RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] w4atv/w6irt

To: jjreisert@alum.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [RTTY] w4atv/w6irt
From: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:49:58 -0700
List-post: <mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:19:08 -0700 (PDT), Jim Reisert AD1C
<jjreisert@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

>Oh, please!  A financial interest in whether SO1R and SO2R are made into
>separate categories?  Please give Joe a little credit.  Perhaps he's speaking
>as himself.

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

I guess I have to spell it out. Please note this is not a personal
attack of any kind, just a statement of facts. You make up your own
mind. 

1. If SO1R and SO2R become separate categories, fewer people will be
have the desire to spend the money to upgrade to SO2R. They will be
perfectly happy operating SO1R and they will have no need to purchase
Joe's products.

2. As a result of #1, Joe will make less money. That is what I call a
financial interest and that is why it should have a disclaimer.

3. As a side benefit of not feeling "forced" to upgrade, fewer people
will become discouraged at always being beaten (badly) and will
continue contesting. This is my motivation for advocating what I
advocate. I have no financial dog in this fight at all, zero.

By his own admission, he has not done any RTTY contesting for the last
two years. I have more than 44.000 RTTY QSOs in my log and his call
does not appear, even once. It seems to me that his interest is PURELY
financial since he doesn't even use his own products for contesting!

Make sense now?

Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>