How about making SS more fun by allowing one qso per band? I watched a fairly
good 15M band dry up simply because there was not enough activity. The signals
were plenty loud from all directions, just no interest. I've always liked
contests where there are more potential contacts than a mere mortal can work.
This is the way SS was in the early 60s, when I first started contesting. For
those who have a limited antenna situation, also allow single-band entries. Who
knows, 10M may even spring to life? Paul, K5AF
In a message dated 11/6/2017 7:59:49 PM Central Standard Time, af5cc2@gmail.com
writes:
I am not so thrilled about such a change also. There are already way too many
clubs that only exist on paper so someone can have another 1 or 12 callsigns to
use. This would just promote such activity. I wish the FCC would do away with
club licenses. We didn't have them for most of the 80s and everything still
seemed to work ok. On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Ron Notarius W3WN
<wn3vaw@verizon.net> wrote: > A rule change to permit the appearance of
additional activity, by > manufacturing contacts under a second or third or
fourth callsign? > > > Doesn't strike me as a good idea. > > > I think a better
idea would be to try and recruit more people to operate > in Sweepstakes. In
other words, actually increase activity with an > increase in operators, not an
increase merely in callsigns. > > > 73, ron W3WN > > > > > > -----Original
Message----- > From: Jim Stahl via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com> > To:
Alan Dewey via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com> > Sent: Mon, Nov 6, 2017
10:17 am > Subject: [CQ-Contest] So Sunday Sucked? > > For all who stuck it out
to the bitter end in SS, it is clear that it is > time for a rules update for
ARRL contests, specifically doing away with > general rules 3.3 and 3.5:3.3.An
operator may not use more than one call > sign from any given location during
the contest period.3.5.A transmitter > used to contact one or more stations may
not be subsequently used under any > other call during the contest period,
except for family stations where more > than one call has been issued, and then
only if the second call sign is > used by a different operator. (The intent of
this rule is to accommodate > family members who must share a rig and to
prohibit manufactured or > artificial contacts.)------------------------As many
of you are aware, > for many years I’ve been doing “Single Operator Multi
Station” efforts in > SS, typically operating from four different stations in
an effort to turn > SS into a 24 hour ratefest. Now that I’m a Florida
snowbird, that has been > reduced to two efforts, this year a QRP effort as
K8MR with the KX3 from a > waterfront parking area, and a LP effort with the K3
from the condo as > W3USA.It was a lot more fun to be working people in the
second effort from > W3USA who I had previously worked from K8MR. I’m sure
nobody was bothered > that I gave them an extra QSO by using two stations.My
take is that these > rules were put in many years ago to prevent “manufactured”
contacts by > friends, fellow club members or whoever. In the days of paper
logs that may > have made sense. But with today’s log checking it is a lot
easier to find > suspicious manufactured contacts. Even though a person “
manufacturing” a > few QSOs is not likely to send in a log of those QSOs.Some
reasonable > limits might be in order, such as a minimum off time from a
previous call > before it could be used again, or even not allowing any return
to using a > previous call. But if a few hundred people were to decide on
Sunday > afternoon (or whenever) to fire up their stations with a new call, and
have > fun running some good rates while giving the full time folks new people
> somebody to work, would anybody really mind? 73 - Jim >
K8MR_______________________________________________CQ-Contest mailing >
listCQ-Contest@contesting.comhttp://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.comhttp://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|