W6WRT distorts facts again ...
> Keep in mind that W4TV is not a contester.
W4TV has been a contester for 30 years ... whether I have been active
in the 48 hour grind for the last few years is not an issue.
> Joe is a merchant; a seller of SO2R products who stands to profit
> from forcing as many as possible to have to go SO2R to be competitive.
> Go to the MicroHam website http://www.microham.com/index1.html and
> see who is the North American distributor.
microHAM has one product that is directly focused to the SO2R operator.
There are far more products for the single operator and other operating
styles. SO2R products in general are far lower volume items for all
manufacturers/vendors. In probably all cases the vendors could see
their SO2R products go away without significant impact to their bottom
line unless, of course, they have but a single product.
> Joe has an agenda about SO2R and it is not oriented toward what is
> best for contesting.
Bull crap! It us Bill who is not oriented to what is best for
contesting ... instead he promotes dumbing down the competition
to his level - he is embarked on a crusade against those whose
skills have exceeded his own and with whom he does not want to
compete. If Bill truly wanted to do what is best for contesting,
he would be advocating for an entry level single operator class
with limited antennas instead of seeking to limit operator skills,
efficiency and flexibility in the area that Bill wants to compete.
> It's about what is best for Joe's bank account and he does not want
> that known. Have you ever seen a disclaimer on one of his posts
> about his financial interest in SO2R?
Again, this is a total and complete falsehood ... my representation
of microHAM has nothing to do with my personal opinions of SO2R.
microHAM America, LLC is a "second job." The success or failure of
any one product has little if any impact on my personal "bottom line"
but Bill has no way to know - and doesn't care about - the facts if
they are inconvenient to his personal crusade.
> This is going to be my last post on the SO1R vs So2R debate. The RTTY
> contest community has already spoken on the subject:
>
> http://www.rttycontesting.com/2007survey/2007octsurveyresults.html
>
> Scroll down to the last graphic on the page. By a two to one margin,
> RTTY contesters want SO1R and SO2R to be two separate categories. I
> call upon the contest sponsors to take note and act accordingly.
The "contest community" has far from spoken ... the survey is far
from scientific or complete. You take the opinions of a small
minority (RTTY operators) from a larger group (contesters in general)
and elevate them to a higher status that those who participate in other
modes that, arguably, require a higher level of operator skill. Of
course, that's your modus operandi ... distort the facts to fit your
personal agenda.
> My disclaimer: I have zero financial interest in ham radio. I want
> what is best for ham radio and for contesting. For me it is just a
> hobby, not a business.
Lies as always ... limiting, penalizing, or segregating operator skill
is never in the best interest of ham radio. It's all about creating
a category free of those with skills that exceed yours so you can
win.
Not that it matters but my opinions are my own and are not effected
by any personal or business relationships that I may have. The are
formed by 30+ years of contesting - as a station builder, operator,
and designer - and by association with some of the best operators in
the world. I have no financial stake in the success or failure of SO2R;
my "second job" is not material to my personal standard of living.
My goal is to see that every operator has the opportunity to use any
legal means to maximize his score; to see that nobody is discriminated
against based on their operating techniques and skill level.
... Joe, W4TV
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|