VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for Limiting MultiOps[was:Asuggestion

To: "Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net>, vhfcontesting@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for Limiting MultiOps[was:Asuggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes]
From: "Dave Wendling" <kb1eaa@berkshire.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 18:32:00 -0500
List-post: <mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Give it up Ev, It's all about the microwaves. We are on to you.....Besides that 
Kenneth is woopping your butt in this debate..

Dave Wendling
kb1eaa@berkshire.rr.com
Home of Palm Rover Software
http:/www.home.nycap.rr.com/nugidoors/

"Ev Tupis (W2EV)" <w2ev@arrl.net> wrote:
__________
>In reply to W2EV, "Kenneth E. Harker" wrote:
>> > Think about this:
>> >
>> > o Donate to the spectrum defense fund
>> > o Create a contesting category that actually encourages you to 
>      NOT use spectrum
>> 
>> You are not going to get everyone who shows an interest in VHF operating to
>> buy microwave gear.  It's expensive, it takes a lot of time and effort to
>> build a station, and a lot of time and effort to learn how to use it.
>
>It's not about getting everyone to buy microwave gear.  It's about sending
>conflicting messages.  The way the rules are written about MultiOp
>participation, those that CHOOSE to use our bands must make a decision to 
>either
>do that (a very good thing) or to enter the Limited MultiOp category (a very 
>BAD
>thing).  L-M/O, the way it is configured now, is bad for our future and works 
>in
>opposition to the efforts funded by the ARRL's Spectrum Defense Fund.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------
>= Commentary on this thread's real topic ends here. =
>-----------------------------------------------------
>
>>   It (uWaving?) has been and always will be a small niche activity.
>
>Let's see if you're right.  Place your bets now.
>
>According to the ARRL On-line database, the January 2003 VHF SS had 798
>continental log submittals.  Of those, 278 submitted a log showing 1296 MHz
>activity.  This means that more than 1 out of every 3 continental participants
>have microwave gear.  If one out of every 3 auto owners had a Hummer H2, you'd
>see them everywhere you went.  uWave participation enjoys quite a "market
>penetration" and is hardly a "small niche activity".
>
>Take a gander at South Texas (you must be an ARRL member to view this):
>http://www.remote.arrl.org/members-only/contests/scores.html?vhf_class=&vhf_sect=STX&clb_name=&ss_call=&long_form=1&sort0=&sort1=&sort2=&con_id=47
>
>You'll see 4 out of 14 South Texas stations submitted uWave QSO's last
>January...some with significant QSO totals.
>
>I was challenged to provide any meaningful response to the rest of your email 
>so
>I almost ignored it.  Then came this nugget...
>
>> Aren't HF contests in opposition to the promotion of microwave spectrum 
>> usage?
>> 
>> Truth.
>
>Only in Kennethville, Mayor.
>
>QRU,
>Ev, W2EV
>-- 
>PropNET: If the band is open and no one is TXing, does anyone hear it?
>HamIM  : Messaging the all-ham way, find Rovers as they go to play.
>         That HamIM, that HamIM -- I'm sure you'll like that HamIM.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Ask me about either.  I'll send a URL and you can join the fun, too!
>
>_______________________________________________
>VHFcontesting mailing list
>VHFcontesting@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting


_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [VHFcontesting] A suggestion for Limiting MultiOps[was:Asuggestion for ERP-based Entry Classes], Dave Wendling <=