If there's a question about scores, why don't we just run the q's &
have a good time. We can all submit our scores to the group afterwards
and then pick which ones get sent in with the SECC comment line...
Gary - WB4SQ
--- Lee Hiers <lee.hiers at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/18/05, ku8e at bellsouth.net <ku8e at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > What's wrong with having a club goal to shoot for ?? We are not
> leaving anyone
> > out because you and I both know that SECC is more of a CW than SSB
> oriented
> > club. The odds are very slim that we will have more than 22 entries
> on SSB.
> > There is nothing elitist about my comments. You are trying to make
> a big deal
> > out of something that is nothing.
>
> Let's see. You said "I sure hope that everyone doesn't have the same
> attitude about SS that AA4GA has". Sounds like you're the one trying
> to make a big deal out of my comments...pretty much a personal attack
> from where I'm sitting, as well.
>
> If you think the odds are slim that there will be 22 or less entries,
> why are you getting so upset? All I'm trying to do is get more
> activity. Having 50 entries from a club is pretty pitiful when there
> are well over 150 members on the roster. Say only 60% are eligible
> to
> enter for the club in SS, that is still over 180 potential entries
> between phone and CW weekends.
>
> Why would you want to limit it to 50 entries? Instead, you should be
> encouraging all members to participate
which you are not doing.
> Further, ARRL General Contest Rule 8.8 states: "A club's entry
> classification may be changed if, in the opinion of the ARRL Awards
> Committee, the club has manipulated its number of entries to allow
> the
> club to enter a lower classification". It could be argued that your
> "discouragement" of casual operators is such a manipulation.
>
> We had members after the CW weekend express concern that maybe their
> scores were to small to report. What you're trying to do is
> discourage these folks
in my opinion, these folks should be
> ENcouraged
> to participate.
>
> > My impression of the SECC is that it just has been a club to submit
> your scores.
>
> WOW! You finally get it! That IS the purpose of the SECC. Go back
> and read the previous discussions.
>
> > There are basically no other activities that anyone is interested
> in. When one of
> > us has made a suggestion for an activity to improve the club we are
> subjected to
> > comments that we are butting in and don't mess with things the way
> they are.
>
> I have never said anything about butting-in. I have (repeatedly)
> tried to enlighten you upon the origins and purpose of the SECC, but
> until now, I don't recall any indication that you understand the
> concept. I actually want you to butt in
and submit your scores for
> the SECC
not sulk and threaten to go watch football on TV!
>
> The SECC has done other stuff. I may have expressed my disagreement
> about whether it's within the purpose of the club, but I certainly
> haven't rehashed it over and over. The GA QSO party for instance.
> When it was initially discussed, I may have expressed that it's
> something I don't think we should do, but I don't get involved with
> the discussions about it, and I don't operate it. I just ignore it.
>
> > I have had a very sarcastic attitude about the SECC for the last
> year. The only
> > reason I belong is there is no other contest club in the area. If
> there was I would
> > be outta here...
>
> Now there's a positive comment!
>
> Lee
> --
> Lee Hiers, AA4GA
> "Have Dobro Will Travel"
> _______________________________________________
> SECC mailing list
> SECC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/secc
>
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
|