[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX & Activity (Was: Intended consequences)

To: CQ Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX & Activity (Was: Intended consequences)
From: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
Reply-to: n2ic@arrl.net
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 10:53:03 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Bob Shohet KQ2M <kq2m@kq2m.com> wrote:

 >    As I have stated before on this reflector:

 >    "More activity = more fun
 >    more qso's = more fun
 >    more qso's = higher score = more fun"

 >    More activity = more stations to work for everyone.

By that logic, you would advocate the following changes:

- Change CQWW CW and SSB rules so same-country North Americans QSO's count for 
- Change ARRL DX to world-works-world. 2 points per QSO.
- Change WAE to world-works-world.

All of those changes would result in more activity, and higher scores. And, by 
your way of thinking, "more fun".

 >    Despite the activity explosion in the WPX contest because of
 >    the 30=>36 hour rule change and the 0=>1 point US-US qso rule change,
 >    which benefits the WPX contest you choose to focus on the narrow
 >    perspective of how your score and that of some regions might be affected.

Yeah, you're right Bob, I guess that considering any part of the USA that is 
west of the Hudson River is a narrow perspective. See 
http://bigthink.com/ideas/21121 .

 >    You steadfastly refuse to acknowledge how the increased activity levels
 >    in WPX benefit EVERYONE (including you) operating in the contest.

And you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that the WPX rule changes 
significantly tipped the scales in favor the the USA east coast. You and I have 
a different definition of the word "benefit".

Steve, N2IC
CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>