loss for us all.
> >
> >
> >
> > I'd like to again ask for some balance. My broader concern has more to
> do
> > with the perception about contesting that is created by the subtle (and
> > sometimes not so subtle) bickering that takes place here. In many cases,
> > I'm
> > not proud of the image we're creating for new or potential contesters.
> > Frankly, we often spend more time bitching than contributing useful
> > insight that
> > benefits contesting at large.
> >
> >
> >
> > While Tom and I try our best to allow for an open forum, this is a
> > moderated list. I'd simply like to ask, via this message, that you think
> > twice
> > before launching your next "nastygram." In an ideal world, the archived
> > version of CQ-Contest should be great fodder for the advancement of
> > contesting
> > and new contester recruitment. As it currently exists, we have a long
> way
> > to
> > go.
> >
> >
> >
> > Think about it and thanks for reading.
> >
> >
> >
> > 73 John, K1AR
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|