CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Two points for intra-NA QSOs in CQWW?

To: "'Ron Notarius W3WN'" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Two points for intra-NA QSOs in CQWW?
From: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>
Reply-to: k5zd@charter.net
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 14:45:12 -0000
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sorry you feel so mistreated Ron.  You have stated multiple times that you
will not submit a log for CQWW so I don't understand why you feel slighted.

The survey was launched late Friday night and then I went on a trip.  The
thinking was to get the active participants through first and then announce
the survey to the public on Monday.  I didn't expect the speed of this
showing up on cq-contest.  I should have known better.

We really are interested in hearing the opinions of active operators in the
CQWW contest. The answers do give us insight into how people with different
activity levels see the contest.  And how people in different parts of the
planet see the contest.

The results of the survey will help inform the review of the rules that is
planned for this year.  The results will be published on the CQWW blog as
has been done before with the CQ WPX survey.

Never forget.  This is all supposed to be for entertainment, fun, and
leisure!

Randy, K5ZD


> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Ron Notarius W3WN
> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 1:11 PM
> To: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Two points for intra-NA QSOs in CQWW?
> 
> Well Bill, at the very least, when the survey results are compiled and
> released... and more importantly, if and when any changes as a result of
> the survey are implemented... come right out and tell us who the survey
> was limited to.
> 
> It is frustrating to read or hear about a change as a result of an
> alleged survey, and then be told "sorry, you SHOULD HAVE KNOWN, better
> luck next time" with no further explanation.  And that's happened more
> than once in the recent past.
> 
> 73
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Cqtestk4xs@aol.com
> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 8:48 AM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Two points for intra-NA QSOs in CQWW?
> 
> How are they supposed to know you operated in a contest and you want to
> submit your opinions if you don't send in a log?  Only way this could be
> done is to check every call in the log data base and then manually look
> up each guy's email address and send him an email.  Pretty time
> intensive.
> 
> I'm sure if you contacted the boys at CQ and told them you wanted to
> submit  your comments they would be glad to accept them.
> 
> 73 Bill K4XS/KH7XS
> 
> 
> In a message dated 3/10/2013 11:10:35 A.M. Coordinated Universal Tim,
> wn3vaw@verizon.net writes:
> 
> I  see.  Thanks Barry.
> 
> There are those of use who operate in the  contest, but do not submit
> logs
> for any of a variety of reasons.
> 
> I guess our opinions aren't important then.
> 
> Pity.   This used to be one of my favorite contests,  too.
> 
> /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

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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