Not at all, John. You find the best location in a Grid-4 and operate. When you're done...you're done. Move on to the best location in the next Grid-4 and operate there. (uh-oh...one more rule needed:
Hi Steve, To your point... The point is actually quite straight forward, though I may have not been as clear in making it as I'd hoped. It is this: The three simple rules that I proposed will align t
Hi Mike, To your point... The underlying issue is that Rover-class participants are allowed liberties that no other class of participant enjoys. It is the depth of that disparity that results in thes
<tongue-in-cheek> Let's give non-Rovers this same ability, then. Say...QRP Portable, for instance. One needs only 4 lunchbox operators to meet the QRP Portable station at each corner of the "home" Gr
-- Steve, I feared that my attempt at making a point through irony would get lost along the way. I'll boil it down and move on... Rovers should be scored (and categorized, btw) the same way that ever
To the questions you raised... In what way is it unfair to stationary contestants? The point is *not* to work as many people as possible. It *is* to align Rover rules with that of all other classes o
With the best of intentions, the 30/50 proposal misses the mark on many levels. I'll start by re-asking, "As regard to CQ and ARRL VHF contests, no other class is artificially limited to the number o
Not at all. As someone who has participated in VHF contesting since before the rover category even existed, I can say with certainty that the baby has been in the same dirty bath water for so long, i
The responses that we see are based on the ability to comment proactively and nothing more. We would have seen similar threads, had the ARRL folk floated previous rover rules through this list prior
So...6-meters opens briefly and I work a rover who forgets to ID as such and I now have 50.01% of my log with Rovers. I'm reclassified as unlimited...even though it's not my fault or intention. I mus
Hi Joe. I agree that open discussion is a good thing for as long as focus remains on the issues-at-play. Thanks for your well-presented point-of-view. You brought up some great points. I'll reply in-
Hey...you know what?! I went looking and I stand corrected! The *only* class of participant that can't change their location within the same Grid-4 during a contest is the QRP Portable class (WHY PIC
OTOH, my QRP Portable station was built into a vehicle that I would drive to my favorite hill top and park for the weekend. It was a real pleasure. I'd drive home when it was all over, disassembling
One either wants to fix the problem or not. The (reduced to) two simple rules fix the problem through score and strategy normalization (something that I've said since first posting it). Please don't
== I understand your point-of-view, Steve. I tend to be a root-cause analyst out of laziness. If I can fix something once, I will. Revisiting the same issue cyclically makes me grumpy. :) As for what
== There is nothing that says that the 500 meter circle can't move...only that it stays in the Grid-4 and that all equipment must reside in it. As such, they are traditional single-ops. Ev, W2EV ____
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Sean, In the years gone by, this sort of statement would have been made in private, to the benefit on only the person who inquired.
Hi Jim, In regard to "absurdly high scores generated by re/contacting a small number of participants...and being rewarded for doing so, publicly", there are several "fixes" that can be applied. I've
Society is full of ambiguity and inaccuracy. While this is difficult for engineers and programmers to truly understand, it is at the very core of the human condition. That doesn't make something "bro
And neither of them appear to have grid-circled in their win. Another interesting fact...the top scoring rovers were *not* the ones that visited the most grids. They were the ones to find other stra