Thanks for the background. It explains a lot. Especially the lack of seeking inputs from the broader contesting community in advance of the decision. I find it particularly curious that the main impe
If I read the guideline (is a guideline a rule?) correctly, a multi-op group MAY, but isnt REQUIRED to, operate in a distributed fashion. I share the puzzlement of why this was driven by off-shore pl
Doesn't it seem wrong to anyone at the ARRL for someone to send an exchange,(for example) like "DC" if they live in MD, VA, DE, NJ, PA or wherever? (I didn't get out the calipers to determine the exa
Why make this decision four months before the contest? I think some of these contest sponsors think everyone lives in the dark ages and depends on printed media for information. This could be communi
"Who will enforce this rule?" You guys will. Will somebody figure out a way to game the system? Most likely. There's no big prize money here, and the vast majority of radiosport enthusiasts are hones
Amen, Steve - what a shock for those who hoped that changes among directors and new CEO who contests would improve things in Newington. 73, Pete N4ZR Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at <http://r
Perhaps it isn't too late for ARRL to clarify this rule and remove some of its more unforseen effects. If they stated that the distributed multi-ops were only viable from outside the USA and Canada,
Let me explain a couple of things. First of all, everything I say on this reflector is from me, not officially from the ARRL or from the ARRL Programs and Services Committee members (PSC). I only off
Based on my discussions with my colleagues this wasnt only based on the wishes of some EU contesters. It was based on input from a number of people. And its for one year only. Absent this rule the on
Mike, Because you are an ARRL Director it probably would've been a good idea for you to just stay out of this discussion. You're sharing information that only someone who is on the PSC or an ARRL Dir
On 10/23/2020 3:24 PM, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote: Doesn't it seem wrong to anyone at the ARRL for someone to send an exchange,(for example) like "DC" if they live in MD, VA, DE, NJ, PA or wherever? (I d
How is that so? This scheme allows a group of scattered operators to operate from their home station as a geographically distributed multi op using a common call sign. As an example, a group of Minne
A one year exception, an accommodation, just like field day where we allowed home stations to treat it like any other contest and added affiliated club competition. Look at the CQWW results on 3830 t
Field Day isn't a contest Look at the CQWW results on 3830 this year. Probably just going to be team RHR and a couple of others, and maybe some who entered M/M to free themselves from M/S rules. Is t
I apparently didnt do a good job of framing my question. First, were not discussing affiliated club competition. Now, my question. You asserted that this arrangement gives more people the opportunity
Quite simply put - several large m/m stations have canceled their operations. By allowing them to stay at home and use the same call, but follow ALL (every single one) of the existing M/M rules, they
Forest, meet the trees. 1) Im not arguing the wisdom of the plan I am trying to understand your assertion of more opportunity. 2) When I speak of 20 operators, that is not 20 butts-in-chairs simultan
You know very well that single and multi op are different games. Not many want to spend 40-48 hours in the chair. Many are happy doing a 6-8 hour shift and then spend the rest of the weekend doing ot
It does indeed. We worked distributed multy single in CQWW SSB as RF9C and managed to attract a guy who never worked in contests before (let alone MS category). There is a psychological barrier exist