Using other logs is indeed a good idea. However, what is it specifically that
the analysis should deliver to convince the skeptics? You don't need any logs
to predict that when you change incentives human behavior will change
accordingly.
Just to sum it up:
1) The proponents of a change favor two options. Option #1 is switching to
distance based model. This option will encourage long distance QSOs (in the
spirit of a DX contest) while also giving credits for local contacts. Option
#2 is allowing US to US contacts plus increasing the pool of mults. Both
options are pretty clearly formulated have outcomes with a fairly high degree
of predictability based on the change in incentives.
2) The opponents of any changes use by and large two arguments. Argument #1 is
that a data analysis is needed to convince them that a change is needed. The
goals of such analysis have never been outlined. Argument #2 is that the rules
are fine as is and no change is needed.
Again, as a Canadian station the current rules serve me very well. I am happy
to get points for working an endless supply of US stations. However, the idea
that a Toronto - Buffalo QSO is worth more than Miami - Seattle is just crazy
and makes no sense.
Rudy N2WQ
Sent using a tiny keyboard. Please excuse brevity, typos, or inappropriate
autocorrect.
> On Jul 22, 2016, at 11:10 PM, Mike Tessmer <mtessmer@cinci.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > I repeat, your statement is flat out misrepresenting the data that's in the
> > logs. You can't analyze data that's not there. You can argue as much as you
> > want, but if logs contain close to zero percent US stations working other US
> > stations, the analysis you demand is impossible and useless.
>
> OK. There are six years worth of WPX logs available, where there are likely
> to be plenty of US to US QSOs. It’s not perfect but at least it’s some data.
> There are four years worth of CQWW RTTY logs, where there are plenty of US
> to US QSOs. Everyone thinks their idea is the magic one, but no one does
> anything to justify why. Figure out how to manipulate the data to derive the
> information you need. Crunch some numbers. Post the results. Don’t expect
> someone else to do the work for you.
>
> 73, Mike K9NW
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|